J.J. Abrams will direct Star Trek Sequel; Pre-production underway | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

J.J. Abrams will direct Star Trek Sequel; Pre-production underway September 13, 2011

by TrekMovie.com Staff , Filed under: Abrams,Lindelof,Orci/Kurtzman,Star Trek Into Darkness , trackback

Back in July we reported on news that Star Trek director J.J. Abrams was "moving towards a commitment" to direct the sequel to the 2009 hit. Now comes news that Abrams has officially committed to the project.

Vulture confirms the news, reporting that pre-production on the sequel is currently underway. Even more important, the site reports that the script — written by Alex Kutzman, Roberto Orci and Damon Lindelof — is expected to be completed by the end of the month and Abrams will begin shooting the film this winter.

There’s still no update on when the sequel will be released. As we’ve previously reported, Paramount delayed it’s release earlier this year (it was originally set for June 29, 2012–now its TBD) and has already slated the G.I. Joe sequel in the former slot. There are rumors that the film could slide into 2013 (perhaps summer or winter).

Last month Abrams teased that an announcement was close:

"I’m excited. We’re working hard. We’re very close and I hope to have something to talk about concretely soon. I do feel like if ‘Trek’ happens as we hope that it will, it will be a fun return to that group of people, because it’s an amazing group."

Update: No additional details, but EW has confirmed that J.J. Abrams will direct the Star Trek sequel.

TrekMovie will have more on this as the story develops.


1. Sloan47 - September 13, 2011

That’s great news! I’m glad JJ’s on board as director!

2. Sloan47 - September 13, 2011

That’s great news! I’m glad JJ’s on board as director!

3. Viking - September 13, 2011

Rosario T. Calabria – who dat?

4. Duncan Macleod - September 13, 2011

Pre-production means actual full time work has begun. Set building, etc… That is pretty much a green light.

5. dmduncan - September 13, 2011

Good news and GLAD to have JJ aboard for the second go.

6. trekker 5 - September 13, 2011

:) :) :) :) :) :) Oh My God!!!!! Oh My God!! Yes!!! This is such good news!!! JJ is in and the script will be done soon,this is the best thing I have heard all day!! I am a very,very happy person right now!!! :) :) :)

7. Mr reliant - September 13, 2011

Should have brought back shatner to direct!

8. Thorny - September 13, 2011

About freakin’ time. Give us a better movie than Trek 2009 please, guys.

9. Aurore - September 13, 2011

“J.J. Abrams will direct Star Trek Sequel…”

Oh, NO!!!! No! Please, Lord, NO! Not him!!!!

I did not expect such a….Well, this is a disaster.



10. Sloan47 - September 13, 2011

Eek! Sorry for the double post above! Didn’t mean to do that! =/

11. dub - September 13, 2011

Woohooo!!! Can’t wait!

12. Craiger - September 13, 2011

This posting is great but how do we know this site wont go on another break after this?

13. fansincesixtynine - September 13, 2011

Wow. News. Actual, honest to goodness news. Yay!

14. Spock's Uncle - September 13, 2011

Having some defintion and closure to the Director issue is good for the Franchise. Abrams’ Trek was a solid, excellent addition to the mythology of Trek, and it’s good to know there will be some continuity with the next installment.

15. Hugh Hoyland - September 13, 2011

Great news! Glad JJ is on board, I had a feeling! Now we know that JJ likes the script. So what can we expect with the story? :]

16. SoonerDave - September 13, 2011

Until I hear an announcement from JJ himself, and we have a completed script, I call bunk on the whole thing.

17. rm10019 - September 13, 2011

Great news, can’t wait for further details from Bob and the gang.

18. Ran - September 13, 2011

Crap… here comes another Trek movie for the 12 years old kids.

19. Rob - September 13, 2011


Ummm. No.

As much as I admire the Shat, he ain’t no director!

20. Ahmed Abdo - September 13, 2011

I hope that they will come with a good movie after wasting all this time in waiting & waiting.

21. Starman - September 13, 2011

hot damn….please JJ on this new film less lens flares and a real engineering section for Scotty….

22. Adolescent Nightmare - September 13, 2011

At last we can get back to the whining and complaining of clueless trekkies!!!

23. moauvian waoul- aka: seymour hiney - September 13, 2011

Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning. You can quote me.

24. Old Geezer - September 13, 2011

Hooray! May I live long enough to see it.

25. Techtrekker - September 13, 2011


26. richpit - September 13, 2011

Well, I guess I’m out of the running to direct then. Nice of them to let me know! LOL.

Seriously, glad to hear that JJ is going to be back directing. But I agree with Starman above…please less lens flares and a real engineering set! Please.

27. dmduncan - September 13, 2011

24. Old Geezer – September 13, 2011


9. Aurore – September 13, 2011

You too: lol.

28. Talos IV - September 13, 2011

VERY EXCITED to hear that JJ will direct. I have complete confidence in him and the rest of the team. Great job in 09, and I am sure that the next installment will be even better. You can’t rush greatness. For all those who are not as confident in JJ’s abilities as a director, have a little faith…it will be worth the wait. On another note…I am also glad that Trekmovie.com FINALLY put some news out. I was beginning to wonder if everyone was on vacation. Come on guys…really?

29. Dee - lvs moon' surface - September 13, 2011

I am relieved…TrekMovie.com is alive! …:-) :-)

30. cdp - September 13, 2011

Glade to hear Trek Movie will have more on this as the story develops. Just hope we don’t have to wait too long.

31. Joel - September 13, 2011

Bout time we had news! Been sad visiting the site over the last week and still seeing the news about the Domino’s on the moon… Pumped for updates on the movie, now that they’re officially in pre-prod.

32. Douglas - September 13, 2011

#21 I agree with you.
If the lens flares aren’t dialed back somewhat and engineering doesn’t look more like an engine Scotty would manage, the unintended laughing and groaning won’t help anybody.
Other than that, it’s good news JJ Abrams is directing. His storytelling is a true gift and bodes well for Trek.

33. Mary Kemp - September 13, 2011

I’m not thrilled about this . . . . I think J.J. Abrams is a big loser who doesn’t understand Star Trek . . .

34. Mary Kemp - September 13, 2011

I’ll be skipping this movie . . . I had hoped for something more.

35. jas_montreal - September 13, 2011

finally…. Its been a dry week of star trek news. Finally we have something now !

36. moauvian waoul- aka: seymour hiney - September 13, 2011

Thought the lens flares worked on the exterior shots.

37. Chris Doohan - September 13, 2011

Did you have any doubt? Okay, it was touch and go there for a minute. Glad to see J.J. At the helm again.

38. Rosario T. Calabria - September 13, 2011

Hi, everyone. Anthony is fine and will be back soon. In the short term, myself, Chuck and Kayla will be providing updates to the site.

39. moauvian waoul- aka: seymour hiney - September 13, 2011

38. Thanks for the update.

40. Canadianknight - September 13, 2011

YAY! Thanks for the update Rosario!!

41. Khan was Framed! - September 13, 2011

Despite his catalogue of horrible work (Trek ’09 excluded) I am somehow still glad it’s JJ-

Too bad Trek is the one thing he does well.

42. DavidJ - September 13, 2011

GREAT news. No matter what the story is, I’m just looking forward to seeing JJ’s energetic, visually dynamic style in a Star Trek movie again.

43. The Last Vulcan - September 13, 2011

Thumbs up for JJ and the return of the Trekmovie gang!

44. NCM - September 13, 2011

@3: – and for others who have wondered how to reach Anthony: If you click the “About” tab at the top of the web page, you’ll find a list of people associated with this site, and email addresses. Rosario Tino is Sci Fi Editor – list probably not updated since a marital status change.

Grateful for the update here, finally, but makes one wonder – as many have – about the site’s future. Perhaps the chief editor is just dealing with RL stuff right now. Hope all is well.

My excitement about the news is tempered by suggested release dates : …winter 2013?! I can see why someone might think it’ll be hard to keep a site going on little and no fuel for four and a half years. But maybe they’ll kindle our interests now and again – is that how it worked years out from Trek 2009?

45. gingerly - September 13, 2011

And we’re off! …Again!

46. Aurore - September 13, 2011

A wise man once said : “Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.” Then, he breathlessly added : “You can quote me.”

And so, I did.

47. The Last Vulcan - September 13, 2011

#41, I would say that “catalogue of horrible work” is a bit unfair to JJ. I’m a UCLA Film School guy and I recognize that some of the stuff he does is straight out of Film School, like beating the hell out of the camera, doing the lens flares, and leaving dangling open-ended plot lines. I’d say that 95% of the audience either doesn’t notice or is negatively distracted by it, but the balance call it genius. Personally I can put up with the camera drumming, but find the flares obnoxious. Then again so did JJ: ” I know there are certain shots where even I watch and think, ‘Oh that’s ridiculous, that was too many.'” What drives me up the wall is the dangling plot lines. I don’t want to “fill in the blanks with my imagination.” I paid my $15 + parking + popcorn and I want YOU to tell me what the story is. But then again… that’s just me! :)

48. Enterprise C - September 13, 2011

“I’ve been waiting for this moment my whole life.” – Nero

49. moauvian waoul- aka: seymour hiney - September 13, 2011

And so you did Aurore. …And I knew you would.

50. Paul - September 13, 2011

Great news now JJ & team please hit this one out of the park like you did in 2009!! Take your time everyone wants a great movie not a movie made to hit a studio release date………….

51. Harry Ballz - September 13, 2011


52. Aurore - September 13, 2011

27. dmduncan – September 13, 2011
9. Aurore – September 13, 2011
You too: lol.

I see.
Being an unrepentant Dijon mustard lover was not enough.
You had to make a mockery of my suffering…in front of everybody, on this board.

I have three words for you; Renesmee, Giovanna, Marie-Françoise (OK, make that four).

Your turn to cry ,now.


53. disappointed fan - September 13, 2011

He sucked the first time around. He is gonna suck this time too

54. Red Dead Ryan - September 13, 2011


Only 33 posts into the first new article in over a week and we have a troll.

“I’ll be skipping this movie…”

Great! The rest of us will be able to enjoy it without having to put up with your bitching. We WON’T miss you!

Anyway, I’m glad that we have J.J Abrams back. Looks like the movie could still make summer…….2013!

And thanks to Rosario for the update. So, when can we look forward to the next sci-fi article? It’s been a long time….

55. MagicDan - September 13, 2011

I predict that this is going to be the greatest Star Trek movie of all time.

It’s all logical, just add it up:

No rush to write or film. Everybody gets to take their time to make it something special.

No set story at all, nothing to establish or any “rules” to be held to. We really have no idea what is going to happen with this crew. No limits, and I think that’s a good thing.

One of the best directors at the helm, gotta love his style, and he gets better with each film he makes.

And have you seen these actor’s in their other movies? Holy crap they are good. (Haven’t seen any 3D Christmas movies yet though….)

I think that it’s just all going to come together and make the best thing we have ever seen.

56. Red Dead Ryan - September 13, 2011


Well, you can join “Mary Kemp” in her compound in Pakistan where you two can share your common deep-seated hatred of J.J Abrams.

Then, after the sequel is a success, we’ll drop a big bundle of “Star Trek 12″ dvd’s on you just to rub it in!

57. Aurore - September 13, 2011

49. moauvian waoul- aka: seymour hiney – September 13, 2011
And so you did Aurore. …And I knew you would.

And,I knew you knew I would. But, you already knew that, of course.

58. Rosario T. Calabria - September 13, 2011

44. Tino is my middle name.

54. Hopefully this week. :)

59. The TOS Purist aka The Purolator - September 13, 2011

What’s this? Actual NEWS from TrekMovie.com? Good heavens!

60. Jamie - September 13, 2011

Oh awesome. Make sure you throw some lens-flare effects into the film, there just weren’t enough in the last one.

And for crying out loud—please make sure you don’t show the Enterprise too much. We spent half the last film staring at the ship….

But for real—-slow down a little bit. Stop with all the annoying visual effects. And show us the damn ship for more than 1/2 a second. You took everything that was trek and bastardized it. The greatest thing about Trek was its storytelling. Let’s get back to that and stop spending so much time wondering where to put the next lens flare or quick scene cut.

61. Red Dead Ryan - September 13, 2011


“Hopefully this week. :)”

Well, I’ll most definitely look forward to it……hopefully this week! :-)

62. Ivory - September 13, 2011

This is the most anti climatic story of 2011. Did anyone think he wasn’t going to return? That said I’m glad he’s back. He did a great job first time out.

63. dmduncan - September 13, 2011

52. Aurore – September 13, 2011

And I am crying — like spicy French mustard has been poured over my eyes!

64. moauvian waoul- aka: seymour hiney - September 13, 2011

57. Yes, um, sure I did Aurore. I knew that.

65. C Mosenko - September 13, 2011

I bet Anthony enjoyed reading all the comments.

66. Charles E. Pratt, Jr. - September 13, 2011


67. C Mosenko - September 13, 2011

When ever the next one comes out, I think it’s gong to be the do or die movie for Star Trek. Did Bob or JJ ever say which Star Trek movies they liked? I’m curious which ones they liked and which ones they did not. ST 3 is one of my favorites. Balance of Terror is one of the great originals.

68. 7beta - September 13, 2011

Welcome back, Abrams!

Welcome back, TrekMovie!

69. Gorn Born - September 13, 2011

@55. Disappointed fan: You suck. Go whine somewhere else.

Yippeeee! Finally some actual news on the new movie.

70. Gorn Born - September 13, 2011

Oops. Sorry about that 55. Meant 53.

71. The Vulcanista }:-) - September 13, 2011


P. LL&P }:-)

72. Anthony Thompson - September 13, 2011

I’m going to be a bit of a skeptic until it’s officially announced or Bob verifies it. How many times in the past have we seen these internet stories proven false? Then Anthony P. would come on here and say that he had determined that the rumors were all wrong after checking with his “sources close to the production” (Bob).

73. Captain Kirk - September 13, 2011

Oh My ! , can´t wait want to se it now!!

74. Jimtibkirk - September 13, 2011

Betcha they’ll work into the script that Scotty gives Engineering a makeover to suit him (aka the fans) better. I think Bob has gleaned as much from this site.

As for JJ and lens flares (the other big gripe) I personally like the effect. I prefer that to that ultra-contrasty look of Transformers where everyone’s all sweaty.

75. Captain Kirk - September 13, 2011

@33/34. good then we won´t have to listen to you anymore because you can skip all the news about the new movie too

76. boborci - September 13, 2011

72. See you at the premiere;)

77. itisstillme - September 13, 2011

All nice. Not that I would be so suprised, but … okay. But the rumor of 2013…. argh!

78. Jimtibkirk - September 13, 2011

And … betcha anything they snag an A-lister to help bolster international box office. Based on the last take, why wouldn’t a top star sign on? Cripes if Batman can get Oldman and Caine and Freedman in the same freakin’ picture, why can’t Trek get at least one? Heard they tried for Russell Crowe for Nero last time. No offence to Eric Bana, he did a good job.

79. Jimtibkirk - September 13, 2011

Sorry, Freeman.

80. Buzz Cagney - September 13, 2011

I’m very happy to see TM up and running and to hear the guys are pulling their fingers out over at Bad Robot!
No weekends off between now and easter guys!

81. MC1 Doug - September 13, 2011

#34: “I’ll be skipping this movie . . . I had hoped for something more.”

What, pray tell, were you expecting? Your comments are truly asinine, but you obviously have your reasons… how can you make a judgment like this without even knowing what is planned for the next time around?

From this one story, we have no clue about plot, cast, etc., so if you wanted more, I’d say, stay tuned.

I do have faith in the production crew, BUT I expect much more than what we saw in their first time up at bat. I expect a true “Star Trek” philosophy this time around; I expect a real engineering set this time; I expect to see more of Dr. McCoy and a more prominent emphasis on the “big three” (obviously, Kirk-Spock-McCoy).

Here’s to an exciting, but thought-provoking TREK this time around! I think they can do it!

82. MC1 Doug - September 13, 2011

Oh, and I expect not to be blinded by all the light flares (LOL).

Complaints about the light flares aside, fans might recall there were light flares in quite a few scenes of “Star Trek – The Motion Picture” –still the best of ALL of the TREK films (ducking for cover as I know countless fans will disagree with me on that one).

83. Charla - September 13, 2011

OK!!! I cave. I can’t stay away … almost died in a head on crash Friday, Both my husband and I was pinned and all that fun stuff – up at this hour because my chest still hurts and just seen this great news on my FB feed with “Collider.com” Had to come here and celebrate 2 things. First, still being alive to even be here, and secondly, this announcement!

BTW, to clarify, I did not mean to sound like I was directing any of my opinions or comments about the discord here towards anyone in particular, several articles ago. I love a good discussion, and even with disagreements, until it gets outta hand. Just my own feelings, good to see everyone so happy!

Before you beat me up for showing back up after expressing my discontent …. I already hurt so be easy on me… k?

84. Charla - September 13, 2011

#53 Nuh uh!!


#60 I think they’ve got this….

85. Schiefy - September 13, 2011

76. Our family will be there! :-)

86. K-7 - September 13, 2011

Finally !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

87. trekman_dave - September 13, 2011

Thrusters At Full

88. number6 - September 13, 2011


89. Anthony Thompson - September 13, 2011

76. boborci

I’ll be there!!! : )

90. Viking - September 13, 2011

Well, there’s the reason Anthony hasn’t been around: Bob, did you pull a Harrison Ford and make Anthony your Mugatu bitch? LOL :-)

91. Nemesis4909 - September 13, 2011

Finally some noteworthy news that actually indicates progress.

Seriously though, script hopefully finished by the end of the month. What on Earth have they been doing that’s caused this much of a holdup? You’d think they should have the script by now!

92. Cygnus-X1 - September 13, 2011

Talk about an anti-climactic climax…

Can you imagine if he’d been holding up the sequel all this time and then decided NOT to direct it?

93. boborci - September 13, 2011

83. Feel better

94. Trekprincess - September 13, 2011

Great news :):)

95. porthos - September 14, 2011

Oh Nooo! He will destroy Andoria!…or Betazed! :)

96. Groucho - September 14, 2011

First I hear that Chuck Norris will be in Expendables 2, then this!! Great morning for announcements!! Now, if we could get Chuck in the Trek sequel…

97. Bernd Schneider - September 14, 2011

That’s good news!

I may have many issues with the way Abrams handles the franchise, but as a director he did a great job.

98. TrekMadeMeWonder - September 14, 2011

Meessa Sooooo Happy!!!!

99. Jeff O'Connor - September 14, 2011

Now this is a great article to break the rut with. Perfect.

100. Jeff O'Connor - September 14, 2011


So glad you’re OK. :)

101. Let Them Eat Plomeek Soup - September 14, 2011




102. TrekMadeMeWonder - September 14, 2011

By the way, I just finished reading “I AM SPOCK.” In the book Leonard remarks that while preparing for Star Trek II TWOK Harve Bennet went back and watched all 79 episodes. He was drawn to Space Seed (and in particular the final moments of the episode). Obviously he understood the show very well from that point on.

I think that is what made STII such a success.

Harve really did take the time to experience the CHEMISTRY that the original characters had enjoyed together. That is what made Trek so special. Trek’s trinity, Kirk, Spock and McCoy had such depth. The character complimented each other very well.

PLEASE JJ and Co., surprise me, and take the time to watch at least the first two season again.

It could’nt hurt one bit.

103. Darkthunder - September 14, 2011

My only request for “Star Trek 2″:

No Lens Flares!!!!

104. AJ - September 14, 2011

I can understand, perhaps, JJ Abrams being reluctant to film a pop-culture sequel such as Trek2012. He’s, after all, gone on to try to step into bigger shoes with “Super 8″ and its ‘Spielbergness,’ and stay on the cutting edge of TV. But he became a noticeable part of the brand himself. It seemed that, no matter what an interview with JJ was covering since 2009, a question about “Trek” would always make it in.

Oh. Can we know the title, please, guys?

105. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 14, 2011

Thank you, JJ Abrams, for finally deciding to direct the next Star Trek. Yes, you did say that an announcement would be made about this time. I guess we were hoping to hear something a little bit sooner, but it is great news. Now, go make one very cool Star Trek!

Bob Orci – I really do wish I could see you all at the premiere. Of course, you could always come downunder and bring Pintoban with you! Just let me know now, won’t you? That’s a good man…

Can’t wait to see “my captain” again. Chris Pine is looking so very good now.

106. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 14, 2011

#83 Sorry about the accident, Charla. I hope you will feel better soon and you and your husband will suffer no lasting effects from the accident.

Anyway, at least, this long awaited good news has cheered you up. It has cheered me up.

Take care and all my best wishes to you and your husband.

107. I'm Dead Jim! - September 14, 2011

JJ must have been following that last science thread (Dominos Pizza on Moon) or his ears were burning.. Maybe Bob Orci prodded him into making the announcement NOW!

Anthony, I hope you are well.

108. Jeff O'Connor - September 14, 2011


Now, now. No reason to get ex… what am I saying?


109. saavik001 - September 14, 2011


110. VulcanFilmCritic - September 14, 2011


While I loved what Harve Bennett, Nicholas Meyer and Leonard Nimoy did with the franchise in the 1980’s, I’m hoping that there are NO re-treads of previous Trek villains and scenarios. This isn’t Shakespeare, you know.
I’ve been watching this show of and on since 1966, and I want something new.

This is the chance to really deliver a new direction for some of the characters, who are not at all like the heroic types we grew up with. The potential exists for more complicated plot lines and character development.

I was not going to see the new movie in 2009, and what got me into the theater were reports that people were crying in the theater. This was unheard of in a Star Trek movie! Even the death of Spock in ST:WOK was accompanied by shock, more than tears. But most of the crying was over saying goodbye to the old crew, and maybe a little pathos from the death of Kirk’s father.

A younger couple sitting in front of us who were not Star Trek fans asked me why we were laughing and crying; we must be getting something our of the movie that they were not. I explained that there were a lot of “in” jokes and backstory that we were familiar with, and so that explained our reactions.

I hope the new movie will give that younger, wider audience something to laugh and cry about that has nothing to do with memories of old Trek.

111. CmdrR - September 14, 2011

Now get Anthony sobered up, showered, and shaved, and we can get on with out lives…

112. Tarrax - September 14, 2011

Awesome news. :D

Now, just wind back the lens flares a little, create a dedicated Engineering set and convince JJ to allow the VFX guys to add Shields that actually work this time. Perfect! ;)

113. Mike - September 14, 2011

hope there are not as many lens flares as the last one

114. Holger - September 14, 2011

Well, this lowers the probability I’m gonna watch the sequel from 0.00001% to exactly 0%.

115. Pork William - September 14, 2011

Moar lens flare!!!!

116. hooch - September 14, 2011

Winter 2013?? Sorry, but waiting 4 years to release the sequel to a blockbuster film is probably too long. Hope people are still interested by then.

117. CardassiaPrimera - September 14, 2011

Good News. JJ is one of the best directors. Though his last movies were not good.

118. Barb - September 14, 2011

No. 110. It will not be a retread of ANY Trek, just as JJA Trek 1 was not a retread. JJA is a Warsie. JJA Trek 1 was a remake of the original Star Wars movie in the Trek Universe. It will be interesting how he retread The Empire Strikes Back in this film. Will he combine it with Return of the Jedi or will that be the third film? Hard to guess. Clearly, he did not find this remake easy. Still we all have the advantage of knowing what face will be behind the mask on the masked bad guy. George Kirk, we hardly knew ya…

119. John - September 14, 2011

Oh boy I can’t wait for this loose remake of the Empire Strikes Back!

120. Harry Ballz - September 14, 2011

Listen, I’m encouraged by two facts: First, recently Bob Orci stated on this board that the script to be filmed is still the original concept they envisioned and wrote many months back. Second, Bob admitted, months before that, he was sincerely grateful to feedback he read HERE, from us the hardcore fans, on being an influence in how they shaped the sequel. Thanks, Bob!


121. Lydia Roberts - September 14, 2011

• The Orion Syndicate as the villains
• Larger all-star cast as well as many cameos including by William Shatner
• More planets
• Larger space battles with more starships
• Kirk having better fighting skills
• Kirk having several human love interests played by Hollywood’s most beautiful young actresses
• No cut scenes
• The Star Trek theme music from the Insurrection end credits used at the end

122. Paula Hatton - September 14, 2011

I want a scene in the sequel with Kirk, Spock and Bones sitting around a campfire at Yosemite National Park singing ‘Row, Row, Row Your Boat’!

I hope J.J. Abrams gives Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie cameos in Star Trek 12. Perhaps as a couple who are ambassadors for the United Federation of Planets that adopt extraterrestrial newborn children from different prospective member planets.

123. Jane Carter - September 14, 2011

I hope they include Lady Gaga in the sequel as a singer with dark connections to the villains. With her futuristic music and style, she would fit right in.

I would like to see Kirk, Spock and McCoy go undercover to a concert of hers on a distant planet like with Diva Plavalaguna in The Fifth Element (1997). When she sings Bad Romance, Paparazzi, Poker Face or Just Dance, her show could be raided by many henchmen who have a thunderous phaser fight with Kirk, Spock and McCoy like the intense post-bank heist gunfight in Heat (1995).

124. jamesingeneva - September 14, 2011

Good to see everyone back in action here at TrekMovie and of course seeing BobOrci, seems like its been ages since we heard from him lol.

Has anyone heard if there will be an ARG coming up again soon? That was so much fun and really brought the TrekMovie community together.

125. Hugh Hoyland - September 14, 2011

Hey Bob, can we have a synop? Villain? :]

126. TheKeeper - September 14, 2011

The best news I’ve heard all day!!!!

127. Kokolo - September 14, 2011

Great news, BUT come on guys PICK the release date already.

128. cpelc - September 14, 2011

121, 122, 123

Good to see the Insurrection Credits/Lady Gaga campaigner back (of course under new identities). I’m sure we’ll see these same posts again on every update for the movie here on out. But here’s some thoughts –

1. Michael Giacchino is not going to use Jerry Goldsmith’s Insurrection credit theme, because that was already an adapted TMP/TNG theme with incorporation specifically of other themes from that Star Trek movie.

2. Including Lady Gaga would make no sense, as she would be clearly dead at the time the movie is set — And even if she was playing a different singer the movie wouldn’t have her perform recognizable songs of her own catalog. (Plus those songs are already beginning to be dated today).

129. nx01 - September 14, 2011

Shoot the Movie already!!!!!!

130. VZX - September 14, 2011

76. boborci – September 13, 2011
See you at the premiere;)

So, is that an invitation? Are you going to take all of us? Cool!

131. AJ - September 14, 2011

Let’s hope the boys keep in those juicy geek references, like Kirk’s apple during the KM test (and the KM test itself…3 times no less) and McCoy’s divorce.

And perhaps Admiral Archer’s beagle.

Throw in a real engine room, and we’re “Happy as Larry.”

132. SupremeDalekOnTheBridge - September 14, 2011

I look forward to the next TrekMovie update late next week.

133. Pizza - September 14, 2011


NO 3D!

134. captain_neill - September 14, 2011

Well I just hope the script is stronger and is true to Star Trek’s ideals. That is what is important to me.

Just remember what makes Star Trek work and don’t lose yourself in thinking how cool can this be if we make it like Star Wars.

135. Janice - September 14, 2011

So glad to know that JJ Abrams is to direct the Star Trek sequel and that pre-production is underway.

Now, I’ll REALLY be excited if Pike(Bruce Greenwood) has a part in the movie. That’s what I’m waiting to hear!

136. Doug - September 14, 2011

Great news!! In the words of the great captain Pike…

“Punch it.”

137. Crusade2267 - September 14, 2011

I do not want the movie to be in 3D. If I wear glasses to the movie, they will be sunglasses to cut down the glare from the lens flares.

138. `Zee - September 14, 2011

Great news to come here and find that JJ is directing, and TrekMovie is back. I was worried about both. I enjoy visiting this site.

#83 Charla , good to hear that you and your husband are OK. Take care!

139. The Starfleet Veteran - September 14, 2011

I love how it takes him so long to commit to directing. I really wish someone with talent would do a new Trek.

140. Raktajino - September 14, 2011


141. Creedy - September 14, 2011

I would like the title of the next movie to simply be the name of the antagonist, without the words ‘Star Trek’ in the title.

142. Charla - September 14, 2011

Thank you so very much #93 Bob, #100 Jeff and #106 Keachick- your words mean alot-

You are sooo right Keachick! Next to being able to wake up the day after the wreck and seeing that my husband was also ok, this news made my week!! No, my month! Just very happy right now. This news was definitely was a “shot” in the arm so to speak! ;)

143. VZX - September 14, 2011

I still wonder what the title will be. I don’t think there is such a thing as a good title for this sequal. I do not think it can be done. It cannot be Star Trek 2 nor can it be Star Trek 12 or XII. It cannot be Star Trek: Something like the TNG movies. It really should have Star Trek in the title, but then it doesn’t have to.

I just don’t think it’s possible to create a good title for this movie.

144. Starfleet's Finest - September 14, 2011

Ahhh, so great to see Trekmovie up and running again and not to mention participation of boborci, trekmovie staff, and (what seems to be) the whole lot! Well, my life can start up again :D (Not sure what’s going on the Anthony P but I hope he is well. And the same goes for you Charla! Best of luck on a quick recovery!)

Now, with formalities out of the way: I’M SO EXCITED!!!! I’m not really suprised that Mr. Abrams has “officially” signed on, but hey, now it IS official! Happy day!! Now we have something concrete for the sequel! I’m super excited that the entire creative team will be returning for the sequel; it gives me even more assurance that the movie will be amazing!! So thank you trekmovie for the update! It made my week!!

My opinion for the sequel? You know, the lens flares really don’t bother me however, it would really be nice to have them toned back to a couple dozen here and there rather than having my own papparzzi rave in my living room. Other than that, I really enjoyed the first movie so I have nothing but faith for the second one.

Just a tiny little side note to those of you who are STILL complaining, now on the topic of JJ directing, which isn’t all that suprising, and telling us (the fans who will see the movie regardless) that you won’t go see it now: don’t let the back button hit you on the way out. Of course I mean that with the upmost respect.

Glad everyone is back!

145. TheKeeper - September 14, 2011

Lens flares did not bother me in the least, actually thought they were a great artistic touch.
Only thing I would like to see is a better engine room design, other then that I’m good with everything else.

146. Steamblade - September 14, 2011

That’s unfortunate, I was hoping this would languish and die. Oh well, maybe someday we’ll have decent Trek again.

147. trekker 5 - September 14, 2011

#76,Bob,so glad to hear from you again!! Tell JJ how happy we are! :)

148. Desstruxion - September 14, 2011

They’ll push it to 2014.

149. Danner - September 14, 2011

How come I haven’t seen a story yet about how Levar Burton Tweeted that he was at CBS studios to check on the progress of TNG Bluray? It’s going down and I’d like more details… if anyone can get more details it’s trekmovie.com! Please please get the scoop for us!!

150. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - September 14, 2011

Great to see the great Trekmovie site up and running at Maxinum Warp. Even the Great Bob Orci is once again graceing us with his presence.
I am excited that J.J is Directing. Can’t wait to see what the court has in store for us.
LONG LIVE STAR TREK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

151. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - September 14, 2011

As for the title of Star Trek.
Star Trek. Attack of the Lens Flares

152. Trekboi - September 14, 2011

nice to see some sign of life but i have lost my enthusiasm for the movie after so many years in the dark.

I’ts so hard not to be negative at this point, i was so excited in may 2009.
I’m glad you guys are looking forward to working together but its not about you.
you now have to win mine and many others attention back mr Abrams.

153. TheKeeper - September 14, 2011

@ 146. Steamblade – September 14, 2011
That’s unfortunate, I was hoping this would languish and die. Oh well, maybe someday we’ll have decent Trek again.

I for one am so glad we WONT be getting another tired old TNG movie filled with it’s sub standard acting, fan boy technobabbles and incomprehensible story lines, not to mention it’s total lack of audience emotional involvement if that’s your definition of decent Trek LOL

154. wowseruk - September 14, 2011

ALL GOOD so far..!

My only hope is that this is the reason they’ve been holding out on contacting me

Now the team is in place, but if they look closely they’ll notice a space :)

155. Tina - September 14, 2011

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE bring Ben Cross back as Sarek! He did so well in that role and his fans want more of him!

156. VOODOO - September 14, 2011

Wasn’t Jimmy Carter in office the last time a Star Trek film came out?

Did anyone think he wasn’t going to direct the film?

157. Landru - September 14, 2011

They met his price! Way to pony up Paramount!

158. rm10019 - September 14, 2011

Really looking forward to any snippet of info about the film, and for that matter the PS3 game coming!

Bob, can you tell us what you chose for the deflector dish name?

159. Charla - September 14, 2011

Thanks #138 Zee, and #144 Starfleet’s Finest also for your kind words- I didn’t see your post Zee until after I had already posted but I do thank you, again.

I love the way you put it Starfleet about the JJ haters, (or whatever) I agree. You stated “don’t let the back button hit you on the way out, with utmost respect” – priceless!

160. Dr. Image - September 14, 2011

#51 Harry- Took the words RIGHT outta my mouth…. now MAKE the damn movie already!!!

161. Rocket Scientist - September 14, 2011

I’ll be there. Trek 2009 was entertaining enough, though over time I developed misgivings about a number of the team’s creative decisions. Prime Universe will always be “my” Trek, but I’ll check out what these guys have to offer. I’m sure it’ll be fun.

162. Valerius - September 14, 2011

Just make sure that Engineering is upgraded from a brewery to, well… at least a distillery! What a joke!

163. CoffeeProf - September 14, 2011


Fine….go ahead and skip it. More room for us REAL Star Trek fans.

164. Phil - September 14, 2011

Such a schizophrenic site. Last week we were burying the movie and this site, and this week we are bitching about JJ directing.

Good to see some direction on this, though it was interesting to note that WHICH month the script would be finished wasn’t mentioned.. :-)

165. Rusty0918 - September 14, 2011

We’ll get something like “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen” and yet it’ll get praised like it’s the next “Dark Knight,” if my guess is correct on this. Seriously, I could actually see this happening.

It doesn’t matter of the quality, critics will bow down at JJ Abrams feet and make it out to be the most amazing thing they’ll ever have seen. Even if it’s total garbage.

Not to say the last movie was bad (though it had a weak plot), but I just don’t have that much faith in Orci and Kurtzman, especially looking at their other work (“Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen” and “Cowboys vs. Aliens” come into mind).

I hope I’m wrong about this, but at this point, I can believe just about anything.

166. the bitter truth - September 14, 2011

Expected news. I wish we had a better established director. When Paramount takes “Dark Night” as the example, it is apparent that it will never happen with JJ and gang. I am sure they have good intentions however JJ will need to learn that he will not be the big screen super director he aspires to be the hard way. I’m afraid he will have a similar career to that of Shyamalan, let’s hope Star Trek does not see his full decline.

167. LukasKetner - September 14, 2011

A loser huh? At least a winner like you is here to set it straight.

168. NuFan - September 14, 2011


169. Starfleet's Finest - September 14, 2011

@ 164. Phil
“Such a schizophrenic site. Last week we were burying the movie and this site, and this week we are bitching about JJ directing.”

Completely agree. No matter what there is to report (or no one reports anything) someone is always ready to give up on Trek or talk about the glory days of the past. Trek is moving forward, always forward. As Trek fans we can do no less…and if you can’t do that keep the mudslinging and witchhunt to a minimum please.

170. the Quickening - September 14, 2011

A little disappointed. TREK can do better than someone who can’t seem to make up his mind whether he wants to direct TREK or not. Can’t figure out this guy. For the second time, Abrams continues to be cagey about announcing whether he will direct or not. Seems to me to be totally committed to something–being excited and passionate–also means taking the first step and/or announcing: “I can’t wait to take the reins… let’s get going… I can’t wait to get started”! There’s an advantage with this kind of attitude, and would be more along the lines of what I would desire for a director of a TREK film, or any film I was anticipating. In my estimation, excitement, passion, COMMITMENT, responsibility, confidence leads to a better life… yes, even better work and success. Abrams has just not demonstrated this. I was hoping for someone else, certainly someone with more talent to direct. Oh, well, can’t have everything.

171. Fabio - September 14, 2011

Who cares! Make a new series! Waiting four years for see Captain Kirk adventures is ridiculous!

172. Thomas Jensen - September 14, 2011

No coverage of the original Star Trek’s 45 Anniversary, but this is a big deal. It takes too long for these movies to be made and released. No matter what the reasons, it’s too long. I’d rather have a TV series.

173. DS9 IN PRIME TIME - September 14, 2011

Thanks fot the update on anthony hope he is ok.

I am very glad that JJ is going to direct!!

174. Darkowski - September 14, 2011

Great. More JJPrise and lens flares :-P

175. Bryan - September 14, 2011

oh just wonderful :-( More unnecessary, unrealistic siezure inducing lens flares.

176. NuFan - September 14, 2011

171 = 172 = 174 = 175

Why do the haters always have to be inflating their numbers?

177. Sky Pilot - September 14, 2011

Leave the gay issues out of this movie.
Let Spock rebuild the Vulcan race, and Kirk save the rest of humanity from certain destruction.

178. cdp - September 14, 2011

No surprise here. You could tell in all his interviews that he wanted to direct the next Trek it was probably just a matter of working out some contract issues and things. I for one am glade he will be back directing as he did a great job with Star Trek 09 and I loved what he did with Super 8. I know the cast is glade to have him back and I cant wait to see what he and his team does with the next one.

179. Bruce Banner - September 14, 2011

@170 the Quickening:
Haven’t you watched Shatner’s “The Captains”? Listen to the interview with Scott Bacula. On Quantum Leap he had that “I can’t wait to get started “attitude you want. It cost him his marriage. That attitude say to the studio “Let me bend over and grab my ankles so you can F*%# me as hard as you can: Translation: I’ll work cheap and stay at the studio 24/7 and give up my life for this movie.

Please remember, this is a business to these people. For those of you complaining about the 4 year wait. This enables the actors to not be type cast as Star Trek charactors, and allows them to make a living without having to do conventions until their 80 years old.

180. Gary Makin - September 14, 2011

Good news.

And I like lens flares.

181. Battle-scarred Sciatica - September 14, 2011


Glad to hear you are OK Charla (and your husband)

I am sure you will know how to look after yourself properly (and, again, your husband!) being of the medical persuasion….

Get well soon if not we might have to send Harry round with some of his crazy soothing “ointment”!
Trust me, you wont want him to rub that in for you!

There was a moment there where i thought TrekMovie had been involved in some kind of accident as we didn’t have news for a while.
so glad we do not have to defibrillate that one as i can never remeber if it is the third or second cycle we adjunct the adrenaline???…….I remember now – it is such a bugger that every 5 years we have to readjust the CPR algorithm – damn the australsian resus council!!!!!

get well soon Charla and TrekMovie and get on with it JJ.

Bloody hell we have waited long enough………..

182. chicken coop - September 14, 2011

Glad everything is ok. :)

183. Lt. Bailey - September 14, 2011

Possible 2013 release….Thats a bit long to wait but what can you do? I also seem to recall that the writers had a script a few months back or perhaps that was only an “outline”. All the ST movie scripts had to be re-written at some point so why not this film as well. I just hope they do away with the lens flares and shakey cameras.

184. Prometheus - September 14, 2011

Why is there no news about TNG Remastered on BluRay? The german Facebook page just confirmed a release of the first 4 episodes for the 15th of december. Cant wait!

185. kinooruen - September 14, 2011

will remember to bring sunglasses with me for the bridge scenes.

186. Anthony Thompson - September 14, 2011


No. It wasn’t for all of us. It was for ME! But he’d better hook me up with a date for the festivities. Maybe the girl who told McCoy to “sit down and shut up!”. She’s my type. : D

187. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - September 14, 2011

#186. You can have her. I will take the Green Chick. Lol.

188. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - September 14, 2011

Harry will take any chick that is not Erica Durance. Lol.

189. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 14, 2011

What I hope is part of the script:

1) Kirk gets a young beagle mascot from Admiral Archer

2) Kirk meets a lovely woman – no Carol Marcus or anyone like her (Ick)

3) Kirk actually manages to win a hand to hand/Kirk fu fight in this movie. It does not have to be more than once…:) That should make Chris Pine happy. He was a little disappointed that his character kept getting ‘it’ handed to him. He thought he was going to play a hero… except, of course, he did, where it counted.

4) Some good scenes of Kirk with ripped/torn shirt. Also there needs to be a scene that moves the story along (or not!) showing Spock and McCoy in a similar state of dishevelment…:) (Bob – a must have scene!)

5) Bring space to the big screen. From the pictures we are getting back from Hubble, there appears to be some extraordinary beauty and scary(?) awesomeness out there. What better way to show this than on a big cinema screen, maybe even in 3D!

6) The Enterprise discovers Menosia… (Bob – talk to me!)

7) Let’s see crew quarters, or at least, Kirk’s.

8) Have an arboretum on the Enterprise – part of the air/water recycling systems and attached to the Recreation area.

9) A little bit of German product placement? :)

10) Ease up on the lens flares.

190. THX-1138 - September 14, 2011

So, to recap the news:

JJ will direct. Script isn’t quite finished. Pert near but not quite. And pre-production has started. Filming hopefully to begin this winter.

And still the movie might not make it to the theaters til summer of 2013? Huh.
I am of the belief that the longer Star Trek movies take to reach the big screen, the less relevant they become to the average movie-going public. Sort of like all this momentum was built and a whole new audience was created and then….nothing. I just worry a bit that in this new era of short attention spans you must strike while the iron is hot. Lord knows that irons don’t get much colder than the Star Trek franchise these past few years prior to the NuTrek movie.

Anyhoo……How about a TV series? I’d rather have that. Trek is best on the Telebij.

191. NDP - September 14, 2011

Cool….Break open the kegs down in Engineering!

192. SoonerDave - September 14, 2011

Well, I was predicting gloom and doom before, and with this announcement, looks like I need to admit I was wrong.

Delighted to hear progress, delighted to hear a movie being made, and not surprised Abrams is directing. Be glad to hear that script is done.

@boborci Nice to see you here again

193. oyboh - September 14, 2011

They are ALL “an amazing group”.
But–right–FOUR YEARS??–mmmph–maybe–kinda worked for Harry Potter. (yes will look’em up)
4 years is good for the actor’s evolution–and the authors haven’t been still. But the public/audience…dunno if the younger ones will not have outgrown ST11 by the time ST12 hits the cinemas.

194. Trekprincess - September 14, 2011

Keachick those are good suggestions :):)

195. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 14, 2011

#190 You have already said this at other times. They are clearly not doing a TV series at the moment and the last thing these people need are more distractions.

Why would the average movie going public find another Star Trek three and a half/four years down the track less relevant? If Paramount do their publicity well, then they should get lots of people in to see the sequel, especially if it is a really good film.

I don’t know how things work in the US, but I have noticed that just prior to another movie being released here, if the actors already have movies “under their belt”, then our television channels will screen those movies, to be seen right across NZ (This is where being small can be an advantage). I am certain the same will apply to Star Trek. We will get to see a repeat screening of Star Trek (2009), just prior to the release of the sequel here – Yay!

This happened late last year. Either TV One or TV 3 (can’t recall which) screened the Princess Diaries: Royal Engagement which stars Anne Hathaway and Chris Pine. At the same time, a movie was released to cinemas starring Anne Hathaway and so also was the movie Unstoppable starring, of course, Chris Pine. Coincidence? Maybe.

196. CJS - September 14, 2011

Anyone know what this movie is about, other than disease and danger wrapped in darkness and silence?

197. Zee - September 14, 2011

#189 Keachick

I like your ideas. I also would like to see more of the ship-crew quarters, an arboretum/rec area, and a briefing room scene with Kirk, Spock, and McCoy involved in a lively discussion.

198. Harry Ballz - September 14, 2011

196. “Anyone know what this movie is about”

Um, I think it takes place in outer space.

(shhhh, keep that under your hat)

199. dmduncan - September 14, 2011

I like lens flares too. Watch Alien, one of my all time favorite movies. Ridley Scott flared like crazy! Not as much as JJ, granted, but they add a semblence of reality that I like.

200. THX-1138 - September 14, 2011


To quote Pete Carroll, “What’s your deal?”. I am sure that if I were to go back through threads I would find that you have re-iterated your points.

As for my points about relevance, I would think that it would be obvious to an objective observer. As a business owner with an understanding of advertising and marketing brand recognition is a primary concern when promoting a product. I have taken an informal poll of my kids’ friends about Star Trek in the past. Most of them didn’t know anything about it or identified with characters or situations more closely associated with TNG. This was prior to NuTrek. After the release of the film almost all of them knew who Kirk, Spock, Bones et al were even if they weren’t familiar with the original series. A month ago I asked some of their friends about the new movie and was surprised to find out that they had forgotten about the 2009 movie. When I asked them about their interest in the sequel they didn’t seem to be interested one way or the other and didn’t give a high priority to seeing it. Now this of course doesn’t mean that the new movie won’t be well received but I don’t think it bodes well for it’s prospects.

And I will re-iterate here once again:

In my opinion Star Trek works better on TV in series form. Storytelling concerning the human condition as Gene Roddenberry originally conceived it, is better addressed in this format. In the movies, although they are enjoyable, It just doesn’t seem to be the priority.

201. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 14, 2011

I don’t have a huge objection to the “lens flares”. When they showed the Enterprise and the space station, that looked right, given the position of the sun in relation to the earth and station. Again, when we see the “lens flares” on the Kelvin when it is near a nova (not the same supernova as in the prime universe?), then the blinding light and glare would be there.

However, I do not see why there should be so much glare (lens flare) on the bridge of the Enterprise when it is in deep space and not near anything bright. It made it hard to see all the characters and what was going on and it did not make that much sense.

Done appropriately, “lens flares” do add a good dimension to a film. Done too much, ie inappropriately, then they become a very annoying distraction. BTW, I liked how JJ Abrams handled “lens flare” in Super 8. Frankly, I liked Super 8 – had a good feel to it – nicely done, JJ Abrams!

202. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - September 14, 2011

Hay harry. I think the movie also has Ships that can go faster then light. But if anyone says they heard that from me I will deny it.

203. Praetor Tal - September 14, 2011

Brilliant. Now if they could just work faster. Espresso? Methamphetamines?

204. John from Cincinnati - September 14, 2011

I really hope they correct the iBridge. Maybe Scotty will bring a few new Engineering improvements to the Big E.

Let’s all hope this is a bigger success than Super 8 and Cowboys & Aliens.

205. dmduncan - September 14, 2011

201. Keachick (rose pinenut) – September 14, 2011

The lens flares in ST.09 did not seem excessive to me, but JJ got a lot of complaints so I do understand if he decides to ease up on them for the sequel as he did for Super 8, which I also loved. Super 8 was more like how Ridley Scott used them in Alien.

206. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 14, 2011

#200 Agreed. I have repeated myself at times.

Again, I will reiterate what I said previously. All Paramount has to do is some good well timed publicity closer to the release date (they need to lock one in) and I suspect there will be renewed interest (or not). Nobody has a (perfect) crystal ball.

There is another aspect to all this and that is that people not only go to films because of the franchise, story, title but also because they like to see certain actors perform. This is the case for me. If the movies, This Means War and Welcome to People, both starring Chris Pine in a leading role but having different plot lines and emphasis, do well, then that can bode well for Star Trek also.

I have just read on another board a person posting from Russia who just happened to see Chris Pine in the movie Blind Dating recently. He was so impressed that he is keen to watch anything else that Chris Pine is in, including, hopefully, the upcoming Star Trek sequel.

207. Rebecca - September 14, 2011

117-I agree with you JJ is one of the best Hollywood directors out there. 121- Love your Star Trek 12 movie suggestions!

208. THX-1138 - September 14, 2011

Truth be told, as long as they don’t F things up too bad, I’ll be happy with the movie. I still think Paramount and Bad Robot need to do more than just well placed ads and promotion. The last film was promoted well enough, but the support after the release left me wanting, and I’ll wager I’m not the only one. I do feel that from 2009 to 2013 is too long between what has been hinted at as being, if not actually a trilogy, a trifecta of films from this particular production group. Your fellow New Zealander, Peter Jackson, didn’t wait this long between films when he did LOTR. And the Harry Potter film series (widely regarded as the most successful film series in history) took care of 7 movies in 10 years. Certainly these are horses of different colors, but I offer them up none-the-less as examples of how a successful series of movies and properties can be handled.

And, BTW, TV series. That’s the way to go. (hee-hee)

209. somethoughts - September 14, 2011

great news! sneak peak us bob! : )

210. Let Them Eat Plomeek Soup - September 14, 2011

Keep the lens flares, keep the shaky cam…just keep the quality, too.

211. CanOpener1256 - September 14, 2011

I really enjoyed his Super 8 movie this summer .. the way it was filmed, lighted, directed and the story (although the ending was a bit weak imho).

I don’t mind a few lens flares for effect and to create a certain look. But I don’t think on a star ship they would have that. “Set phasers to lock on that Klingon” arrggh .. can’t see the switch …damn lights’ Enterprise explodes.

I also don’t mind the staircases and junk for engineering (original version had that to a certain extent). But you need to blue screen some effects in there also to modernize it. At least a “real” warp core like we saw in the old series in the background.

p.s. I hope we see more types o ships, and some more aliens we know and love.

212. Shannon Nutt - September 14, 2011

Enough with the lens flares comments…you’re going to get them…JJ LOVES the look of them, and they’ve become almost a ‘signature” mark for him. It could be worse, you know…GEORGE LUCAS could be directing it! :)

213. Jonboc - September 14, 2011

I grok it! Glad to have you back at the helm JJ!

214. Bobski - September 14, 2011

Great another “Star Trek” movie for Star Wars fans.

It is time to restore the timeline and get rid of the USS Abramprise and bring back the Matt Jefferie’s Enterprise. She deserves to be on the big screen.

215. Dee - lvs moon' surface - September 14, 2011

#86 – boborci…

Did you see that, Mr. Bob Orci?…people are excited now… just give us a little bit of information… because there was an atmosphere of desolation and despair before that… LOL

…………….Announcement?? ………………….and then Premiere!!!! …and then YES!!!!!

#198 – Harry Ballz ……….

“Um, I think it takes place in outer space.”

Yes I agree with you…. you’re absolutely right………..+LOL

:-) :-)

216. Bob Tompkins - September 14, 2011

I am soooooo glad that Abrams has finally deigned to give a little time and effort to a project that should have been first and foremost in his thoughts since the moment the first movie wrapped. The writers seem to be able to give their energies to all sort and manner of claptrap, giving us a Transformers movie every 18 months like clockwork while giving us instant classics like ‘Cowboys and Aliens’ on the side. Now they are going to start filming a new Trek just about the time it was supposed to have been released according to the original schedules.
I just can’t seem to get too excited over it given the recent track record.

217. Bob Tompkins - September 14, 2011

Perhaps the suits at Paramount are closet realists and came to the same conclusion that I did, that ST 09’s performance, when factoring for inflation, was nowhere near as good as saome of the others in the franchise; the best comparison is ST:TMP, a tepid entry at best.

218. captain_neill - September 14, 2011

I am not that enthuse with excitement over this news. As far as I am concerned he is talented guy for character but completely unoroginal in most departments.

I want someone who GETS Trek. Anywho it will be a good film, just hope they fix up the things that didn’t work well in the last one. And most important he better remember the Roddenberry ideals and not do Star Wars.

Why try and emulate a film that is constantly being ruined by George Lucas?

219. Jim Nightshade - September 14, 2011

Bob Orci-if the new trek movie isnt going to be released til 2013 your audience will be much smaller cuz of the end of the world in dec 21 2012—be sure copies of the movie are made worldwide cuz if the only copies will be in california-when the west coast falls into the sea-all prints will be lost–then again jj n you all better relocate to a safe area of the us before dec 2012 or the movie will never be finished–im up in wash state so we will all be dead also-damn i was hoping for a release date before dec 2012 for this reason–sigh—

220. NuFan - September 14, 2011


221. Rosario T. Calabria - September 14, 2011

217. Bob Tompkins

This is neither the time nor place for this discussion, however, that’s not true.

Star Trek (2009) is in fact the best-performing Star Trek movie of all time even when adjusting for ticket price inflation.

The average price of a ticket in 2009 was $7.50 and Star Trek sold approximately 34.4M tickets. Star Trek: The Motion Picture, on the other hand, sold approximately 32.8M tickets (with an average 1979 ticket price of $2.51).

Adjusted for ticket price inflation, Star Trek: The Motion Picture would have grossed approximately $245.8M domestically had it been released in 2009 (vs. the $257.7M grossed by Star Trek).

222. captain_neill - September 14, 2011


However, just because its the best performing film does not mean that it is the best Trek film.

God we live in an age were Transformers by Michael Bay can be in the top 20 highest movies ever. What does that say about the mainstream? Is this really the audience we have to cater to now? Lose the substance for a quick buck. Unfortunately that is what is required to make it big again.

What I would like to know is why does the mainstream think that this is the only good Trek? Have they actually watched Trek?
“This time we paid the proce with our dearest blood”

223. C Mosenko - September 14, 2011

Let’s have a war the new universe vs the old one. In the end maybe a third universe will be created.

224. Neilio - September 14, 2011

bout time!

225. Bill Peters - September 14, 2011

Glad Everyone is back and looking forward to hearing more about Production and a Premiere date soon!

226. dmduncan - September 14, 2011

221: “This is neither the time nor place for this discussion, however, that’s not true.”

Also, TMP was still the result of the original fan push to get Star Trek going again, either on TV or in the movies, whereas ST.09 jumpstarted the franchise from its wheels-on-the-cinderblocks position after Enterprise failed to keep interest alive. So it’s not an apples to apples comparison. STTMP was the result of inertia to get Star Trek back, whereas ST.09 had to generate momentum from a condition of absolute rest.

I think that may be one of the underlying reasons why the movie moved so fast. i.e., to reestablish itself as a vigorous, living thing again.

227. dmduncan - September 14, 2011

I didn’t finish my thought!

The point being that I think ST.09 had to do more without the advantage than TMP had, and it did so.

228. dmduncan - September 14, 2011

than = that

229. Suellen from Savannah - September 14, 2011

I am a 50+ who has been a star trek fan since the beginning. The 2009 was trek and it wasn’t trek. It was better or worse than TOS it was just different.

I do think some of the posts to be rude and hurtful to others. One can have an opinion without being nasty to someone who share a different opinion.

To Bob and the rest of the team “may fortune favor the foolish” for taking on ST in the first place.. Remember at the end of the day if you did your best that is all that anyone can do. Bless your little hearts.

Also please ask JJ not so many lens flare too much of anything is not good.
As we say in the south “you all must have run up on a stump with the story, bless your hearts.”

230. Rusty0918 - September 14, 2011

Captain_neill, I share the same sentiment to an extent. The main reason is that the nuTrek is where the action is now. It is insulting when some people hail Star Trek (2009) as being better than any other Trek episode or movie that has come out. Unfortunately, the people who have this viewpoint have a big fortress to hide behind (the stellar reviews it got).

Granted yes, I have issues with the previous movie. Such as Kirk’s rapid cadet-to-captain promotion, the engineering brewery, etc. Although I do think there are some who complain too much. As with the barcode readers on the iBridge, keep in mind that on DS9 they used Rubbermaid Action Packers for weapons lockers, and there was an old style switchboard terminal in the TNG episode “Unnatural Selection” complete with handset telephone! So, I’ve let that slide. And I also am not fond of the people crying over the colors of the Enterprise’s warp nacelles or deflector dish. Also there was a converted art scanner that was used in an Enterprise episode.. That goes to the extreme. I’m not a fan of the miniskirts as uniforms, although keep in mind that there were a number of Enterprise women in trousers in the movie, so I do give a partial allowance.

I do question what will happen in the sequel though. “Star Trek” (2009) was more of an “Independence Day” kind of movie – fun but stupid. I’m not sure how much faith I have in Orci, Kurtzman, Lindelof, and Abrams to win me over. Orci and Kurtzman were partly responsible for the mess that was “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen,” and their “Cowboys and Aliens” movie didn’t do much beter with critics.

Is the sequel going to go all “Michael Bay” on us? I don’t know. Are we going to be seeing Kirk being even more of a douchebag than he was in “Star Trek” (2009) – you got to admit he came off as a jerk in some cases. Are we going to see unecessary sexual humor? Yeomen with fake boobs? Jar Jar Binks style characters (like Skids and Mudflap)? Go all out racist and sexist like “Tansformers: Revenge of the Fallen?”

And if it does, will the critics care or not? Heck, they were bowing at JJ’s feet last time around. Could a movie that degrades to the level of “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen” get a Best Picture Oscar? Yes, I know the reviews of that Transformers movie were pretty much dreadful, but with enough propaganda and manipulation, they could do it.

231. Mel - September 14, 2011

@ 221. Rosario T. Calabria

I think that the last movie was a success, but only a normal one and not a huge one in comparison with other movies from that year. It was “only” on place 13 in the 2009 worldwide grosses ranking of cinema movies.


It was even beaten by some movies with a much smaller budget like:
Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs
The Twilight Saga: New Moon
Sherlock Holmes
The Hangover
Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Squeakquel

Your comparison with The Motion Picture is useless.

First speaking about only domestic grosses is a waste of time. It really doesn’t matter where the money comes from. So when movies are compared, the worldwide box office is what matters.


This site estimates that The Motion Picture made worldwide $435 million adjusted for 2005 Ticket Price Inflation. It is a little out of date and probably not exactly right, but it shows, that international grosses had already a big importance in 1979.

And second comparing the actually sold tickets is also ridiculous. A fast search on Wikipedia revealed this:


Population of the USA
1980: 226,545,805
2010: 308,745,538

80 million more are quite a difference!

All in all it just doesn’t make much sense to compare decades old movies with new ones. So much has changed since then. The last movie should be compared with other new movies with similar budgets. That is what matters. Not if the last movie is the financially most successful Star Trek movie or not.

232. Mel - September 14, 2011


“Part of the hold-up has been that Alex Kurtzman, who wrote Abrams’ first Trek with Roberto “Bob” Orci, has been busy editing and posting Welcome to People, his directing debut at DreamWorks Pictures. We’re told that now that Kurtzman is finished with those duties, he is back in his office and the team is ready to work.”

So it seems this time Alex Kurtzman was the reason for a further delay. The producers/writers were much too busy with other projects in my opinion. I hope that they either make Star Trek 3/13 their main priority next time or that Paramount gets new people. I don’t want a repetition of all those delays again.

233. moauvian waoul- aka: seymour hiney - September 14, 2011

Welcome back Charla. Glad you could make it.

234. Spockanella - September 14, 2011

Bob Orci, if you’re still lurking somewhere…hoping that you all won’t forget our friend Del Trame (British Naval Dude). On September 26, it will be a year since we lost our irreverent sailor man. It would ease a lot of hearts if he could be memorialized (is that even a word?) in some way in the next film. Yes?

235. TrekMadeMeWonder - September 14, 2011

I just had a conversation with an old time Trek lover who said, “They killed the franchise. Why watch what they distroyed? Same for Scott Bakula’s Enterprise. Last episode killed the show.”

This is in addition to three other friends of mine who have lost interest. Yeah, they’re forty-somthings, but hey, they sure do pay for tickets too.

Better FIX things, JJ! And fast!

236. TrekMadeMeWonder - September 14, 2011

231. Mel

“2010: 308,745,538″

They are now counting Illegals that are in the country. And we know that they only watch bootlegs. ; )

237. dougner - September 14, 2011

And a huge sigh of relief falls upon trek nation, as Abrahams is back in the director’s seat. He brings a Michael Bay action quality mixed with a Spielberg story telling mentality. This is the best news trek fans could get. As long as the script is half decent, this should star treks dark knight!

238. Rusty0918 - September 14, 2011

Michael Bay action quality? Like robot testicles?

239. Rosario T. Calabria - September 14, 2011

231. Mel

You’re conflating three different points: gross, attendance and profitability.

Yes, you could make an argument that Star Trek underperformed internationally. However, it shouldn’t go unnoticed that domestically it was a strong draw–7th overall for the year (to go top 10, irrespective of competition, is noteworthy).

And regardless of population growth, Star Trek IS the most-attended of the Star Trek franchise films. That’s not disputed. Notice I ‘ve said most-attended or best-performing (in domestic gross). I’m not projecting opinion with regards to the critical standing of the film. I’m not even claiming it’s the most profitable of the franchise.

Because those would be separate points for an entirely different subject.

And on that point…let’s get back on track.

The Star Trek sequel has: a director in place; a script near completion; and a target in its sights for a start to principal photography.


240. Mr. "There are always possibilities" - September 14, 2011

This is good news. I still marvel at the love for Trek that was shown in ST:09. I still love all of the ST:TOS references. I have no doubt that the “Supreme Court” will show just as much reverence for the new movie.

My one little wish would be a cameo of Mr. Shatner as Kirk. I have my own ideas of course, but I am sure that the Supremes would do it right.

241. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 14, 2011

Honestly, it is really painful reading some of these posts. Some people are just so obsessed with Star Wars – they see the damn SW movies in everything they look at. Such silly twits on this board. Truly. Would you please get over the transformer testicles (actually the word used was “scrotum”), Hans whats-his-name and the Millenium Falcon, cowboys meeting aliens, blah, blah, blah… been there, done that. Such silly fun killing twits come and post here sometimes. Oh dear…what to do?

Those “Supreme Court” guys certainly seemed to have moved on. I believe they are now working on a movie belonging to this franchise I think they call Star Trek. They even have a new cast ‘n’ all. They mention stuff like a Federation of Planets? – a what, you say? And there’s this guy with long funny looking ears, s’posed to be a real brainbox…then there’s this real neat looking space ship that goes at warp speed. Huh? WTF? Not to mention that super cute guy who gets promoted to captain. It is all so incredibly amazing. I can’t wait!

242. Brock - September 14, 2011

I’m not really that excited. So in 2 years we’re gonna have a 2 hour long movie?
Now if it was another trek tv show that had been greenlit, THAT would be exciting. Trek’s homeground has always been TV and these new reboot movies aren’t gonna change that. Trek ’09 wasn’t Star Trek for me.

243. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 14, 2011

Forgot to mention – I have to get back to giving yellow puffle Spock and little orange puffle Chris Pine lots of cuddles. I am under strict orders from my daughter, you see…

244. Charla - September 14, 2011

Thanks # 182 Chicken coop & #181 Battle Scarred Sciatica, Battle, you’ve given me some real incentive to get well quicker with the thought of Harry and ointment! :P haha

And yes the ever changing ACLS protocols/algorithm! Your right it is 2 shocks, then epi or vasopressin, and so on…(I’ll stop there as to not bore anyone reading this,lol) Curious, does your name reflect the type of work you do? Just hearing the words “Battled Scarred Sciatica” makes me feel for you- ; )

#233 Moavian Waoul, Thanks so, so much, I am glad to be back-

I have to say I am still basking in the announcement of JJ directing, the script being completed soon, and the filming to begin this winter, that I find it difficult to clearly focus on the other topics within this blog! Still happy! and no, it’s not the meds either…haha :D

245. Devon - September 14, 2011

#235 – Are you honestly implying that your two friends are representative of the whole fanbase and that J.J. and them need to rework their extremely successful formula just for those two?

More Trek fans liked the last film than most Trek from the past 20s. This can be backed up by polls on this site, TrekBBS.com, TrekToday, etc. And the fans helped vote with ticket sales too.

Sorry, anyone who is telling themselves that “J.J. destroyed” anything is being delusional.

246. Canon Schmanon - September 14, 2011

I’m glad they’re finally moving on the next film. I just hope I’m still glad after I see it. I liked the first one quite a bit, but they really need to make a better one this time. They must maintain forward momentum. I never get my hopes up too much, but I DO get my expectations up.

247. TrekMadeMeWonder - September 14, 2011

It’s a moot point. Devon.

It should never had happend unless there is a fix on the way.
Consistency rules the day in any franchise..

248. DeShonn Steinblatt - September 14, 2011


Oh, don’t be so dramatic. It wasn’t nearly as mindless and stupid as First Contact.

249. JimNightshade - September 14, 2011

Ive been a trek fan since the beginning myself–in my opinion–jj n roberto n alex took our classic characters and updated them in both style n look n pacing to make trek fun to watch for everyone–i admit it is not just our trek anymore n some fans dont like that—but its the only way for trek to survive n thrive after nearly collapsing upon itself with so many years of stories within stories so detailed n convouluted that even trek fans didnt like a lot of the trek being made–nutrek is the bet of both worlds-its clever fast paced awesome n epic in scope n action-yes it is more like star wars–the good star wars–more humor,fun for all-myself trek09 was the trek i always wanted-epic fun with plenty of inside references for us fans n character arcs like original spock et al–a fine send off for fans n non fans alike-grs dream is now accessible to all-as it should be thanks to jj n roberto n alex n a fine cast–keep up the great work-2009 trek was the only trek other than tmp that i enjoyed so much i went to the theatres many times–i doubt i was the only trek fan to do this either-i also bought hi-def tv n bluray mainly for watching the nutrek at home–and i was not didappointed for that either–

250. Battle-scarred Sciatica - September 14, 2011


Avast ye!
I too am medically inclined. I am a cardiology/respiratory clinical nurse educator here in Dunedin, New Zealand – but hail originally from Norwich, Norfolk, England.

Beware! Harry and his special ointment – ooooh and those calloused, pint holding palms…..#judder!
That’s enough to turn a Jem’Hadar turn to mush.

Get well soon my friend.

251. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 14, 2011

What’s all this about Harry and his ointment?

252. Harry Ballz - September 14, 2011

My ointment? I don’t just rub it on, I rub it IN!

253. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 14, 2011

Aww, Harry!

254. Hugh Hoyland - September 14, 2011

I’m wondering when the new comics are coming out. Sometime this month right?

255. Battle-scarred Sciatica - September 15, 2011

Those hands and your special ointment Harry!


That could earn you a few quid/dollars.

Or a warrant for your arrest of course…

256. captain_neill - September 15, 2011

Sorry folks but I still think Wrath of Khan, First Contact, Undiscovered Country and Voyage Home still rank above the new movie.

Out of the work I have seen from Oric and Kurtzman, their script for Star Trek XI was prob their best script but in the scale of Star Trek stories I felt it fell a little short in comparions to many of the great Trek stories.

And Nero still is one of the worst villains ever.

257. ur - September 15, 2011

Thats great news regarding J.J. and that the movie is in pre-production. What I miss most are the main characters and I am looking forward to being reaquainted with them.Our team out there in the great unknown tackling some unsurmountable crises with wonderful character moments and interactions,the Trek humour and an emotional depth which in engaging and makes demands of us their fellow travellers who are with them at a distance is to me Trek at its best and what I hope to see in the next movie.

258. Aurore - September 15, 2011

63. dmduncan – September 13, 2011
52. Aurore – September 13, 2011
And I am crying — like spicy French mustard has been poured over my eyes!


And, I fully agree with what you once stated: “I said my piece. I figure I either persuaded or didn’t, so no sense going round with it anymore. We’ll see what happens, right?”

I’ll be there, for the sequel, either way…provided the story is worth it, for, I want an outstanding movie first and foremost.

When I discovered The Original Series, in the 1980’s, through reruns, it was love at first sight .
The focus of the show , for me, was on Kirk and Spock, with McCoy… never too far behind; I, personally, never saw any holy trinity, so to speak.

I did, however, see a family.
Star Trek 2009 gave me a glimpse into a future where that family could be back in all its glory.
Therefore, each and every character must be treated fairly by the powers that be ; with the respect they all deserve.
Thus, what each member of the family brings to the whole must be emphasized. there are reasons why they are able to overcome whatever obstacles come their way, together.

I would like for those reasons to be seen, felt in the sequel.

259. Aurore - September 15, 2011

258:there are reasons= There are reasons

260. P Technobabble - September 15, 2011

I am looking forward to the sequel very much. I think Abrams and Co. did a great job with the first film, and knowing they must take the sequel up a notch is, IMO, enough motivation for them to give us a spectacular Trek sequel.
I don’t agree with anyone who says the first film was a dog, or that the sequel will be a dog, particularly when they speak as if their opinion is fact, rather than simply their opinion.
Trek09 was a hit and it accomplished its goals. IMO, this is the only way to measure success. I don’t think opinion is a measure of success for anyone other than the person stating that opinion. It’s not expected that everyone will like the same thing, and Trek is no exception. But when someone makes comments like “the movie sucked,” they must be laughed at.
Everyone has expectations for the sequel, and I’m sure the Court is doing its very best to try to satisfy those expectations. They had a tough job in front of them when they did the first movie and, IMO, they pulled it off. They have an even tougher job with the sequel. Let’s wait and see what they have in store for us — no matter how hard the waiting is.

261. Patrice - September 15, 2011

Yea– the website is back up with great news none the less. Let the mud slinging begin….

Personally I got sick of seeing Mr. Quinto’s smirk mocking us saying that he thought that a long wait between Trek films was a “great thing”.

262. Charla - September 15, 2011

@250 That is wonderful Battle that your a Clinical Nurse Educator- I hope that it provides some relief for that sciatica inbetween classes/educating! When I first seen your name, (on other posts) I thought, hmm… this person sounds like he or she could be in the medical profession. hahaha I would love to visit New Zealand. From what I have seen/studied it is beautiful.

About Harry’s ointment…. I think I’m stepping in it LOL

263. Daoud - September 15, 2011

They’ve taken far too long with this project.
All of TOS was made in the time between their two films. This thing is destined now to tank at the box office.
Many of us “old ones” here on Exo III will be disinterested when the movie does show up. At this point, I’m tired of hearing dribbles of “oh yeah, we’re working on it.” B.S. The first movie was supposed to come out in December 2008. Paramount greenlit a sequel in Spring 2009, before the film was released. It’s frickin’ two and a half years later. The “Supreme Court” is more like a “Kangaroo Court”. They’ve been amusing themselves with other movies, tv series concepts that epic fail, or end up in purgatory (quite literally!), or broadcasting their episodes of “planking”.
They’re the worst kind of producers now, because they don’t seem to be hungry. They’re full of Doritos and Cheetos. They’ve been coddled by the studios, thrown big checks. They don’t take it seriously. They don’t live every moment trying to struggle. If they ever do getting around to putting out product…. what are we looking to now, Summer 2013?
We won World War II (Dec 1941-Jun 1945) in less time (Dec 2008-Jun 2013?!?!). Sure, we get visits from Bob now and then, and thank you Bob for that… but really… you’re like the Presidential Press Secretary, you’re thrown out there, propped up, making about as much sense with a script you once told us was 80 pages and mostly done a year ago.
As they say “p*ss or get off the pot”. Judith and Gar probably wrote 10 full novels, all of them fascinating reads during the same timeframe. If you can’t handle the Trek franchise, give it the hell up. Put it back in the hands of CBS where it belongs. Get Coto on board to run it, and make a series about something in your new universe.
But the hill with you as producers. You’ve had more than enough time. If Paramount still had stockholders that mattered, they’d have fired your team a long time ago.
Life goes on. Sitting around hoping a Trek movie comes out, is clearly the refuge of those of us who still thought Trek could speak to today’s audiences. It probably can. But if this is how JJ announces he’s on board, forgeddaboutit. I no longer care.

264. falcon - September 15, 2011


Duly noted, and probably what a lot of us have been thinking. “OMGthisisgreatnewswhatthehelltookyousolong?”

As to what I’d like to see in the new movie, first, stop with the shaky-cam already! It’s a starship in space with artificial gravity, not an office building in Tokyo during an earthquake. Shaking is not justified. Neither are huge lens flares. If the lights are that bright on the bridge everyone’s gonna need sunglasses (or eye exams every couple of weeks). Tone it down a bit. Also, build Scotty a real Engineering section that looks like it’s worthy of a starship. He can make his single-malt Scotch in his quarters if he wants. And let’s figure on a real size of the Enterprise – 3000 feet is kind of ridiculous if it only has 430 people on board. (Ryan Church, are you listening?) Since it took (or will take) four years between movies, that’s plenty of time for the Big E to go back to Spacedock and be refitted (to look a little more Enterprise-like). And for expository scenes (like Spock and Sarek in the Transporter Room), some slow dolly moves or tracking shots might be nice to add some atmosphere – straight, static cuts do nothing to add to the drama (but of course they don’t distract, either).

Stop with the film school stuff, break out of your little filmmaker’s box, and do something that will not only do Star Trek proud but also win the franchise its first Oscar for Best Picture!

265. Red Dead Ryan - September 15, 2011


First of all, World War 2 lasted SIX years, 1939-45.

Secondly, I find your lack of faith disturbing. These guys did a great job with the first movie and will do an even better job this time around.

“I no longer care.”

Good. Now get the hell out of here! Pronto!


Look, do we really need to go through all of this again, Captain Neill? We know that you prefer the older stuff over the new movie. No need to keep bitching into our faces about it. Sheesh!

Can’t understand why the Trek Fundamentalists/Talifans refuse to accept the fact that the old days are long gone and never coming back.

266. Chadwick - September 15, 2011

With the story finished, pre production underway, and the scrip done by September…if production starts in winter we might get that 2012 release without the 2013 push back. Shooting for the last film took only what..three months I think it was. If they finish shooting by January that gives 4-5 months for post production.

267. Mark Lynch - September 15, 2011

@82 MC1 Doug

I agree with you… ST:TMP is the best Star Trek film out of them all. Especially since The Directors Edition DVD

And in closing, if ever a film needed to come out on Blu-Ray, that is it!

268. sunspot - September 15, 2011

I hope that JJ Abram’s loses all of the lense flairs this time. I hated the lens falirs.

269. VOODOO - September 15, 2011

I don’t get a lot of the negativity in regards to Abrams ability as a director.

With the exception of Robert Wise and to a much lesser extent Nicholas Meyer ST has never had a director as accomplised and in demand as Abrams. Would you same people prefer that they brough back low end talent like Frakes and Shatner to keep the budget down?

I don’t know if you nerds realize this or not, but there would be no Star Trek going forward if it wasn’t for Abrams and his vision of what modern ST should be…The franchise was dead and buried. It was a tired relic of the past that nobody outside of these boards cared about anymore…Think about it, who besides dorks who come here on a regular basis even knew that Ent, Ds9 and Voyager even existed never mind cared about?… Bet you guys couldn’t wait to get a spinoff where Quark and Neelix go off on adventures together that would attract about 425 people per week.

Abrams delivered the kind of fun film on a grand scale that the general audience wanted out of a ST film in 2009… Was ST 09 a “deep film”? no, but it wasn’t designed to be. It was designed to get the general public interested in Star Trek again and he succeeeded on a grand scale by delivering a fun (ST had become so boring, self important and bland) film that excited the long time fanbase by bringing back the characters that people actually care about as well as the legendary Leonard Nimoy as Spock (the film would have been pitch perfect if Shatner was involved) and engaged/excited a new generation of fans who had no interest in ST with a great cast and a big budget modern day blockbuster that they prefer.

Yeah, I agree with the critics who feel the wait between films is far too long and that the franchise may lose some of the goodwill that ST 09 built up, but one must remember that the reason why there is such a wait in between films is that these guys are in such high demand. I’d much prefer to wait an extra year to see what these truly talented people come up with as opposed to rushing a film directed by one of the stars of the film who has questionable ability directing.

Bottom line is that you ST dorks should thank your lucky stars that someone of Abrams ability is running the show and that he made ST relevant for the first time in at least 15 years.

270. Harry Ballz - September 15, 2011

262. Charla “About Harry’s ointment…. I think I’m stepping in it”

Tell me, Charla, do your feet now feel all buttery and soft? Welcome to my world!

271. THX-1138 - September 15, 2011

Why do we have to be in love with the 2009 film? It was good and was received well because people were giddy with anticipation having talked on this very site for 3 years in advance of it’s release. Upon seeing it I know that we came out of the theater feeling very positive about the movie and felt that Star Trek was going to be alright.

But time gives some of us a different perspective. I can appreciate that there are fans that still love NuTrek, because I myself did after I first saw it. Upon repeated viewings, however, I was able to identify the things about the movie that bothered me. Heck, before the movie was released I admit to not being too keen on the idea that this wasn’t going to be a series of movies that took place in the original timeline, but I decided to just go with it. I don’t like Vulcan being destroyed. I am not buying into the Spock/Uhura romance angle. Kirk came off as a whiny cheater with a low moral center. And like most of the Trek movies, there was very little “exploring strange new worlds” with which we could examine the human condition against.

So I ask, why doesn’t my opinion, and others who are like minded, count for anything? Those who defend JJ’s effort are just as vitriolic as anyone else on these comment sections. The NuTrek film is a great entertainment and I will surely be in the theater seat to watch the next one.

I just prefer a different brand of Trek. The original timeline is my fave, warts and all. And I find it difficult to get behind the sequel with much enthusiasm given the things in the last movie that disappointed me AND the now four year wait.

And Trek is absolutely wonderful as a weekly TV program (that’s for you, Keachick. I may just have to add that to every post from now on :>))

272. Rocket Scientist - September 15, 2011

271. THS-1138

Bravo! You’ve expressed my sentiments exactly. I’ll watch the sequel because I love Trek, but after ’09, I’ve got a number of reservations about this team’s vision. There are some things I liked. Others? Not so much.

But I’ll be there.

273. Harry Ballz - September 15, 2011

Funny, I’m reminded of the popular chant when a President is looking to get re-elected. Fans of said President will be at a rally and start chanting, “FOUR MORE YEARS!” over and over.

I think most of us here should start chanting, “FOUR MORE YEARS? NO!” over and over until the Supreme Court gets the idea.

274. DiscoVery - September 15, 2011

ROBERTO ORCI (sorry for the capital letters), please consider producing a mini-episode with the crew while they’re assembled. I realize this needs to be planned, budgeted and produced outside of the next movie production. I think the marketing efforts, the build-up, the hype would only benefit the next Trek film.

Make it so!

And keep up the great work!

275. DiscoVery - September 15, 2011

Btw, the mini-episode could be chunked into a series of webisode releases. ;-)

276. Bugs nixon - September 15, 2011

The villians could be super intelligent flares of light…. Eh?



277. "Check the Circuit!" - September 15, 2011

To the rigid “Old School” fans…..you’re wasting your breath. In the capable hands (which is not to say PERFECT hands) of Mr Abrams, Star Trek has evolved to match the demands of today’s audiences. And it has done so BOTH critically and financially. Embrace it and be glad the franchise is thriving once again. Had it stayed “true” to the Berman-era approach for another movie, we can speculate with some certainty that it would be DEAD. Instead, it is very much alive and another film is finally on the way. (Evolution versus is extinction is always preferable IMHO.)

So go ahead, boycott the movie and watch (non-remastered) episodes of TOS on betamax tape instead if you must. I suspect the movie will be another blockbuster without you. Or be a little more flexible and come along for the ride.

Onward and upward!

278. Plum - September 15, 2011

Speaking as an old school trekkie; I’m thrilled JJ and company will return! :)

279. Red Dead Ryan - September 15, 2011

The title for the sequel will be…….drumroll please…..buh-duh-buh-duh-buh-duh-buh-duh-buh-tttiiisssssss!……….Flare Trek!


*Cough, cough!* crickets chirping, a toad croaks while a tumbleweed bounces along.

Tomatoes and bricks come flying in my direction, I beam out.

280. star trackie - September 15, 2011

Love Nutrek, as it really is a throw-back to old Trek. It had all the elements that Berman’s middle–of-the-road Trek chose to ignore….kinda like a peach pie, made with lemons. Still tasty to those who love lemons, but too sour for fans of a good peach. JJ’s Trek was back to old-school basics and I can’t wait for more. The news of his return is both welcome and exciting….also, the fact that he wants to do it gives me great confidence in Bob and company’s script…JJ said, he wouldnt sign on to direct unless they had a good story. So, it must be pretty good, right? aside from the time it took to get to this point…I’m stoked!

281. celticarchie - September 15, 2011

So it really will be Star Trek: The Incompetent Director Strikes Back, bringing his moronic finger-painting *cough* writing team along with him for the next lens-flare trashing of one of the most beloved Science Fiction shows of all time..

Just to remind us what we’ll be getting, my Top 11 Gripes about their last Vomit-Trek 2009! :D

(In answer to someones gripe about Kirk’s rapid promotion)

1) To be fair everyone was becoming captain in that movie. Right from the start it was you’re the captain Mr. Kirk. Now you’re the captain Mr. Spock. Now you’re the captain Mr. Janitor! Basically the writer just didn’t understand the difference between being a “captain” as in the rank, and being placed in “command” of something (i.e. Ship) while the actual captain is indisposed. They also seemed confused by the tradition that when someone is place in command, they are referred by the title “captain” regardless of their rank, it still doesn’t make them a captain.

2) Anyone who thinks that a ship the shape and structure of the Enterprise can be built on a planets surface in full Earth gravity, is quite frankly, beyond stupid! Just try building some of the old model kits and you’ll see keeping those nacelle perky and level is no mean feat.

(In answer to someones wondering about the changes in the, ahem, timeline.)

3) I don’t know what to say…the whole thing was BS from the start.

(In answer to a note about the phasers sounding like toys.)

4) I was having a seizure so I could pay much attention to the sound effects. (So glad it wasn’t in 3D!)

(In defense, well loosely in defense, of their use of terminology)

5) Away teams, landing parties, boarding teams…who gives a frak! I’ve just been introduced to the same character three times (which I’m already supposed to know because he’s a frekking archetype!!!) That was the beauty of the original series (hell, all the Trek series) is that because of the archetypal nature of the characters you didn’t need twenty minutes of pointless introduction.

6) Technology!!!! Transporters that can pluck you from out of the sky when your traveling at ??? metres per second toward the ground, but have trouble to do the same when your foot slips out from beneath you after…(get this)…after the transporter beam has started to dematerialise you…hmmmm. riiiiight?!

A ship from the future that can, first of all, survive a trip through a blackhole…oookay, maybe Paramount shouldn’t have invested in Dick & Jane in Space as a guidebook for the writers. Not only is this ship capable of destroying at least two fleets of starships, both off-screen, one in the future and one in the “alternate” past that we see the result of. Yet it has trouble fighting a piddling little scoutship from something like 150 years in the past, it’s also supposed to be captured by Klingons who have no interest in reverse engineering it whatsoever, but instead conveniently park it so that 20 years down the line the crew can board it as use it on an intergalactic killing spree.

We also have the all new schizophrenic Enterprise that has an ipod bridge and a brewery for an engine room…and the Kelvin which had walls made of concrete block construction…come on, we’re supposed to believe we are in space…

(In response to the overuse of time travel in Star Trek movies)

7) Hey! It’s Time Trek…what did you think you were watching?

8) Red matter…ketchup…….You can just see the headlines now. Director JJ Abrams and his writing staff savaged by a feral Trekkie. Judge clears feral Trekkie of all charges after reviewing the evidence and having an epileptic fit…neat trick as the judge was not prone to epilepsy.

9) Stereotypical and comical Russian accent!

10) Simon Pegg winner of 2009’s Miscast Idiot Award.

Whenever they release it, it will be more of the same bullshit. Won’t be wasting an time on it.

282. THX-1138 - September 15, 2011

Just to stoke the fire a bit:

If it weren’t for “old school” Trek fans, Star Trek would have died in 1969 and stayed dead.

Can we not lose ourselves in these “I’m a better fan than you” type debates?

283. Shatner_Fan_Prime - September 15, 2011

#269 VOODOO … Excellent post, everything you said is absolutely correct. :)

284. THX-1138 - September 15, 2011

Wow #281, I just wanted to stoke the fire. You took a bucket of gas, dumped grenades into it and launched it at the fire with a rocket.

I’m getting some popcorn. This should be good.

285. celticarchie - September 15, 2011

There are way more competent directors out there than JJ Abrams.

286. Lt. Bailey - September 15, 2011


You brought up some very interesting points about the film. It did seem to suspend belief on a few subjects as you mention that others may have overlooked or failed to acknowledge for what ever reason.

Some would say that was overlooked because we waited so long for a ST film or because JJ can do no wrong or whatever. While my wife and I did enjoy the film, it did not become the best, finest, #1, head & shoulder above therest film for me in the series. Most of all due to some of the reasons you brought up.

But if you are making a film to please the masses who may not have been a ST fan, then this is what JJ did in 2009 and maybe again in 2013 or 2014 or….

We will just have to wait an see.

287. Starfleet's Finest - September 15, 2011

@241 Keachick
“They mention stuff like a Federation of Planets? – a what, you say? And there’s this guy with long funny looking ears, s’posed to be a real brainbox…then there’s this real neat looking space ship that goes at warp speed. Huh? WTF? Not to mention that super cute guy who gets promoted to captain. It is all so incredibly amazing. I can’t wait!”

The use of sarcasm in that statement was overwhelmingly perfect I’m still laughing :) Well played ma’am.

@258 Aurore
“I did, however, see a family”

That was so freakin sweet!! A great way to put it! I loved it!

On another note, while reading over the posts again I am just floored by the amount of, well for lack of a better word, older Trek fans saying that they’re giving up on Trek. Really? I mean, wow, after 43 years (i’m going by the time the nuTrek came out) of loyalty you’re going to just stop caring about it just because they’re doing things differently?? I guess that’s kind of suprising to me. Just becuase things are being handled differently doesn’t mean it’s ruined; if anything I would think that the older members of the Trek community would be thrilled to see the franchise being renewed so that the younger generation can enjoy it just like they had. Maybe that’s just me but seriously, Trek is moving forward and evolving, I would think the fans would be willing to do the same, and if not, step out of the way of progress and the the next generation have their time. I’m sure that’s just a me thing :)

288. celticarchie - September 15, 2011

Well, 284. THX-1138, you’ve gotta put them (i.e: Paramount, Abrams, Ocri, Kurtz and the other guy), in their place.

They have to understand this in an intelligent fanbase, and we understand things like characterisation, story structure, pacing, plotting etc., and we can tell when they are “killing off the main characters father in heroic self-sacrifice” what they are actually doing is tricking their audience into emotionally engaging with the movie so that we don’t start asking inconvenient questions half-way through, Like…

Where is the set up for Red Matter? Where’s this come from? Why is it so important? Couldn’t they have come up with a better ****ing name for it? My gosh, lets send movie Sci-Fi back a 100 years, after finally being accepted as a serious storytelling medium.

Why does Spock have Kirk thrown off ship? More importantly, why does anyone on board actually obey that order?

Why would Nero leave Old Spock on a planet? Does he want revenge or not?

Why is Kirk this High School Musical Jock character? Who ever thought a young (even with out a father) Kirk would be like that?

All this stuff mounts up and it just becomes impossible to watch Star Trek 2009. I’ve seen it, all the way through, what maybe twice, after that I can barely get to the point where Simon Pegg is introduced without throwing the remote through the TV, and I can’t do that….it’s a new TV. :D

So the sequel will just be more of the same, and it just ain’t worth it.

I’d rather Paramount just left Star Trek alone. When it’s ready, the fans will bring it back. We done it before, and we’ll do it again. But right now, JJ Trek is just so…forced.

289. RAMA - September 15, 2011

281. Cool, so long. 40 million other ticket buyers don’t miss you. Neither will Paramount.

290. RAMA - September 15, 2011

281. BTW 281….shitty movies don’t get Hugo, Writer’s Guild and Oscar nominations for their scripts….quite a trifecta.

291. Anthony Thompson - September 15, 2011

281, etc., etc.

All the neanderthal haters have come out of the woodwork. If you aren’t interested in a second movie from JJ (and hated the first), why do you bother wasting your time (and ours) at this site? Bottom line!

292. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 15, 2011

We get this good news that finally JJ Abrams will direct the sequel and that Paramount is happy to finance a new Star Trek with the script they have and then out come the sour pusses and people with little in the way of basic comprehension skills.

Honestly, celticarchie – you still asking all these questions 2 years 4 months since Trek 09 was released? Duh. And you are getting pissy over stuff like Spock actually calling some red looking liquid matter “red matter” rather than calling it by its actual name – you know, that very long scientific word that nobody can pronounce or remember.

It is just sooo “been there, done that”.

There appears to be some sucking going on here and it is not the kind done for nutritional and/or pleasurable reasons. It would actually make more sense and be more fun if indeed the sucking here was done for nutritional and/or pleasurable reasons.

I can’t believe that I come here on a Friday morning to read the same old bitching and griping about Star Trek 09. Really, so some of you feel the need to put JJ Abrams and his team in their place? I think they know their place. Do you know what your place is?

293. Trekprincess - September 15, 2011

I can’t believe the haters are back it’s quite sad actually :(

294. Shamelord - September 15, 2011

Abrams + friends + more ambitious story than the previous one = good news

295. MJ - September 15, 2011

Awesome news! I can’t help but thin that some of the fan pressure some of us have put on this site may have helped to get the Supreme Court off the dime here. Well done, everyone!!!

296. captainkirk - September 15, 2011

At last!!!!!!

297. THX-1138 - September 15, 2011

Your turn, ‘archie.

298. section9 - September 15, 2011

I’m saying this because someone has to:


299. T'Cal - September 15, 2011

Forgive my selfishness but this is all taking way too long. I’m used to my Trek being on TV 24 episodes a year for 7 years plus never ending reruns AND at the movies every 2-3 years. I’m spoiled. Sue me.

I’m also dazzled by the Batman franchise and think that all others should use it as a model. The first film is the origin story with a couple of very good B-stories. The next one starts with everything in place and it takes off right away with with a 2 hour thrill ride. The last one (I hope) will complete the triology with a solid story and a real ending.

Star Trek 2009 was that good origin story but it seems from reports that there is no bible, no outline, no epic tale that Abrams & Co. have in mind. That doesn’t mean that the next two will fail but I really prefer it when the story teller knows the beginning, middle, and end to the story. I feel like they’re winging it.

300. Rusty0918 - September 15, 2011

Well, the big thing that makes some people weary is the ultimate direction Abrams will take the franchise.

Captain_neill and I fear that they could fall into the “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen” trap. Meaning a racist, sexist, vile, and putrid mess. Keep in mind the first Transformers movie actually is rated Fresh among top critics at Rotten Tomatoes (somewhere in the 60’s). Are we going to get something that degrades into introducing Jar Jar Binks-caliber characters like Skids and Mudflap? Female yeomen with fake boobs? Unnecessary raunchy sexual humor taken to the extreme? Vapor thin plot? Kirk not growing up? Alien ships with testicle-weapons (related to those robot balls from “Revenge of the Fallen”)? More insulting Chekov’s v/w pronunciations?

And if that’s the case, will the critics call them on it? After the glowing praise from the last movie (which I do think was overrated, not that I hate it), I could believe that they could whip up a propaganda and PR machine to make it look like a masterpiece even if it WAS as bad as TF2.

I’m not speaking bad of one movie, but of the bigger picture. Is Trek going to degrade into MTV-style garbage? Or something better. The jury’s still out on that.

301. Harry Ballz - September 15, 2011

300 posts on a 2 day old thread? Who said this site was shutting down? BAH!

302. NuFan - September 15, 2011

They have to understand this in an intelligent fanbase

I have seen no evidence of that in all the time I have been coming here.

303. Canon Schmanon - September 15, 2011

So much hate!

Look, I watched TOS from the time it first aired. True, I was too young to really get it, but I wanted to be Spock when we played Star Trek, so I must have liked it. I saw it later in reruns, when I was old enough to get it, and while I thought some of it was silly, I really liked the show, and I really liked the trio of Kirk, Spock and Bones.

I’ve watched every Trek series since then. If you guys who thought Abrams’ Trek was so bad, I wonder what you thought of Voyager and Enterprise…

I loved TOS, I loved TNG and I loved DS9. I loved to varying degrees the first four Trek films, I loved 25% of Generations and all of First Contact.

With some reservations, I loved the new Star Trek film. I have major quibbles with about four elements from the movie, but overall I thought it was great. I saw it three times in the theater and three times on DVD. Still not tired of it.

IN MY OPINION it retains the spirit of Star Trek while utilizing a more dynamic storytelling style. After the slow motion train wrecks of Voyager and Enterprise (MY OPINION), this was possibly the only way to revive the “franchise.” It was a good idea, and I look forward to the next one. Yes, the wait has been a major pain in the ass, but there’s nothing I can do about that. I’m not about to let my anger over that turn me against the possibilities.

I will decide if I love, like or hate the next movie AFTER I’ve seen the movie and no sooner. To do otherwise would make me a reactionary idiot, lacking in reason and judgment.

Sloppy love to you all, even the haters.

304. dmduncan - September 15, 2011

258: “Right.
I’ll be there, for the sequel, either way…provided the story is worth it, for, I want an outstanding movie first and foremost.”


Even if it’s not what I want or how I would do it, I do like to see other people’s versions of Star Trek, so it’s enjoyable in that regard. Nothing is changed to what came before by what comes later, no matter how bad one thinks it is (and very much probably it will not be bad at all!).

But no matter what, “we’ll always have Paris” Aurore. ;-)

305. P Technobabble - September 15, 2011

Is there a release date for your movie?

306. D. Moon - September 15, 2011

Right back at ya, Canon Schmanon!

307. boomer13 - September 15, 2011

While I am glad that JJ is directing the next film. I think though they lost a bit of goodwill with the fans on their dithering on when it will be made.
While it may not be true, it just feels like every other project they had was more important than this one.

308. Hugh Hoyland - September 15, 2011

Star Trek 09 was exactly what was needed for Star Trek at that time, a perfect storm.

Im glad these guys were given the wheel on this franchise. Honestly its the best thing thats happened to it in a long time IMO. And thats straight up.

I just hope that they (Bob specificaly) can eventually get a TV series off the ground in the near future. We need a good Space Opera right now!

P.S. And I’m still going to complete my spec script and compare it! :]

309. dmduncan - September 15, 2011

299: “Star Trek 2009 was that good origin story but it seems from reports that there is no bible, no outline, no epic tale that Abrams & Co. have in mind. That doesn’t mean that the next two will fail but I really prefer it when the story teller knows the beginning, middle, and end to the story. I feel like they’re winging it.”

I like the same thing, but there’s nothing about ST.09 that prevents a 3 movie epic from happening either, EVEN IF Bob and Co. did not have one in mind when they wrote the first movie. With the destruction of Vulcan we sure do have fertile ground for epic level continuity from one movie to the next, and TSFS was an epic way to follow TWOK though I don’t think they had that outcome in mind when they were doing TWOK. So don’t lose hope! It may turn out that way yet!

310. dmduncan - September 15, 2011

308: “P.S. And I’m still going to complete my spec script and compare it! :]”

I think these guys are going to hit a home run. Bob has been so incredibly open to feedback that I think there’s a lot to be optimistic about.

311. rogerachong - September 15, 2011

Some folks talk about the recent Batman films by Nolan. These have all been spaced by exactly 4 years and look how that turned out. Compare and contrast that other franchise Transformers with its 2 year gap between films. The next Star Trek movie will come out in summer 2013 with a 4 year spacing and frankly IMO that bodes well for the quality of the upcoming chapter.

Quick note to the “supreme court” or whatever title you guys prefer, Super 8 was fantastic even my wife loved it when she saw it in the UK. I had seen it earlier and loved it as well, best film of the summer without a doubt. Cowboys and Aliens was solid, but Bob remember to work on the character dynamics and interplay as you continue to grow as a writer. That’s why I like the fact that Damon and JJ also worked on this new script (no offence Orci & Kurtzman) with the added visionary take that Damon has and JJ’s attention to character development we can have an eclectic mix in the kitchen. I am in heaven next summer it’s Prometheus time and then Star Trek in 2013, brilliant.

312. MJ - September 15, 2011

@303 “IN MY OPINION it retains the spirit of Star Trek while utilizing a more dynamic storytelling style. After the slow motion train wrecks of Voyager and Enterprise (MY OPINION), this was possibly the only way to revive the “franchise.” It was a good idea, and I look forward to the next one. Yes, the wait has been a major pain in the ass, but there’s nothing I can do about that. I’m not about to let my anger over that turn me against the possibilities.”

Well said!

313. New Trekkie - September 15, 2011

Hooray! That made my day! So glad JJ will be back in the director’s chair.

314. Chadwick - September 15, 2011

I am curious, please chime in, wondering how many times aprox you have watched the 2009 star trek movie.

Including the theater the count is at 52 for me. Never have I counted how many times I have watched a movie, but for this one, I did.

315. Red Dead Ryan - September 15, 2011

“Celticarchie” is a f@ckin’ moron. I bet it’s Iva’s sockpuppet. Pretty pathetic!

All you other losers out there that hate the new movie ought to stay the hell off this site from now on. This site is called “TrekMovie.Com” for a reason. It’s for people who like the movie. NOT for those who try to tear it down.


Take a bow, MJ! :-)

316. MJ - September 15, 2011

@314. 8 times for me.

317. MJ - September 15, 2011

@315 Will do!!!

318. celticarchie - September 15, 2011

289. RAMA – At least I’m going be 20 quid better off, and not suffering an epileptic seisure.

290. RAMA – Oh yes they do, all the time!

291. Anthony Thompson – Dagger of the Mind, The Devil in the Dark, The City on the Edge of Forever, The Offspring, Yesterday’s Enterprise, In Theory, The Inner light, Relics, Tapestry, Dark Page, Lower Decks, All Good Things, Duet, In the hands of the Prophets, The Wire, Past Tense 1 & 2, Exlorers, Our Man Bashir, Hard Time, In the Pale Moonlight, The 37’s, Meld, Resolutions, The Raven, Random Thoughts, Timeless, Thirty Days, Good Shepherd, Inside Man, Author, Author, Homestead, Terra Nova, Shuttlepod One, Civilization, A Night in Sickbay, The Catwalk, First Flight, the whole of Enterprise third season and a sizable chunk of season four.

I don’t know how many classic episodes of Star Trek there, I’ve missed out loads more, I’ve picked episodes from the original, the next generation, deep space nine, voyager and enterprise. I love them all, even the episodes I don’t like. But they are all well thought out, well scripted, good stories, they don’t rely an a huge budget and special effects to ‘wow’ an audience into submission, they capture an audience by simply telling good comprehensible stories.

292. Keachick (rose pinenut) – Because they are crucial points that bring the plot crashing to it’s knees. At the end of Star Wars we never ask ‘what the hell are the Death Star plans’, not because they are set up right from the first moments of screen time.

297. THX-1138 – This is where the fun begins…ugh,…

302. NuFan – Sadly I have to agree with that. If I have to explain why dropping someone off on a planet so that they just might see their homeworld explode is not ‘revenge’, and that it is way too convenient that the ‘hero’ gets dropped off on the exact same planet, conveniently near the only person who can explain the plot to him. Gee, does anyone remember when the hero had to earn the right the slay the demons.

305. P Technobabble – In two weeks, it’s called ‘The Hunt for JJ Abrams’, a gripping fly on the wall documentary. ;P

Well folks, I hope you all enjoy the sequel if ya like it. But don’t say I didn’t warn you, if the teaser trailer starts with the voice over guy saying ‘There is a prophecy of a chosen one, Spock must lead, where so many have fallen’, then be afraid, very afraid. :)

319. celticarchie - September 15, 2011

315. Red Dead Ryan – Sadly if I was, then I’d be jumping right on the ‘JJ Abrams is the chosen one’ bandwagon.

320. Vultan - September 15, 2011


RDR, I don’t think it’s a black and white matter… entirely. Some of us thought the movie was so-so. Some parts good. Some great. And some really bad.

Hey, Trek ’09 really was a rollercoaster ride of a movie! ;)

As for the sequel, Abrams directing again doesn’t bother me. The script is where it counts… wait… it’s the same writers?

Oh dear….

321. dmduncan - September 15, 2011

315: “All you other losers out there that hate the new movie ought to stay the hell off this site from now on. This site is called ‘TrekMovie.Com’ for a reason. It’s for people who like the movie. NOT for those who try to tear it down.”

Uh, no. I don’t like the complaints any more than you do, but as long as he’s not breaking any rules, this site is for people to drop by and express their feedback whether we agree with it or not, and Celtic Archie is an additional voice, as far as I know, even if we’ve all heard the same old complaints he’s making over and over from others.

He’s complaining about the Delta Vega coincidence. I’m tired of answering that one. Suffice it to say, I don’t agree with his point of view on it. But it seems he’s a different person making the same argument, and numbers for or against this or that add up as a mass of feedback (just like lens flare complaints), and if I’m going to have my say and you are going to have your say, then other people must be able to trip in and have theirs too.

I think the best way to answer is by making stronger counterarguments, not by telling them to go away.

322. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 15, 2011

#288 – “and we can tell when they are “killing off the main characters father in heroic self-sacrifice” what they are actually doing is tricking their audience into emotionally engaging with the movie so that we don’t start asking inconvenient questions half-way through, Like…

Where is the set up for Red Matter? Where’s this come from? Why is it so important? Couldn’t they have come up with a better ****ing name for it? My gosh, lets send movie Sci-Fi back a 100 years, after finally being accepted as a serious storytelling medium.”

The film explained what red matter was. It was a compound that, when injected into the rogue supernova could destroy it, ie cause it to implode. That is why it was so important. Why is having a fancy name important? It could just be called “stuff” so long as it did what it was designed to do, which in this case was to destroy a supernova which it did. Prime Spock explained all this Kirk during the mindmeld. Why weren’t you paying attention? Not giving a chemical compound a “neat” name has not set any damn thing back a 100 years. Geez, just when I thought I had heard it all…Holy crappola!

The fact that this part particular chemical compound simply known as “red matter” could have an unusual side effect, ie cause a wormhole and plunge Nero and Spock back 129 years and form an alternate reality, was not intended by its user, prime Spock.

“Why does Spock have Kirk thrown off ship? More importantly, why does anyone on board actually obey that order?”

Spock is not quite himself. He has just seen his planet implode, not to mention watch his own mother die before his own eyes. He is valiantly struggling to keep it together in order to effectively command in Pike’s absence. Kirk had already proved to Spock to be something of a “thorn in his side” and Kirk’s insubordination gave Spock reason to have him removed from the ship. This action could and has been within the prerogative of a captain. Delta Vega was close by – it was a moon/planet with a breathable atmosphere, even if a bit inhospitable (Kirk was told to stay in the pod) and it had a Federation space station, so that’s where Kirk got put.

“Why would Nero leave Old Spock on a planet? Does he want revenge or not?”

Nero was a bit loopy. Did you not notice? He (and his crew) also had seen his own planet implode and Nero had lost his wife and unborn child. Nero wanted Spock to witness the death of Vulcan and die a slow, lonely death on an inhospitable planet…

“Why is Kirk this High School Musical Jock character? Who ever thought a young (even with out a father) Kirk would be like that?”

Like what?
– An adventurous, but naughty 11 year old boy taking a vintage car out on a joy ride – not sure whether the kid actually intended to total the car or not, or was just testing his own acceleration/braking skills – it could have that…Oops. It is obvious that the young James Kirk had no respect for the man looking after him and it was likely to be mutual.

– I don’t know what a “High School Musical Jock character” is, but I find it interesting when people use these kinds of denigrating and clicheed labels against another person. Very little is known about the Kirk we meet in the bar, other than what Pike told us – “a genius-level repeat offender” with “aptitude test scores off the charts”. We are not told what sort of repeat offending Kirk did, but it was obviously not serious enough to disallow his entry into Starfleet Academy.

As for Kirk “cheating” on the Kobiyashi Maru test, he thought it was a stupid test to begin with, which Kirk himself considered it to be a cheat. Bear in mind, that the prime Kirk received a commendation for original thinking, in the prime universe.

What I find extraordinary and disappointing really is the number of negative, even nasty, assumptions people prefer to make regarding a character where only a little is told or shown of them. Wow!

323. Aurore - September 15, 2011

304. dmduncan – September 15, 2011

“But no matter what, ‘we’ll always have Paris’ Aurore. ;-)”

I must remember this…As time goes by…


324. Buzz Cagney - September 15, 2011

Calling it ‘Red Matter’ was pretty simplistic though, Keachick.
Its lucky these guys didn’t invent the automobile. They’d have called it the Go-Places Device. ;-D

325. Buzz Cagney - September 15, 2011

#310 its not feedback that Bob has been looking for on here, its inspiration. There is a subtle but all important distinction.
Luckily he has classed us as advisors on the movie so thats ok then. lol

326. Buzz Cagney - September 15, 2011

#256 and i’d add TMP to that list.

327. Vultan - September 15, 2011


And Top Gear would be called “The Three Brits Go Places and Drive Rather Fast Show.”



328. Vultan - September 15, 2011


I’ll second that nomination. TMP is a beautiful film.

Oh sure, there will be those who criticize its slow pace, but when it comes to depicting man’s future in space on the big screen in a BIG way, you can’t do much better than TMP (aside from 2001: ASO, of course).

329. FarStrider - September 15, 2011

Oh c’mon, folks. . . “Red Matter” makes just as much sense and is more descriptive than “Protomatter” from TWoK. . . I mean really what the hell is protomatter? and why the hell is it any more acceptable to some people than Red Matter? At least red matter is really red. . . they are both made up substances from a made up universe, so why is one more acceptable than the other?. . .from what I understand, proto means first form of something. . . is protomatter protogold? is it protocarbon? protouranium? protoeinstinium? Seriously, in TWoK we learned nothing more about protomatter than we needed to to understand the story. . .and in ST09, we didn’t learn anything about red matter beyond what we needed to to understand the story. . . sheesh. . . give it up already. . .


330. Thomas - September 16, 2011

329. FarStrider

That is absolutely true. We don’t have to know how everything works in Trek, since it all exists to serve the story anyway. Didn’t Roddenberry himself say in the TOS writers’ guide not to overexplain the tech involved, just to let the audience know what it’s for? If I recall correctly, I think he used the example of Joe Friday not having to explain the physics of ballistics just so the audience could understand why he carried and used his service revolver.

331. DJT - September 16, 2011

Oh, so there *is* a sequel in the works. Nice!

Whatever happened to that UNICEF / Giant Robot Magazine raffle where one of the prizes was a visit to the sequel set? Who won that?

Nobody called me, but for JJ, sure I can clear my schedule. No problemo.


332. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 16, 2011

#318 – “292. Keachick (rose pinenut) – Because they are crucial points that bring the plot crashing to it’s knees.”

I assume you are referring to your questions as quoted below.

“Where is the set up for Red Matter? Where’s this come from? Why is it so important? Couldn’t they have come up with a better ****ing name for it?”
“Why does Spock have Kirk thrown off ship? More importantly, why does anyone on board actually obey that order?”
“Why would Nero leave Old Spock on a planet? Does he want revenge or not?”
“Why is Kirk this High School Musical Jock character? Who ever thought a young (even with out a father) Kirk would be like that?”

Why is it crucial to the plot that we know all about red matter, other than what was explained in the movie? It is not crucial.

How does Spock putting Kirk on the planet cause the plot to “crash”? There is a precedent for doing this. Whether he should have done it is another issue, no doubt something that gets brought up in all the various reports that inevitably get made after surviving such events. However, for the purposes of the story in the movie, this is not relevant. The fact is that Spock as acting captain could put Kirk off the ship and did so.

Nor does Nero marooning prime Spock on an ice planet next to his now destroyed homeworld “crash” the plot.

As for Kirk, I can’t see that he is exactly the same person we meet in the bar. He has been put through his paces, or perhaps more correctly, put himself through the paces, in order to complete a four year course in three years. He is still James Kirk though, which makes him passionate, intelligent, independent, loyal/focused and a little unpredictable. How does Kirk’s behaviour “crash” the plot?

It has been noted by some that Kirk has a low moral centre. Even at this early stage, Kirk risks, at the very least his own career, in order to avert what he believes is a potential disaster. That is an indication of someone who has, in fact, a high moral centre.

Why is calling a red substance “red matter” simplistic? I am sure it does have another name, a scientific name, but it is SIMPLER to say it as you see it. If only everything else could be that simple. This is like saying that because someone has learned only one word for a closed in vehicle that can carry him safely from A to B, ie car, that this is simplistic. Does the person actually NEED to know that it is also called an automobile (a French word incidentally) in order for this piece of machinery to fulfill its function?

Right now, a factual storyline has taken place. My family have got into the car and gone to watch the All Blacks play Japan on a very big screen at a local church auditorium. Is it essential that I and they know exactly how, for example, the pistons work in that car in order for it to get to this place? Does not knowing in any way “crash” the plot line of events taking place? (I assume that all is well with the pistons, otherwise another/different story would be unfolding right now). What is the focus of my true life story? It is about my family going to watch a rugby game on a huge TV screen with friends. Questions relevant to this are: Did they get there? Did they enjoy themselves? Who won the game? Do they get home safely?

333. captain_neill - September 16, 2011


You saying Michael Bay action style is right?

334. captain_neill - September 16, 2011



I also concur, this is how I feel. The new movie is fun and I will see the next one but my love is for the prime universe and always will be but despite my gripes with the changes now I will stay with Trek.

To use Orci’s comment on the blu ray about putting more rock n roll into Star Trek, just remember a lot of us like classical music.

335. P Technobabble - September 16, 2011

Movie critics are a funny breed. For the most part, they have no real film-making or screenwriting abilities, yet they make blanket statements about movies – particularly ones they don’t like – as if their statements reflected some real, “objective” facts. In fact, it is all opinion – completely subjective opinion. How many movies have been panned by critics, but you liked them? How many have been praised, but you hated them? Reaction to a film is just that: a reaction. Period.
We’ve been through all this stuff a million times, but the bottom line is:
A) Star Trek is fictional, not actual reality. There is no law stating that fiction, particularly science-fiction, must adhere to conventional knowledge. Science-fiction is about stretching boundaries, not limiting itself to boundaries. Star Trek is not about presenting scientific theories, it is about flights of imagination.
B) Star Trek is, in Gene Roddenberry’s own words, an “action-adventure series that must capture and entertain an audience.” Star Trek is not drama or intellectual exercise, although these qualities can exist within the world of Trek.
All criticism – positive or negative – is entirely subjective, and I don’t see how anyone could argue this point.
Of course, everything I say is just my opinion…

336. trekprincess - September 16, 2011

Captain Neill do we have to through this again :/ we all know you prefer the prime universe you don’t need to remind us.

337. celticarchie - September 16, 2011

322. Keachick (rose pinenut) –

1) It’s called ‘Set-Up’, okay. It’s basic scriptwriting 101. You set-Up the narrative devices early in the script. Think of Spock’s death in TWOK, it’s foreshadowed right at the beginning they make a joke of it, then in Act 3 it happens for real and because of that setup the event itself is much more poweful. Take the Genesis Device (that’s not a scientific name, but that works, that’s a cool name) for another closer example, we know exactly what it is, what it can do any why it important. So that when you get to Act 3 there is no need for any stupid exposition as to why it’s important to get away from the Reliant. Now look a ST 2009, Red Matter turns up in the middle of the movie! Then 20 minutes later we actually find out what it is, and why should we give a frak, because by that time there’s a whole bunch of other bullshit that doesn’t make any sense.

2) And no one on the whole crew, not even McCoy, has the presence of mind to say; ‘Gee, Spock isn’t throwing Jim of the ship a bit extreme, we have a nice padded cell we can put him in’, of course if anyone had said that I’m sure Spock’s line would have been, ‘Well no, look it says in the script he has to meet my future self’. I’m sorry, but this is pathetic convenience for convenience sake.

3) Even loopy, if I were Nero. I would have wanted to see the look in Spock eyes as his world is destroyed. But then the Klingons captured my ship, reversed engineered it and destroyed the Federation…you know it was really nice of them to park it in a nice convenient spot for my escape.

4) Oh yes, Anakin Skynawhinger, ahem, James Tiberius Kirk. Objects in motion tend to remain in motion, and no amount of scrabbling at the ground is gonna stop you from become a dark smear on the canyon wall, but glossing over that for a moment and going into the nonsense backstory that isn’t stated in the film. So why does Kirk have an abusive step-father? I’m sorry, I’m not buying that the mother of James T. Kirk needs a man to help raise her son. Come on, it’s the 23rd century, not the 18th. Furthermore the Thelma & Louise moment the second time we’re introduced to Kirk, I’m getting bored. If you can’t introduce an archetypal character fully in the first two seconds of screen time, then don’t bother. Darth Vader, archetypal villain, dramatic music, sinister entrance. Easy! Captain Kirk, archetypal hero, in a fight, with an alien, losing, but makes a comeback when his friends Spock and McCoy make a distraction. That would have took less than five minutes of screen time, and not only have I introduced Kirk, but also the loyalty of his two best friends, and I’ve got what? Another hour and a half to have a fun space adventure story. Where as with ST 2009 30 minutes into the movie and we are still waiting for it to actually begin.

5) As for Kirk’s cheating, yeah he’s meant to cheat! But he’s supposed to reprogram the simulation so that the Klingons think he’s a legendary captain and they respect him so much they won’t fight him, that’s the irony of it, he cheats programing the simulation to respond to who he’s destined to become. Just making the Klingon’s shields go down is sub-lame in comparison.

338. star trackie - September 16, 2011

#295…Awesome news! I can’t help but thin that some of the fan pressure some of us have put on this site may have helped to get the Supreme Court off the dime here. Well done, everyone!!!..

Funniest thing Ive read in a while. Yeah, well done everyone…the reason JJ has decided to direct was, no doubt, in some small way, a direct response to the bitching and whining by fans at Trekmovie!

…it probably had very little to do with Super 8, or Mission :Impossible 4, or a script finally being nailed down after the writers were able to get their various projects/commitments and schedules aligned… lol

…and 335…”Star Trek is, in Gene Roddenberry’s own words, an “action-adventure series that must capture and entertain an audience.” Star Trek is not drama or intellectual exercise, although these qualities can exist within the world of Trek.

well said. Sadly Gene forgot his own words when he created TNG…and what a different Trek it was…not bad TV, just radically different from the blueprint already established in 1966, Strayed too far for my tastes. But JJ’s movie, on the other hand…it captured the flavor and spirit of STar Trek., and Im talking TOS here. its great glad to have Trek back., the new movie cant get here fast enough!

339. denny cranium - September 16, 2011

I think having JJ is a good move.
It will bring a sense of continuity to the production of the movie.
The actors are comfortable with him. JJ knows how to work with this particular cast.
A new director may have come in and turned everything upside down. (remember stuart baird?)
Paramount is happy. JJ delivered last time and is likely to deliver again.
I wonder if JJ was just holding out for his share of the pie this time.

340. Phil - September 16, 2011

Once again, confusing fan and critic….

341. Aashlee - September 16, 2011

A few thoughts:

Hearing that the production wheels are turning is great news. Knowing that a director is in place — and that it’s J.J. Abrams — is also a relief. I like the continuity in direction. Althought this was never a deal-breaker for me, I found the changes in directorial style throughout the “Harry Potter” movies a bit jarring. Having Abrams’ vision behind the next film to complement the 2009 one will help maintain “flow” in this universe.

I am a first generation fan. I love TOS, and, in the two hours of the 2009 film, I like nuTrek, too. I think that the essences of the characters and universes they occupy have been maintained consistently between old and new. What has changed are life circumstances and the ages of the characters when we meet them, so, of course, there will be some differences. (Kirk grew up without his father, who was a major stabilizing influence on directing his son’s genius. Spock, because of Nero’s incursion in Federation space, may have faced additional xenophobia while growing up, giving him additional motivation to leave his homeworld.) But, deep down, they are themselves, and I believe that the Bad Robot team have represented them well.

Was there a little deus ex machina in play in the film? Perhaps, but that, too, might be explained as the universe trying to right itself, the idea that this group of people was meant to be together no matter what universe they occupy.

Truth be told, I remain amazed at all the things that the first film had to accomplish in establishing the characters for a new generation, bring them together, give them a challenge, and have them emerge victorious at the end , plus throw in enough TOS elements to bring along old school fans for the ride — again, in about two hours of screen time. The original series had about 65-70 hours (I’m taking out commercial breaks) to establish its universe. If you compare the 2 hours versus 65-70, I’d say that the 2009 performed admirably.

Well-considered and -outlined critique is always welcome. But there will always be that fan segment that whines because “it’s different” or “it’s not what I wanted to see.” These fans think that loud, persistent complaining is somehow empowering, that it puts them in control. (Especially the claims that Orci/Kurtzman “didn’t do their research.” Oh, please…) The truth is, it makes all of us look like a bunch of tantrum-throwing 2-year-olds, and when does anyone take an out-of-control 2-year-old seriously?

Yes, the budget Engineering-Budweiser was inconsistent with the whole Trek look. The Bad Robot folks know that, but that’s what the budget allowed. Armed with a new budget, I believe that this talented team will take care of it and other things as they move forward to produce an even better Trek movie. I look forward to it.

342. Trekprincess - September 16, 2011

Well said Aashlee :):)

343. chrisfawkes.com - September 16, 2011

This is good news, i think i’ll polish up my set of Spock ears.

344. THX-1138 - September 16, 2011

I scan these comments and notice a couple of things:

There is not as much hate for the new movie and JJ Abrams as some would lead you to believe.

There seems to be more name calling from the pro NuTrek faction against the detractors than vice versa.

There seems to be very little patience shown to the detractors from the pro NuTrek folks, too.

Just because someone doesn’t agree with your opinion it does not make them bad, wrong, evil, stupid or any other negative connotation. If one’s opinion or argument is indeed strong it can withstand the test of scrutiny. ‘archie’s arguments may be over the top at times but I have yet to see a counter to his points that truly dis-assemble his view. I agree with much of it in principle. I can point to no good reason to kick Kirk off the ship in the middle of a hostile environment with no means to defend himself only to have him escape into the exact same cave as Prime Spock (out of everywhere else on the entire planet!). It’s just ridiculous.

And for the 9 zillionth time, I enjoyed the 2009 movie, saw it four times in the theater, and bought a bluray player specifically to watch it at home. I will be there opening day to see the sequel. But I can recognize the warts on most of the things I enjoy, and still enjoy them.

Has anyone considered the notion that a Trek series on TV would be cool? I sure have. I’ve got some ideas on that subject.

345. LordCheeseCakeBreath - September 16, 2011

Urgh! Bad news! I really wanted a less poppy star trek. Stupid brewery engineering sections, shakey cameras, and way overdone lens flares. Oh and the plastic looking bridge with high beams shining everywhere! The uniforms were awesome! The Enterprise was…a little ackward.

Other than that the movie was on the ok side. Please JJ…don’t use 20th century breweries for a 23rd century starship. Thanks! E

346. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 16, 2011

#337 If only life could be as well “set up”. Fortunately, or otherwise, I don’t know much, if anything, about Screenwriting 101. I just watch movies and live my life. Why did we have to know from the beginning about this substance called red matter? Are reasons for why things happen always apparent from the beginning? You are also supposing that everything is, or should be, “set up” to imitate the events that occur in the prime universe. There is no reason that everything should be the same, so why would you expect this of the new Star Trek production team? Why would/should anyone?

I do think that the Delta Vega scene could have been done better. I actually posted my alternative version on another thread in this site. Nevertheless, this is what we have, and I can live with it.

Synchronicity. The movie “Mother and Child”, which I have just seen, also shows synchronicity. Lovely movie, by the way.




It is your prerogative if you want to compare or relate everything you see in Star Trek 09 to that Star Wars stuff – JJ Abrams and the writers only admitted to using the kind of energy for Star Trek that the Star Wars movies have, particularly the first three (not the prequels) and nothing more (OK, they had R2D2 in a wreckage – so?). Please do not assume that everyone is, or should be, comparing this movie to Star Wars or any of its characters. Why should they? Star Wars is the furthermost thing from my mind when I watch Star Trek.

#340 – “Once again, confusing fan and critic….” Hmmm
I suspect that people tend to conclude that it is “subjective” fan and “objective” critic but it could also be the other way around sometimes. Perhaps one can become a fan because they start out being an “objective critic”. I can be both – an “objective” fan and a “subjective” critic…;)

347. "Check the Circuit!" - September 16, 2011

@ 334

I wonder how many albums The Beatles sold versus The Boston Pops?

Not saying one is better than the other, but studios make movies to make money. And the majority of today’s audiences expect fast-paced action and big budgets. OldTrek just wasn’t going to sell enough tickets. (Nemesis, anyone?) Hence…NuTrek. The beauty of it is they got the fundamentals right and added rock ‘n roll. That’s not just my opinion. The critical praise for Star Trek was through the roof.

Another thing they got right; jettisoning the technobabble. The audience today doesn’t want a Braga-era dissertation on Red Matter and a multi-syllabic name. They just need to know it is VERY VERY BAD.

As a 50 year old that grew up on TOS, I’m delighted Trek is back in a big, bold way, along with Kirk and Spock, and has been introduced to a whole new generation. Star Trek lives!!

348. Suellen from Savannah - September 16, 2011

The characters were significantly younger than in the TOS. How many of us were like to be judge based on how we acted in our early 20s? In our 20s do not most young people think they have the world by the tail and have all the answers.

By the end of the movie Kirk’s character had evolved quite a bit. Offering to assist Nero. Spock’s character was off, but again different life experiences. Uhura was totally off, but even Zoe said had she met with Nichelle sooner the character would have been played differently.

Actually I though a different twist would have been to have Spock given a Captaincy and Kirk the ever faithful First Officer guiding and tempering Spock as Captain. Know that opinion is not popular, but think of the great friendship/personal relationship potential as they encounter new world and new civilization to explore. Spock becoming Captain truly woulld have made more sense and would not have enhanced the relationship dynamics. I did not have the problem with the S/U romances other do as I thought is was handled well. That was part of my problems with Uhura during the moments with Spcok she was more like the TOS character. Articulate, sensitive and intelligent. I actually liked Cho Sulu better than Takei and Anton did a good younger Chekhov.

I liked Ben Cross’s Sarek as he was more like the Sarek of the JTB ending and the TOS movies. I hated the Sarek of the TNG and dont even get me started on Perrin. I never saw Sarek with such a witch.

New McCoy was spot on and while I liked Simon Peggs Scotty. i did think the the whole food fixation was slapstick and not really my cup of tea with ST.

Again having lost so many of the military troops I could see promotions being granted with warp speed, but Spock being promoted from a Commander to a Captain would have made more sense. Perhaps Kirk should have been already graduated and a Lt at the time of Nero.

So since I am a fan of 45 years I say I enjoyed the movie and I just accepted it for what it is and tried not to make too many comparisons. When we try to recapture our youth and past it rarely is ever better than we remembered.

Overall as I said in an earlier post. It was our old ST and it wasn’t. I don’t think it was better or worse just different and like the TOS there were plot hole big enough to fly a starship thru. The Supreme Court bless their hearts they couldn’t help it. They had to make changes and i do know they made a much better movie than I ever could have.

I have recently gone back and watched all the TOS movies and think TMP was the least original of all. It was just a remake of the changling episode and really not that well done. The characters were off. Kirk was an ass in the that film too. Spock was wooden and McCoy was just plain off. TWOK was a great movie, TSS was necessary to bring Spock back, VH was fun. After watching FF I now have a better opinion of it that I did years ago. It actually was about higher goals, man searching for answers and truly defined the friendship of K/S/M. I like the ending when they realize they are family by choice not blood and that bond is even deeper than if by blood.

The Undiscovered country to me was more episodic and I would have preferred ST made peace with Romulans. i alway thought there was so much more potential for cultural growth than with the Klingons.

349. boborci - September 16, 2011

344. Interesting stuff.

I’ve noticed the “why would spock evict kirk from the ship?” argument a lot. answered this before:

Kirk is a genius who never gives up when he believes something, including not following orders and attempting mutiny when Sppck has made his decision as to their course of action as acting Captain. Spock could throw him in the brig, but Spock saw Criimson Tide, and he knows someone as smart as kirk will escape and interfere with the actions spock feels are necessary. He wanted to make it impossible for Kirk to get in the way. Evicting Kirk from the ship is quite logical.

350. NuFan - September 16, 2011

349. Spock saw Criimson Tide

Hah! I wonder what movies are still popular in the 23rd century. Besides your Star Trek movies of course, Bob!

351. dmduncan - September 16, 2011

344: “only to have him escape into the exact same cave as Prime Spock (out of everywhere else on the entire planet!). It’s just ridiculous.”

Tell that to Harry Ballz on vacation with his girlfriend in Greece.

352. dmduncan - September 16, 2011

Well, you know, I won’t disagree with you and say it’s not ridiculous. I’d just say that calling it ridiculous does not mean it’s not realistic, as Mr. Ballz can attest.

And unlikely it was that on the 10th anniversary of 9-1-1, the first three horses to win at Belmont park in NY that morning were…you got it…9-1-1.

It’s ridiculous! And true.

353. captain_neill - September 16, 2011


I thought you just needed a reason to get Kirk on the planet to meet Spock Prime. That was the most amazing stroke of luck eh. Lol

Destiny doesn’t really cut it for still. I understand that to get to point A to B it is required to get things moving along, just like the Nexus in Generations to get Kirk and Picard together.

354. Vultan - September 16, 2011

So… will there be a planet in the sequel where Carol Marcus, Khan, Kor, and the Gorn Captain all meet Captain Kid Kirk in the Destiny Cafe? Eh, better make that the Destiny Cantina. No droids allowed.

[rolls eyes, walks away]

355. Sebastian S. - September 16, 2011

About frakking time. Nice to finally read an article about the next Star Trek movie that is actually in the affirmative for a change…

Now let’s see how long it takes them to make it, do all the FX/post on it, and get it into theaters.

I’m guessing mid to late 2013?

356. Dee - lvs moon' surface - September 16, 2011

#349 – boborci …

Mr. Bob Orci, who wrote the scene where Kirk back to the Enterprise with Scott?… Kirk’s speech “Well, I’m not telling… Acting Captain”… I love how Chris Pine talks this… this is one of my favorite scenes.

:-) :-)

357. Phil - September 16, 2011

@355, 356…..really…going to spokeo.com now.

358. Phil - September 16, 2011

Okay, don’t know to many DOJ consultants who would be putting their phone numbers and e-mails on line. Oh, moderator……

359. Battle-scarred Sciatica - September 16, 2011


I like your post and have to agree with you.
Opinions are just opinions.
Like you I could see the faults and allowed them to not mar my enjoyment of the film.
Heck there have been plenty of major plot holes throughout Trek history….some you could quite easily climb through!
Hopefully BO, JJ et al will improve and rejig some aspects for the next adventure. If they don’t; so what. I’ll probably still enjoy it.

I would love Trek to return to TV. I was especially intrigued by the year 3000 take.
What would your ideas be? I would love to hear and no doubt so would many others.


360. roy - September 16, 2011

269, Spot on as you stated something of substance.

361. Harry Ballz - September 16, 2011


Ah, dmduncan, I’m proud to be the benchmark you cite for a coincidental world!

362. Battle-scarred Sciatica - September 16, 2011

@262 Charla

If you ever consider visiting beautiful NZ then you will always have a place to stay, here with my family.

Keachick may have it warmer up in the north island but we have beautiful scenery and hobbits down here in south island!

No offense Pinenut! Love ya!

363. celticarchie - September 16, 2011

344. THX-1138 – I probably go ‘over the top’ because it’s just simply frustrating to be talking about the structural underpinning of a story, and have people say your just being a Trekkie techno-babble fanatic. I couldn’t care less about the fictional details of say Red Matter, to me it’s NOT a material for stopping supernova or blowing up planet. It is just a narrative device to give the villain power to fulfill his role in the story, my problem with it is that it appears in the middle of the story with no explanation of it whatsoever, and it’s name doesn’t help because it suddenly makes me think of black & white Flash Gordon serials with rocketships on wires with sparklers coming out the back. It is kinda like if Harry Potter in the middle of his fight with Voldermort sudden pulled out a machine gun to kill him. It’s ridiculous because being set in a Fantasy world of magic you suddenly have this technological element and it bounces you out of the world. Opposite genre but the same thing, Red Matter is a magical fantasy substance in a Science Fiction world and it snaps you out of the story because it makes you aware you are watching fiction and you’re not involved with the story.

346. Keachick (rose pinenut) – All stories have structure. You can play around with that structure somewhat depending on the type of story you are telling. For example, watch two romantic comedies and you’ll immediately see similarities in the plot, characters, events, outcome. Same goes for action adventure, horror, drama, and every fantasy epic must always start with a prophecy of a ‘chosen one’.

As long as the story structure is sound then the ‘details’ of the story can be played around with to the writer, producer, directors hearts content, who ends up with who, why the villain wants the magic rock, how the hero defeats him. They can have fun with that stuff, because they know their story structure, the foundations are sound.

I go into more detail about the problem of Red Matter above, the thing is that it’s introduced in the middle of Act 2. Which is just too late for that kind of narrative device to be introduced. It doesn’t have to be fully explained or anything, the audience just has to be made aware that it’s what the villain wants and that it’s powerful and dangerous, in early to middle of Act 1.

Why do I compare Star Trek 2009 to Star Wars? Because they both use the same story structure. It’s a common frame of reference and as you said JJ & Co, used it as a motivation. I could just as easily compare ST 2009 with The Matrix, or Back To The Future, The Karate Kid, Indiana Jones, because they all use the basic Hero’s Journey story structure that Star Wars essentially pioneered as being a winning formula for summer blockbuster movies. ST 2009 does that formula very poorly, but that’s my only basis for comparing it to Star Wars, most people are familar with Star Wars. It’s a good template, and I can use it to point out the flaws in ST 2009.

Actually, Star Trek 2009, has probably had one positive influence on me. And that is that is force me to look at Star Trek as a whole objectively, and outside the whole “Trekkie” box so to speak. From that point of view, a Contrived Time Travel Plot To Rewrite History so we can redesign everything, but still keep our fanbase. Just comes across as patronizing in the extreme. I didn’t need the ‘time travel rewrites history’ bullshit to accept an alternate version of Star Trek. If they had said, look we can’t tie in our version of Star Trek with the old Star Trek, but we can say wipe the slate clean and make our own version of Star Trek and we hope it’ll be fun and enjoyable for us and you. Now that is something I could respect, I might not have liked it, but the chances are they would have had more fun writing and producing it. In that case, the only complain I would probably have would be the redesign of the Enterprise…oh, how wish the only thing I had to complain about ST 2009 was the design of the ship. It’d be like a vacation! :D

364. moauvian waoul- aka: seymour hiney - September 16, 2011

I still think that many (not all) of the fans that have a negative, nearly visceral reaction to the movie aren’t upset that it wasn’t like TOS but are instead unhappy that it wasn’t more like TNG.

365. NCM - September 16, 2011

344: Mostly agree.

I loved the movie, and also agree with much of the criticism. I hope the criticism will serve a positive purpose; that the writers will pay greater heed to plausibility in future films.

Some have mentioned red matter. I also think Spock would have insisted on a more scientific, rather than ‘cartoonish’ name. More notably, he needed only a drop of the hyper volatile stuff, but appeared to be transporting enough to collapse the entire galaxy.

366. DJT - September 16, 2011

“but Spock saw Crimson Tide”


367. dmduncan - September 16, 2011

361. Harry Ballz – September 16, 2011

Great story, Mr. Ballz.

363: “I go into more detail about the problem of Red Matter above, the thing is that it’s introduced in the middle of Act 2. Which is just too late for that kind of narrative device to be introduced. It doesn’t have to be fully explained or anything, the audience just has to be made aware that it’s what the villain wants and that it’s powerful and dangerous, in early to middle of Act 1.”

Interesting argument but I’m not persuaded. The movie starts with a mystery: This giant Romulan ship comes out of a black hole, attacks a Federation ship, and demands to know where an as yet non-existent Ambassador Spock is.

So we know right away that these guys are from somewhere else in time, that they have a grudge, and that they have the technology to create and to travel through black holes. So when Red Matter becomes the official explanation of that means later on, it wasn’t a shock to me at all; it was merely the moment when the initial mystery was solved. Even if you don’t know how Red Matter works, THAT IS the answer to the mystery initially raised by the opening events.

SOME method is implied in the beginning, and the EXACT method is identified with the introduction of Red Matter later on. So even though you do not SEE Red Matter until later on, Bob DID fulfill the obligation of solving that little initial mystery. They created a black hole somehow, and when the time was right for us to learn how, we did. It did not seem forced or unnatural to me. It seemed just right.

368. Suellen from Savannah - September 16, 2011

I will go to see the sequel. I think Bob, Damon and Alex did a great job. I found the movie to be entertaining and I look forward to more of the same. I have now found another Trek to like. Although I do wish the next movie was not taking so long to get here. I would have loved the sequel to be ready within months of the first movie.

I would also like to see a TV show with the Reboot characters. A new reboot of the series would be great, but doubt the movie actors would reprise their roles for a TV series. Too many different Kirks/Spocks/et all would be hard to accept in any universe.

How about a reboot of the reboot and set in Star Fleet Academy Days with everyone at the academy. Sort of an Animal House meets Star Fleet Academy. Instead of Greek week competition it could be survival/war games. Captain Stiles and the Excelsior crew vs our Cadets. Think of the possibilities and the fun that could be had. Not for the serious Trekker, but Bob think of the fun to be had. It could be made for TV movie during a sweeps week.

369. FarStrider - September 16, 2011

@364 I totally agree with you. The whole “calling Red Matter some technobabble goobledygook name would make it more plausible” arguments could definitely be seen as a sign of TNG favoritism. . .I mean what does calling Red Matter: Red-shifted hyperfluidic cis-decalithium add to the plot? Maybe people got so used to INSERT TECHNOBABBLE HERE dialogue, that they can’t think of Star Trek without it. . .


370. dmduncan - September 16, 2011

323. Aurore – September 15, 2011

Suddenly…I like more than French mustard, Sophie Marceau, and Aaton movie cameras.

371. boborci - September 16, 2011

As far as red matter goes, i dont hear anyone complaining about the lackof set up for DARK MATTER.

372. FarStrider - September 16, 2011

@371 Or BLACK HOLES, even. . .


373. Harry Ballz - September 16, 2011


red matter, dark matter……..it really comes down to mind over matter……

If one doesn’t mind, it doesn’t matter!

374. Harry Ballz - September 16, 2011

By the way, that was our saying in my old………wait for it…………..alma mater!

375. Vultan - September 17, 2011

With a shrug of indifference, the scientist turned off the machine, looked out the window, and a new element was born—-



376. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 17, 2011

Bob Orci – What is dark matter? Will the new story be about Dark Matter or are you going leave us in the dark?

377. celticarchie - September 17, 2011

367. dmduncan – It doesn’t come across as a mystery though, it comes across a piss poor writing. Therein lies the problem.

378. Jai - September 17, 2011

Bob Orci,

Welcome back ;)

I won’t get involved in the “red matter” controversy, but I have a few friendly suggestions for the sequel:

– There’s currently a cool early-1960s stylistic & fashion vibe which is quite, well, fashionable. If you could somehow work that into the Star Trek sequel (obviously with a 23rd century twist) then it would be a nice touch, and it would also fit in perfectly with the pre-TOS timeframe. Think “Gattaca” combined with “Mad Men”.

– Apart from the occasional shots of Starfleet Command in San Francisco, along with the view from Kirk’s Frasier-style apartment window, we’ve actually seen relatively little of Earth’s cities in that era. If any parts of the sequel are set on Earth, it would be great for the movie to include some panoramic Michael Mann-style aerial-view night-time shots. Let’s see the glittering cities of 23rd century Earth ;)

– I’d like to add my support to Keachick’s excellent suggestion of using recent images from the Hubble telescope as inspiration for dramatic, beautifully vivid and awe-inspiring images of deep space in the sequel. It would look incredible on the big screen.

379. P Technobabble - September 17, 2011

367. I agree with you, dm.

Red matter is just a MacGuffin, isn’t it? It serves the plot exactly as it should, in just the same was as the Genesis device did in TWOK. The story is not about red matter, it is about the crew of the Enterprise coming together and battling a Romulan mad-man from the future.

Revealing red matter at the END of the film would have been a rip-off, I think.

380. szychu - September 17, 2011

Jezuuu ale bieda. Jaśnie pan od super 8 się zdecydował, że łaskawie wyreżyseruje, a parówkarzom się przypomniało, że mieli scenariusz skończyć, a rok temu już bredzili, że będzie “soon”. Co za żenada, o matko przenajświętsza

381. NCM - September 17, 2011

@371-372: Good shot, but no score. No concoction ever painstakingly created in a laboratory emerged without a scientific name. Scientist classify things by name, and those names are descriptive – indicating components of the “matter.” Black Holes and Dark Matter were so named before anyone had any idea of their make-up, and they remain mysteries.

It was a tremendously fun picture. Like most films, it could have been better. With even slightly more effort, many bobbles could have been avoided. Here’s hoping the writers will just raise the bar a little. Those of us who are distracted by bobbles will be less distracted and those who don’t notice them won’t notice them missing:-}

382. P Technobabble - September 17, 2011

re: 379

I probably should have said “alternate time-line,” or “alternate universe,” rather than “from the future.”

383. dmduncan - September 17, 2011

377. celticarchie – September 17, 2011

367. dmduncan – It doesn’t come across as a mystery though, it comes across a piss poor writing. Therein lies the problem.


By mystery I mean that something amazing happens, and you don’t know how or why. You may come to some preliminary conclusions — Nero created the black hole, and then after Vulcan is destroyed, Nero used the Red Matter to create the black hole in the first place; later that view is revised by the mind meld sequence when we learn what really happened — but you don’t know for sure if your preliminary understanding is correct.

And then that puzzle DOES get solved when you finally learn the true sequence of events.

So it did come across as a mystery to me because I wanted to know what was going on and I could only provide a best guess until I had more to go on, and that kind of structure kept the movie interesting for me. It was GOOD writing as far as I’m concerned.

And Red Matter does seem to be a 23rd century moniker for “dark matter” or “exotic matter,” but what it really comes down to is that when Gene Roddenberry was creating Star Trek in the 1960’s he needed a cheap way to get his crew to the surfaces of planets, and so the relatively cheap effect of the transporter was born.

Notice, you need a transmission pad to transport people, but you don’t need a receiving pad!!! And in hard SF you need both, or else how does anybody or thing get recomposed on the other end? That would be like watching a TV broadcast without any reception equipment. Everyone who stepped into that thing should have been sent to their doom, but they weren’t.

And Red Matter is following the pattern of the transporter technology. It doesn’t have to make perfect sense, but it fits what the franchise has always done, so it makes Star Trek sense, and when it came time for other versions of Star Trek on TV, that wasn’t something they changed to make transporter technology more believable.

Finally, what’s neat about the mystery angle trick is that Red Matter actually DOES get placed at the beginning of everything, where you want it to be, when the mystery of how they created the black hole gets solved and you revise your understanding of how it happened. So it IS there, they just don’t refer to it as such directly at the time. These guys are smoother than that. Again, GOOD writing, not bad.

384. dmduncan - September 17, 2011

379. P Technobabble – September 17, 2011

Pretty much, yeah. Red Matter does exactly the same thing for the story as the Genesis Device did for TWOK, but nobody excoriates Nicholas Meyer for that. Interesting inconsistency, isn’t it?

385. Red Dead Ryan - September 17, 2011

Red Matter is so named because it’s RED, it MATTERS, and it makes people RED in the face because they’ve made it MATTER too much!

386. Red Dead Ryan - September 17, 2011

I was going to talk about White Matter and Brown Matter, but those are entirely different matters……!

387. Suellen from Savannah - September 17, 2011

Red Matter, white matter, any matter. Just get the movie done my little Sugar Foots.

388. Zyx_Psilon - September 17, 2011

Latest Title on paper? Star Trek.
No really, i mean it.
Dimensional grasp in both scope and antagonist shades.

389. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 17, 2011

#381 – “@371-372: Good shot, but no score. No concoction ever painstakingly created in a laboratory emerged without a scientific name. Scientist classify things by name, and those names are descriptive – indicating components of the “matter.””

As I have stated, no doubt this red matter substance does have a scientific name. Why would you even think that it didn’t? However, as far as someone like Nero is concerned, a miner with (it appears) certain mathematical skills but not a scientist, calling it simply red matter suffices. The term suffices for everyone else as well, except possibly those who are easily distracted by the baubles of pedantic scientific words and terminologies.

“Those of us who are distracted by bobbles will be less distracted and those who don’t notice them won’t notice them missing:-}”

Personally speaking, I am not sure that I have ever been a person who is easily distracted by baubles, ie shiny little trinkets containing (incredibly) complex words and formulae…Also, my concentration and focused attention can vary, especially if I am tired, but most of the time I do manage to pay attention to what is important and relevant…just saying.

390. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 17, 2011

Edit: ie shiny little trinkets containing (incredibly) complex words and formulae, and nor do I wish to find myself distracted by their inclusion – occasionally even I have lapses in attentiveness…:)

391. moauvian waoul- aka: seymour hiney - September 17, 2011

Not a big fan of “Red Matter’ myself. It seemed too contrived: something introduced one time (so far) that so neatly fits into this single story. Genesis didn’t bother me as much. Maybe it’s because, though it was integral to the plot, and it’s fought over, it’s effects aren’t really felt until the next movie. Yes it explodes but many things do, and at the time it’s depicted as conventional explosion, nothing truely exotic. Also it becomes part of the conflict, not the sole source of it. Khan and Kirk would have had it out regardless. Anyway, that’s how I see it. Sorry Bob.

392. moauvian waoul- aka: seymour hiney - September 17, 2011


393. Dee - lvs moon' surface - September 17, 2011

……………… not really matter………. ph so acid………..:-) :-)

394. the Quickening - September 17, 2011

Not sure why what Red Matter is called is more important to discuss than it’s function in the movie. If memory serves, Proto-matter was mentioned first in TSFS, not TWOK. First, we are familiar with the Genesis Device from TWOK (we learn later in TSFS that Proto-matter is contained in it’s matrix); Second, in the TWOK, we have been given details of of what the Genesis Device is (a recording by Carol Marcus, a heated debate between Spock and McCoy), so we have been prepared indirectly for Proto-matter; Third, because the Genesis Device plays such a pivotal part in the plot of TWOK, when Proto-matter is brought up in TSFS, it doesn’t come off as a gimmicky plot device, but rather a strong MacGuffin and works splendidly. Not so Red Matter; it serves only as a plot gimmick, a rather weak MacGuffin, with no established existence to make it significantly substantial to the story, and that’s my problem with it.

Speaking of which, this illustrates one of the many problems I had with ST ’09–way too many gimmicky devices. Examples. Need an excuse for making the movie? Put the story in an alternate universe. Need to get the Trekkers to flock to the movie? Let’s get Nimoy to appear in the film. Need to shock the audience? Let’s kill Kirk’s father on screen. Need an obligatory threat to destroy the earth? I know, give ’em Red Matter. Need more tears? Let’s kill Spock’s mom. Need more suspense and thrills? Let’s blow-up Vulcan. I liked the movie, but I sure hope the next one is a lot better.

395. NCM - September 17, 2011

Keachick, I meant BOBBLE, as I said. If you look it up, you’ll understand. I did not mean ‘bauble.’

“The term suffices for everyone else as well, except possibly those who are easily distracted by the baubles of pedantic scientific words and terminologies.”

– I believe you meant to suggest that we’re distracted by the lack of such terms.

Your arguments rarely make sense to me. You seem to habitually contradict yourself or twist your own argument. Yogi-isms are fun as one-liners, but as part and parcel of an argument – not so much. I’ve learned to skip your posts because they make my head spin. I only responded this time because you addressed my comments: I’d rather you didn’t – I may feel the need to respond, as when you correct my English without understanding it.

Where we come together, here, it feels like a cat fight. I’ve never engaged in those before and I don’t find them entertaining, now. If you’d like to take a final swipe, I’ll try to resist a response and maybe we can respectfully agree to let each other be.

396. celticarchie - September 17, 2011

384. dmduncan – That’s because in ACT 1 of TWOK. Kirk, Spock and Bones actually discuss: What Genesis is. What it does. And why it’s dangerous.

Remember that little scene where Kirk asks the computer about it? Get’s his eyes scanned and McCoy gets all grouchy to Spock when he acts so calm that it could be used as a weapon.

All Red Matter needs is to be introduced say a scene or two earlier in the film. Doesn’t have to be long. Just Nero and a lackey saying we have the Red Matter, a little wary of it, indicated the danger, and Nero saying that it will be the instrument of there revenge. Nothing fancy, no complex lecture of it’s atomic structure, that you techobabbe-aphobes seem to think we desperately want in there.

Just… What it is? What it does? Why it is dangerous? Simple!

397. dmduncan - September 17, 2011

Harry Ballz: You ever see the Billy Wilder film with James Cagney called One, Two, Three? Just watched it. Hilarious old Hollywood film. Lots of rapid fire one liners. You may enjoy!

That was off topic, by the way.

396: “All Red Matter needs is to be introduced say a scene or two earlier in the film.”

Maybe it wasn’t a by-the-book way of doing it, but these guys have been writing long enough not to follow the book all the time, and they got away with it because in that instance it worked, at least for me, and I didn’t have even the vaguest feeling that the timing of its introduction was off. It didn’t at all seem awkward.

The first time it occurred to me as a complaint is when I read other people posting their complaints about it. It wasn’t something I had coming out of the theater. And usually the complaint is about not knowing what Red Matter itself is; that it was just a plot device with no scientific backing, and nothing more…which is pretty much true of the Genesis Device as well, regardless of when it was introduced in TWOK.

The Genesis Device was also a much more central part of the plot of TWOK than Red Matter was to ST.09, so it makes more sense to introduce the Genesis Device much earlier in TWOK.

Can’t be sure, but I think the issue you raise that RM was introduced too late is the first time I’ve read that one.

398. Harry Ballz - September 17, 2011


dmduncan, I LOVE James Cagney! What a talented actor. The guy could do anything!

Been many years since I saw One, Two, Three….worth another viewing.

Speaking of Billy Wilder, I loved The Apartment starring Jack Lemmon.

399. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 17, 2011

#381 – “It was a tremendously fun picture. Like most films, it could have been better. With even slightly more effort, many bobbles could have been avoided. Here’s hoping the writers will just raise the bar a little. Those of us who are distracted by bobbles will be less distracted and those who don’t notice them won’t notice them missing:-}”

This is what you wrote. This is how “bobble” is defined –


I just don’t agree, in this context, that any mistakes were made on the part of the writers.

#395 – “Your arguments rarely make sense to me. You seem to habitually contradict yourself or twist your own argument. Yogi-isms are fun as one-liners, but as part and parcel of an argument – not so much.”

Wow. The only person who is mentioning the term “yogi-isms” is you, NCM. I also wonder if anyone else has the same problems understanding my arguments. I was not taking a swipe at anybody. I will simply querying your comments.

400. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 17, 2011

Incidentally, I read ALL comments posted, even if I don’t agree or necessarily understand them at first…

401. dmduncan - September 17, 2011

398. Harry Ballz – September 17, 2011

First time I saw it. The gag with the monocle was hilarious.

402. celticarchie - September 17, 2011

I’ve got it! It was Red Batter…

That’s it, they were trying to make the Vulcans surprise pancakes and they mixed up the Red Batter by mistake, accidentally destroyed their homeworld, whoops-a-dasies…

I wondered why the Romulans were wearing pinnies… who’d have thunk a Romulan cookery show…genius.

403. Harry Ballz - September 17, 2011

I hear Orci was half-tempted to call the stuff DUZITREALLY MATTER, but figured that was too “on the nose”.

404. Red Dead Ryan - September 17, 2011

Still discussing Red Matter, I see.

A matter of principle, perhaps. Or a matter of perspective. But eventually the debate will end. It’s only a matter of time!

405. Harry Ballz - September 17, 2011

An ode to Red Matter and the Shat:

Hello Matter, hello Fatter
Do we care, does it matter
Please get going on
The much desired sequel
Or this bitching we’ll never equal!

406. NCM - September 17, 2011

@399: If you look at the first entry for “noun” under the link you offered, you’ll see that a “bobble” is a “blunder.” The latter was too strong a word for the context.

407. Brian K - September 17, 2011

Ok, can we get back to the topic? I just love how we go off on unimportant and insignificant tangents for something like 200 posts!

As for the topic of this thread (JJ to direct, pre-production beginning), has anyone seen anything OFFICIAL yet? Are we to believe a single post on one online entertainment rag like Vulture? We all know everything you read on the internet is true, LOL! Frankly, I need more than one source. I’ve been searching all kinds of entertainment sites, and not one peep about the sequel. Even Bob Orci, in his usual cryptic posts, hasn’t even hinted at confirming the news…..

Call me a skeptic, but can you blame me?? After 2 years of on again/off again news about the script and release date, I need something official. A short press release from Paramount and/or Bad Robot would suffice. Until then, I’m not buying it…..

408. Adolescent Nightmare - September 17, 2011

Will it be in 3D?

409. Basement Blogger - September 17, 2011

@ 405

Harry, that’s funny. But J.J. Abrams, could we have an official anouncement? How about a exclusive video for this site. Check this out. We have scantilly dressed dancing Vulcan babes. You know the type of costume with a lot of leg showing. Just like Roddenberry would love. Then there’s smoke on the stage. Timapani roll. LeBron James comes out and announces, “Ladies and gentlemen, your director for Star Trek 2013 is J.J. Abrams.” Ouf of the smoke comes… J.J. Abrams, arm and arm with a Vulcan dancing babe. Here’s what I think J.J. might say,

“Star Trek will be out in 2013. I think. Unless Tom Cruise wants me to direct MIssion Impossible V. Maybe in that case, 2014. Oops, I forgot about my Alias spin-off designed to appeal to the an ever younger demographic. The show is where Sydney Bristow takes her children on missions. I got this really cool scene where Sydney is nursing her baby and she kicks a guy in the nuts. Anyway, in that case, Star Trek will come out 2015. And then there’s the sequel to Super 8 which is titled VHS. Okay VHS: The Movie will take us to 2016 Look Star Trek will come out when I’ve got time. Until then, get a life you crazy Trekkers.” ;-) .

410. dmduncan - September 17, 2011

Oh talk of
Batter and red matter
And we all now mad
As a mad hatter!
Bad words, feuds, no sheriff in town
Close it, close the site down now!
Before its too late, to say I do hate.
For haranguing, and lambasting, and
Distracting BobOrci
The years between movies
May add up to catorce.

411. Harry Ballz - September 17, 2011

dmduncan, you are one smooth bastard. You are the Bard reincarnated!

412. dmduncan - September 17, 2011

Aah thank you sir, thank you!

413. FarStrider - September 17, 2011

@407 I know that it was in Entertainment Weekly:http://insidemovies.ew.com/2011/09/13/j-j-abrams-directing-star-trek-2/ which was picked up by things like CNN. . .and while it is not Variety, Vulture is pretty good about it’s reporting. . .

Also, the movie’s status has been updated to “Pre-production” on the IMDb. And Bob Orci hasn’t said “Hold your horses” in this thread. . .so, it’s a pretty good bet that this is true. . .


414. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 17, 2011

“Production Notes from IMDbPro
Status: Pre-production | …
Updated: 15 September 2011″

Yes, Yes. This is what I have been waiting to read all year. Finally!

Chris Pine has got a new group of young tribbles colonizing his face. It seems he gave himself a clean shave so he would not need to bother doing anything while in New York. Now, Mr Orci, what will this Captain Kirk look like – clean shaven or with a nicely groomed short beard? I can get used to either…I’m easy that way…:)

News Just In –

Apparently I have just found out that a new but small galaxy gets discovered by my captain and co. I believe it has a long title, however, for the sake of being simplistic, it gets referred to as “the horny loop galaxy”. It seems that this galaxy is made up of several large round loops and when you travel through any of them, there is an immediate effect on males and females. The males experience a very resolute. large and firm member and the females experience a warmth and moistness of a kind never felt in such a way before. A search of historical records, such as they are, indicate that in about 2011, a UFO, as seen and then not seen, took back with it a sample of Harry’s ointment. It is not clear what events took place exactly, but it is believed that somehow the use of Harry’s ointment caused this new galaxy to be formed, to be discovered 200+ years by Captain Kirk and the USS Enterprise.

415. Harry Ballz - September 17, 2011

Well, if it’s from Harry’s ointment, then when entering this new galaxy one would say…

“We are now entering the goo galaxy!”

416. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 17, 2011

Yes, I see, Harry. I think it is called the “Gooey yummy galaxy” as well.

Just announced – The “horny loop” or “gooey yummy” galaxy has been quarantined as too many space vehicles from around the rest of the galaxies have jammed up all the loop entrances. These aliens just will not learn to stand in line and wait their turn…:)

417. Harry Ballz - September 17, 2011

Yummy would seem to imply some sort of ingestion. Hey, I like the way you think!

418. DonDonP1 - September 18, 2011

I’m so glad J.J. Abrams will direct ‘Star Trek XII’.

419. the Quickening - September 18, 2011


Of course, logically, as an extra precaution, Spock could have posted guards in the brig, or simply ordered McCoy to tranquilize him, but then Kirk couldn’t have met Spock-A in that cave if he had done anything sensible. Seeing that the universe is correcting itself, why is any explanation for Spock’s action necessary at all? And, isn’t it strange that the universe cares about Kirk and Spock and not billions of beings on planet Vulcan… at least not enough to correct it’s destruction.

420. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 18, 2011

#417 It is sucking on something yummy. You may swallow, but my own preference is to not swallow.

#419 I guess it is the same kind of universe that allows 10 million people to die in concentration camps in WW2 (not to mention the many more millions of people who died outside Nazi concentration camps) and then have some individual survive the most horrendous perils…

421. Dee - lvs moon' surface - September 18, 2011

#414. Keachick…

Yes… at least according to IMDb they are in pre-production now …

I wonder if Kirk/Pine will continue to be blonde… but I dare not ask this to Mr. Bob Orci… then, along comes a boring suggesting that the matter is not relevant… as if Mr. Bob Orci needed a secretary filtering the “ridiculous matter” here… hmmmm… perhaps… but I think he deserves a little fun when he comes here… LOL

Remember when I said that Chris said in an interview that it was he who decided that Kirk would be blonde……………CP doing something with his mouth……ZQ so serious talking about Star Trek … and then funny …



:-) :-)

422. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 18, 2011

Chris Pine was nervous, that’s all. Shaving his arm hairs? How could he? Chris Pine’s arm hairs drive me into a pinenut. They are so gorgeous to look at. Don’t ask me why.


You do realize that Chris Pine has done what some consider to be “armpit p*rn”, (as in his armpits looks so good) in that you got to see his armpit hairs in a brief scene in the movie Unstoppable.
Gosh, that man is such a handsome dude…Uh oh, I’m starting to drool again. Bye!

423. boborci - September 18, 2011

419. In your scenario, who the hell knows where Bones’ loyalty lies. Or anyone else on the crew who might agree with Kirk. It still remains that the most sure fire way to make sure Kirk is not a problem is to get him off the ship.

424. moauvian waoul- aka: seymour hiney - September 18, 2011

Good points. I guess if one was to apply logic one might argue how many more planets would be lost if Kirk and Spock we not brought together. That is if one were to apply logic.

425. Yammer - September 18, 2011

Great news, thanks to Trekmovie for hosting all this news and contribs to keep it entertaining.

boborci, as a thought experiment I have been trying to guess the second plot. I felt that a lot of the first movie was reverse-engineering some of the favourite tropes and memes (catchphrases, famous incidents and well-known character traits) and using them not (just) as a gimmick but as a legitimate way of telling your story.

Now that you have established your territory with an original villain and meaningful events, I wonder how much of the second movie is going to be a sequel to the first and how much will continue the mining of TOS.

I am hoping that the antagonist of the second movie isn’t just another space villain, but a way of thinking, a culture if you will — science fiction is where this kind of big-idea stuff can really get a workout because of its ability to use allegory.

Or… you could just do Diane Duane’s The Wounded Sky!

426. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 18, 2011

# 419 – “Of course, logically, as an extra precaution, Spock could have posted guards in the brig, or simply ordered McCoy to tranquilize him, but then Kirk couldn’t have met Spock-A in that cave if he had done anything sensible.”

None of these characters know what we, the audience and TOS viewers, know, except prime Spock. Kirk would not have seen his meeting Scotty as a coincidence. People have to meet somewhere. Possibly coming across prime Spock as he did, could have had a wow factor, especially given his perilous situation – “Thank God you were there, man!” that sort of thing.

Of course, at this point in the story, Dr McCoy has just become the ship’s Chief Medical Officer which does give him certain powers he did not have before, like being able to relieve an officer from duty if he believed that he was physically and/or psychologically unfit.

It no doubt became apparent to Captain Pike and Spock just who was responsible for helping get Kirk aboard the Enterprise in the first place. Dr McCoy’s reaction when Spock spoke to him just after he had Kirk put off the ship quite probably confirmed to Spock that he had done the right thing. It was not just Kirk who was a problem but also, just as likely, Kirk’s buddy, Dr McCoy.

427. Dee - lvs moon' surface - September 18, 2011

#422. Keachick …

This is something genetic, I guess… Pine’s arm hairs… although CP’s arm hairs are more impressive… LOL


Does Mr. Bob Orci, Mr. Kurtzman and Mr. Lindelof are not creating a character for Trek sequel that could be interpreted by Mr. Robert Pine?… It would be nice to see both again in a movie…

:-) :-)

428. Sarah - September 18, 2011

Good! I’m glad JJ is directing. Changing recipes at this juncture could sour the milk. So far, there’s good news. I’m just waiting to hear something about filming to begin so I can get excited.

429. Sarah - September 18, 2011

I only have one request: Please don’t let the story progress so quickly in this movie. The last one was good, but it all passed by so fast it was hard to keep up. Also, don’t edit out the good stuff. I’m still reeling over the movie having lost the scenes of Kirk’s step-father, and Spock’s parents arguing. That would have added nice flavor to go with the muscle.

430. Yammer - September 18, 2011

I want to see something I have never seen from Kirk’s past. How about his dealings with Starfleet? I like the high intrigue Federation stuff as much as the next geek.

Also, location work and big sets. Star Trek movies should not be bottle shows (although I do want to see a lot about the ship — how about the rec areas, the hanger, the cafeteria? ) and JJ brought those excellent SFAcademy scenes.

431. Rusty0918 - September 19, 2011

#430 – I think you have no need to worry about the next one being a bottle show.

As with Spock throwing Kirk off the ship, there should have been a scene telling us why he chose that instead of putting him in the brig. That would have made more sense.

432. Cygnus-X1 - September 19, 2011

371. boborci – September 16, 2011

—-As far as red matter goes, i dont hear anyone complaining about the lackof set up for DARK MATTER.—-

Let’s not get carried away here. Scientists don’t pretend that dark matter isn’t a mystery. At this point, it’s basically defined as something that is required to be present in galaxies in order for the laws of gravity to hold.

Your Red Matter, on the other hand, is pretty fantastic stuff—basically a deus ex machina plot device. How do we get a black hole that Spock can have control over so that Nero can then blame him for having had the power to save Romulus but failing to do so? Red Matter, a little dab’ll do ya (but then a crazy Romulan will pursue ya).

What I want to know is how such a substance could have enough mass/energy to create a black hole without totally obliterating the container it was in, the ship carrying it and everything else within a pretty wide radius. If you have an answer to that, Bob Orci, I’ll be impressed.

433. celticarchie - September 19, 2011

“371. boborci – September 16, 2011 – As far as red matter goes, i dont hear anyone complaining about the lackof set up for DARK MATTER.”

The universe isn’t governed by narrative structure. MOVIES ARE!!!

434. Harry Ballz - September 19, 2011


Couldn’t it be the same magnetic holding field used to contain anti-matter? Just sayin’..

435. boborci - September 19, 2011

432. Same way a nuclear decive is not incinerated by its contents until it is detonated.

436. boborci - September 19, 2011


437. NCM - September 19, 2011

@435: Good enough for me. If B. Orci could explain the composition, physics, and containment of Red Matter, it wouldn’t be science FICTION:-/

438. Harry Ballz - September 19, 2011


Bob, the way you posted that, you must currently be writing Chekhov dialogue.

We’re lucky you didn’t type “nuclear wessels”! :>)

439. Aurore - September 19, 2011

435. Roberto Orci.

I guess we’re lucky you did not type “nuclear deciwe”…… I meant to write “Dewice”.


440. dmduncan - September 19, 2011

138: “We’re lucky you didn’t type ‘nuclear wessels’! :>)”

The danger there is that we could have got “nuclear weasels.”

441. Suellen from Savannah - September 19, 2011

I had no problem understanding Spock kicking Kirk off the ship.
1. Who wants a loose cannon on a ship. It was not like he could terminate him and have security escort him off the property.

2. How else was he suppose to hook up with Spock.

My only complaint with all of ST is why Spock always takes on some much guilt for things that logically are out of his control. Its always the same in the TOS , TOS movies and ST 09. It was not his fault a force of nature did not act according to exact measurements. Tornados, hurricanes, etc don’t always follow predictions so why should have a Super nova star. I have always thought Spock’s excessive guilt over issues was kind of lame.

I loved the movie and am looking forward to the sequel.

Movie making is a career and these people take their careers seriously. i have the utmost faith the next 2 movies will be enjoyable. Although i really would cut down on some of lens flares. Like them during the Kelvin sequence, thought it most effective. The more they were used in the rest of the movie the more I felt like I was on an verge of a seizure.

442. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 19, 2011

Star Trek 2009 had narrative structure, otherwise NO ONE would have been able to follow it. Just because some people could not follow it, because it did not adhere to narrative structure they expected (and even feel is owed to them), does not mean it did not have structure. The fact is – many people could follow the story and did not need to have much, if anything, explained to them.

443. Vultan - September 19, 2011

I really didn’t have a problem with red matter.

But the Romulan star going nova all of a sudden… hmm, remember that episode of TNG where the Enterprise helps this species with a dying star? It guest starred David Ogden Stiers (from MASH fame) who played a scientist working to save their star, and who apparently has been one of several generations of scientist working to save it.

Well, it just struck me as odd that the Romulans, this advanced space-faring species, would be caught by surprise and being utterly helpless with their star going nova. Even with their arrogant, xenophobic nature, and thus not reaching out for help until it was too late, you’d think maybe just maybe they would MOVE their capital to some other hospitable planet it their vast empire before the star went nova. I mean, the life of a star is a pretty measurable thing, even with our “stone knives and bear skins” technology of today. It doesn’t just sneak up on you.

What say you, Bob Orci?

444. NCM - September 19, 2011

Poor Mr. Orci. More than two years after he lets the ship sail, he’s still being summoned to account for plot contrivances. Personally under fire more than anyone here, and he’s still one of the most consistently civil. Maybe we need an ‘appreciate Orci day’ here on the site.

445. Cygnus-X1 - September 19, 2011

435. boborci – September 19, 2011

—-432. Same way a nuclear device is not incinerated by its contents until it is detonated.—-

I thought of that. The chemical bonds of an atom, in an amount as miniscule as a drop of Red Matter, do not have nearly enough energy to warp space into a black hole, even if a black hole could be created in that manner (which we can reasonably stipulate to as a science fiction premise). To reproduce the mass effect necessary to warp space into a black hole, you’d need enough energy to equal the gravitation of a star many times the mass of our sun. And while I am keenly aware that we’re talking sci-fi here, and at the risk of seeming to take this too seriously, the idea of a drop of Red Matter having as much gravitational force as a star many times the size of our sun did seem like a wee stretch in your movie. Not a deal-breaker in terms of acceptability of your story, but it did stick out as a conspicuous plot device.

446. Cygnus-X1 - September 19, 2011

Even a matter/anti-matter reaction, which I think is the most energetic reaction there is, would not even come anywhere close to having enough energy to produce a black hole in such a tiny amount.

447. Cygnus-X1 - September 19, 2011

For the sake of perspective, a handful of anti-matter reacting with matter would supply enough energy to power California for a week. And while that is an impressive reaction, it’s not even in the same ballpark as warping space into a black hole big enough to swallow those ships.

448. dmduncan - September 19, 2011

445. Cygnus-X1 – September 19, 2011

Okay, so Red Matter is even more implausible than earth-like gravity on the Enterprise, without which there would be no Kirk Fu when somebody tried to take his ship.

What’s more important, man? Scientific accuracy or Kirk Fu?

449. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 19, 2011

Do all stars die the same way and take the same amount of time to do so?

Then there is a notion – “the calm before the storm…”?

The chemical composition of Red Matter is not given. Sometimes it only takes a drop of whatever…


The word “contrivance” has several meanings –


#444 – ” (Bob Orci)…he’s still being summoned to account for plot contrivances. Personally under fire…”

Which definition for plot “contrivances” are you referring to?

450. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 19, 2011

#448 – “What’s more important, man? Scientific accuracy or Kirk Fu?”

Should you even have to ask? Kirk Fu, of course and I can’t wait to see some on that Enterprise with an implausible earth-like gravity!

451. Vultan - September 19, 2011


“Do all stars die the same way and take the same amount of time to do so?”

Nope. But they do give signals when they’re about to go bang (changes in temperature, size, etc.), and the Romulans would definitely see these indications many years before zero hour. At least I hope they would know. They were almost always depicted as arrogant and xenophobic, but they never struck me as being stupid or crazy or suicidal (like Imperial Japan).

Since the destruction of their star was the singular event that drove the story in Trek ’09 forward, it does deserve a bit more scrutiny than a simple MacGuffin, Hollywood pixie-dust device like red matter.

452. dmduncan - September 19, 2011

If you tried to make Star Trek totally scientifically plausible by projecting from today’s knowledge, it would look nothing like it does. And since nobody is going to radically revamp the franchise to do that, why not just enjoy it for what it is and the cool things it has?

453. NCM - September 19, 2011

New discoveries are constantly making scientists question premises long taken for fact – about black holes, how stars form… But the famous old double-split experiment (first done in 1803!) continues to prove there’s so much we’ve yet to learn about physics. The possibilities are limitless and exciting – and yeah, could maybe wipe us all out.

Scientists are now talking seriously about parallel universes, of realities we can’t yet perceive; where our laws of physics and what we believe to be normal do not apply. Depending on how far man can boldly go (and remember, the Vulcans are ahead of us), limitless energy and far more may be harnessed from those yet illusive dimensions – and if so, it’s not likely to follow our current dictates of logic.

Imagine explaining nuclear fission to a tribal Jungle dweller… Something as dubious as Red Matter may one day be a reality – even so, I think scientists will honor it in the tradition of nomenclature:-]

454. moauvian waoul- aka: seymour hiney - September 19, 2011

“Poor Mr. Orci. More than two years after he lets the ship sail, he’s still being summoned to account for plot contrivances.”

True perhaps, but I think most of us really enjoy our time here with Mr. Orci. He’s a big reason why so many are here. And I hope he enjoys that time as well. I’m impressed that he continues to show up, even after the way the less socialized of us behave.

455. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 19, 2011

Don’t you mean the destruction of the Romulan planet?
Actually it was not the destruction of the star that drove the story. It was the fact the Nero with his mining ship was way too close when Spock delivered the red matter into the supernova. It is quite likely that the much smaller ship that Spock was in could have escaped the gravity well had not the much larger and heavier Narada been there – as in feathers float, heavier objects fall to the ground kind of thing… Nero was being a dick and had clearly followed Spock in order to exact his revenge – duh, and well, the rest we know.

456. Aurore - September 19, 2011

“And I hope he enjoys that time as well. I’m impressed that he continues to show up, even after the way the less socialized of us behave.”

Oh, come on, seymour!
I only called him Toto twice!!!

(or something like that!).

457. moauvian waoul- aka: seymour hiney - September 19, 2011

I was referring to myself, Aurore. But you already knew that.

458. Vultan - September 19, 2011


Of course. The destruction of the star… (wait for it)… (wait for it)… means the destruction of the planet.

And it sets up… the characters’ motivations. Again, it all goes back to that wacky star going *poof!* all of a sudden.

But hey, maybe the Rommies were too busy playing Angry Warbirds on their Hi-Phones to notice. Or watching movies about giant robots doing smashy, flashy things….

459. Aurore - September 19, 2011

Yes….um, sure I did, seymour. I knew that.

460. Vultan - September 19, 2011


I’m not trying to make everything in Star Trek scientifically accurate, nor do I want to. But it’s not tachyon-quantum-phase-shift-bussard-collector technobabble nonsense we’re talking about here. It’s a supernova. A plain old supernova—one of those things covered in every 7th grade science class.

461. moauvian waoul- aka: seymour hiney - September 19, 2011

Yes, yes you did, and I cannot hide anything from you. You know me so well Aurore, it scares me. …Like you’re in my head, with all those other voices. You are still in France, right?

462. Aurore - September 19, 2011

“Like you’re in my head, with all those other voices. You are still in France, right?”

(Must. Resist. Urge. To. Moan. In. Seymour’s head.)

Of course, I’m still in France, seymmmmmouuur…

(dammit! I was so close!….)

463. moauvian waoul- aka: seymour hiney - September 19, 2011

…Like putty in your hands, Aurore.

464. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 19, 2011

#451 – “Since the destruction of their star was the singular event that drove the story in Trek ‘09 forward”

and then

#458 – “Of course. The destruction of the star… (wait for it)… (wait for it)… means the destruction of the planet.”

No. The destruction of the star was meant to SAVE the planet Romulus from being destroyed, as in Prime Spock was meant to destroy the STAR before it destroyed the PLANET, Romulus. My proposition is that it was not the supernova being destroyed that drove the story, it was the destruction of Romulus that caused Nero to be where he was, chasing prime Spock and being way too close to the supernova.

465. moauvian waoul- aka: seymour hiney - September 19, 2011

Alas it is getting late, so I must bid you adieu. But I’ll listen for your response…in my head. It’s crowded in there so feel free to shout.

466. Vultan - September 19, 2011


And yet… the events you described still all surround this star suddenly exploding. Take away the nova and there’s no story. No need to save Romulus. No need for Spock to act with his space squid ship and its red matter magic caviar machine. No need for Nero to go on a crazy warpath.

And no alternate universe. No movie. No rebooting of a recognized brand. No ticket sales for Paramount.

I’ve said it before: Trek ’09 was a fun movie, a nearly genius work of marketing and revitalization of a recognized and profitable brand, but is it a great (or even a good) work of science fiction? Sorry, not so much.

467. boborci - September 20, 2011

445. Cygnus-X1 – September 19, 2011

Eh. all fine arguments if you wish to be contrarian.

However, as far as RED MATTER goes, the minute we are talking about the great great grandson of the concept of Dark Matter (just one of the real life deus ex machinas of mainstream theoretical physics) which happens to represent the GREATEST TOTAL MASS in the universe, the way a BLACK HOLE REPRESENTS GREAT MASS, and which indicates we called it RED MATTER to clue you in on the connection to our “real world” inspiration, and in which we state the universe is a MULTIVERSE, in which connections are possible between realities in a way not contemplated by classical physics, then your explanation starts to sound a little like saying the world is flat.

Just my opinion.

468. boborci - September 20, 2011

466. Thanks! We participated in the marketing as well.

469. boborci - September 20, 2011

Although calling us genius takes it a bit far, but thanks anyway.

470. Aurore - September 20, 2011

“…Like putty in your hands, Aurore.”

That sentence has the makings of an incredible poem.

I shall wait for it.
You know where to find me.

I’m the loudest voice in your mind.
The one that either shouts: “seymmmmouuur!!!”, or ; “Pizza!”.

Sometimes,even, both words, concurrently…


471. Devon - September 20, 2011

#466 – “but is it a great (or even a good) work of science fiction? Sorry, not so much.”

Most Star Trek wasn’t, nor should it be, so no reason to start making genres out of Star Trek that don’t apply.

472. Harry Ballz - September 20, 2011


Bob, the post numbers you cite in your response don’t seem to match up!

‘Course, does it really (red) matter?

473. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 20, 2011

#466 No, the story comes about because of Nero’s reaction to what prime Spock failed to do in time.

If prime Spock had not been there proposing a solution as he did – ie to save Romulus by destroying the supernova, then Nero would have no one to blame for the destruction of his world. Nero felt VERY let down and angry, as no doubt his crew did as well.

Re – why didn’t the Romulans evacuate the planet if they knew the supernova was coming? Well, are there any other suitable Class M planets about in that system? How do we know that those planets or planet might not also be in the path of the supernova? How do we know that many Romulans were not evacuated, perhaps some living on space ships searching for a suitable new world?

However, the answers to these questions are not relevant for the purposes of this movie, because the events that are pertinent take place in an alternate universe, a universe where Romulus does still exist and where the clock has gone back 129 years.

474. Cygnus-X1 - September 20, 2011

448. dmduncan – September 19, 2011

—-Okay, so Red Matter is even more implausible than earth-like gravity on the Enterprise, without which there would be no Kirk Fu when somebody tried to take his ship. What’s more important, man? Scientific accuracy or Kirk Fu?—-

I agree that some of the staple Trek technologies also seem highly implausible—transporter technology especially, as many professional physicists have remarked—but the more such fantastic things that are added, the weaker and more contrived seems the Trek universe. From the beginning, Trek was premised on rational explanations for its futuristic otherworldiness. Gene & Co. invented the transporters as a practical necessity when they couldn’t find a way to land the crew down on the planets that was both budgetable and acceptable-looking. I know that they gotta make a compelling story, but I can think of more “acceptable” ways to have accomplished that.

475. Cygnus-X1 - September 20, 2011

467. boborci – September 20, 2011

—-However, as far as RED MATTER goes, the minute we are talking about the great great grandson of the concept of Dark Matter (just one of the real life deus ex machinas of mainstream theoretical physics)—-

Well, for what it’s worth, I’m not just being contrarian; I really did react to the Red Matter as I expressed.

I actually didn’t even make the connection from Red Matter to dark matter until you just mentioned that such was your intention. Dark Matter is voluminous stuff that makes up 23% of the universe. For some reason it doesn’t seem to interact with ordinary matter except with respect to gravitation, perhaps because dark matter particles are very small and they pass through ordinary matter, but that is an attribute that is also present in ordinary matter. The point being there’s nothing that seems “magical” about dark matter; we just don’t know much about it yet, beyond its measured physical effects.

And dark matter is NOT a deus ex machina; it’s kind of the opposite. The mysterious effect of dark matter is measurable. We already know that the effect exists, we just don’t know any other attributes about the stuff that’s causing that effect. So, with dark matter, we didn’t come up with a device to magically cause an effect that we wanted to be caused. The effect was already there. We just came up with a name for it—sort of a place holder—so that people all over the world could refer to it by the same name while they were investigating its properties. So, dark matter is almost the reverse of a deus ex machina: Instead of “God from machine,” we’re trying to find the “machine” (the mechanics) that causes the “Godlike” effect that is already evident. Your Red Matter, on the other hand, was contrived specifically to cause an effect that you wanted caused for the purposes of your plot and story.

—-and in which we state the universe is a MULTIVERSE, in which connections are possible between realities in a way not contemplated by classical physics, then your explanation starts to sound a little like saying the world is flat.—-

I understand the premise that “this is a different, mysterious place where anything is possible,” and leaving it at that would be fine for a fantasy story. But a science fiction story demands a little more attention to detail and accountability. For example, you could have had another, large-mass star within a distance able to affect the the scene. Spock shoots some kind of a catalyst into the star, causing it to exponentially increase its nuclear fusion over some period of time until it collapses into a black hole like stars do in real-life when they run low of nuclear fuel.

Or, if you wanna go the multiverse route, there’s a current theory which has gravity being caused by parallel universe in the multiverse and sort of “leaking” into our universe. Maybe Spock finds a naturally occurring wormhole between the Prime universe and one of these parallel universes with strong gravity sources that leak into our universe. He shoots some device into the wormhole to home in on a strong gravity source, attracting it into the wormhole which focuses it like a laser beam, causing a strong gravity source to emerge out the other side into the Prime universe and voilà — your black hole, courtesy of Spock.

The point is, it would have been more compelling and less conspicuous as a plot device if you’d offered some scientific explanation for the cause of the black hole, instead of just “there’s this magical red stuff that makes a black hole, but you’ll accept it because there are so many mysterious things in the universe.” That’d be fine for a fantasy movie like LOTR, but it’s a tiny bit lazy for Trek. Not a huge deal, like I said, but just another little thing that would have made your story stronger.

476. Cygnus-X1 - September 20, 2011

Actually, nix my suggestion of blowing up another star. That would likely be very unfortunate for the lifeforms in the area dependent upon that star. Then again, creating a black hole and just leaving it there is also pretty irresponsible, but at least if you didn’t destroy anything vital in the process, the black hole could be undone by means related to its creation, leaving the area nice and tidy. Always clean up your work area, as one of my first bosses used to tell me.

477. Cygnus-X1 - September 20, 2011

To put it another way, science fiction is premised upon the fiction be tied to science somehow. Whereas you didn’t bother tying your fictional Red Matter to science or to real life in anyway. It’s just magic.

478. Maxim - September 20, 2011

Red matter may have the ability to extract ‘matter’ from all dimensions and universes to create a black hole in one dimension and thus you only need a drop of it. Just like an atomic bomb can extract energy from the bond of atoms, red matter can extract energy between the bonds of dimensions.

479. moauvian waoul- aka: seymour hiney - September 20, 2011

Wow, that was some dream. I coulld sure go for some pizza.

480. dmduncan - September 20, 2011

477. Cygnus-X1 – September 20, 2011

To put it another way, science fiction is premised upon the fiction be tied to science somehow. Whereas you didn’t bother tying your fictional Red Matter to science or to real life in anyway. It’s just magic.


Star Trek is what it is. It was low budget SF for TV which means that even though it had a big budget at the time, it wasn’t big enough for the genre, and the material had to shrink to fit the reality.

It was way better than Lost in Space, but not the best of all possible worlds. And since it was established that way, that’s how it unfolds today.

And it was necessary to do that to get the stories that we did and the drama of the characters that we got. So the violations were done for drama.

I understand what you are saying, and I too would like things to be as dramatic as possible while also seeming more plausible, but at the same time it’s not a deal breaker if that doesn’t always happen, in part because I got used to Trek doing that before ST.09 so it’s part of what I expect from the franchise.

481. Jai - September 20, 2011

Y’know, the notion of “red matter” as a vaguely-defined-but-useful plot device isn’t that different from “dilithium” or other types of scientific-sounding jargon thrown into the story.

If I was going to be really pedantic about issues involving “plausibility”, Vulcan in ST09 should have had multiple orbital weapons platforms and corresponding land-based weaponry in place, which would have enabled the planet to defend itself from Nero’s surprise attack. It’s supposed to be one of the Federation’s most important planets, after all.

But if you think about it, (as far as I can recall) even Earth was never depicted as having that kind of defensive weapons arsenal in any of the ST television shows (including the spinoffs) or the movies….which is actually pretty unrealistic for the planet that’s supposed to be the capital of the Federation and the headquarters of Starfleet Command. They wouldn’t be relying purely on starships for their defence, as though they were 23rd century versions of WW2-era Pearl Harbour.

But…..such things would make much shorter television episodes and movies. Unless you’re going to explain things by depicting a brilliant-but-arrogant scientific genius accidentally causing Vulcan’s weapons systems to be infiltrated and disarmed due to his romantic involvement with a 6-foot blonde supermodel-type spy. Which might get a bit confusing for viewers familiar with certain other sci-fi franchises ;)

482. NuFan - September 20, 2011

The claim that previous Star Trek movies were tied into science “somehow” is ridiculous and must be motivated by something else. Probably a desire to be contrarian.

483. Harry Ballz - September 20, 2011

Contrarian? I think you guys are psychotic equestrians, as you seem to enjoy beating a dead horse!

484. Jai - September 20, 2011

Let’s introduce a lighter note into the conversation, since Bob Orci is here. Sofia Vergara would be perfect as an Orion woman in the Star Trek sequel, a fact that was noticeable yet again during her arrival in the Emmys red carpet show. I bet she’d be great in the role too. Plenty of scene-stealing va-va-voom there.

Bob Orci, take note ;)

485. Harry Ballz - September 20, 2011


only if they can coach Sofia to lose that mud-thick accent of hers!

486. Dee - lvs moon' surface - September 20, 2011


487. Dee - lvs moon' surface - September 20, 2011

#485. Harry Ballz…

What would be the most appropriate accent for a Orion woman?….LOL

:-) :-)

488. Harry Ballz - September 20, 2011

Well, it ain’t gonna be Spanish, that’s for sure!

Her talking like that wouldn’t just pull you out of the movie, it would also slap you across the side of the head for good measure!

Hey, don’t get me wrong, if Sofia was a singer, I could LOOK at her voice for hours!

489. the Quickening - September 20, 2011

In your scenario, who the hell knows where Bones’ loyalty lies. Or anyone else on the crew who might agree with Kirk. It still remains that the most sure fire way to make sure Kirk is not a problem is to get him off the ship.


Loyalty verses following orders? Seeing that McCoy has already been guilty of questionable actions by getting Kirk on the ship in the first place, would he again pursue questionable actions to risk mutiny, or court marshal? Perhaps. Since the universe is correcting itself, and Spock’s actions are destined anyway, it’s a moot point. Actually, this was a minor annoyance to me. It was running into Spock-A in that cave that knocked me out of the movie. Universal destiny just wasn’t enough for me to swallow that.

490. the Quickening - September 20, 2011

Good points. I guess if one was to apply logic one might argue how many more planets would be lost if Kirk and Spock we not brought together. That is if one were to apply logic.


So, the universe discriminates? It could also be argued how many more planets would be lost, if billions of people disappeared–many who would or could be just as vital to the positive progression of the universe as Kirk or Spock.

491. Harry Ballz - September 20, 2011

“So, the universe discriminates?”

Hey, I’m so uncertain about the future, I don’t even buy green bananas!

492. boborci - September 20, 2011

478. Exactly. See, was that so hard?

493. boborci - September 20, 2011

477 so you missed the part above where i told you above that red matter was based on dark matter, hence the similarity in name?

494. boborci - September 20, 2011


Wanna check your stats on the percentage of supposed dark matter in the universe and come back for part 3 of this discussion?

495. NCM - September 20, 2011

I feel like Scotty on the bridge of the Enterprise: “This is exciting!” Fun to see Mr. Orci engage… The perspective and explanations add dimension to the argument. Too bad you over-estimated us when naming Red Matter via the genealogy route, after dark matter. Me thinks we think more in terms of Auntie Matter.

Go Orci! Go!

496. Harry Ballz - September 20, 2011

I like to see Bob Orci ENGAGE the fans about Red Matter and MAKE IT SO easily understood.

497. Harry Ballz - September 20, 2011


Oooh! Oooh! I know! I know! Is it 25%?

498. dmduncan - September 20, 2011

478. Maxim – September 20, 2011

Good enough for me!

499. dmduncan - September 20, 2011

So, let’s think of it this way:

What Red Matter does is either possible or impossible.

If we say it is possible, it is not worth criticizing.

If we say it is impossible, it is worth considering the first of AC Clarke’s Three Laws of Prediction:

“When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.”

In light of which case, again, Red Matter is not worth criticizing.

But instead of Red Matter I think the next movie should have something even more awesome: Kirk Fu.

500. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 20, 2011

So I see that some people here don’t believe in a little magic. Well, that’s a shame!

501. boborci - September 20, 2011

475. And you say dark matter is not a deus ex machina, but the opposite?!

A substance that cannot be detected visually or by any other way except for gravitational properties which keep the universe from falling apart?!

In other words, we cant see or detect dark matter, we just know “it” (whatever it is) is there because without it tbe universe wouldn’t work. Talk about a dues ex machina.

I find many of you hold us to standards that you dont apply to “real world” science.

502. Harry Ballz - September 20, 2011

Maybe some of them don’t understand the GRAVITY of the situation.

503. moauvian waoul- aka: seymour hiney - September 20, 2011

490 “So, the universe discriminates?”
Now that is a profound question. I wish I knew, but I guess this alternate reality does, as you seemed to address this very issue earlier:
“And, isn’t it strange that the universe cares about Kirk and Spock and not billions of beings on planet Vulcan… at least not enough to correct it’s destruction.”

504. boborci - September 20, 2011

As far as the universe correecting itself, that is just the mystical way of articulating the function of probability in a multiverse ruled by quantum mechanics. Some universes are more probable than others, and since WE KNOW, thanks to canon, that a universe in which the crew of the Enterprise comes together somehow to trek through the stars, then IT IS ALREADY A MORE PROBABLE UNIVERSE than one we have not seen. The configuration of the canon universe is a fair indicator that there are many universes SIMILAR to it, according to the favored interpretation of the most succesful theory in the history of science;)

505. boborci - September 21, 2011

To answer above, i would say The universe doesn’t discrimiate. It’s probabilities are deducible. However, even given some things being more probable than others, there are still numerous configurations. An alternate unuverse in which Vulcan survives Nero’s attack may be just as probable as the one we depicted. Therefore, it is we ( the court) who discriminate. We picked what we felt was the most dramatic and entertaining universe among the probable universes.

So i suppose you can say we copped out by picking the mst entertaining reality.

506. Aurore - September 21, 2011

“Therefore, it is we ( the court) who discriminate. We picked what we felt was the most dramatic and entertaining universe among the probable universes.

So i suppose you can say we copped out by picking the mst entertaining reality.”

How arrogant of you. Please, proceed…

507. Harry Ballz - September 21, 2011

Ah, yes, I see, Aurore. They should have gone with the boring one. Riiiiight!

508. NCM - September 21, 2011

Love it, Mr. Orci. Keep it coming. I don’t think he’s being arrogant at all, but if he is, he’s in good company. These are the best arguments I’ve seen on this site.

See where seeing RED can lead to? Guess committed psychotic equestrians can breathe life back into a dead horse. I’m convinced, dark matter is the ultimate deus ex machina.

509. Aurore - September 21, 2011

“Ah, yes, I see, Aurore. They should have gone with the boring one. Riiiiight!”

Not so fast.
That so-called boring universe/reality had its merits!

When I was in my lover’s hea……..When I…discussed the matter with one of my fellow Trekker, a few weeks ago, I was amazed at how many opportunities were missed by “the court” ,with Star Trek 2009.

Take a look at Toto’s original vision to reinvigorate our beloved franchise :
[edited copy]

“No! There should be no sex since it will be obsolete by the 23rd century, so no offensive displays of skin! None whatsoever, or affection. I never get any. Besides what about the children? And no violence either. We will have evolved, so no action. Any conflict will offend my delicate sensibilities and my superior intellect. True “Star Trek” should be about Data talking to his cat, since that’s what I do all day. Maybe have Wesley figured something out. I’d pay to see that!” (post 54)


Mr. Ballz, if you want to know what is the surest way to ruin a franchise, this is it. That’s how you do it . You ignore such brilliant ideas. That’s what Mr. Abrams did. Hence the epic failure that was Star Trek 2009.


510. Aurore - September 21, 2011

507. Harry Ballz – September 21, 2011

Now, sir, please, tell me. Did you really believe I had taken objection (@506) to what Mr. Orci had said in 505 ? Really?

511. moauvian waoul- aka: seymour hiney - September 21, 2011

Yes Bob, of course, that’s what I meant. But you say it so much better. Quickening, I wasn’t necessarily disagreeing with you, I was adding my voice to the discussion. The point had already been established by the writer himself previously.This universe (is that fair Bob!) is attempting to correct itself. 
As for the “red matter” discussion, I tend not to agree with this “choice” to use it. Then again I don’t care for the term “dark matter.” I did see the connection (for what it’s worth) but the very notion strikes me as a cheat, and even somewhat arrogant.  Perhaps it’s the physics these scientists don’t get, and they’ve created a noun to cover their ignorance of verbs.  More likely I’m just plain wrong. That would be the second time.

Aurore, just keep on keeping on! :))      

512. moauvian waoul- aka: seymour hiney - September 21, 2011

Wrong puncuation. Should read, “is that fair Bob?” Okay, so that’s the third time, for those keeping score.

513. moauvian waoul- aka: seymour hiney - September 21, 2011

Actually I don’t even have a cat.

514. Cygnus-X1 - September 21, 2011

492. boborci – September 20, 2011

—-478. Exactly. See, was that so hard?—-

No it’s not, and that’s exactly my point. It’s what YOU should have done. You could have made Red Matter seem not so conspicuously contrived with but a few lines of explanation as to how it works, or even better, with a little graphic sequence illustrating the mechanics of Red Matter while Spock told his tale.

493. boborci – September 20, 2011

—-477 so you missed the part above where i told you above that red matter was based on dark matter, hence the similarity in name?—-

No, I already told you I got that part. But I didn’t make the connection while watching the movie for the reasons I explained, and you didn’t bother offering a word of explanation IN THE MOVIE or tying it to science or real-life in any way other than by using the word “matter” which isn’t much science for a science fiction premise.

515. Cygnus-X1 - September 21, 2011

494. boborci – September 20, 2011

—-cygnus Wanna check your stats on the percentage of supposed dark matter in the universe and come back for part 3 of this discussion?—-

Sorry, dark matter accounts for 23% of the MASS-ENERGY density in the universe and constitutes 83% of the matter. But the higher figure of 83% just makes my point all the more, which was that dark matter is voluminous stuff that bears no characteristic resemblance to your Red Matter, hence why I did not make a connection between them.

501. boborci – September 20, 2011

—-475. And you say dark matter is not a deus ex machina, but the opposite?! A substance that cannot be detected visually or by any other way except for gravitational properties which keep the universe from falling apart?! In other words, we cant see or detect dark matter, we just know “it” (whatever it is) is there because without it the universe wouldn’t work. Talk about a dues ex machina. I find many of you hold us to standards that you dont apply to “real world” science.—-

Actually I think that dark matter can be detected by its gravitational lensing effect on light. But in any case, you’re missing the point. The point is that the effect already exists. The “deus” is evident and we’re just investigating the other properties of the “machina.” Whereas you invented your “deus” and then offered no explanation of its “machina.” Real world scientists don’t invent effects and properties of the natural world; they observe and measure its effects and then set about the task of figuring out their mechanics. They witness the “deus” and then try to pull back the curtain to see the “machina.” Whereas you made up a “deus,” which is fine, but then didn’t even bother to show a curtain, much less give us a peek at what lay behind it.

It’s only my opinion of course, but I’m noticing that you have a tendency to put the burden on the audience to figure out what you meant to show us instead of taking the time to actually show us in the film. Maybe next film you could do with one less monster-chase scene and use that time for something more meaningful. Because whatever anybody thought of Red Matter, the fact is that you offered absolutely nothing in the way of explanation for it. And it came across as a textbook deus ex machina which called attention to itself as a plot device.

516. Aurore - September 21, 2011

509 : one of my fellow Trekker=one of my fellow Trekkers

517. Dan - September 21, 2011

I have never missed a premier of a Star Trek movie and it pleases me that there is another such movie in the works.

Now that past plot lines can be re-written, I am curious as to how this “universe” turns out. May it be as optimistic as the first series.

Keep the faith


518. NuFan - September 21, 2011

Sorry, but they can’t risk slowing down the movie to explain every little thing for one fan. That could make the new universe as dull as the old one. And I think the average viewer would be capable of at least a little independent thought, anyway.

519. dmduncan - September 21, 2011

515. Cygnus-X1 – September 21, 2011

You actually sound like a scientist. It would not surprise me if astronomy was your actual profession.

520. dmduncan - September 21, 2011

“No! There should be no sex since it will be obsolete by the 23rd century, so no offensive displays of skin! None whatsoever, or affection. I never get any. Besides what about the children? And no violence either. We will have evolved, so no action. Any conflict will offend my delicate sensibilities and my superior intellect. True “Star Trek” should be about Data talking to his cat, since that’s what I do all day. Maybe have Wesley figured something out. I’d pay to see that!”

LOL! Love it!

521. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 21, 2011

Re: Aurore quote at #509 – What has seeing the skin of another being got to do with sex? And what about the children? Don’t they also have skin?

Red matter does not have to be explained in any extensive detail. The audience sees the unusual and devastating effects of “it” and it is when Dr McCoy asks “Where the hell did they get that kind of technology?” (or words to that effect) that Spock offers a possible answer. This is later confirmed through the mindmeld that prime Spock has with Kirk.

Did the survivors of the atom bombs that were dropped nearby on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki need to know the specifics of what makes an atom bomb work to understand how the results of the use of such a bomb had on them and their descendants? Interesting, no doubt, but not essential. So, in the eyes of those Japanese survivors, were the two atom bombs deux ex machina?

I don’t get this obsession with having to know details about red matter and why some reference needed to be made to it earlier in the film. It is not necessary to the advancement of the story, which was mainly about a young Kirk and Spock’s journey to becoming legitimate crew members of the starship Enterprise.

Anyway, it’s a big universe and we barely know what our near neighbours, the moon and Mars, contain and their properties and they might react if put with say, something like arsenic (just an example). Red matter was either a naturally occurring substance or something created as a result of experimentation and found to have certain properties, the most important one being the ability to cause a large object (like a planet or even supernova) to implode, without effecting/damaging other suns and/or planetary systems nearby.

From a certain perspective, one could say that all of life is just one big contrivance.

522. Rusty0918 - September 21, 2011

#518 – Correct, they can’t do that. But they can’t make it extremely mindless and dumb as well.

In response to the no sex thing – there would be most likely, duh. Too much of such material would be a problem though. Like I say, I don’t want to see them degrade to the route that “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen” or “Charlie’s Angels: Full Throttle” took.

523. Harry Ballz - September 21, 2011


Aurore, I have a dry wit, but you ram the stick as far up as you can, then smile as you break it off. Quirky, to say the least!

524. Randy - September 21, 2011

I can’t believe how many people are slamming JJ Abrams. I’ve been a fan for a LOOOOOOOOONG time. I admit, I was a bit skeptical but once I saw the movie, I thought it was great.

525. Dee - lvs moon' surface - September 21, 2011

Wow that’s great……

Would I be quite inconvenient if I ask to Mr. Bob Orci how fares the script for Trek Sequel?… yes probably would!… anyway he would not answer, I know….. :-) :-)

526. dmduncan - September 21, 2011

Oh forget about Red Matter already. In addition to being able to warp time and space, Kirk Fu can pull out the still beating heart of a Blarksthurian Borgleflarjd. And that’s saying something.

Surely Bob can let us know if Kirk Fu will be unleashed in the sequel?

527. dmduncan - September 21, 2011

Come on, Bob! If you can read this, then . for “yes” and .. for “no.”

528. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 21, 2011

#522 But they didn’t make it “extremely mindless and dumb”.

I have to say that over the past two years (in fact, 16 September, to be exact) since I have been online, reading and posting to this and another board, namely the IMDb Star Trek 2009 message board, the number of times I have read posts saying how “dumbed down” and “mindless” this movie was, has been…well, a lot. The problem is that the people writing this stuff tend not to have much in the way of basic comprehension skills. They describes certain scenes as being plot holes, when they are NOT plot holes at all. They say this movie is not like TOS at all and at the same time, they will demonstrate that they appear not to have watched much of TOS (TV series or movies or spin off series) nor understood many of the basic TOS scenarios or characters.

Frankly, it has got to the point that when I read a post where someone refers to the movie (or aspect of it) as being “dumb”, “mindless”, “made for ADHD teens” etc, my immediate knee jerk reaction is to think – OK, here is another person’s projection in that what THEY don’t necessarily understand automatically means that the movie and those who wrote it must be dumb.

One has to seriously ask, at times, just who really are the dumb ones.

529. Suellen from Savannah - September 21, 2011

Just thinking about the security that will take place to protect the contents of the script and the filming. I envision Spy Drone, brief cases with handcuff chains and retina scans to gan entry to the sets.

How about it Bob? Is security tight.?

530. boborci - September 21, 2011

529. We are not even allowed to read the script once we’ve typed it up;)

531. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 21, 2011

#530 Yes, but you know what’s in it.

532. dmduncan - September 21, 2011

Not only does Bob not answer my questions, but he will actually PASS OVER mine on the way to someone else’s question. Aaargh! I’m going to sit in the corner moving my finger across my lips going “BABABBUBBALABEEBOOOBAABUBBAABUH.”

533. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 21, 2011

@ Bob Orci – This is how an alt-Kirk could look like, or not –


Very nice indeed. His neck could be clean shaven, though. The hair and beard colours are great. If that is Chris’s natural colour, then do nothing. If not, then make it look like what is shown in the picture above. Love it. Thank you.

534. Dee - lvs moon' surface - September 21, 2011

#533. Keachick…

…Oh Captain Fine………..:-) :-)

535. Hugh Hoyland - September 21, 2011

Bob, if send the script my way and I’ll give coverage, free no less!

And of course I would expect the same myself. ;]

I honestly dont see the problem with Red matter. In fact a whole story taking place in a universe composed of nothing but Red Matter might be quite interesting (or maybe not).

Now can we at least have a villain? ;]

536. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 21, 2011

Dee, I have that picture on my desktop – such a lovely photo.

Yes – Captain Fine……:-)

537. Suellen from Savannah - September 21, 2011

well I ‘ll be happy to proof it you. Seriously truly looking forward to seeing movie.

BTW I am writing my comedy monologue for my alter ego of Suellen and me trying to come up with 5-10 minutes worth of material is hard. I can’t even imagine trying to write 2 hours worth of material.

If Suellen gets discovered on some open mike night will you invite to the premier.

538. dmduncan - September 21, 2011

Well. It’s clear that I couldn’t help to break an atom’s worth of news on this site if I had a…news breaking…DEVICE. Invented by Nikola Tesla! And Steve Jobs! And powered by Red Matter!

539. NCM - September 21, 2011

I’ve noticed ST 2009 is often disparagingly compared to Wrath of Khan, and I haven’t seen the comparison contested – as if WOK’s beyond criticism. The graphics for the Genesis device were fairly cool and helpful, etc…, and WOK was a good and fun film – the best Trek film, I think, until 2009. But it also had major plot droppings; like Kirk failing to raise shields despite reg’s and Saavik’s reminder. His negligence resulted in the near loss of ship and crew and cost the Fleet one of its best officers – not to mention Kirk’s BFF. He’d gotten killed the man who helped him save worlds, and, at the end of his busy day, he felt “YOUNG”?!

540. Dee - lvs moon' surface - September 21, 2011

#536. Keachick …

CP has appeared so thin in recent photos… I’m wondering whether we’ll see shirtless Kirk … is he getting ready for this?… Mr. Bob Orci never will inform us of this, I’m sure… LOL… I made a comment on IMDb… you know a link impossible here… I obey AP, wherever he is these days…:-):-)

541. DeShonn Steinblatt - September 21, 2011


No one ever said that ST 2009 was any more “flawed” than any previous Trek movie. Well some do, but we let them hang out here to provide comedic relief in between more thoughtful posts. They also serve as a warning to new fans of something they never want to become.

542. moauvian waoul- aka: seymour hiney - September 21, 2011

521. Keachick (rose pinenut) –
“Re: Aurore quote at #509 – What has seeing the skin of another being got to do with sex? And what about the children? Don’t they also have skin?”.

She’s right Aurore. Explain yourself!

543. moauvian waoul- aka: seymour hiney - September 21, 2011

541 “They also serve as a warning to new fans of something they never want to become.”
I love this.

544. Harry Ballz - September 21, 2011

Oh, so this thread is starting to slow down…..Oy! C’mon, boys, put your back into it!

545. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 21, 2011

#541 I thought Chris looked a bit drawn/stressed in those photos taken at LA Airport, but he looked great, gorgeous, sweet, sexy, please – don’t get me started…:) in the photos taken of him in New York.

Of course, I really do hope we see a shirtless Kirk, at the very least – several scenes would be just fine. Examples – 1) He is removing his own shirt, 2) She is removing it for him, 3) The shirt is getting thoroughly ripped and torn as he does Kirk Fu in which he wins this tussle and 4) He is wearing nil as he is just coming out of the shower. There is no need to increase the pace of scenes here. Please film Chris properly. He is a beautiful man.

Please, Bob, pay attention to this. I know I am repeating myself here but I need to impress upon you the needs, wants and concerns in this matter as a rose pinenut and Star Trek lover.

546. Aurore - September 21, 2011

“She’s right Aurore. Explain yourself!”

Sure :


However, that is just my opinion. I do NOT presume to speak for others, seymour!

In any case, I do hope I have clarified “my” position on the question.


547. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 21, 2011

Aurore was quoting somebody else. I was commenting on the contents of the quote.

548. Harry Ballz - September 21, 2011


Vague and purposely obtuse, as usual! Aurore, for once in your life, be specific!

549. moauvian waoul- aka: seymour hiney - September 21, 2011

547. Yes she was. I only wish I knew who. Oh, wait a second, I just remembered something…

550. Aurore - September 21, 2011

“Vague and purposely obtuse, as usual! Aurore, for once in your life, be specific!”

Very well….
I’m hopelessly in love with you, Mr.Ballz!!!

There, HAPPY NOW???!!!


551. moauvian waoul- aka: seymour hiney - September 21, 2011

“Vague and purposely obtuse, as usual!”

Don’t you just love it?

552. Aurore - September 22, 2011

551. moauvian waoul- aka: seymour hiney – September 21, 2011
“Vague and purposely obtuse, as usual!”
Don’t you just love it?

Wait a second…Wait a second…

I am so self-centered that, at first, I thought you were referring to me…
But, you actually meant… Roberto Orci…Yes… “vague and purposely obtuse, as usual!”…indeed…

And, no, I don’t like it, seymour. Nevertheless, what am I to do? Threaten him with a boycott of MY (own) sequel ?!


553. moauvian waoul- aka: seymour hiney - September 22, 2011

Harry was commenting on somebody else. I was quoting the contents of the comment.

554. moauvian waoul- aka: seymour hiney - September 22, 2011

“Vague and purposely obtuse, as usual!”
They’re right! Orci, start talking!!

555. Aurore - September 22, 2011

553. moauvian waoul- aka: seymour hiney – September 22, 2011
Harry was commenting on somebody else. I was quoting the contents of the comment.

Yes. I knew that.

As if it was going to prevent me from saying what I wanted to say….

You know, being self-centered and all that…

556. moauvian waoul- aka: seymour hiney - September 22, 2011

I’m sorry we’re you saying something? I couldn’t tell since I was thinking of myself.
And those voices, they’re so loud at times.

557. Cygnus-X1 - September 22, 2011

519. dmduncan – September 21, 2011

—-You actually sound like a scientist. It would not surprise me if astronomy was your actual profession.—-

Well thanks, but I’m not. I did start off as a biology major in college, but I realized after a couple of years that 8 hours a day in a lab staring into microscopes wasn’t for me. These days I’m just a businessman with a continuing interest in science, which is why I notice little oversights in ST09 like “a supernova explosion that threatened to destroy the galaxy.” Actually, if you look at a map of our galaxy with its 100 – 200 billion stars, you’ll see why that premise is a rather large oversight. It’s like saying that an exploding gasoline truck in Iowa threatened to destroy the Earth. If I were in the Trek “Supreme Court,” I’d spend a few bucks on a Science consultant this time around. A couple of hours with a professional could make an important difference in a project costing $200 million or whatever.

558. Aurore - September 22, 2011



559. moauvian waoul- aka: seymour hiney - September 22, 2011

You sure know how to get my attention!

560. celticarchie - September 22, 2011

442. Keachick (rose pinenut) –

I’m not saying it didn’t have structure. I’m just saying that structure was awful. Most of it stemming from the fact that it’s trying to be too many movies at the same time, it’s a reboot movie, a time travel movie, an alternate universe movie, a revenge movie, a buddy movie, an origin movie. An honest critic would say that ST 2009 just can’t make up it’s mind what it wants to be, using the low end of pulp Sci-Fi to disguise the fact that it’s patronizing and alienating an established fanbase, while desperately trying scraping the bottom of the barrel to gain a new following.

561. celticarchie - September 22, 2011

444. NCM –

“Poor Mr. Orci!!!” What about the poor audience who has to sit through a hour and a half pure mindless dribbling crap! He’s being called on the carpet for writing an inconsistent, contrived, patronising, pathetic excuse for a movie and so he should.

562. celticarchie - September 22, 2011

449. Keachick (rose pinenut) –

“Which definition for plot “contrivances” are you referring to?”

Every definition. Do I have to quote examples? Awful coincidences, contrived nonsensical time travel plot, contrived disaster backstory…a supernova that can destroy the entire galaxy and can only be stopped by black hole making ketchup! Come on, all he’s gotta do is called the bad guy Ming and Abrams’ll be asking the effects guys to put sparklers on the engines.

563. celticarchie - September 22, 2011

467. boborci –

In other words utter bollocks! If you can’t talk to us on the grammar and syntax of storytelling, without patronising us with a bunch of technobable gibberish. Yeah, we know ‘red matter’ is a play on the real world term ‘dark matter’, it’s one of the reasons it’s so idiotically cheesy. This really casts doubt on whether you’re the genuine article, a real professional writer would at least try to talk in storytelling terms.

564. celticarchie - September 22, 2011

475. Cygnus-X1 –

YES!!!! At last, there is someone out there who gets it! I was beginning to think it was all hopeless. I think I’ll stop reading the comments there before someone else…eh, oh…too late! :D

565. moauvian waoul- aka: seymour hiney - September 22, 2011

557. Cygnus-X1 – The supernova observation was an obvious one that I believe most got, (still not sure how the Court missed that one) but many of your points are well thought out and expressed. I especially liked the idea that the alternate Spock should have inadvertantly triggered the destruction of Nero’s star. Well here you go, in your own words:

“Or, if you wanna go the multiverse route, there’s a current theory which has gravity being caused by parallel universe in the multiverse and sort of “leaking” into our universe. Maybe Spock finds a naturally occurring wormhole between the Prime universe and one of these parallel universes with strong gravity sources that leak into our universe. He shoots some device into the wormhole to home in on a strong gravity source, attracting it into the wormhole which focuses it like a laser beam, causing a strong gravity source to emerge out the other side into the Prime universe and voilà — your black hole, courtesy of Spock.”

566. Vultan - September 22, 2011

At first I thought the “supernova threatening the galaxy” line was just Spock exaggerating, as we saw him do in TWOK. But old pointy ears had a reason for exaggerating in that film (fooling Khan).

I’m afraid the whole mind meld-flashback sequence in Trek ’09 was just a product of bad writing—an info dump in the middle of a movie to catch everyone up to speed before launching into the third act and the big fight, catchphrase-to-the-baddie-before-blowing-him-up Steven Seagal finale.

Too bad the writer’s strike prevented a script rewrite (or so they say). It could’ve used a bit more polish—like a lot of scripts these days.

567. dmduncan - September 22, 2011

In Firefly, when they talk about “the verse” (short for “universe”), they actually mean that one overpopulated solar system that the entire series and one movie takes place within. It’s a colloquialism of that time and place. They don’t literally mean the entire universe when they use that term.

Why wouldn’t Spock use whatever colloquialisms are in voque in HIS time and space? So if we take it as that, as I did automatically, then we don’t have the burden of trying to explain how one supernova could literally threaten an entire galaxy from edge to edge.

Now let’s say that the situation we saw happen was real. A star went supernova and destroyed Romulus (and Remus (it wasn’t shown but we’d have to assume the destruction of that world as well because it was so close, unless Spock somehow managed to stop the supernova using the black hole after Romulus but before Remus was destroyed)).

What would we have to assume about the kind of star system that Romulus and Remus were a part of in order for both of them to be immediately threatened by that supernova? Probably that it was a binary system at least.

How many other worlds in that system might be endangered immediately?

Now, how many nearby star systems might be inhabited and to which that supernova’s gamma ray burst would be a threat in a few, or tens of hundreds of years?

Such that you could break down the threat to numerous worlds both in the Romulan system and others near by classing those threats as immediate and long term, and the number of worlds threatened both immediately and long term would be enough to justify the use of Spock’s colloquial use of the word “galaxy” to describe the scope of the full eventual disaster.

None of that is impossible. Proxima Centauri is the nearest star to Sol, and that is only 4.2 light years away. A long time for us, but not for a gamma ray burst.

You would have to use the black hole soon or it would be too late to save worlds light years away away, and of course we know the Romulan star system has at least 2 inhabited worlds; and if it’s a trinary system, there might be even more worlds in immediate danger from teh supernova; and if it’s a populated neighborhood of stars the danger exists to them as well if the gamma ray burst is focused through that neighborhood.

But Spock still has to act with great urgency to save those star systems years from now.

568. Rusty0918 - September 22, 2011

Well, here’s an actual explanation regarding Red Matter. I take a page from Arthur C. Clarke – he said something that technology far more advanced than us WOULD be indistinguishable from magic.

Red Matter didn’t bother me too much.

569. Vultan - September 22, 2011

One thing I hope the sequel does is eliminate the reuse of phrases we’ve famously heard in other Trek movies and series. You know the ones—“I’m givin’ her all she’s got, Cap’n!” and so on that are wedged into the script just because… they can. (The “I’m a doctor not a…” phrases get a pass since they’ve become something of a tradition).

“Rise of the Planet of the Apes,” while a pretty decent flick, did the same thing recently, awkwardly wedging the famous “damn dirty ape” and “it’s a MADHOUSE!” lines into the script just for the sake of… what? To remind us we’re watching an Apes movie?

C’mon, leave that cutesy referential stuff to The Simpsons and Family Guy.

570. Vultan - September 22, 2011

Troy McClure (singing): “I hate every chim-pan-A to chim-pan-ZEE!!!


571. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 22, 2011

#563 – “Awful coincidences, contrived nonsensical time travel plot, contrived disaster backstory…a supernova that can destroy the entire galaxy and can only be stopped by black hole making ketchup! Come on, all he’s gotta do is called the bad guy Ming and Abrams’ll be asking the effects guys to put sparklers on the engines.”

No, the really ludicrous writing is what I have just quoted above.

Awful coincidences? What is a good coincidence, a non-awful coincidence? Nonsensical time travel? Time travel plots have been the “meat and three veg” staple of science fiction stories since… How is this version of time travel creating an alternate time/universe anymore nonsensical than any other kind? So clearly something can’t be destroyed or created by anything that looks a bit like ketchup? Now, that’s good to know.

Carl Jung described a certain type of verifiable experiences had by people throughout the ages as “synchronicity”. I posted a link to the meaning of this word earlier in this thread. Perhaps this has not been your own experience, but please do not deny the possibility of synchronicity occurring for others just because you are not aware of it, or have not been paying attention.

#567 – “I’m afraid the whole mind meld-flashback sequence in Trek ‘09 was just a product of bad writing—an info dump in the middle of a movie to catch everyone up to speed”

So, you can’t have a puzzle solved or have pertinent information revealed to you “halfway” through dealing with a crisis, where not everything is known.
Really? Why not?

There is a notion of “art imitating life”…

#564 – “#467. boborci
In other words utter bollocks! If you can’t talk to us on the grammar and syntax of storytelling, without patronising us with a bunch of technobable gibberish. Yeah, we know ‘red matter’ is a play on the real world term ‘dark matter’”

Really? That’s funny, because in all of the discussions I have read on this site and on any other site, NOBODY has mentioned the word ‘dark matter’ in connection with the words ‘ red matter’. So you actually knew, from the beginning, that ‘red matter’ was play on the term ‘dark matter’? How come nobody, especially you, Celticarchie, mentioned the connection before now, until AFTER Bob Orci talked about the connection? As far as I can tell, NOBODY else made any connection, or if they did, they did not write about it anywhere.

So you only read posts where people will agree with you? Well, that’s *good* to know. I hope you and NCM have fun together…

572. dmduncan - September 22, 2011

546. Aurore – September 21, 2011


No wait. Let me honor you by reposting that in French:


573. boborci - September 22, 2011

563. I was respondimg to scientific attacks like, “your science fiction not based on anything.” Happy to discuss story anytime.

574. boborci - September 22, 2011

561. Two hours.

575. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 22, 2011

BTW, I heard the term ‘synchronicity’ used on Fringe last night. William Bell was explaining it through Olivia Dunham.

As a matter of interest (or not), I used the word ‘synchronicity’ to explain the apparent coincidences in Star Trek 09 almost two years ago, when I first came online and starting posting to the IMDb message board for Star Trek 2009.

I know what you mean, dmduncan, about Bob Orci passing over questions and comments in favour of others. I guess we all do that, but he seems more obvious about it. Perhaps he does not like those who might agree with him – thinks they’re ass-kissers or something. Sorry, Bob, personally I’m not into kissing anyone’s ass, never have been.

Just noting/saying…

576. dmduncan - September 22, 2011

575: Well I ask good questions. That’s why he ignores them. ;-)

577. Vultan - September 22, 2011


Oh, I like to solve a puzzle—just one piece at a time and not all at once. More entertaining that way. But then again, that really comes down to personal preference.

Trek ’09 isn’t alone though. Lots of films do the ‘info dumping’ thing just to move the plot forward, particularly when they’re more action-oriented. At least most aren’t as bad as some of those 50’s sci-fi movies where the guy in the lab coat explains for thirty minutes how the Martians are going to melt our brains… before it happens. Yeesh!

578. boborci - September 22, 2011

75.76. Love your posts. What question did i miss?

579. NCM - September 22, 2011

561-563: It would be mindless “to sit through an hour and a half of pure…dribbling crap.” Where were you sitting, what were you thinking and why are you here, still reeking of ire and spewing waste?

“He’s being called on the carpet…” by whom (an angry ticket stub holder – 2 years after the fact?), and why would you want Orci “to talk to us on the grammar and syntax of storytelling”? You redundantly accuse him of using “technobable gibberish” in response to the list’s science jargoneer (no offense intended, science guy), yet you claim to understand the latter’s arguments.

By the way, ‘contrived’ is something ‘obviously planned or forced’ (take your pick). It’s the result of contriving, which is “to plan with ingenuity; devise; invent…” Example; “The author contrived a clever plot.”

580. dmduncan - September 22, 2011

See Keachick? He loves our posts so much he has to ask us which ones he missed! We need to give that guy a free subscription. ;-)

581. dmduncan - September 22, 2011

For me: 526, 527.

582. dmduncan - September 22, 2011

Oh boy!:


583. boborci - September 22, 2011

526. Kirk fu? You mean his Chop?


584. dmduncan - September 22, 2011

Chop, flying drop kick, head lock, arm bar, eye poke — all the magic of Kirk Fu, man. Release the hound, Bob!

585. Charla - September 22, 2011

Jeez, gone a week it seems for tests and more tests which left me very tired and look what has gone on! Wow, I will be busy tonight and tomorrow catching up!

Love the explanations of the science and the not so much science behind Star Trek 09- loved it all, BOTH fact and fiction.
Loved the story, bottom line and at this point, I think every complaint has been spoken so I tend to skim through the nay-sayers. Sorry, but your not bringing me down! :D

Thanks for the invite Battle, same goes to you if your ever state side!! And Harry, man you can make a girl laugh till it hurts!! Thanks!! ;)


586. Charla - September 22, 2011

*585 only meant to put one thanks- oops, not that I’m not really thankful or anything! heehee

587. Cygnus-X1 - September 22, 2011

584. dmduncan – September 22, 2011

For my money, the wall move is the best:


588. Brian K - September 22, 2011

GEEZ folks, lighten up! Enough with the Red Matter! Some of you seem to forget the key word in Science Fiction, that being “FICTION”!

Do we really wanna go down that path or just enjoy the fiction? As you may be aware, current scientific thinking has concluded that Warp Drive, the Transporter, and artificial gravity as presented in ST are IMPOSSIBILITIES.

Star Trek has, over the past 45 years, established it’s own FICTIONAL vision of the future, none of it based on actual science. Rational detatchment and letting go is key to enjoying Science FICTION.

Can we just relax and enjoy the ride without debating impossible minutea?

589. dmduncan - September 22, 2011

587. Cygnus-X1 – September 22, 2011

The wall move is great, and so is this classic ass beating:


But please, let’s not have any of this:


590. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 22, 2011

#588 I love it that video. There are just some things (not many) that do require rehashing/repeating and that scene is one of them. Is our Pine man up for it? Hope so.

I hope this video gets seen by Chris Pine. He’s gotta learn from the best…LOL

591. dmduncan - September 22, 2011

And here is a pretty good medley of Kirk’s greatest HITS set to music:


592. dmduncan - September 22, 2011

Make particular note of the hip throw he puts on Spock, and that freaky flying WWE move he puts on Khan. THAT is Kirk Fu.

Any questions?

593. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 22, 2011

Oh yes, more cool stuff. I do hope that our new captain is taking note.

So you are saying that Kirk can get his shirt ripped and torn, but he can’t split his pants? Well, I guess it is really up to the Starfleet tailors as to whether they use tough enough materials. OK, if there has to be a compromise…sigh! – here’s the deal – flimsy shirts, tops, singlets etc, but tough pants. Starfleet tailors need to take note…

Bob – I hope you are getting this…:)

I’m pleased you enjoy reading my posts. I guess I wonder if I am on right track in my interpretation of the last Star Trek movie. Anyway, I had few problems with it, other than a little too many lens flares in the wrong places, an overly lit and busy/crowded Enterprise bridge and biologically deranged monsters…I am actually trying to think of other things that seemed duh, but I honestly can’t think of anything at the moment. It’s the truth.

I also see that Bruce Greenwood has signed up to do a different movie. Is there any chance, script and schedule wise, that he will make an appearance as Admiral Pike in the next movie? He was just sooo good in the last one.

594. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 22, 2011

#592 Loved that video as well. What’s not to love about Star Trek? LOL

595. the Quickening - September 22, 2011

#507, 508
I think in order for me to accept these explanations, as they pertain to the film, they needed to be more deeply incorporated into the fabric of the film, or at least with more detail, and certainly not outside of the film itself, or after the fact. A film has to be judged by what’s on the screen. Without these theoretical explanation–some might say excuses–the movie on it’s own falls prey to way too many questionable coincidences and actions by the characters.

I’m sure the next argument will be: there would be way too much exposition. Perhaps, but I can’t help but believe they could have helped with suspension of disbelief–a problem that many, including myself, have with the film. A few more lines added to Spock’s diatribe on the bridge, or in the mind-meld sequence might have done the trick. Not sure.

Seeing that detailed info regarding Nero, and his actions were also dealt with outside the scope of the film (a comic book), it would seem to me this might have been your prescribed way of handling what I feel were necessary ingredients to make a more satisfying film–at least to me. I can’t speak for others.

Of course it was still possible to have a movie with these theoretical explanation, and not have questionable coincidences and actions by the characters. After all, it is fiction.

596. the Quickening - September 22, 2011

Okay. My Bad.

597. dmduncan - September 22, 2011

595: “A film has to be judged by what’s on the screen. Without these theoretical explanation–some might say excuses–the movie on it’s own falls prey to way too many questionable coincidences and actions by the characters.”

But when people say that a supernova CAN’T threaten the galaxy, they ARE in fact making assumptions about how the words are being used in the movie, and those assumptions undergird their complaints. And those assumptions aren’t based on anything in the movie either.

And if you change your set of assumptions then the conclusions also have to change.

I mean, I took Spock as speaking colloquially and others might take him as speaking literally, as if the ENTIRE galaxy, from edge to shining edge, is endangered by one supernova — why is my assumption wrong? What in the movie, if that is all you want to appeal to, supports the idea that he was speaking literally rather than figuratively?

There is certainly nothing in the movie that directly points to one sense over the other, and there is no reason to think that every word used must be used literally as the default unless otherwise specified.

Words have all kinds of meanings, and are not just used literally, and when people have conversations — even in movies — you have to rely on context and general knowledge to make an informed judgement call about exactly what shade of meaning a given word has by the context used.

And for me, that one supernova could literally threaten the ENTIRE galaxy from edge to edge, which is what? About 65,200 LIGHT YEARS across? Is too much to take literally. The crazy smart Spock I know would be speaking colloquially, much as the characters of Firefly speak when they reference the solar system they inhabit as the ‘verse — or when Chang tells Kirk he shall blow the Enterprise “out of the stars.” Being “in the stars” is colloquial not literal, because the stars are often too hot for spaceships to be inside of, so even there you have to add an interpretation of what “in the stars” really means by the context of use, which is exactly what I’m doing when I do not take Spock as speaking literally when he says “galaxy.”

Point is, you HAVE to add something of your own to the movie to come up with ANY meaning. That applies to ALL movies, not just Star Trek movies.

598. dmduncan - September 22, 2011


599. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 22, 2011

While we are arguing about what might or might not be possible in terms of science fact/fiction, somebody posted this on another board –



600. Rebecca - September 22, 2011

Wow! I’m a new poster. It seems that people either love or hate Star Trek 2009! Watching Star Trek 2009 motivated me to finish watching all the series in prime universe! While I am a fan of the prime universe and all the Star Trek television series, I’m also a fan of the Shatner universe! Seeing my favorite planet destroyed and an alternate timeline wasn’t my cup of tea, but the next movie may just introduce us to another alternate universe! At least, this alternate universe, in Star Trek 2009, produced noble characters and Leonard Nimoy’s performance was touching in its own right! Wouldn’t it be nice if Nero’s family and Romulus and Vulcan were restored. There is an episode of voyager where, thanks to the intervention of the crew, the villain’s original timeline was restored and his wife and family saved. The Villain, in Star Trek Voyager, creates a temporal device that literally erases worlds from existance, but each time a world is erased, new and unknown paradoxes and, often negative, events occur. I like the suggestion given by others to merge the two universes! I am a fan of resurrecting the old Kirk as well! I will always prefer television series over all the Star Trek movies since I’m visually impaired. The dialog and drauma and the human stories with their positive visions mean more to me than action packed scenes! However, Kirk’s development as a character in Star Trek 2009 is wonderful and the conflict Spock endures shows that Abrams understood the Spock character enough to play him well. I wasn’t as happy with the other main characters. Their roles were infrequent i.e. McCoy and Scotty, or they were unlike their original counterparts. However, if most of the movie’s audience didn’t see the original series, how current characters are compared to the old series is irrelevant.
I’m anxious to learn more about the new movie. In the meantime, I’ll be content with the prime universe and respect the myriad Star Trek universe. Please don’t feel threatened by the discontinuity between these universes! If you are, join temporal investigations and see which universe is real in the Star Trek world! It would be amazing if we had a Star Trek movie where a time paradox introduced multiple universes in the same movie! What a complex storyline!

601. esb - September 23, 2011

you cant just push the date back. jj needs to take this movie seriously. him pushing it off for that other shit he just made, is pushing it off. star trek, isnt just some movie. yeah sure its a movie, but to alot of people its a reality. its a real thing that people count on to be good, and to not look like your holding out on shit. if you push it off, for one you loose interest. there was so much momentum from the last one. if you dont push forward on the new one, you WILL lose alot of the people. kinda like the “its not cute anymore” thing, this is marketing. the die hard fans will of course show up, but their girlfriends wont. their parents wont. the last film earned it by being badass, even against physics, but it was so good it stood past that. the new film, its gotta start being star trek. people want spock to be spock. they want these characters to develope but not over too many years. there is an expiration date to your franchise, and its looming. the money is there, the script is done. get that shit done, trust me, those actors who signed for this WANT to do to the impossible because thats whats made their careers. get it done. dont ever make an excuse. just do it, and do it better like you know how. thats the problem with being too good, the impossible is expected

602. esb - September 23, 2011

i agree so much with rebecca, but in spirit. i see jj’s idea. its not just his its alot. the idea is to recreate the franchise, get it going in a new way. and remember, janeway used alien tech from the delta quadrant to do those things, cant do it in this one if you wanna keep true as it has started. its started. now, its gonna be new adventures. kirk will go where he didnt go before because the little butterfly effect. its not the same kirk and no one can replace that one. this is an alternate universe, as much as we want to make shatner 30 again we cant. yet. this star trek saga will go on in its direction of where shatner kirk turned left, our new kirk turns right. but its ok. they have amazing story writers, they just need to start talking to physicists more. they have amazing ones on science channel have them as advisors. or my teacher, he’s strict as hell. dont piss people off with too much sci fi, they want that but they want science too. and they want good writing. you have the writing and the acting down. who ever imagined that we could see a new kirk and LIKE it? you did it. the rest of the crew? so perfect. when i see simon pegg, a very worthy scotty, so in love with the part, do i say he’s wrong? no way! he does a great job the guy loves the role! and SYLAR as spock? there is not another human in my mind that could do it. he is sooooo good. zach quinto is the man. an amazing actor that they are so happy to have. make sure that you DO WELL with these men. dont ruin their careers, dont ruin fans lives. your doin alright. keep it up! but make it timely! and seriously, call some astrophysics guys first. alot of them. make sure shit makes sense before you write stuff. and becca, i wanna see that too, but sorry hun, i can watch star trek 2-4 again and love it, and i dont WANT them remade. i want new shit.

603. Jai - September 23, 2011

Dmduncan, re: #499

“But instead of Red Matter I think the next movie should have something even more awesome: Kirk Fu”.

I beg to differ. The next movie should also have something even more awesome than Kirk Fu. That’s right, I’m talking about “Ancient Aliens” hero Giorgio and his galactically magnificent hair.

Observe: http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/f60cc4bfa319.jpg

You gotta love Giorgio and his enthusiasm. On any given topic, he always finds a way to make it about aliens. Usually involving him leaning forward, wagging his finger, and saying “No ! No ! It was because of extraterrestrials !!”. And then he sits back in his chair, smirking and nodding knowingly.

I bet the great man would love to be in the Star Trek sequel ;)

604. Jai - September 23, 2011

Bob Orci,

I’m assuming you’ve realised that I’m just kidding around with my Giorgio recommendation (although he does make “Ancient Aliens” an enjoyable show) and it’s not actually one of the genuine casting suggestions I’ve seriously made, especially for the role of a certain Mr K.N. Singh.

But since you’ve been taking a lot of hits on this thread over the whole “red matter” controversy, here’s some fun stuff for you. It’s amusing to imagine how McCoy’s constant personal insults against Spock (“green-blooded pointy-eared hobgoblin” etc) could cause both of them to end up in a Human Resources tribunal. For example:

*Screen dissolves to dream sequence*

Captain’s Log, Stardate 2309.11, James T. Kirk commanding. As we near the end of our 5-year mission to write a script for the sequel, the good news is that we’ve finally written the first line. The bad news is that it says “A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away”. However, I’m pleased to report that I’ve had a revelation. And it is a revelation I intend to share with the universe. It is the revelation that I am…indeed…so very, very handsome. Yes.

Uhura: Gentlemen, Starfleet Command have appointed me to perform the duties of the Enterprise’s resident Human Resources manager. Now, I’m approaching this with an open kimono –

Sulu: Oh my !

Uhura: – but we’ll be taking the helicopter view, with the expectation that you can hit the ground running. Going forward, I’ve prepared an information pack as a handout, focusing on your capacity to pluck low-hanging fruit. Please socialise this material amongst your colleagues.

Scotty: How does Uhura stay looking so young ?

McCoy: Botox.

Spock: Buttocks ?

Kirk: Where ?!

Uhura: Going forward, remember that there are no “problems”, only “opportunities”. Let’s begin. Captain James T. Kirk presiding.

Kirk: The “T” stands for “Ten Inches”, y’know.

Uhura: Is it accurate ?

Spock: Sadly no.

Uhura: Going forward. Dr McCoy, perhaps you should tell Mr Spock how you honestly feel about him as a co-worker so that we can get some constructive synergy going.

McCoy: Okay. Spock, you see that piece of decomposing chewing gun that looks like it was sneezed out by an elephant with pneumonia and has been stepped on by a thousand people whilst stinking up the place during the past hundred years ?

Spock: Yes.

McCoy: That’s you.

Spock: I fail to see the logic of anyone using this forum to elicit the dubious opinions of a cross-burning white-hood-wearing redneck incompetent quack.

McCoy: Now wait just a damn minute. I’ve never worn a white hood.

Uhura: Let’s break for a recess so that people can cool down. We’ll reconvene in 10 minutes.

Kirk: It’s going really well !

Uhura: God, I need a drink.

Kirk: So Uhura. Do you like to…party ?

Uhura: Captain, that is an incredibly offensive question based on a insidious agenda to reinforce the existing socio-cultural hegemonic patriarchy and gratuitously exploit me by alluding to outdated stereotypical notions of attire, physique and conduct.

Kirk: …..

Uhura: And “Yes”.

605. Shotahunter - September 23, 2011

Well, I LOVE THIS!!! JJ and the gang actually getting to it? ITS ABOUT TIME INDEED! Haters gonna hate, guys, nu!Trek was amazing and I’m sooo sure 12 is gonna be incredible.

Don’t care about the brewery from Engineering, the camera flares, the Enterprise built in Iowa, none of that, it was all great… Just… PLEASE STOP WITH THE SPOCK/UHURA crap. none of it, zero. And start with that Kirk/Spock epic friendship that will define them both, for God’s sake. Women love Spock, we love him, but we know Star Trek is no Bridget Jones or Under the Tuscan Sun, it’s about epic space adventures and awesome characters boldly exploring the universe and being totally awesome in the process. We need more Karl Urban too, Bones is too important (and hot) and he did a fantastic performance in ST 11.

This is a whole new world you created, anything can happen, and it makes the future exciting! This new Trek is not bound by timelines to other series or movies, its a completely different dimension and that is just brilliant. This movie made millions of new Star Trek fans, got them in touch with the franchise and made them look back to TOS, TNG and all the incarnations of the trek universe.

Good luck to the whole crew, don’t rush it but please HURRY, we desperately need more! :D

606. Janice - September 23, 2011

# 593 keachick—

Bruce Greenwood signed up to film “FLIGHT”.
Is that the movie you mean?? If so, I read it’s being filmed in Atlanta in October. Lots of time for a big Star Trek role!!!

607. dmduncan - September 23, 2011

After reviewing more closely what Cygnus-X-1 is calling “the wall move” here:


I’ve come up with two names I think fit better:

Kirk Fu Maneuver Gamma Delta Buttface

The Gluteus Maxipunch

In other words, when Captain Kirk says “kiss my ass” during hand to hand combat, he’s not just delivering an insult — he’s predicting the future.

608. dmduncan - September 23, 2011

603. Jai – September 23, 2011

lol! I’ve watched that guy on Netflix. I could never follow anything he’s saying because his hair gets all my attention.

609. Harry Ballz - September 23, 2011


Yeah, dmduncan, but I’ve always hated that move by Kirk, even when I was a kid watching it. Kirk’s opponent is dazed and all Kirk has to do is deliver one simple kick to the guy’s head to render him unconscious. But what does Kirk decide to do? A “Flying Wallenda” leap in the air, off the wall, so he can kiss the guy’s face with his ass. I mean, c’mon, really? I would have stabbed Kirk MYSELF for that, if I had been there! Sheesh!!!

610. NCM - September 23, 2011

Many have suggested having more women in Abram’s universe:), and placing them in stronger positions. Maybe it’s been suggested, but how about Chapel as an MD, or on her way…, at the beginning of her career? It would be a nod to Trek’s First Couple and a nice re-envisioning of a character who deserves to be upgraded and updated. Even as a kid, I thought a ship with 400 people, charting dangerous territory, would have more than 1 or 2 MDs.

It’d also have a resident ambassador – given it’s mission and the importance of not stirring up galactic war, but that suggestion’s for the next original Trek storyline, as it’d be next to impossible for such a character not to infringe on the triad – which I hope will be restored.

611. Cygnus-X1 - September 23, 2011

609. Harry Ballz – September 23, 2011

“The Flying Wallenda”

That’s it! That’s the name!

612. Cygnus-X1 - September 23, 2011

607. dmduncan – September 23, 2011

Your names are pretty good, but I gotta go with Flying Wall-enda.

But the BEST part is the SOUND that is made when Kirk and the Andorian both hit the floor! It sounds like an empty plastic cement jug being hit with a spoon!

613. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 24, 2011

@Bob Orci – re Welcome to People

I know – boring… When will we hear about a release date for the movie?

On another site, people are wondering if it will go straight to DVD release and some are already blaming Michelle Pfeiffer and/or Chris Pine for their “bad” acting etc. So, the knives have already come out…cripes. What’s with people?

Why is it that some movies get cinematic release dates before they are even made and yet other films, which have been completed, don’t always get a release date until whenever…?

614. Charla - September 24, 2011

Still excited about the news to worry about anything else!!! LOL!! :D

615. boborci - September 24, 2011

613. What site? That’s ridiculous. No one has seen it yet!

616. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 24, 2011

#616 Bob – This is what one or two people were writing on the IMDb Message Board for Welcome to People. Unfortunately, this is the kind of crap I am trying to get used to reading, if and when I happen to come across it. I know it is totally ridiculous, but I guess we can never underestimate how stupid and nasty some members of joe-public can be. However, it has prompted to ask about the release date (again, I know…). People are wondering…

I just realized that the numbers appear not to be the same for me as for others. I assume you are referring to my post about Welcome to People at #614 Keachick, which is what I see on my screen, otherwise your comment (#616 boborci) does not make sense.

617. Rusty0918 - September 25, 2011

#610 – I suggested they throw in a female cheif of security – one who doesn’t wear one of those goofy-looking cocktail waitress outfits (lol).

I hope they don’t bring back some of those annoying characters like that Yeoman Rand (ok she wasn’t as bad in ST1, 3, 4, and 6), who in TOS was nothing more than a glorified maid. She (and the other yeo-wenches) were the most useless characters in TOS.

618. Dee - lvs moon' surface - September 25, 2011

#616. Keachick…

…IMDb guy can only be a troll… and I suspect he is the “sophisticated troll “… remember, one that puts things about CP only as a provocation… and on top of the joker is imitating my style of writing…

The “BabyfacedAssassin” do not fool me… I would not be surprised if he also walks over here with another code name… LOL

:-) :-)

619. Keachick (rose pinenut) - September 27, 2011

I just posted this to another message board –

I agree that there is a general confusion on just how much of a military organisation Starfleet is or should be, especially when it comes to issues like discipline.

I am hoping that the Bad Robot team will be able to present Starfleet in a more coherent and consistent way. I have written before, on this site I think, that I see a 23rd century Starfleet organisation as a blend of both military or corporate organisations that we have today. Both have a hierarchical structure. Starfleet becomes greater than the sum of its parts and is a very strong positive organisation dedicated to pursuing the highest aims of humankind, ie peaceful exploration of the universe, effective communication between species/peoples from different worlds to avoid discord, let alone war and simply allowing people to be themselves (eg not trying to “masculinise” women by expecting them to wear regulation male type attire all the time), while maintaining a basic discipline that is understood and accepted by all who join Starfleet.

A rose for remembrance

620. celticarchie - October 3, 2011

573. boborci –

Okay then, storywise and character, I have a few questions and comment one why I’m asking the question after. I’ll start right at the beginning of the movie.

1) Why was it felt necessary to use a time-travel plot to create this alternate timeline that ‘reboots’ the Star Trek universe to the original crew? Why write the ‘reboot’ into the plot of the movie at all?

2) Why spend so much time introducing ‘archetypal’ characters?

Taking Kirk as an example, it seems to me that he’s introduced three times at the beginning of the movie. As a baby, and a rebellious teen, and yet again as a rebellious young adult. You don’t need all these scenes to introduce Kirk, he’s the ‘square-jaw all American hero’, and that archetype is so ingrained in our cultural psyche that even if you had never seen Star Trek you’ll know the character. Think of Malcom Reynolds from Firefly, browncoat, old west style gun, probably losing a fight. Or Indianna Jones, fedora, leather jacket, bullwhip. Characters so iconic that introduction is unnecessary. Captain Kirk is the same. All he needs is a gold Starfleet uniform, captains rank (re-imagined for the modern audience if you must), in a fight with some alien who caught him hitting on it’s sister. Tells the audience all you need to understand who Captain Kirk is.

3) For an ‘origin’ story wouldn’t it have been simpler to do two ‘Hero’s Journey’ for Kirk and Spock running parallel alongside each other?

Rather than the very Spock heavy jumbled storyline that you actually came up with. Kirk’s story is rather wafer thin, nothing challenges him, he’s never defeated. He’s doesn’t come across as likeable even as a charming rogue. Nothing in ST 2009 gives us any hint that this guy is on a journey from one state of character to another, again that is the whole point of a Hero’s Journey storyline.

While I’m on the subject of origins…Why wasn’t there any attempt to show the formation of the Kirk, Spock, McCoy triangle? Which anyone who has watched the Original Series will understand was one of the backbones of the show. The chemistry between those three as Spock and McCoy because a Greek chorus of Kirk’s thoughts, voicing the various pros and cons of the situation before Kirk makes the tough decisions. Why does McCoy suddenly disappear half-way through the movie and become essentially an extra?!?!

Honestly, all the Kirk and McCoy humour was brilliant. If that had been the whole movie, I might not have a complaint.

That’s all I got. If I had anymore questions then they are lost in my soup of thought. Or don’t really relate to writing/characterisation. Just be glad you didn’t have anything to do with the casting…whoever picked Simon Pegg really needs locking away for a long, long time.

TrekMovie.com is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.