Simon Pegg says he knows Star Trek 2 story + More villain rumors |
jump to navigation

Simon Pegg says he knows Star Trek 2 story + More villain rumors December 12, 2011

by Staff , Filed under: Spoilers,Star Trek Into Darkness , trackback

While promoting his latest movie “Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol”, Simon Pegg (Star Trek’s Scotty) recently spoke to the Danish movie website Filmz and revealed that he knows the story for the Star Trek sequel.

Pegg says he knows part of Star Trek 2 story

Here’s an excerpt from the interview with Filmz [via TrekWeb] where Pegg reveals that although he still hasn’t read the script, he does know what the story will be, or at least part of the Star Trek sequel’s story:

“I haven’t seen a script yet. I do know the story, though. I know PART of the story, but we haven’t seen a script yet. We’re gonna see it soon. I think next week.”

Pegg added he’s confident the story is something the fans will really enjoy:
“Absolutely. It’s more of what we love as Star Trek fans, you know. What’s not to love?”

Speaking more generally about what he’d like to see happen with his character Scotty, Pegg says he wouldn’t mind reciting more classic lines — like he did with “I’m giving it all she’s got Captain” in Star Trek— but only if “done properly for the right situation and not just be done as a sly wink”.

Khan in Star Trek sequel? Both Pegg and Bryan Burk cast doubt on rumors

Recently rumors have surfaced online that the villain in the sequel would be Khan (see recent stories here and here). However, director/producer J.J. Abrams has downplayed those rumors and now Pegg is echoing those statements, telling MTV he “[hasn’t] heard the name Khan come up”:

“Not to say it won’t come up, but I have heard no mention of him whatsoever…He is a great villain. I don’t want to say too much and then have to eat my words as I often do, but we’ve seen Khan [in a ‘Trek’ movie before]. To see him again, how much value is there in that? I don’t know.”

Bryan Burk: Sequel will be original, unique and different

Star Trek producer Bryan Burk offered a similar, albeit more concrete response, saying they chose “to do something we thought would be original and unique and different” for the sequel adding: “I think on paper, we made the right choice. Now we have to go shoot.”

Burk also revealed that the the sequel will pick up after the events of 2009’s Star Trek: […W]e’re going to jump right back in, and we don’t have to set up everybody and we can go right in it.”

For the complete MTV interviews with Burk and Pegg click here.

As previously reported, filming on the Star Trek sequel is scheduled to begin on January 15, 2012. The film — still without an official released title — is scheduled to hit conventional and 3D theaters on May 17, 2013.


1. Captain Sanders - December 12, 2011

I think I am in the minority but I think Khan would be awesome

2. somethoughts - December 12, 2011

I cannot reach the buttons captain

3. Vultan - December 12, 2011

“original and unique and different”

I like the sound of that!

4. The Original Animated Next Generation Deep Space Voyager Enterprise I-XI - December 12, 2011

Could it be the Ferengi?

5. James Cathcart - December 12, 2011

If Pegg knows the basic story, and hasn’t heard the name “Khan”, I would guess that character is not in the film.

My guess is that we’re talking Klingons. Having covered Romulans (in a way) in the last film, I think they would be the natural choice.

6. Admiral Stedman - December 12, 2011

Would love to see Kor (the Klingon) handled in a great way.

But would also enjoy Khan if we get some of the Eugenics War back story tossed in. Maybe even some Gary Seven.

Either way always excited for more Trek on the big screen.

7. Ran - December 12, 2011

“Absolutely. It’s more of what we love as Star Trek fans, you know. What’s not to love?”

Terrible, infantile and shallow script!

8. Anthony Thompson - December 12, 2011

It certainly seems as though there will be no Khan. Thank (a higher power) for that!!!

9. Anthony Thompson - December 12, 2011

Bob, couldn’t you have told us what Brian said? Or do you enjoy rousing the rabble (I being one of the rabble, of course)? I hereby dub you Bob “The Troublemaker” Orci. : )

10. VZX - December 12, 2011

The new villain is named Bick Rermen.

Actually, I don’t care. I am more interested in the title. This HAS to be the hardest thing the production team has to come up with.

It can’t be Star Trek 2. It can’t be Star Trek: Something Something (too much like TNG movies.) And it HAS to have Star Trek in the title. (It worked for Dark Knight and James Bond movies, but it won’t work for Trek. Proof: Star Trek Enterprise.)

I just can’t imagine a good title for this next Star Trek movie.

11. njdss4 - December 12, 2011

It’s great to read that JJ is very skeptical of another Khan-based movie being worthwhile. Original stories, please.

12. DavidJ - December 12, 2011

Cool. I always thought Abrams and the writers had more imagination than to simply bring Khan back.

It’s probably inevitable that he’ll be back at SOME point, but going to that well so early after rebooting just never made any sense to me.

13. NCM - December 12, 2011

“to do something we thought would be original and unique and different”

I don’t take that to suggest Khan, Klingons, Borg, Tribbles or Mudd.

14. Gordon Ramsey's knife - December 12, 2011

Tom Hanks will have a small walk on cameo in this next movie…u can book that

15. moauvian waoul - aka: seymour hiney - December 12, 2011

Quietly remaining hopeful.

16. Admiral_BlackCat - December 12, 2011

Cool, so they’re going to take Khan and do something original and unique and different with the character and his story. AWESOME!

17. kc - December 12, 2011

It wasn’t the title that killed Star Trek: Enterprise

18. captain spock - December 12, 2011

its called Burgman & braga(the B-twins) return to help jj abarms ruin trek in 2013. LOL

Burk also revealed that the the sequel will pick up after the events of 2009’s Star Trek: […W]e’re going to jump right back in, and we don’t have to set up everybody and we can go right in it.”

yea read between the line here, they pick up after the events of star trek -09 ..ok what do that tell ya . nero is defeeted ..vulcan blowen up hum, picking up the peaces of what happen & carring it on from their. what more romulans, vulcans enought ok go do something else please!

Star Trek producer Bryan Burk offered a similar, albeit more concrete response, saying they chose “to do something we thought would be original and unique and different” for the sequel adding: “I think on paper, we made the right choice. Now we have to go shoot.”

they are going to do something different …origional .. unique.. well it could be that they are doing another time line. but your guest is good as mine . a new villian i hopethe heck Khan please, over kill… maybe we can have trelane the squire of gothos would be a choose hes a worthy apponet for kirk & crew or harcore fenton mudd .the klingons have been over done so have the romulans & the vulcans. please leave them out.

19. Valenti - December 12, 2011

“I just broke my legs due to all these pipes, Captain!”

“Stop whining, just dump the cores!”


20. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - December 12, 2011

I like the fact that bob and the court is going with more of a Original and uncut Trek and starting after Trek 09 and no Khan. But. still think we will see the S.S botney bay at the end of Trek 13.

21. AJ - December 12, 2011

Put Scotty in the Center Seat while Kirk and Spock are planetside, and have him show those command cojones Jimmy Doohan was so great at expressing in that situation.

22. Let Them Eat Plomeek Soup - December 12, 2011


I read somewhere the odds on that are astronomical. Personally, I’d take Khan over the Ferengi.

I wonder if Pegg would get arrested if he put out some spoilers on twitter or something…probably.

“We have twelve hours before the ship explodes, sir.”

23. Let Them Eat Plomeek Soup - December 12, 2011


bwahahahahaha…. ^_^

24. Greg Warden - December 12, 2011

I’ve noticed that no one has mention Gary Mitchell anywhere. That could be interesting to see…

25. Jerry Modene - December 12, 2011

#2, nice Animaniacs reference!

26. Aurore - December 12, 2011

“to do something we thought would be original and unique and different”

….Mmmmm………..’sounds dangerous to me and so….. SEXY!!!!!

“I think on paper, we made the right choice. Now we have to go shoot.”

I’m waiting for the magic word to be uttered, anytime soon, then.

The “O” word….
….No!Not that “O” word… the other one!!!


27. RenderedToast - December 13, 2011

Burk pretty much just confirmed Khan for the sequel, at least in some capacity.

28. Tiberius Subprime - December 13, 2011

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: Gary Mitchell and / or the Talosians!

(I remember when Bob said we may see one of the following five: Mudd, Gary Mitchell, Talosians, Trelane, Horta )).

Interesting times…

29. Tiberius Subprime - December 13, 2011

True, @27.

They could be doing what Admiral_Blackcat suggested. Hope not.

30. Phil Baiden - December 13, 2011

Simon Pegg has just been on BBC One Breakfast here in the UK talking about Mission Impossible. He says that on the media tour he’s been pressing Brian Burke for information but hasn’t been able to get anything out of him

31. Will_H - December 13, 2011

Sounds hopeful that there’s not going to be Khan in this movie. I don’t think they’d outright lie about it, more likely they’d just be vague.

32. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - December 13, 2011

“but we’ve seen Khan [in a ‘Trek’ movie before]. To see him again, how much value is there in that? I don’t know.”

That’s what I’m saying….

33. Porthos 2258 - December 13, 2011

Beam me up, Scotty!

34. Cygnus-X1 - December 13, 2011

Well, that’s a good sign.

I’ll admit that all of this rumor-milling about Khan being in the story has had me worried.

I hope the Khanspiracy theorists will pipe down now.

35. Beam_me-up - December 13, 2011

That’s funny, because he was on the bbc breakfast news this morning, and said he doesn’t have a clue about it, the only thing he does know is that they should start filming early 2012

36. ProtoVulcan - December 13, 2011

January 15 filming date keeps being reported, but Hollywood doesn’t typically work Sunday, especially to start. Does that mean the real date is not locked down?

37. Basement Blogger - December 13, 2011

First, it’s Khan. Then it’s not. I’m Khanfused. Sorry about that.

38. Basement Blogger - December 13, 2011

@ 26


What’s up with the Shirley Bassey singing “Goldfinger” video?

39. Aurore - December 13, 2011

“What’s up with the Shirley Bassey singing “Goldfinger” video?”


I’m in a Shirley-Bassey-singing mood, Bernie.
This all started yesterday night……GOLDddddddFING-Aaaaaaaaarrrr!!!!

40. CmdrR - December 13, 2011

So, Auric Goldfinger is the new Trek villain? Awesome.
And do we also get… urm… Pussy Galore?

41. Aurore - December 13, 2011

“And do we also get… urm… Pussy Galore?”

….Who cares about THAT? LOOK what YOU made me DO!!!!



42. CmdrR - December 13, 2011

I think Aurore just tossed her ladypants up on stage…

43. TrekkerChick - December 13, 2011

Found a copy of the vocal arrangement for the opening in a recycle bin

“Just sit right back and you’ll hear a tale
A tale of a fateful trip
That started from this Starbase port,
Aboard this Starfleet ship.

The mate was a Terran-Vulcan man
The skipper: brave and sure…”

44. Christopher Roberts - December 13, 2011

Sighs over relief here about the Khanspiracy.

I’ll stay on alert, just in case though.

45. David - December 13, 2011

@ 10:
“It can’t be Star Trek 2. It can’t be Star Trek: Something Something (too much like TNG movies.) And it HAS to have Star Trek in the title. (It worked for Dark Knight and James Bond movies, but it won’t work for Trek. Proof: Star Trek Enterprise.)”

I’m having the idea that “Star Trek X 2″ instead fo Star Trek 12 or XII would be an option. That could be read as X+2 = 12 (or XII) and as Star Trek 2, with X as meaning for a new Star Trek…

46. Christopher Roberts - December 13, 2011

10. VZX – “It can’t be Star Trek 2. It can’t be Star Trek: Something Something (too much like TNG movies.) And it HAS to have Star Trek in the title. (It worked for Dark Knight and James Bond movies, but it won’t work for Trek. Proof: Star Trek Enterprise.)

I just can’t imagine a good title for this next Star Trek movie.”

How about this…

Top line small font – STAR TREK
Bottom line much larger font – TO BOLDLY GO

47. TrekkerChick - December 13, 2011

Five hundred crew set out one day
On a gal-actic tour
A gal-actic tour.

The warp drive started getting rough
The Starfleet ship was tossed
If not for the imagiination of the Engineer
The Starfleet ship was lost
The Starfleet ship was lost”

So, don’t worry! It’ll be a GREAT story! LOST and Trek rolled into one!

48. Alf - December 13, 2011

Star Trek 2: The Wrath of Spock???

49. VZX - December 13, 2011

@46: Yeah, that’s the step in the right direction, but I don’t think the producers would want that split infinitive in the title, it would be too easy to mock. Of course, whether or not split infinitives are considered to be grammatically accepted is still open to debate.

But then, Abrams does like to appeal to the lowest common denominator, so, yeah, sure, why not?

It has to have a title, and there is no perfect title for this. So, let’s just hope the movie will be good, cuz the title won’t. Not that it’s their fault, though.

50. Christopher Roberts - December 13, 2011

49. Cheers. I think those who’ll mock Star Trek will always do so and find absolutely any excuse. TO BOLDLY GO would be an easy target when Pine or Quinto go on chat shows sure enough… but it’s too late, the conversation is started by then. Leave it to the trailer and FX to make them “laugh it up”. :)

51. Sebastian S. - December 13, 2011

I take Burke’s comment below as a positive sign that the new movie won’t be a re-hash/re-imagining of the Khan story:

“but we’ve seen Khan [in a ‘Trek’ movie before]. To see him again, how much value is there in that? I don’t know.”

I hope the villain we see is someone/thing new…

52. Hugh Hoyland - December 13, 2011

I told everyone its going to be a mash up “Star Trek vs X-MEN!” :]

53. Blake Powers - December 13, 2011

My opinion doesn’t matter. Because I trust them.

54. Shaun - December 13, 2011

having read a lot of what boborci has posted over the past few months, i’m leaning towards some “evil” corportaion or secret society. i could recommend several peer-reviewed journal articles presenting original research into free market capitalism, but i doubt he would be interested.

55. Chris Doohan - December 13, 2011

21. AJ

I like that idea!

56. VZX - December 13, 2011

@50: Yeah, I forgot about that innuendo of the phrase, I never recognize those.

I hope it’s not a one word subtitle, though. I would prefer a short phrase like “The Empire Strikes Back” that refers to the plot or object or place in the movie like “The Temple of Doom”.

But then, your “Star Trek: To Boldly Go” title is the most probable.

57. Time Traveller - December 13, 2011

It seems to me that we are groping in the dark… :)
According to the latest information, the only obviousness is that we’ll see a New Vulcan Colony.
It seems also difficult that Klingons and Romulans won’t be somehow involved in the story, as well.

I’m also curious to know which are the “legendary enemy race” that we’ll see in the Digital Extremes’ Star Trek videogame…. said that they have glowing helmets akin to Killzone’s Helgast. Who could they be? The Breen? The Tholians? The Gorn? Maybe a new race? Will they have a part in the new movie?

58. T'Cal - December 13, 2011

“to do something we thought would be original and unique and different”

You know, if Spock were here, he’d say that I was an irrational, illogical human being by taking on a mission like that. Sounds like fun!

59. Trek Nerd Central - December 13, 2011

I’m still expecting to see Klingons. C’mon! We haven’t seen them on screen in too long, and they’re too important to the franchise.

I just take “unique” and “original” to mean we’ll get a *new* Klingon villain, not some recycled Kor or Kang.

60. Brett L. - December 13, 2011

I don’t see them discussed very often, but I think it would be nice to see the Talosians get the big screen treatment, either in a primary or secondary role. You could still have heavies like the Klingons hanging around to help advance the plot in some way, but the Talosians would open up some interesting possibilities and give the film a classic sci-fi feel. It would also allow Bruce Greenwood some more chances to shine. In any case, the one-dimensional revenge-crazed villain is soooo overdone, even in the most talented hands.

61. CaptRobau - December 13, 2011

@28 Gary Mitchell was featured in the Where No Man Has Gone Before issue in the new Star Trek comic series from IDW that retells several of the iconic in the JJ-verse. CBS Paramount isn’t going to allow someone to write a comic about a story that might be retold in the second movie, that’s just bad merchandising. While the script has only now been finished, the list of potential villains was probably one of the first things the writers settled on. If Mitchell had been on that list, I don’t think CBS wouldn’t have given the green light for that comic to IDW.

I will admit that CBS Paramount’s marketing isn’t exactly ideal. Sure calling the movie Star Trek is not too bad when you’re doing a reboot. But subsequently naming a comic series and a videogame, both taking place after the movie, Star Trek as well is just bad thinking. How are fans supposed to differentiate between these three different Star Treks, when there’s going to be more comics, games, etc.

I guess we need to settle on a few unofficial names.

For the movie = Star Trek: The Future Begins (refers to the tagline on the poster)
For the comic = Star Trek: Ongoing (it is described as the ongoing mission of the crew of the Enterprise)
For the game = Star Trek: Hidden Enemy (a line from the trailer)

62. Lucas G - December 13, 2011

I think Darth would make a good villian.

63. Tiberius Subprime - December 13, 2011

Good point about Gary Mitchell.

SO bring on the Talosions.

64. Aurore - December 13, 2011

“I think Aurore just tossed her ladypants up on stage…”

Dude…Who cares about THAT?!

By the way…those were not my…Wo-oo-wo-oo wo-wo-ooo….


65. pen2paper - December 13, 2011

With regard to titles, how about just ‘Trek’..? :)

66. Marshall McMellon - December 13, 2011

Maybe they’ll just do a remake of The Way to Eden and retool the ‘Space Hippies’ as ‘Occupy Star Fleet’ protesters.

67. Dennis - December 13, 2011

I think a beginning scene, briefly showing the crew wrapping up their 1st encounter with Khan would be a nice shout out to continuity, perhaps even charnging it slightly (mentioning periodic visits). Then march on with an entirely original story.

68. Aurore - December 13, 2011

“With regard to titles, how about just ‘Trek’..? :)”

Roberto Orci half-jockingly (?) suggested “T.R.E.K”, once.

69. VZX - December 13, 2011

Yeah, he is half-jock. Sure.

70. VZX - December 13, 2011

But, really, just “Trek” sounds OK.

71. Thorny - December 13, 2011

I have no problems with Khan returning in the Reboot Universe, but I’d rather that he wait until the third or fourth movie and let the new cast and crew build their own chemistry (they really didn’t have a lot of scenes together in Trek 2009) before bringing in Trek’s best known villain in a movie that’s going to be all about the villaim, a’la Dark Knight.

I’m still rooting for Kor being this movie’s principal villain. He’s well known enough to fans, but not widely known outside the core audience. Perfect.

72. 'Trick - December 13, 2011

Glad that Khan seems unlikely.

I would like to see Klingons; I would like to know what happens to the empire after losing what could possibly be a huge chunk of their fleet in the previous film.

I would also like to see what happens to the Vulcans as well. That might be a more interesting story, and might go a long way towards justifying the destruction of Vulcan. Perhaps it was a small piece of a greater story they wanted to tell? Heh, maybe the villain will be sybok. Star Trek: The Rise of Sybok.

73. Michael - December 13, 2011

How about Khan Jr.? LOL Marla McGivers(sp) & he could have done the nasty. *snicker*

74. Aurore - December 13, 2011

@69. VZX – December 13, 201
Yeah, he is half-jock. Sure.

Ahem……Oh….Um…..Look who’s joking now…You’re joking right?…Right? RIGHT?RIGHT???!!!


AAAAAAAanyway, who really knows whether *HE* was joking or not:

78. boborci – April 29, 2011
Maybe Star Fast, Star Furious?

Or perhaps T.R.E.K.

75. NuFan - December 13, 2011

16. Yes, we know the villain is someone known but I’m sure the story is completely new.

76. Time Traveller - December 13, 2011

I’ve tried to mix together all the rumors, imagining a villain that be related to:

– Klingons
– Vulcans
– Good and Evil
– (Genghis) Khan
– Genetic engineering
– Hidden enemy (original, unique and different, but also nasty and beefy)
– Glowing eyes
– Tribbles
– Neural parasites
– Conspiracy

And the winner is… Yarnek! XD

77. Tiberius Subprime - December 13, 2011

Kang or Kor would be interesting,

78. boborci - December 13, 2011

28. Don’t recall ever saying that.

79. Matthew M - December 13, 2011

You people are wack. Don’t know why I bother to read comments any more.

No Khan, no Kor, may be Klingons in a minor role.

The ‘villan’ will not be a known character from any of the series’.
The major villan will be a female and from an unknown humanoid species.

The new Vulcan homeworld will be called a new name, not New Vulcan.

There. That’s my take on the next movie.

80. Time Traveller - December 13, 2011

79. The new Vulcan homeworld will be called a new name, not New Vulcan.

Ehm… have you looked at this screenshot (the name they’ve given to it)?


81. Aurore - December 13, 2011

half-jockingly = half jokingly.

(Thank you,VZX.).


82. Phil - December 13, 2011

Well, the base story is the ongoing adventures of the Starship Enterprise, and her crew. Mr. Pegg knows nothing beyond that, because the script isn’t done. That much we know.

83. Phil - December 13, 2011

Well, he hasn’t seen the script. He does know the story, though. Wait, that’s part of the story. Hold on, that’s some of part of the story. Stop, it’s a portion of part of the story. Hang on a sec, it’s a segment of a portion of part of the story…, wait, I know it’s in space, right?

At what part of the interview did the bartender quit bringing the drinks?

84. ralph pinheiro (Brazil) - December 13, 2011

post 78. Bob Orci,

You didn´t say it.

Read this:

Back in October of last year, the folks over at Badass News claimed to have spoken with an informant close to the production about just who the Enterprise crew will face off against: “It’s definitely a character that will make fans of (the original series) excited. Think along the lines of Harry Mudd or Trelane or Gary Mitchell or the Talosians or the Horta. Actually it’s one of those that I named.”

85. Dave - December 13, 2011

Please no Khan! How un-original and counter productive would that be to keeping trek alive?
They did a slamming job with the last movie and to go back would be stupid! If they would bend to a few fanatical fans they would be the only ones going to see it!

86. Slornie - December 13, 2011

After the destruction of Vulcan in ST09, I wouldn’t be surprised to see some more of the political/strategic side of the Federation akin to that seen in Undiscovered Country (where the destruction of Praxis caused huge upheaval in interstellar affairs). One of the founding members of the Federation is gone, the Klingon fleet lost 47 Warbirds to Nero and a significant chunk of the Starfleet Academy students were killed. Where does that leave the balance of affairs? Who is going to take advantage of the chaos left by these events?

87. - December 13, 2011

Bringing back Khan would be as dumb as killing off Kirk by dropping him off of a cliff or something like that.

88. - December 13, 2011

Edith Keeler played by Anne Hathaway would be awesome.

89. Christopher Roberts - December 13, 2011

86. That’s what I hope for and it seems to fit the Empire Strikes Back flavour, of following a massive popcorn flick with something darker and deeper meaning.

90. Phil - December 13, 2011

@84. The writers and producers have been fairly consistant in saying this was going to be a stand alone story, and not a re-make of some previous effort. I would tend to take their statements at face value before believing a new report of some on-line blog of questionable reputation.

91. Captain Hackett - December 13, 2011

-> Bryan Burk: Sequel will be original, unique and different

It is exactly what we need from next ST movie! :)

92. Shannon Nutt - December 13, 2011

I don’t think Khan is in this movie…but I think JJ and the gang ENJOY us thinking Khan is in the movie – it will keep the rumor mill free of what they’re ACTUALLY shooting. Heck, I wouldn’t be surprised if we see some leaked photos/videos of “Khan” after the shoot begins (remember when everyone thought that “X-Files: I Want To Believe” was going to be about werewolves?!).

93. The Seer - December 13, 2011

The villain is going to be Darth Vader. You heard i here first!!!

94. VZX - December 13, 2011


Haha. But was it even half-true? This I half-doubt.

95. VZX - December 13, 2011

Anne Hathaway reading the phonebook is awesome. But, yeah, Keeler is cool, too.

96. Doug - December 13, 2011

I’m still waiting on “Spaceballs 2: the search for more money”

97. Khan's Mullet - December 13, 2011

There has to be more Scotty in this one. His first appearance in 2009 was well after an hour. Good intro to the character though…

98. Red Dead Ryan - December 13, 2011

The thing is, neither Burk nor Pegg were allowed to reveal anything substantial. Pegg might have been told very vaguely of the story, but also said he hasn’t read the script. He also said he hasn’t heard the name Khan come up, which isn’t surprising, since I doubt that Abrams would reveal the villain before he is cast. Burk has said the sequel will be unique and different. And it could very well be, all the while still involving Khan, albeit in a different situation from either “Space Seed”, or “The Wrath Of Khan”.

99. Red Dead Ryan - December 13, 2011


Oh, how I wish that “I Want To Believe” was about werewolves!

Instead, we got a lame story about a psychic pedophile priest helping Mulder and Scully track a serial killer!

100. CmdrR - December 13, 2011

78 – Boborci — Why bother saying things when Trekkies are more than happy to put words in your mouth?
Hope everything’s running smoothly and the shoot goes well. Are you there everyday during filming; do you sit under a tree writing dialogue, a la Roddenberry during “Shore Leave”?

101. Dee - lvs moon' surface - December 13, 2011

Ok … it’s not Khan… at least Simon Pegg knows nothing about that… or Mr. Burk… or Mr. Bob… …………nothing about that…. :-) :-)

102. Shaun - December 13, 2011

i hope the primary villain is cast soon. more information would be ever so nice.

103. SirBroiler - December 13, 2011

Interesting that the language in these denials say that Khan is not THE VILLAIN. Not that Khan isn’t in the movie.

I still think Khan will be there – maybe not as the cut-and-dry villain of TOS or WOK – a little more complex. He may not pop up until the very end of the movie, but I am pretty sure he’s there.

104. Battle-scarred Sciatica - December 13, 2011

@41 Aurore

superb TJ moment there.

loooooooooove it!

105. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 13, 2011

Simon Pegg, like Zachary Quinto and others before him, is very good at saying a lot of nothing. Simon Pegg – be quiet. How can Bryan Burk not know anything – he is one of the producers? Duh.

I suspect that if/when Chris Pine does ever say anything, then it is possible that he will be saying a lot of something. He is the only one who has remained quiet in all this, except to say, a little while back, what he hoped the writers would do to develop the Kirk character he is playing. Then again, he has been busy doing his music and helping make a music video – a la Ivy Walls and being the voice of Jack Frost.

106. Shaun - December 13, 2011


i tend to agree with you.

oh, peter weller, what is your role in all of this? c.o.o. of a genetics/bioengineering corporation, perhaps? so many questions…

107. Jefferies Tuber - December 13, 2011

We’ve all been so caught up in the Khan vs. Klingons conversation that maybe it’s been right there in front of us the entire time. The story must have something to do with either the search for a new Vulcan homeworld, the Romulans or some kind of Kirk-like effort to unwind the destruction of Vulcan. What the hell is the Katric Arc for if not this exact situation–an XXL version of Star Trek III?

108. rm10019 - December 13, 2011

107 – sad to say but all the Katras stored in the ark are either released into the universe or sucked into the black hole if they are at all subject to the laws of ‘physics’, and I use that term as loosely as the writers ;)

109. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 13, 2011

Chris Pine appears in this short teaser to a new album released by The Ivy
Walls band on 15 January 2012 – there’s that date again.

Forget the visuals here, but I can imagine James T Kirk, after a hectic time battling whoever and listening to this musical sound switch on as he enters his quarters. The band has quite an interesting underlying smooth tone, although some of the singing (and lyrics?) can have an edgy sound and quality.

Bob Orci – possible?

110. Richard C. - December 13, 2011

They need that talking velociraptor from Jurassic Park 3.

111. John from Cincinnati - December 13, 2011

“but we’ve seen Khan [in a ‘Trek’ movie before]. To see him again, how much value is there in that? I don’t know.”

Well, we’ve all seen Kirk, Spock, Scotty, Sulu, Cherpov and Uhura in Star Trek movies before too, so what is the value of seeing all of them again?

112. Tiberius Subprime - December 13, 2011

Point well made, I suppose.

113. SirBroiler - December 13, 2011

Thanks for the support @106

I’m also thinking that The Botany Bay is discovered by Klingons…and Khan is either put in charge of a ship…or highjacks one. But this won’t be revealed until much later in the story. Why else would they put full-face helmets on Klingons in the first movie (footage they didn’t use) if they weren’t looking to hide the identity of one or more Klingons down the line.

And @107…totally. It is very easy to embrace the idea of Spock going to great lengths to reverse the destruction of vulcan. Remember the Menagerie? If Spock would go to such lengths to help Pike, how far would he go to save his homeworld and the vulcan race? Very far if you ask me.

114. trekker 5 - December 13, 2011

This news of the doubt of khan is like simon and bryan have just given me a christmas gift!

115. Silvereyes - December 13, 2011

78 boborci

Bob, am I crazy or did you or someone else from the production team mention a while back that the movie would not include any story element from TOS? I don’t remember how exactly it was said, so “story element” is surely not the right wording, but it was following early speculation about Khan…

116. Craiger - December 13, 2011

I don’t think they can reverse the destruction of Vulcan. The main reason they did that was so they could start a new timeline and not adhear to previous canon.

117. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 13, 2011

Prime Spock can’t go back in time to bring back this alternate universe’s Vulcan. If, by some miracle, he is able to travel back, it would only be to yet another alternate universe where the planet may well still exist, but it won’t be this same alternate universe, where Vulcan is no more, that we are in now.

Prime Spock knows that and so logically he sets about helping those surviving Vulcans start afresh on a new planet…

118. Jefferies Tuber - December 13, 2011

113 Exactly, I just played The Menagerie for a friend and that was very much on my mind. I think Vulcans vs. Klingons, played out as some kind of Israeli-Palestinian dispute over a colony world. Sans Khan. The Klingons were Russians, so are we destined to get them served up as Arabs?

119. Barb - December 13, 2011

Of course there’s no Khan. Khan wasn’t in The Empire Strikes Back, why would he be in a remake of it?

120. boborci - December 13, 2011

108 And we writer’s used the term as precisely as current theoretical physics:

121. boborci - December 13, 2011


122. boborci - December 13, 2011


123. John from Cincinnati - December 13, 2011

I currently just finished a college Physics course and multi universes is a real theory out there.

The one that blows my mind is the one in that we are all just a hologram. A 2-D projection from beyond the outer edges of the universe.

124. Christopher Roberts - December 13, 2011

123. Computer, End Program.

You lot still here?

125. Christopher Roberts - December 13, 2011

Just checking! ;)

126. Phil - December 13, 2011

@109. Maybe Kirk is a Hendricks fan….or Zamfir…..

127. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 13, 2011

I posted some information on the latest/current theories as regarding black holes, especially Kerr’s Black Hole, on another thread on this site. It seems that people do not always pay much attention to what is being posted here.

Re: my post #109
For the record, my idea about possibly using some of The Ivy Walls music has nothing to do with Chris Pine’s own musical preferences. It has to do with me hearing some of it on various videos and thinking it might work for some of Star Trek. I think that it may be more “legitimate” sounding music, or as “legitimate”, that might be heard in the 23rd century as say, Sabotage by the Beastie Boys. That is all.

128. Phil - December 13, 2011

Springsteen is timeless. Thunder Road will sound just as good in the 23rd century as it does today.

129. Aurore - December 13, 2011

“superb TJ moment there.
loooooooooove it!”

If you believe I went too far with this one, just remember ; CmdrR made me do it.

130. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 13, 2011

#126 Yeah, possibly. Very retro is our Kirk – into the Beatles, Jimmy Hendriks, Rolling Stones, Muse, The Ivy Walls, etc…:) He’s also been known to appreciate a little Vivaldi’s Four Seasons; quite eclectic is our James Kirk. I mean, who knew? Well, I have known it for a while now…You read it here first!

He is into basketball as well – loves shooting hoops whenever he can, and athletics (he needs to be, given what I suspect these new writers could have in store for him and his first officer..;)).

Why do you think SF built that brand new state-of-the-art space station with great recreational facilities on the edge of a universe containing a mighty ocean, sitting within it a quaint little set of planets known locally as Menosia…:)!

131. Odkin - December 13, 2011

Interesting report on disgusting bahvior by “Hawaii 5-0″ production crew at a Hawaii cemetary.

Sounds like wrapping (and catering) a location shoot was a little more important than letting 90+year old WWII and Pearl Harbor vets conduct their solemn ceremony undisturbed:

132. Adolescent Nightmare - December 13, 2011

Oh, Simon, you’re not fooling anybody.

133. Vultan - December 13, 2011


Well, let’s look on the bright side. A hundred years from now, the veterans will be remembered. The 5-0 production crew won’t.

134. theadagency - December 13, 2011


Of course they won’t call it New Vulcan. They’ll call it Vulcan 2, or Vulcan \ /

135. Craiger - December 13, 2011

I got it this is what the sequel will be about.

136. Brian K - December 13, 2011

No Khan it seems. My faith has been restored, somewhat. Now, maybe that Hispanic actor they’ve been trying to cast can play an actual Hispanic. Or perhaps a Klingon, a Vulcan, a Talosian, an Andorian, or a Borg. Just not Khan from India, Earth.

137. DonDonP1 - December 13, 2011

Respectfully, I have to agree with J.J. Abrams. He stated that unlike to the original series Trek films, this film will have a subtitle with no number following the series title “Star Trek”, like The Next Generation-era motion pictures. This will avoid repeating the sequel number of the acclaimed “Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan” or making a confusing jump from “Star Trek” to “Star Trek 12″.

138. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 13, 2011

It is now Wednesday here in my world. I thought we were supposed to hear who will be playing the main villain by now.

Re: Music of 23rd century – what will still be heard? I don’t really know, none of us do, but it is interesting to speculate on just what kind and whose music will stand the test of time. However, I do suspect that people will still be playing and listening to music by J Bach, Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Tchaikovsky, Vivaldi, Handel and others. The music of Handel is already almost 400 years old, so what’s another 200?

When JJ Abrams(?) decided to use the Sabotage song by the Beastie Boys, I did not get into a lather, the way I believe some people have, and that is because…well, it’s the future, after all. When I heard the music for the first time as I watched the scene, I thought it was energetic with a basic raw melody line, punchy, out there, rebellious – just like the young kid driving the convertible!

The thing about using the music by say the Ivy Walls, in a scene like I mentioned, is that it is the latest Indy music as of NOW. The album has not even been released yet. It is not of the past, but of the future. I have no idea as to its overall quality or appeal – who knows. However, it may be a sound that a Pine/Kirk could relate to. Anyway, Michael Giacchino is doing the main score again – this would just be a little musical cameo (if there is such a thing as a “musical cameo”).

139. Red Dead Ryan - December 13, 2011

I don’t recall any of the writers or J.J Abrams saying the villain would be revealed this week. I think they’ll announce it in January once filming begins, because as of right now, there is no actor hired to play the lead bad guy.

And speaking of music, I wonder if J.J Abrams plans to insert the Beastie Boys’ “Intergalactic” in one of the scenes in the sequel? He should have added it to the bar scene in the first film. Would have been funny.


They could use the regular “2”. It’s not the same as reusing the Roman numeral “II”, except when you say it, but that could easily be negated by just referring the movie by it’s subtitle. Which most people tend to do anyway when they mention (orally) the first ten movies.

The standard “2” would be for visual distinction, seperating it from the TOS and TNG films.

140. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 13, 2011

#139 I said – “I thought we were supposed to hear who will be playing the main villain by now.”

That is not the same as saying who the main villain will be. It was reported that the actor would be chosen by the end of the week. I had believed it was the end of last week. Perhaps I’m mistaken and it will be at the end of this week, ending 16/17 December.

141. NCM - December 13, 2011


Unlikely the Fox News “professionals” realize that the words “disrespecting” and “disrespected,” which they bandied about ad nauseam in their bitch session, were centuries long out of use until hip-hop culture revived them.

Most likely, were I there, or were the story reported by a reasonably valid news source, I’d side with the vets. But bringing Obama’s name into the rant and airing a caterwauling “reporter” vowing that “this isn’t going away” is simply an example of over-the-top sensationalism. It’s not patriotism (yes, they even squeeze that notion into the fray) and it’s sure as hell not reporting – but it’s spot on for Fox “News.”

142. NCM - December 13, 2011

124. Christopher Roberts – December 13, 2011

“Computer, End Program……….. You lot still here?”

Good one!

143. Trekwebmaster - December 13, 2011

KIRK: The statement Lucifer made when he fell into the pit. ‘It is better to rule in hell than serve in heaven.’

SPOCK: It would be interesting, Captain, to return to that world in a hundred years and to learn what crop has sprung from the seed you planted today.

KIRK: Yes, Mister Spock, it would indeed.

144. Red Dead Ryan - December 13, 2011


Yes you’re right. I meant to write “I don’t recall any of the writers or J.J Abrams saying the actor who would be playing the main villain would be revealed this week.”

I accidentally skipped a few words I meant to type because I was typing too fast, and didn’t bother reading what I posted, either before I hit “say it” or after I clicked on the button. Only until you corrected me did I get around to fixing it.

Dammit, I hate accidentally omitting words!

145. Mr. "There are always possibilities" - December 13, 2011

I can’t wait until 2013.

As to the villian, if Messers Orci, etc., decide to do Khan I am sure it will be done well.

I hope they don’t overload us with villians, though. I keep thinking Spiderman 3, where we had three bad guys when at most we needed 2.

146. Anthony Thompson - December 13, 2011

131, 141.

Odkin has been schooled again! LOL!

147. Nano - December 13, 2011

Giant cloaked spaceship discovered near Mercury?

OR –

Vulcan was a small planet proposed to exist in an orbit between Mercury and the Sun. In an attempt to explain peculiarities of Mercury’s orbit, in the 19th-century French mathematician Urbain Jean Joseph Le Verrier hypothesized that they were the result of another planet, which he named Vulcan. No such planet was ever found, until now????

148. James Cathcart - December 13, 2011

Oh my gosh…did you notice how Bob Orci used an apostrophe in “writer’s”? He followed up with a correction, but the cat’s out of the bag folks.

It is now crystal clear to me that there will be multiple classic bad guys in this film. From his freudian slip, we can now confirm that Khan, Mudd, Trelane, Kor, Kang, Charlie X, Anton Karridian, Captain Garth and a man-eating tribble will feature prominently in the movie.

I am now going to start a new blog and post this over and over again until it’s true!

149. boborci - December 13, 2011

148! Lol

150. ME!! - December 13, 2011

After pouring over the Original Series episodes and, in particular, villains, I’d say it’s quite possibly & most likely one of the following….

1. Kor

2. Koloth

3. Kang

151. Hijo de Rick - December 14, 2011

Tio Bob, Alex que venga, mi otro papa

152. Andrews - December 14, 2011

The only reason people are insisting it’s Khan is because they’re looking for a specifically Latino actor. Which is a dumb conclusion for them to reach. It’s far more likely that Abrams and co are looking for someone specifically hispanic to provide the necessary cultural melting pot that the future and the Enterprise is supposed to have as per Roddenberry’s vision. IIRC, Robau was written and cast as Middle Eastern descent for similar reasons.

153. Aurore - December 14, 2011

“It’s far more likely that Abrams and co are looking for someone specifically hispanic to provide the necessary cultural melting pot that the future and the Enterprise is supposed to have …”

This makes sense…to me.

154. Shaun - December 14, 2011

@152 & 153

makes sense. as a huge ds9 fan, i would like to see a sisko show up in a new film. sisko’s father…or grandfather, or grandmother. the writers who worked on ds9 did an amazing job presenting a diverse future. they even “humanized” capitalism, to an extent. i miss that show.

155. VZX - December 14, 2011

The only similarities between black holes and wormholes is that they have the word “hole” in their name. Black holes do exist. Wormholes do not. A black hole is not an actual hole in space, but simply the final fate of extremely large stars that became so black (due to extreme gravitational lensing stemming from its escape velocity > c) that they look like holes, but are in fact solid objects. The fictional wormhole is a hole in space. But it can never exist, unless you can create negative density.

Too bad, so sad, I’m glad.

156. boborci - December 14, 2011

The Einstein-Rosen Bridge

But this also revives an ongoing controversy surrounding black holes. The best description of a spinning black hole was given in 1963 by the New Zealand mathematician Roy Kerr, using Einstein’s equations of gravity. But there is a quirky feature to his solution. It predicts that if one fell into a black hole, one might be sucked down a tunnel (called the “Einstein-Rosen bridge”) and shot out a “white hole” in a parallel universe! Kerr showed that a spinning black hole would collapse not into a point, but to a “ring of fire.” Because the ring was spinning rapidly, centrifugal forces would keep it from collapsing. Remarkably, a space probe fired directly through the ring would not be crushed into oblivion, but might actually emerge unscratched on the other side of the Einstein-Rosen bridge, in a parallel universe. This “wormhole” may connect two parallel universes, or even distant parts of the same universe.

157. boborci - December 14, 2011

The above from Michio Kaku. End of story.

158. Shaun - December 14, 2011

so…why didn’t vulcan go through?

159. portho's bitch - December 14, 2011

anyone here voiced the thought of these indian actors being Klingons and Peter Weller being Gary Seven.. more than a passing resembalence here… the latest blonde “thing” could be Roberta Lincoln.

160. Hugh Hoyland - December 14, 2011

Bob, are you saying the wormhole is in fact the next villain and not Khan?

161. Hugh Hoyland - December 14, 2011

When Quantum mechanics came into being all bets were off. Esp String theory.

162. boborci - December 14, 2011

158. Same reason a ship at sea can navigate around the ring of a whirlpool but debris in the water cannot. A ship has propulsion and manuverability. A collapsing planet obviously does not.

163. boborci - December 14, 2011

158. Also, as you just read above, the black hole has to be spinning. Not every black hole us spinning.

164. Shaun - December 14, 2011


got ya. that makes sense. i’ve got my niche, and it is not astrophysics and space science. so, quite obviously, i’ve never had a huge problem with all of that. the positive attributes of the story and the performances overshadowed any quirks i might have noticed.

165. Aurore - December 14, 2011

“i’ve never had a huge problem with all of that. the positive attributes of the story and the performances overshadowed any quirks i might have noticed.”

Many of the so-called “quirks” of the story were pointed out to me… on the internet.

Fortunately for me, there are threads such as this one, where one of the writers can, half-JOCKINGKLY, half-jokingly or otherwise, explain himself.

I love it.

166. boborci - December 14, 2011


and many of the “quirks” pointed out to you are the result of IGNORANCE!!!

167. boborci - December 14, 2011

flat earthers complaining about the curvature of the earth not being explained!!!!!!

168. Aurore - December 14, 2011


(Yeah…the “joke”is on me…So, what’s new?)


169. VZX - December 14, 2011

Holy crap on a hat, even Einstein stated the laws of physics would forbid such a thing to exist since wormholes require “exotic” energy to stay open. There is no way it could be stable long enough for even photon to go through.

Traveling towards a black hole: The tidal forces from any extremely dense object such as neutron stars and black holes would tear anything apart that gets close to it. Not only that, but time would slow down so much for those object that they would appear to get stuck in time so we couldn’t even witness the destruction.

170. Aurore - December 14, 2011

“flat earthers complaining about the curvature of the earth not being explained!!!!!!”

Hi, Mr. Orci!
I thought you had left!

171. VZX - December 14, 2011

But, it’s all good in sci-fi land. I still love the movie, just hate the science in it.

172. boborci - December 14, 2011

169. VZX – December 14, 2011

Einstein also didn’t buy quantum mechanics, which is the most successful scientific theory in history.

As for the requirement of “exotic” energy… that’s why we had red matter.
Obviously, the wormhole in our movie is not naturally occurring.

As for tidal forces, surely you know that accelerating to any appreciable percentage of the speed of light in short time, the way a STAR SHIP does, would kill all its occupants without something like “inertial dampeners” to save the crew. But even without relying on the physics of star trek, a sufficiently massive black hole has significantly weaker tidal forces.

173. VZX - December 14, 2011

Aurore, that’s what you get from so-called half-jocks. What does that even mean? Or were you half-jokingly misspelling it twice so it was half-jockingly=half-jockingly?

I’m half-confused. Or half-indifferent. But also half-amused.

174. Phil - December 14, 2011

@156. Or it may not. Take that!

175. - December 14, 2011

I’m going to be traveling around Europe throughout most of 2013 and i just started wondering how i’ll go getting my Mr Spock ears through customs.

Should i risk it or just try to buy another set at the other end.

176. Phil - December 14, 2011

Trek has long had collective amneseia when it comes to acknowledging 20th/21st century culture. Featuring Springsteen and Roy Orbison in the musical score in next movie goes a long way toward fixing that oversight……Timeless…anything else is a waste of time.

177. VZX - December 14, 2011

172. boborci – December 14, 2011

Yeah, I know. Just like the “Heisenbarg-compensators” in transporters so we we really can know the exact placement AND velocity of electrons before transport.. At least it shows that even though Trek writers sneak around pesky laws of physics to tell their story, they at least acknowledge them with the “inerial dampeners” and “red matter”.

Physics teachers appreciate this.

178. boborci - December 14, 2011

177. Great!

179. Aurore - December 14, 2011

“I’m half-confused. Or half-indifferent. But also half-amused.”


Since you took the time to address me, I think I have your… *full* attention.

But, I may be half-flattering myself…

….Oh, and, don’t try to change the subject ; I’m still waiting for your answer to 172, or, perhaps you are replying as I’m typing this….I’ll find out in a moment.


180. VZX - December 14, 2011

But wormholes still don’t exist.

181. boborci - December 14, 2011

180. Can’t prove a negative. And even if you could, they may exist in the 24th century.

182. boborci - December 14, 2011

180. Warp speed doesn’t exist either. That’s why I am confused about your point.

183. VZX - December 14, 2011

179: I was just half-joking. ;)

184. - December 14, 2011

I’m having a flashback to Galaxy Quest.

185. Brock - December 14, 2011

Its hard to comprehend people getting excited about this sequel.

186. portho's bitch - December 14, 2011

ummmm Bob, shouldn’t you be writing something…punching up a script ??? On another note I just pulled up an image of Trek Writer (adaptor)
James Blish looked exactly like all the other writers of sci fi at the time….

187. VZX - December 14, 2011

182: I was just trying to be funny.

And to re-emphasize a fact. VZX FTW!

188. boborci - December 14, 2011

185 hard to comprehend people who are not excited about this sequel commenting on this thread. Except as a failed attempt to piss me off for reasons only you can articulate;)

189. boborci - December 14, 2011

Except it’s not a fact. And your continued emphasis is desperate. How many more articles and quotes from the giants of theoretical physics do you want me to present to you before you before you accept their opinion over your own.

190. boborci - December 14, 2011

From Hawking lecture:

“However, to create a wormhole, one needs matter that warps space-time in the opposite way, like the surface of a saddle. The same is true of any other way of warping space-time to allow travel to the past, if the universe didn’t begin so warped, that it allowed time travel. What one would need, would be matter with negative mass, and negative energy density, to make space-time warp in the way required.
Energy is rather like money. If you have a positive bank balance, you can distribute it in various ways. But according to the classical laws that were believed until quite recently, you weren’t allowed to have an energy overdraft. So these classical laws would have ruled out us being able to warp the universe, in the way required to allow time travel. However, the classical laws were overthrown by Quantum Theory, which is the other great revolution in our picture of the universe, apart from General Relativity. Quantum Theory is more relaxed, and allows you to have an overdraft on one or two accounts. If only the banks were as accommodating. In other words, Quantum Theory allows the energy density to be negative in some places, provided it is positive in others.
The reason Quantum Theory can allow the energy density to be negative, is that it is based on the Uncertainty Principle.”

191. portho's bitch - December 14, 2011

the idea of a spinning black hole, cyclonic in nature..with a non spinning center…. “think of the eye of a hurricance Dr. ” isn’t that sort of the nature of the Uss Bozmann ???

Speaking of Black Holes wasn’t there some noise by Disney a few years ago about rebooting that filml ?? TheBlack Hole was the main competiton for ST: TMP back in ’79

192. Phil - December 14, 2011

Come on, guys, 100 years ago people were debating about if the moon was made of cheese or not, and Jules Verne was writing fanciful stories about actually flying there someday. It doesn’t matter if Mr. Verne got all the details correct or not, it sparked the imagination of those who ended up figuring out how to actually do it. Star Trek is no different, it doesn’t matter if wormholes or FTL drive exist or not, it serves to inspire, to ask “what if”…….

193. NuFan - December 14, 2011

I’m definitely excited about this sequel. And note that I have not posted any bizarre explanations for why this villain must be hispanic, but not Khan.

194. VZX - December 14, 2011


Wow, I was merely trying to make a little joke.

Well, I read this article by some guy named A.Einstein:

My favorite though is this one by Kip Thorne:

It states how we can use the concept of wormholes as a teaching tool for explaining general relativity. I like the part that explains all the crazy parameters for a stable wormhole to exist. And then if wormholes exist, then time-travel can exist, and we can kill ourselves in the past before we went back in time creating a paradox that will DESTROY ALL EXISTENCE! Ok, well, it didn’t say anything about universal armegeddon, but it did about the other stuff.

I also noticed the part where it says blackholes are impossible to traverse. Just saying…

195. boborci - December 14, 2011


Like Einstein, you keep ignoring Quantum Mechanics, the favored interpretation of which is the many worlds interpretation, which avoids the paradox you mentioned. You are stuck in classical physics.

196. Phil - December 14, 2011

Yeah, I’m looking forward to the next story, too…..

197. boborci - December 14, 2011

And like Hawking, Kip Thorne believes QM may allow for naturally occurring negative energy density (or exotic matter), which would allow a wormhole to be stable.

198. VZX - December 14, 2011

@192: I’m sure 100 years from now things will be so crazy different it will be like magic to us. Arthur Clarke said something about that. But I’m sure such basic things like c as the universal speed limit will still exist. We can warp space all we want, but we still observe c as c no matter the reference point.

I had argued this with my physics professors before (when I was in favor of warp speed travel), and they were adamently against it.

199. VZX - December 14, 2011

195: OK, I got my BS in physics in 1997, so maybe I am still stuck in the past and have to brush up a little on QM. I have read Hawking, Kaku, Thorne, deGrasse Tyson, etc. but will again.

I will concede….. for now….

Now, I gotta get back to work on my lesson on global warming, teaching it next week.

200. boborci - December 14, 2011

194. From your very own Kip article:

“As we shall see below, it is not clear today (1987) wether the laws of physics prohibit or actually permit the construction of such “traversable wormholes.”

201. boborci - December 14, 2011

199. Good luck “hiding the decline!”

202. VZX - December 14, 2011

200: Dude, read the parameters! That stuff is bat-shit crazy talk! It just can’t happen!

203. VZX - December 14, 2011

201: Yeah, right?

heh, I knew that would ruffle your feathers as well…

204. boborci - December 14, 2011

203. I keeeeeeed!!

205. VZX - December 14, 2011

Triumph reference, nice.

Khan sucks.


206. Aurore - December 14, 2011

“179: I was just half-joking. ;)”


(half-laughing to that…)


207. Damian - December 14, 2011

Looking forward to the sequel. I’m taking them at face value for now that Khan is not in the sequel. I agree with another poster that it’s dangerous to assume just because they are looking for a Latino actor translates to Khan. I hope it’s not because it was already perfectly executed, therefor unnecessary to redo.

I’ve honestly never had an issue with “technobabble”. For me that added a layer of realism to the Star Trek universe. Sure, it’s still sci-fi but I always appreciated that the various writers of all the “regimes” tried to put some thought to various Star Trek technology. They didn’t just randomly add something to advance a story, they actually tried to think it through, cause and effect. That’s one of the primary reasons I’m more of a Star Trek vs a Star Wars fan. At times, the people behind Star Trek almost can make you believe someday we will have transporters and warp speed.

208. CmdrR - December 14, 2011

129 – (in 3/4 time) Why… why… WHY… Aurore?

In truth, I loved Tom Jones’ music when I was a kid, and I really love his new stuff. His son (and producer) finally got him to swear off the hair dye. Now, he looks like one hell of a handsome man of years. He could even give Shat a run for his money, as far as energy.

209. CmdrR - December 14, 2011

Are you there everyday during filming; do you sit under a tree writing dialogue, a la Roddenberry during “Shore Leave”?

Or does Paramount make you sign a script in blood and never change a comma?

210. Chris Doohan - December 14, 2011

All objects in OUR universe are composed of filament, or vibrating strings and membranes. The theory of everything depends on positive and negative density in these strings. A wormhole may exist if the negative density is stronger than the positive energy. Once the hidden element, like the God Particle is isolated, time travel may be possible.

That being said, I have no idea what I’m talking about. I’m a Transporter Engineer damn it, not a physicist

211. Damian - December 14, 2011

185–Always wondered why people who hate something comment about it. If you don’t like the new Star Trek, don’t watch it. No one’s holding a gun to your head. There’s plenty of Star Trek out there to go around. That’s the beauty of if (hundreds of hours of TV/movies) You are allowed to pick and choose :)

212. Aurore - December 14, 2011

209. CmdrR – December 14, 2011
129 – (in 3/4 time) Why… why… WHY… Aurore?

Because I could CmdrR. ‘Simple as that. Besides, you made me do it.

Thank you for the link ; I truly enjoyed this song. I did not know it.
I found it to be deliciously heartbreaking. The man has such an incredible voice…

“He could even give Shat a run for his money, as far as energy.”

…But, of course, you had to say this….

(in 3/4 time)

Why…..Why…..WHY do you like to provoke me, CmdrR?
Just because you can do something does not mean you should.

Unless your name is Aurore.

213. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 14, 2011

What Roy Kerr showed that something thought not to be possible even in theory was indeed possible in theory. Most physicists believe that you would not survive a black hole in reality, however THEORETICALLY it is possible. Many have tried to disprove Roy Kerr’s mathematical calculations made in 1963, but none have succeeded.

Coincidentally, there was a news items on TV here a week or so back, where Roy Kerr and his wife were interviewed. I’ll try to find the interview, on TV3’s Campbell Live programme. Roy Kerr still has the little lab he set up in his house to do his experiments and mathematical calculations explaining this type of black hole.

The Star Trek writers, like other sci-fi writers, have used the “what if”, “perhaps, maybe, just this once” to make a *legitimate* story. Anyway, flukes do occur, even in nature.

214. John from Cincinnati - December 14, 2011

If you’re interested in warping space and black holes you should watch “Event Horizon”. Laurence Fishbourne and Sam Neill, good movie.

215. CmdrR - December 14, 2011

CERN just found Higgs. At least one team did. As you can see, it’s all over the news. Or was that a report on Lady Gaga I saw? Anyhoo… The God particle is real enough. Just need to get a containment field on it.

Aurore — track down “Praise and Blame.” You will NOT be disappointed.

216. Damian - December 14, 2011

215–I thought “Event Horizon” was good too. At the time it came out, it was largely bashed, but it has earned a following since. I’m a big horror movie fan, and not much gets under my skin, but that movie really did freak me out (esp. the log recording of the prior crew before they died).

217. Alex Rosenzweig - December 14, 2011

#113 – “It is very easy to embrace the idea of Spock going to great lengths to reverse the destruction of vulcan. Remember the Menagerie? If Spock would go to such lengths to help Pike, how far would he go to save his homeworld and the vulcan race? Very far if you ask me.”

But, OTOH, unless it was reversed very closely after the initial event, the result would much more likely be simply the creation of yet another branching continuum, the way the Abramsverse has branched off from the Primeverse.

Much simpler would be the idea that, after having gotten the survivi9ng Vulcans squared-away, Spock would find a way to return to his own continuum. After all, he’s got a wife–and maybe other family members by 2387–back in his home continuum, so he’s got motivation to try to get back, and given his scientific brilliance and level of experience with temporal and multiverse phenomena, if there’s anyone who could figure it out, it’d be Spock.

I think it’d be an awesome throwaway line to have Quinto-Spock mention that he got a message from Nimoy-Spock to the effect that now that he’d gotten the Vulcan people settled, he had also found a way home, so goodbye, farewell, and amen. Or something like that. :)

Any possibility of such a thing, Bob O.?

218. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 14, 2011

Bob Orci et al –

What is important now is – when does the Quinto shaving and plucking begin?

Has the new Trek cast been assembled for those group photos to get taken and sent to us at
Christmas Eve is only 10 days away… no rush, no pressure…:)

Found the Pine/Kirk puffles (orange) and Quinto/Spock puffles (yellow) yet? Good man…

(If you are wondering, but not pissed off, I hope, I am operating on the squeaky door principle. Hope it’s working).

219. Buzz Cagney - December 14, 2011

#188 I’m kind of excited, Bob, but I’m yet to comment. ;) All this Kwontum Fizziks is just too complicated for me.

I’m more concerned at how you are going to explain this away in the next movie….


220. Spock/Uhura Fan - December 14, 2011


Well, the MI: Ghost Protocol trailer looks great. I’ll be watching. :-)

221. Phil - December 14, 2011

@219. You forgot to ask if the script is done yet…..

222. Chris Doohan - December 14, 2011

220 Buzz

I think it’s just combed differently, with a little darker color. If he did get transplants…so what. Plus, it may be a write-off. He looks good.

Now a days, they do such a good job, it’s hard to tell if someone had hair transplants. I did, and you can’t tell.

223. VZX - December 14, 2011

216: Yeah, I’m excited about the Higgs, we will see if it really helps us nail down TOE or GUT.

224. Buzz Cagney - December 14, 2011

I never said it mattered, Chris. His money, his choice, if indeed he has had it done. Plus i do understand that actors do have the pressure of maintaining an image. I mean Bill’s hair never worried me, and that seems to have a mind all of its own! ;)) If i got up in the morning not really sure where on my head my hair was going to be that day i think i’d find it quite exciting. ;D

Have you had the call yet for the new movie, Chris? I delighted in telling people ‘thats the real Scotty’s son there’ last time out. :))

225. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 14, 2011

Re #222

Bob Orci – Have you finished the script yet?
Hang on, I did ask you that before. I wondered how the third draft was going and if the drafts had been giving you cold chills. I never got an answer.

Why don’t you answer my questions? Don’t you like my questions, is that it?…:-(

226. Tony Whitehead - December 14, 2011

I just hope that JJ calms down on the camera movement while shooting the pic. In 3D, the Big E’s not going to be the only thing that needs seatbelts. . .so will the audience.

Otherwise, I’ve got a lot of confidence in the production team.

227. Damian - December 14, 2011

226–I wouldn’t take Bob Orci not responding to you personally. He rarely seems to respond to questions about the next movie or plot. There’s tons of people he has not responded to here, myself included. First of all, he can’t (unless he quit his job and responded to posts all day). Second, he has to be careful. I remember another board he accidently capatilized a C in Con and everyone thought he was feeding a Khan hint. He misspells or uses wrong grammar, everyone thinks there is some ulterior motive.

228. VZX - December 14, 2011

@207: Yeah, I like technobabble a lot, I love it when things are explained, but only when it explains it in a plausible way. I know some critics (and even the actors) complained about the heavy-use of technobabble in TNG, but I greatly enjoyed it. Screw the haters. I don’t care if it has nothing to do with the story, I want to know how a phaser works!

But, then, when the tenchobabble is just plain wrong (like stating Saturn’s rings has “magnetic distortion”), it draws me out of the movie. But, like you, this is why I am more of a fan of Star Trek than Star Wars. Even Roddenberry made attempts to have his show based on real science. It is plainly, smack-you-in-the-head obvious that Orci does the same. Orci really does his homework to make sure the science is right, within the confines of the story. I don’t think Lucas cares.

229. nano - December 14, 2011

Hi Bob, I have a ?
Do you kill off a main character say Chris Pine is just simply doesn’t like the story, script or part etc… just curious how it’s handled? Does JJ have thugs for such situations. How often does it occur if any, thanks.

230. Harry Ballz - December 14, 2011


Bob, only jerks point out quirks!

231. nano - December 14, 2011

Crap! Need not answer if I can’t type it correctly, sorry…

232. Damian - December 14, 2011

229–That’s the key difference between Star Wars (fantasy) vs Star Trek (sci-fi). Star Trek has always used some experts in their stories to at least try to make things sound plausible.

I always liked when Rick Sternbach would get online and explain how something like the warp engines work. He makes me feel like I can go out to my garage and build a warp engine:)

233. Harry Ballz - December 14, 2011

211.Chris Doohan “The theory of everything depends on positive and negative density”

Chris, is that why some people are more dense than others? :>)

234. AJ - December 14, 2011

Bob, I think nano is asking if say, a main actor, say Chris Pine, doesn’t like the story, script, or his part, does JJ hire thugs to kill him? How do you handle that situation? ;-)

235. AJ - December 14, 2011


Harry, as a Transporter Technician, Mr. Doohan is obsessed with dense people, I mean the density of people.

George McFly: “You are my density.”

236. Harry Ballz - December 14, 2011

I just hope they don’t make it the Talosians simply because of the popularity for the movie Inception (a highly OVERRATED film, by the way).

237. Harry Ballz - December 14, 2011


Whoa, heavy, AJ!

238. NuFan - December 14, 2011



239. Daoud - December 14, 2011

Bob, from both my undergraduate and graduate background in physics, and teaching physics and math for about 20 years…. you’ve got it all right, and I’ve got no complaints! It is science *fiction* after all…. you set forth a fictional scientific principle or two, and then try to maintain it throughout the work. Red matter is your spindizzy, and that’s okay.
VZX, if you could travel back in time as suggested, there’s one small problem. QM suggests you’ll never travel back to YOUR exact universe with all “settings” exactly the same. You’ll create a “1985A”! :) So sure, you can kill yourself, but that just means 1985A you will never go back in time to kill you in 1985B.
Oh well, back to looking for false god particles. :)

240. AJ - December 14, 2011


“There’s that word again; “heavy”. Why are things so heavy in the future? Is there a problem with the earth’s gravitational pull? “

241. Alex Rosenzweig - December 14, 2011

BTW, for a very interesting pair of treatises on Star Trek temporal physics, in the form of Trek novels, check out _Indistinguishable from Magic_ by David McIntee and _Watching the Clock_, by Christopher L. Bennett.

Between the two of them, they cover just about all the temporal oddities Trek ever came up with, including such questions as why time travel is treated one way in one episode and another way in a different episode.

242. dmduncan - December 14, 2011

Bob dispensing the scientific smackdown? Sweeet!

VZX, I hope you know your climate science better than that other stuff!

243. Aurore - December 14, 2011

“…track down’Praise and Blame.’ You will NOT be disappointed.”

Thank you for the recommendation*, and, thanks again for the link.

*Listening to “Lord Help” as I type….

244. boborci - December 14, 2011

Have finished third draft. No chills. Except for lots of chills.

245. boborci - December 14, 2011

230. Yeah, whoever doesn’t like the script is DEAD!!! DEAD!!!!

246. TrekMadeMeWonder - December 14, 2011

Don’t worry, Bob. It will be brilliant the first ten times we see it.

Just plan now to get a third out fast! ; )

247. Jack - December 14, 2011

Having just seen Pegg almost entirely serious for most of the latest mission impossible (well, as serious as he can get) – I’m hoping he stays a little animated as Mr. Scott (and it bugs me twhen characters other than Kirk, and even then it should only be very occasionally, calls him Scotty) in this next one.

Yep, he was a little goofy in mi4, but still pretty flat. Although, compared to Cruise he was Rip Taylor.

237. Insanely overrated. I still don’t get what’s so intelligent about it (everyone kept saying how smart it ws). Slick and well-crafted, yes, but…

I also hope they don’t put in backstory that falls flat (ie. we’re supposed to care about it and don’t) say like the stuff with Nero, or the various manufactured emotional connections (Hey, look, it’s Kerrie Russell!) in the third MI movie. Backstory can work beautifully (the cage, st Ii) but…. the was a bit of this in MI4, but it didn’t slow down the movie. Uch….

248. Daoud - December 14, 2011

245: What about *thrills*?

249. Dee - lvs moon' surface - December 14, 2011

#245. boborci…

Mr. Bob Orci Ok, now show the script to Simon Pegg as soon as possible, please … well maybe he has something to us … and if it does not kill him, please… LOL

:-) :-)

250. Daoud - December 14, 2011

Because I got chills, they’re multiplyin’.

251. AJ - December 14, 2011

Why hasn’t Simon Pegg come out and said “WOW! What a story! This one is gonna rip every fan a new arsehole, for sure!” Instead he says “What’s not to love?”?

I don’t know. The Engine Room? Spock/Uhura? Keenser is the main protagonist?

I guess it’s too early to get the adrenaline levels up.

252. dmduncan - December 14, 2011

251. AJ – December 14, 2011

Why hasn’t Simon Pegg come out and said “WOW! What a story!


That’s because they sent Pegg a dummy script wherein Scotty gets bent over a barrel by a Gorn. Saved by Keenser in the nick of time, but still….

253. VZX - December 14, 2011

@239: I was only suggesting that there are too many “holes” in wormhole theories for them to exist. But, like you said, they are fun concepts to use in sci-fi. And, I teach physics and math as well.

BTW: The the whole multi-universe thing is just based on probability of where an electron could be, may be, might not be, and is. I remember talking about it in my quantum 1 class, but it was just a fun thought exercise, nothing more. The “grandfather paradox” has existed for a long time to prohibit the possibilities of time travel as nature would not allow such a thing to exist.

254. VZX - December 14, 2011

@242: He didn’t smack nothing.

To tell the truth, I don’t like teaching climate. But I have to, since it’s part of the IB curriculum. I like the IB, but teaching world energy sources is a stupid waste of time when I would rather teach basic physics concepts like projectile motion, torque, and harmonics (they took all that out in favor of the climate unit!).

255. Phil - December 14, 2011

Was there ever an episode of Trek where they went forward in time?

256. NuFan - December 14, 2011

Is TrekMadeMeWonder schizophrenic? Or are there two different people using that name?

257. Bucky - December 14, 2011

Boborci, if you tell us who the villain is for the Star Trek sequel I promise I will go out and buy three copies of “The Island”. On Blu Ray. How’s that for a deal? I’ll keep my mouth shut, honest!

258. Hugh Hoyland - December 14, 2011

Bob I’m on my first draft, you must be feeling pretty good right now. ;]

259. Craiger - December 14, 2011

Bob, I have seen the script and I don’t like it. :)

260. richpit - December 14, 2011

I think the only logical choice for villain is”reimagined” Tribbles.

Now they’re carnivorous, with huge sharp teeth and they’re very angry about only being given quadrotriticale to eat.

261. spooky - December 14, 2011

260. I could totally get into that. :P

I don’t want to see Khan redux, or redux anything that was already seen and done before. As long as there are Andorians, Tholians, Gorn and such then I will be less finicky about the whole reboot.

262. Red Dead Ryan - December 14, 2011

I thought “Inception” was awesome. I don’t know why some feel it was overrated. It was highly acclaimed by audiences and critics alike, and made hundreds of millions of dollars worldwide.

That would be like saying how “The Matrix” sucks.

If you didn’t like “Inception”, that’s fine, but don’t call it overrated. It cleary wasn’t.

263. dmduncan - December 14, 2011

255. Phil – December 14, 2011

Was there ever an episode of Trek where they went forward in time?


Yes. Every episode where they didn’t go backward.

264. Harry Ballz - December 14, 2011

252. dmduncan “Scotty gets bent over a barrel by a Gorn”

Oh, gonna rip Scotty a new Gornhole, eh?

265. The Original Animated Next Generation Deep Space Voyager Enterprise I-XI - December 14, 2011

“245. boborci – December 14, 2011

230. Yeah, whoever doesn’t like the script is DEAD!!! DEAD!!!!”

By being hung by the neck?

266. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 14, 2011

#244 Bob Orci – Thank you. Glad to read that the third draft is done.

Now, Bob, don’t tell you are going to have my heroes holed up in some chilly, damp forest somewhere. It gives me the chills just thinking about it…:)

Does anyone know how I can get in touch with Chris “my captain” Pine to warn him that there is a crazed Hollywood producer/writer on the rampage who promised death to all who may not like his script. I need to warn my huggable Pine so that he does not put himself in any danger…

What if I don’t like your script? That could mean you coming downunder to deal unto the wretched keachick in person, but then, at least, we would finally get to have that little chat…:)

(BTW, the numbering of posts don’t match up to the names).

267. Harry Ballz - December 14, 2011

Yes, but do the curtains match the drapes? :>)

268. AJ - December 15, 2011

I guess Pine should’ve read the fine print in his 3-picture contract.

Now he’s dead.

269. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 15, 2011

#268 So, AJ, I guess what you are saying is that Bob Orci’s script sucks, because I trust that Chris Pine knows a good or a bad thing when he sees it. This is why I need to warn him so that he can prepare himself as any good actor does. This is because I would have thought that Chris might be good at pretending, you knowing – acting, so he does not give away his real impression of the script.

So, Bob, do you think there might be something in the script that CP might not like? Of course, I am not expecting an answer to this, but you never know…:)

270. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 15, 2011

Typos – “you knowing” is meant to read “you know”. Re: previous post – “Bob, don’t tell you” is meant to read “Bob, don’t tell me you…”

271. TrekMadeMeWonder - December 15, 2011

256. NuFan

No. I keep up on TM and no one has commandeered my TMMW name here.

Sorry if I go back and forth on ST09. Its still a slick looking movie. But, It still has many, many plot holes.

IMO, 7 out of 10 stars.

Now Spider-man 2, That was a GREAT movie. But, poor Sam Raimi, now there was a director that was slammed for trying to do the right thing.

I’d love to see Sam’s take on Trek.

272. TrekMadeMeWonder - December 15, 2011

Can’t be Khan alone. I’d be up for a whole cast of TOS villians. I’ve been dreaming for years now of a Prime Spock cleaning up Federation space with the new crew.
Just take all best plots from season 1 and weave them into a fast action-packed storyline.

My Star Trek II dream movie.

The Enterprise goes on a “Journey to Babel” and ends up “Where No Man Has Gone Before.” On board the Enterprise is “The Conscience of the King” while the “The Naked Time” has the crew in its grips as Kirk battles “The Enemy Within” along the way The E needs refueling and we learn “What Are Little Girls Made Of” then they rendezvous with a “Space Seed” and Khan escapes onboard the E.

An overwhelmed Kirk and company try to complete all the tasks the Prime Spock has appointed them while the half-crazed crew almost mutinies.

Khan and Gary Mitchell end up with the God powers. Khan kills Prime Spock and Kirk has to kill Khan and Gary both at the same time.

The End.

273. Anthony Thompson - December 15, 2011

256. NuFan

I’ve wondered the same thing. He wrote something really offensive about Bob Orci here a couple of weeks ago. I thought he would be banned for it. But most times he seems pretty reasonable.

274. Aurore - December 15, 2011

“I agree with another poster that it’s dangerous to assume just because they are looking for a Latino actor translates to Khan. I hope it’s not because it was already perfectly executed, therefor unnecessary to redo.”

Some argue that Star Trek II : The Wrath of Khan, cannot be topped.
I tend to disagree with that view ; besting the original movie is possible.
I think that Mr. Abrams would be perfectly capable of delivering a good movie with Khan Noonien Singh as the *main villain*.

However, I am also of the opinion that there would be no challenge in such an endeavour ; there already was a Khan movie, many years ago.
Did he reboot the franchise to direct his own versions of other Star Trek movies?

If such is the case, what is to be expected next? The Search for “NewSpock”? I hope not.

As a man that I believe to be ambitious, I’m convinced that he is not interested in revisiting that character (Khan) . In my opinion, he wants to tell his own stories within the Star Trek universe.

275. VZX - December 15, 2011

I still don’t want to see Khan, but I trust the filmakers. Orci is passionate about Trek, and Abrams is a slick and skilled director. Whether the villain is Khan, Kor, or Keeky the Jungle Bunny, I know they’ll make it awesome no matter what.

276. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 15, 2011

@ Bob Orci and anyone else with an interest – Here is the TV3 Current Affairs programme Campbell Live doing an interview with Roy Kerr, NZ mathematician and physicist, and his wife.

277. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 15, 2011

#275 Yes, please, make it Keeky the Jungle Bunny, but as a villain? No, bunnies are nice, just so long as you don’t get into a “conversation” with those hind feet!

278. AJ - December 15, 2011


We’ve seen the Khan arc go up, and then come down to the end. We’ve seen it done by a master thespian, who truly ate up all the scenery in the process while throwing the word “typecasting” into the trash forever.

I imagine Montalban was quite intrigued to get a phonecall in 1981 to return to a one-off TV series role he’d done in 1966. And he just nails it. To the floor.

As a fan, I don’t need to re-visit Khan. His book has been opened and closed satisfactorily, which is something one rarely sees in pop celluloid Sci-Fi. Look at the disaster of Darth Vader.

279. MONGO - December 15, 2011

Mongo say villain is Mugatu. He bear resemblance to Mongo. Mongo tell Bob Orci mans about somebody who could play part. And maybe not need too much make-up.

Mongo want Scotty to be more strong character, less jokey. James Doohan mans make you believe that he could command starship. No problem. Mongo want Pegg to be like that. In TOS Scotty had wit but not be jokey all times.

Mongo say “hi Bob Orci mans”. You need help writing you just ask Mongo.

280. CardassiaPrimera - December 15, 2011

Not is Star Trek 2, is Star Trek XII o Star Trek something.

281. captain_neill - December 15, 2011

All I can say is if he redoes Khan, the little faith I have in Abrams will have totally evaporated.

I want Abrams to prove me wrong about him with Star Trek XII. I want to see that he has talent and prove to me that he is not a hack who has no original ideas.

282. Phil - December 15, 2011

@277. Bunnies are villians – I submit Monty Python and the Holy Grail as evidence…..

283. Phil - December 15, 2011

@266. On to the fourth draft……

284. Anthony Thompson - December 15, 2011

274. Aurore

It is “Space Seed” which would need to be topped, not “Wrath of Khan”. Because without the original story, the followup story has no meaning. Which is why introducing Khan into the reboot series at all is problematic: the arc of the Khan story took 15 years to complete. The reboot of Trek is not likely to last nearly that long.

285. TrekMadeMeWonder - December 15, 2011

273. Anthony

What ever that means??!!

286. Red Dead Ryan - December 15, 2011


Even if it’s about Khan, you’ll still be one of the first in line to see it, despite your claim otherwise.

287. Harry Ballz - December 15, 2011

#244. boborci “Have finished third draft”

Let me guess…every time you walk into your office to do a little writing, you look around and proclaim, “I feel a draft in here!”

288. boborci - December 15, 2011

281. If you dont like the ideas, you can blame us.

289. TrekMadeMeWonder - December 15, 2011

Mmmmm. Nice hint, Bob! So, I take from that, that we will be seeing some old TOS storylines AND some fresh new ideas – like Khan and Gary Mitchell getting the God power! It would be a fun twist to have Gary play the “Elizabeth Dehner” role.

Seriously though, I was just spitballin’ up above in Post 272 with “My Star Trek II dream movie.” But, I’d really love to see that type of mix in the new flick.

290. TrekMadeMeWonder - December 15, 2011

I personally would be siked to see Khan and Kirk meet at “Where no man has gone before.” At the edge of the Galaxy where Humans gain the Gods powers.

It would make sense for Khan to be after THAT power. At least once he somehow learns of it.

Kinda like his fascination with another of Star Trek’s Genesess.

291. AJ - December 15, 2011


Are you, Alex and Damon capable of bringing a story like “Errand of Mercy” to film? Where the ‘big battle’ is canceled? And the moral of the story is clear? No war?

What about “A Taste of Armageddon,” where the money-shot of mass destruction is replaced by diplomatic negotiations to end a centuries-long war?

I think many old-line Trekkers wonder if your team is capable of understanding that Star Trek is about, as they say, Peace on Earth, and Good Will toward Men.

ST09 is questionable, as Spock decided he wanted revenge, and he sure got it. Doesn’t sit well with lots of Trekkers who pay attention,

292. Red Dead Ryan - December 15, 2011

No one is going to pay $12 to sit in the theatre for two hours watching two sides talk it over. Peace and diplomacy are better left for the small screen. Action and conflict are what sells, and the writers know that.

293. boborci - December 15, 2011

291. Trek 09 was a bush vs Obama paradigm.

294. boborci - December 15, 2011

Parable is a better word.

295. Harry Ballz - December 16, 2011

Bush was bush league.

296. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 16, 2011

Re: Video about Roy Kerr – it seems it was about the fact that light may not go at one constant speed but may vary in speed, including possibly being able to go faster than what Einstein thought it could. However, he is the same man who came up with the theory of being able to traverse a certain type of black hole, one which spins.

Sorry about that. Anyway, I hope people were able to see the item and enjoyed watching it.

I was busy at the time – only just caught the fact that it was on. Campbell Live plays weeknights between 7.00-7.30pm.

297. captain_neill - December 16, 2011


They can mix action in with the Star Trek ideals.

298. Aurore - December 16, 2011


I think I see your point , Anthony.

Nevertheless, it seems to me that, even in such case, topping the original material would be feasible from the “( writing ) team” which brought back Kirk and Spock despite the fact that it was thought to be impossible (by some).

It’s doable, I believe, but …..ya know….how about some NEW stuff ?

On different occasions, I have read comments stating that since Kirk, Spock etc…had been successfully reintroduced today, the same could occur with Khan.

That’s a fair enough argument.

Except that, as far as I’m concerned, Khan is just one villain amongst many ( already known within the Star Trek “canon”, and/or, why not, to be created ) other villains.

When I fell in love with The Original Series, in the eighties, it wasn’t due specifically to his presence in the Star Trek world….

Therefore, and, although he is a great vilIain, if he were to be absent from the sequel , I would not miss him.

299. VZX - December 16, 2011

298: Yeah, new villains like Keeky the Jungle Bunny.

Sorry, just half-joking. ;)

300. Aurore - December 16, 2011

“Yeah, new villains like Keeky the Jungle Bunny.”

Yesterday, when you referred to it, I googled it… and found… NOTHING!!!

So, enough with the half-joking already!


301. Shaun - December 16, 2011


” Trek 09 was a bush vs Obama (parable).”

with the realization that president obama is the same as president bush…considering his willingness to indefinitely detain u.s. citizens, and his failure to fulfill his promise to close guantanamo bay, will this new film examine how politicians will say anything to get elected?

302. VZX - December 16, 2011


Look again!

Oh yeah, Keeky!

303. Aurore - December 16, 2011

“Oh yeah, Keeky!”

Allow me to say it.

You are crazy.
And, believe me ; I know crazy.

304. VZX - December 16, 2011

304: I teach in a public school. I think that explains it.

305. Cap'n Chris - December 16, 2011

No way do Orci and Kurtzman have enough creative juices in them to do an original story. This will use a crutch from the past and I wouldn’t put it past them to use Khan. It wouldn’t be the first time they have used the “bait and switch” tactic (LOST).

306. Aurore - December 16, 2011


to be created = yet to be created

307. Anthony Thompson - December 16, 2011


Are you talking to yourself? : )

308. Anthony Thompson - December 16, 2011

301. Shaun

Politics are not welcome on this board.

309. Phil - December 16, 2011

@308. Not sure that Shaun was getting political here….

310. VZX - December 16, 2011

308: Uhhh, no? I was trying to respond to Aurore.

Oh, I get it. Crazy.

311. boborci - December 16, 2011

305. Alex and i had nothing to do with Lost, so all of your opinions are now suspect your faulty facts.

312. captain_neill - December 16, 2011

I like action and all in Trek but there has to that Trek twist at the end. Like AJ pointed out where the war was averted. Or in Arena when Kirk chooses not to kill the Gorn when he had the opportunity, these are the things that are part of what makes it Trek.

Just don’t forget Trek when you are thinking about that mainstream audience who has never seen Trek before.

313. Alex Rosenzweig - December 16, 2011

#311 – Yeah, but to be fair, Bob, you spent a lot of time on “Star Trek” (2009) leading us to believe–without ever quite saying it ;) –that you were really doing an “origin story” for ST:TOS. And, of course, that wasn’t what you were doing at all.

(Y’know, all that stuff about how to reconcile conflicting canonical datapoints from early TOS, leading to the “Supreme Court’ monicker, etc. ;) )

So while a linkage of you and Alex to “bait and switch” tactics on “Lost” might be dubious, a linkage to such tactics on “Star Trek” really isn’t.

I’ll admit it, you had me snookered for a long time, though to be fair, it was probably because that was what I wanted to hear, and “restart/reboot/reimagining” was absolutely not (those three words being equivalent, in my Hollywood lexicon, to “fail”). But I’ve taken my lessons learned, and won’t be so trusting again.

So, while there’s little chance that this “alternate universe” will ever make me care the way I care about Trek’s “prime” universe ( I won’t say “no chance”, because there are always possibilities :) ), I guess all I can really ask is, “Please, at least give me a movie that doesn’t kick me out of the story every 20 minutes or so with moments that were so screwy that they blew away my suspension of disbelief, like last time.” It may be asking too much to bring Trek back to its original universe, but I figure I can at least ask for a solid story, right? Is that fair? :)

314. - December 16, 2011


Pure gold.

315. - December 16, 2011

Will Simon Pegg fit in a round hole?

316. AJ - December 16, 2011

The ‘Bush vs. Obama’ parable intrigues me as an insight into that moment in ST09 when Kirk offers rescue, yet Spock opts for revenge.

It certainly makes for much better cinema to see the Narada + Nero swallowed up by the black hole than to have him escorted in cuffs to the brig.

So, I assume, in this case, Spock is Bush (makes decisions from the gut), and Kirk is Obama (Do what is, theoretically, the right thing, but knowing Nero will choose suicide).

Now, how does that relate to the ‘Lennon/McCartney’ vibe, Bob, that you & Alex mentioned was an inspiration for the Kirk/Spock relationship in the last film? Were they as diametrically opposed as partners as Bush and Obama would have been if they had to work together?

Oh. This is a Scotty thread. Give him command, and some bad-ass lines. “You humans make a brave noise…”

317. boborci - December 16, 2011

313. It was an origin story as well, in my view. Who is to say that Kirk and Spock did not meet the same way in both universes?

318. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 16, 2011

#302 So Keeky is the reason that Spock will be doing a lot of running in the next movie. She(?) looks “real scary”…:) Perhaps her *villainy* might come about because of her awesome reproductive capabilities…or not.

I met a breeder who bred California rabbits which is where I got my male bunny (dec. July 2010). He commented, “If only they would ‘breed like rabbits'”. Fussy, picky are the bunnies apparently and when you want certain parts of the male and female anatomy to join together…Nah, and when you really don’t want anymore wee bunnies, things happen… Oh, and the breeder said you take the female to the male, because if you do it the other way, it is more than likely she will give the poor lad a seriously bad hiding for intruding on her territory…

Now, where were we?

319. VZX - December 16, 2011

314: I liked it. Science faux pas and all.

So did many others:

I don’t get how your “bait and switch” concept applies to that movie. It is what it was advertised to be: an awesome space adventure movie. Whatevs. To each his own, I guess.

320. Anthony Thompson - December 16, 2011

285. TrekMadeMeWonder

“What ever that means??!!”
Let me help to refresh your memory. You’ve already stated above that you monitor TrekMovie closely and that your ID hasn’t been highjacked. So please explain your behavior here on these two occassions:

“screw you orci”, which was comment 133 on the “Viacom CEO..” article dated 11/14.

“Uhura is turning out to be a Ho”, which was comment 135 on the “JJ Abrams: Star Trek sequel…” article dated 11/23.

321. Harry Ballz - December 16, 2011

#311 boborci “Alex and I had nothing to do with Lost…your faulty facts”
Bob, are you telling the guy that he doesn’t get Lost, or to get lost? :>)

322. dmduncan - December 16, 2011

303. Aurore – December 16, 2011

And, believe me ; I know crazy.


I believe!

323. Garak - December 16, 2011


When will we have some official news about the movie? Something about the story.
You don´t give us any hint this year.

324. Garak - December 16, 2011

Mr. Orci
Won´t you give us any hint about Star Trek prequel this year ?

325. Dee - lvs moon' surface - December 16, 2011

318. Hey Keachick…

Happy Birthday… in NZ!!!… I guess… :-) :-)

326. Aurore - December 16, 2011

322. dmduncan – December 16, 2011
303. Aurore – December 16, 2011
And, believe me ; I know crazy.
I believe!

Thank you for your support, dmduncan.
I appreciate it.


327. Dee - lvs moon' surface - December 16, 2011

Mr. Bob Orci, can you tell us something about WTP? … still no definition on the release date?…

:-) :-)

328. Damian - December 16, 2011

317–The one thing I liked about Star Trek (2009) was that it was a prequel, sequel and reboot all tied up in one. That was the beauty of it. I liked the fact that it did not do what so many reboots due, it didn’t pretend the last 40+ years of Star Trek never happened. All of it happened in your story and all that was necessary for your story to exist (hence the sequel). It also was a prequel in the sense that it gave us some insights into the character’s early lives. Maybe things did not happen exactly the way they were supposed to in the “prime” universe, but they are still the same people at their core. Some of what happened likely happened in either case. And of course the reboot idea, a chance for fresh stories involving the original series.

Sure, the Star Trek fan in me would have loved to see an origin story in the “prime” universe with the original sets and ship design (a la “In A Mirror, Darkly), however, movies have to appeal to a wider demographic, so you have to balance satisfying the Trekkies with the general public. I thought they did a good job at that. The fact that this new “alternate” universe was created from the prime universe tells me they have enough respect for Star Trek and for the fans.

329. MONGO - December 16, 2011

Mongo think there room in story for large hairy animal/man in movie.

Maybe as antagonist.
Could be protagonist.

Mongo like AJ mans thoughts on Trek story. War, fighting, death can be avoided. Man aspire to higher purpose. Rise above baser instinct.

Like what Gene Roddenberry mans envision for Star Trek story. It be Human Story. Our place in galaxy and Universe.

330. VZX - December 16, 2011


Definition of release date: Date when a product, press release or news story will be released to the public.

You don’t need Bob Orci to tell you that….

(tongue is in cheek)

331. Daoud - December 16, 2011

Bob, at 317, you point out that Kirk and Spock may have met under similar circumstances…. I think you have that argument in your favor, because in the prime universe, we know that Kirk entered the academy at 17, and Spock was probably a class or two ahead (in order to make Lieutenant under Pike by the time of Menagerie.)

The same Kobayashi Maru situation could have played out, and instead of being the alt universe training Lieutenant Spock, he’d have been an upperclass Cadet Spock with this great new programming idea, completely blown away by that walking stack of books prime Kirk.

Also, perhaps a Spock classmate was a fellow named Finnegan, who picked on said prime Kirk so much it drove him to destroy Spock and Finnegan with his solution to the KM.

Ahah! Where the heck is Finnegan in this alt universe?

332. Daoud - December 16, 2011

The Finnegan Divergence!

333. TrekMadeMeWonder - December 16, 2011

320 Anthony

133. trekmademewonder – November 15, 2011
screw you orci

You can plainly see that the above quote was not MY TrekMovie handle.

Mine is always TrekMadeMeWonder in initial caps. and Unbolded (for some reason I have not figured out, perhaps its plain because I always seem to be one step from being kicked out of here). I would certainly like to be as bold as you! : )

However the “Uhura is turning out to be a Ho” comment was mine. And I stand by it. C’mon. She’s been with pimped out to Kirk (albeit a forced kiss), she’s approached Scotty in the past (or at least in an alternate future), I’ve seen her try to get it on in a turbolift (with Spock) and hall way (with a Salt Vampire) and then there is this quote here…

Pretty much sums up Zoe’s approach. But hey she’s young and sexy.

So. I think that I am owed an apology on this issue of me, TrekMadeMeWonder, deserving to be kicked out of here, or that I am two-faced, or whatever negative was applied.

Hey, like my title says, Trek Made Me Wonder. It’s what it does best.

And why no replies about my idea of “Space Seed” meets “Where No Man Has Gone before? Sounds like magic to me, (it gave me chills thinking about it). It certainly provides more time for comparisons between Khan and Kirk. I think the Khan/Kirk comparison is very relevant for the ne movie.

334. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 16, 2011

#327 Dee’s post. Hi there, Dee.

Bob said he was doing something with tea leaves(?) in determining when to release Welcome to People. I realised that I should not write stuff to Bob like “Don’t tell me…” because then he can legitimately say, “OK, I won’t tell you then…”

Please, let it be soon.

Two months from the release of This Means War – YES! It gets released here on 16 February, instead of 17 February 2012. The other cool aspect of this is that the Star Trek sequel will be released on 16 May 2013, not 17 May. Read it and weep! HeHeHe…;) I will be *** years and one day off two months old when TMW comes out and *** years and one day off five months when “ST: Our Fine Pine Captain” gets released…(see goofy puffle face here)!

Any news about whether either Edgar Ramirez or Jordi Molla have been cast to play the bad boy. Surely the bad boy you have written into the Star Trek sequel can’t be that good or that bad, that one of these guys can’t sign on the dotted line…?

* If I seem a little “out there” today, it is because it is now Saturday, 17 December, which means it is my birthday and I can be as daft as I want… can smell my chocolate cake baking – yum.

335. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 16, 2011

#333 – “However the “Uhura is turning out to be a Ho” comment was mine. And I stand by it. C’mon. She’s been with pimped out to Kirk (albeit a forced kiss), she’s approached Scotty in the past (or at least in an alternate future), I’ve seen her try to get it on in a turbolift (with Spock) and hall way (with a Salt Vampire) and then there is this quote here…”

My understanding is that “ho” is short for whore or prostitute. How does any of this make Lt Uhura a prostitute or anything akin to that?

*Forcing someone to kiss another (it was forced on both Kirk and Uhura) is a violation against those two people, however that does not make either of them ho’s/whores/prostitutes (Plato’s Stepchildren episode from TOS?).

*Lt Uhura expressed appreciation and affection for Scotty and provided him with “lunch” while he was busy fixing up the problems with the Enterprise (Star Trek V). How is that “ho” behaviour?

* Lt Uhura gave Spock affection and comfort at a truly desperate time for him. As I and another woman expressed it on another site, we would not have expected anything less from a close male friend/lover if we had been in Spock’s position. How is her chastely kissing and holding him turn her into a ho? Answer – it DOESN’T!

* Didn’t the salt vampire appear to be a male crew member that Lt Uhura knew and liked? (I don’t have a video recording of that episode).

* Re: Zoe Saldana’s quote – Are you kidding me? How on earth does what she said make her a ho? I guess I must be a ho as well, because I totally agreed with what she said. Sex is not something we should feel ashamed of and I am damned if I am going to stay silent while someone like you, TrekMadeMeWonder, craps on the positive and healthy honesty of Zoe Saldana’s statement or anyone else’s for that matter.

336. TrekMadeMeWonder - December 16, 2011

Oh please.

I apologize for the “Ho” comment already if it makes you feel better as a Trekkie. Even though it was made in jest.

But wait, don’t leave out all of Zoe’s apparent quote. She was reported to have said that “She also indicated that she is open to doing a graphic sex scene.” (?!)

Sorry, but I come from a xristian fundelmentalist background. I thought anyone having sex outside marriage was to be considered a “ho.”
Also remember, Uhura did give that provocative fan dance in ST VI.
Sorry again, to be mixing reality with ST fantasy, but haveing a graphic sex scene onscreen does seem to make you a ho IMO. Deal with it, Keachick.

337. Jack - December 16, 2011

336. What does a sex scene have to do with reality?

Only Mongo makes sense here. I kind of want to marry him. No offense, Mongo.

338. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 16, 2011

Meaning of a Ho – “Top answer: ask the girl on the corner of the street waiting for a car with a married man in it to pick her up and go for a drive and get paid for it.” ie a prostitute.

You did not make that “ho” comment in jest. You made the comment a while ago, you repeated it here and said you stood by it. If this is jest, then you have a very peculiar sense of humour, not one I am familiar with nor want to be.

Neither I or Zoe Saldana fit into that category, nor ever would. You deal with that, you rude so-n-so. Not everybody comes from a Christian fundamentalist background, thank God for that, and they do not see sex and sexuality in such narrow rigid terms. Stop demeaning people’s feelings, behaviours and moral compass just because they do not completely concur with your notion of what goes for right and wrong.

Zoe Saldana did not elaborate on the context of the graphic sex scene that she said she would be happy to do. How do you know it may not be in the context of a marriage, in accordance with your own doctrine? It might even be in the context of a Spock/Uhura marriage. BTW, the characters are doing it for real, but the actors are not, especially if/when it comes to anything we might see of a Saldana/Quinto liaison. Now, who is really the one mixing reality with ST “fantasy”?

Using the words “ho” and “whore” is slang. It is derogatory and demeaning and often an inaccurate description of a person and their general behaviour and attitude. It is simply slagging off people – UGH!

339. Aurore - December 16, 2011

334. Rosemary.

Happy Birthday to you !

340. Phil - December 16, 2011

@ TrekMadeMeWonder…no worries, I had the audacity to suggest that graphic sexuality might not be age appropiate for a PG or PG13 Trek audience, and that got me a tongue lashing from the lady in NZ, too. I know some folks don’t have issues leaving their bedroom doors open to teach their kids about the birds and the bees, what they do in their own homes is their business – it still irritates me, though, when people who consider themselves progressive scream to high heaven about the virtues of tolerance, until you disagree with them about something. Tolerance tends to be a one way street – when you agree with them, you are a wonderful individual, when you don’t, you are a knuckle scraping idiot. For the record, if ZS wants to do a hard core sex scene, I’m sure she will get her chance, and it’s her choice. Trek probably isn’t the best vehicle for that, though….

341. NCM - December 16, 2011

293. boborci – December 15, 2011

“291. Trek 09 was a bush vs Obama paradigm.”

Really? I don’t get it. Anyone willing to give me more clues?

342. Phil - December 16, 2011

@341. It’s open for interptation, as other readers have pointed out. Paradign, losely defined, refers to a philosophical or theoretical framework of any kind. I did not vote for either man because both struck me as being empty suits, individuals who would be swept along the tide of current events. That aside, I suppose Bush understood the value and power or his position, though he tried he never mastered it. Obama, on the other hand, has never demonstrated that he has that knowledge, he comes across as a bit detached, as seeing the presidency as just another cool job. Kirk, probably is Bush – as Spock points out towards the end of the story, “I’d cite regulation, but you would ignore it”. Spock probably is Obama, comfortable in the confines of what he thinks his role is, and not willing to step outside of that. .

Anyway, that’s my opinion, and it’s open to adjustment with the introduction of new facts. Cheers….

343. Harry Ballz - December 16, 2011

If anyone is questioning the character ofTrekMadeMeWonder, I can personally vouch for him.

I’ve corresponded for years with TMMW. People call him a fat malicious little troll. I can tell you right now, he is NOT fat!

344. Shaun - December 16, 2011

#308: “Politics are not welcome on this board.”

that was not my intention. i was not getting anymore political than boborci is. he threw out a bit of information regarding the last film and its relation to former president bush and president obama. i was trying to take that further by asking if the current political climate (politicians who will say anything to be elected, and then maintain the status quo) has influenced the new story. he chose to ignore my question. no biggie. i just wanted to add to the conversation…and hopefully, get some information on the new film.

my apologies.

345. TrekMadeMeWonder - December 16, 2011

Trek probably isn’t the best vehicle for that, though….

That what I was thinking too, Phil.

Sorry again, Keachick, and Zoe too. I will refrain from using that slang, ever again.

346. TrekMadeMeWonder - December 16, 2011

Geez. This is the sorriest I’ve ever seen TM.

347. TrekMadeMeWonder - December 16, 2011

Very funny, Harry. As always.

348. NCM - December 16, 2011

336. TrekMadeMeWonder – December 16, 2011

“Sorry, but I come from a xristian fundelmentalist background. I thought anyone having sex outside marriage was to be considered a “ho.””

I guess the above statement’s a joke, too? Would a Christian Fundamentalist sacrifice “Christ” in “Christian”? I’ve read that many (ordinary) Christians object to “Xmas”; yet even heathens show respect by capitalizing the “X”.

By your accounting, TMMW, I’m fairly certain you’re cavorting with a disreputable bunch of HOs, here (or do men enjoy divine sexual favor?)
Damn it! I never even got paid!

349. Shaun - December 16, 2011

“(or do men enjoy divine sexual favor?)”

you’re thinking of a different religion there.

350. Harry Ballz - December 16, 2011


Oh, and you ain’t that little!

There, does that help? :>)

351. NCM - December 16, 2011

342. Phil – December 16, 2011

Well, thanks, Phil. I appreciate your attempt to explain it. Maybe you’re right, but somehow, I don’t think so. On the other hand, I’ve got nothin’… and that’s frustrating. I hate not even having enough of a clue to allow Trek to make me wonder, in this case.

BTW, TMMW. What is it you wonder about?:)

352. Phil - December 16, 2011

@345. I’d go so far as to suggest you have nothing to apologize for. If your world view suggests that some modesty is in order, there is nothing wrong with that. If others take issue, that’s their problem, not yours. That’s the joy of a free society – at least, in theory, everyone if free to choose their own course.

353. Phil - December 16, 2011

@351. Hey, I tried. Given that Mr. Orci has shared fairly freely here, (except for details on the upcoming movie, damn it!) I don’t think my thoughts on the topic are going to line up with his, either.

354. TrekMadeMeWonder - December 16, 2011

351. NCM
“BTW, TMMW. What is it you wonder about?:)”

All things Trek, of course.

Star Trek happened for me in the mid 70’s. I was in high school and a local station (WPXI) put Star Trek on the schedule starting at 3 am. Of course I had to watch every espisode and for a time I was getting 3 hours sleep a night – for months! Needless to say I was captivated by every aspect of the show.

As for the Wonder. The original series gave you just enough to keep you on the edge of your seat enjoying the sci-fi drama. But the impressive photgraphic effects kept things real. The way they filmed the original Enterpise and the angles they chose made it very easy for me to actually believe that the (Star Trek) future is not so far away from the now. Especially that one shot from way back on one of the the warp engines as the E speeds through space. And when the effects were poorly made it seemed like it was just a framework that left something for the imagination. There always seemed to be a margin there that your mind would need to fill in. And like a good book, it’s best when you can visualize the tale in your own mind’s eye. That added to the wonder factor too.

And now, low and behold, I have lived a life where most parts of the science and technology depicted in the show (see latest TM article on Majel) have already made it into our real lifes – mostly because so many other enjoyed the show and aspired to “make it happen.”

I think that is some of the “wonder” that we all share with Star Trek, but one that I was enraptured by at an early and impressionable age.

355. Aurore - December 16, 2011

333&336. TrekMadeMeWonder.

“But wait, don’t leave out all of Zoe’s apparent quote. She was reported to have said that “She also indicated that she is open to doing a graphic sex scene.” (?!)”

Your link led to a comment on Zoë Saldaña’s quote not to the actual quote.

Apparently, as an actress, she once was asked whether she would be willing to do a sex scene in a movie. Here is what she appears to have answered:

“If you asked a painter, ‘Are you going to paint in red?’ the answer would be, ‘I’m going to paint paintings and if one day there is red in it, there’s red in it’.”

She wasn’t referring to any “graphic sex scene” in the next Star Trek, from what I understood.

356. NCM - December 16, 2011

@355 – Cool. And now, you’ve got me wondering…

I wonder just how many Trekkies got on board as adolescents. I wonder if anyone’s done any serious market research on Trek.

Come to think of it, nearly everyone I know… and more specifically, almost every woman I know who’s a Trekkie fell in love with the show at age 11 or 12. I’m not sure I know anyone who got hooked as an adult. If this anecdotal experience isn’t anomalous, I wonder if it speaks to the future of Trek — as in, ‘Reel ’em in before high school or find that the ship has sailed!”

357. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 16, 2011

“I know some folks don’t have issues leaving their bedroom doors open to teach their kids about the birds and the bees, what they do in their own homes is their business”

It is just this kind of statement or reasoning that gets a tongue-lashing as you call it. What a presumptuous and stupid statement. And btw, what folks are those that you know of who leave their bedroom doors open to teach their kids about sex, because I do not know any of them? Come to think about it, I have wondered how couples living with several children in one room in some very poor ghetto in one of those big cities get on when it comes to nuptials. I guess they must do it outside, so that the kids can’t see or hear…

358. Phil - December 16, 2011

@356. I was a teen ager. A buddy, his grandfather did his bedroom as the bridge. Told me it was the greatest show ever, and when to watch. Caught a few episodes of TOS, and was hooked. This was probably back in the mid 70’s….

359. Phil - December 16, 2011

@357. Regardless. You just proved my point.

360. NCM - December 16, 2011


1976 for me. I was 11, and I’d crouch by the 12″ B&W, hand on the dial so that if my mom came in, I could feign channel scanning (not what we called it with 3-4 channels:). She’d heard from other moms that Nimoy wore blue eye shadow – Not Good: She was raising 3 boys (+3 girls). She also had issues with the Bridge integration. Gotta hand it to her, though, she’s 86 and while her eyesight’s failing, her world view keeps expanding.

361. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 16, 2011

“Sorry, but I come from a xristian fundelmentalist background. I thought anyone having sex outside marriage was to be considered a “ho.””

Since you were the one to bring up religion as a reason for your objections and unsavoury comments about Uhura/Saldana, let’s just look at that, shall we?

My understanding is that those referring to themselves as Christian fundamentalists are usually from a Protestant church background, although I have just read that the word “Protestant” is a bit outdated. However, what marks a big difference between two major Christian groups is their understanding and acceptance of sacraments. As a fundamentalist Christian, I take it that you do not see marriage as a sacrament as opposed to somebody adhering to a Catholic Christian understanding. Am I correct in my assessment?

Catholics believe in seven sacraments, whereas only two of the seven are accepted by most other Christian denominations, baptism and communion. The sacraments which were not considered relevant/especially sacred anymore were confirmation, penance/reconciliation, anointing of the sick, holy orders and wait for it, MARRIAGE (15th and 16th centuries).

In other words, according to a non-Catholic Christian viewpoint, there is nothing that special conferred on a couple when they marry, other than it being solely of their own belief and choice. So what is it that makes a married couple’s sexual relationship better, more moral, more holy, more anything than an unmarried couple’s sexual relationship, in terms of Protestant/fundamentalist Christian doctrine?

I am not saying who is right or who is wrong, but I do find it strange that so many Christian fundamentalists get their panties in a knot over sex outside marriage, when it was their forefathers who did not see marriage and the sex that goes with it as necessarily of any more valid or sacred than any other activity. It was a merely a social/legal contract between a male and female which could receive the blessing of a religious celebrant.

At least that is my understanding. For that reason, I find the objections and name-calling unreasonable. Your sarcasm does not sit well with me either, TrekMadeMeWonder.

362. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 16, 2011

Phil – did I prove your point or did someone else? I see my post in response to yours about leaving bedroom doors open so kids could learn about the birds and bees as being post number #357. If so, what point of yours did I prove?

Names and post numbers do not match. Unfortunately, the curtains don’t match the drapes…:).

363. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 16, 2011

Thank you, Aurore, for your birthday wish to me.

364. dmduncan - December 16, 2011

343. Harry Ballz – December 16, 2011


365. dmduncan - December 16, 2011

363. Keachick – rose pinenut – December 16, 2011

It’s your birthday? Happy birthday YOU!

366. NCM - December 16, 2011

Happy Birthday, Keachick – celebrated with ice cream and cake?

367. Harry Ballz - December 16, 2011


Thanks, dmduncan! Yes, I find the “old jokes” can be a source of pure gold!

368. dmduncan - December 16, 2011

367. Harry Ballz – December 16, 2011

Aye! That’s why they live on.

All that’s old is new again…aftuh a short time of fuhgettin’.

369. Harry Ballz - December 16, 2011

Hey, with the way Hollywood writers like to recycle old TV shows, and with them filming in Hawaii, I figure the next movie might be:

An old classmate of Kirk’s, driven mad by how fast Kirk was promoted over him, lures the Enterprise to a plush tropical paradise planet, where, as the crew starts to enjoy shore leave on one of the planet’s loveliest islands, he starts to kill off crewmembers one by one. A fight to the death begins between the villain and “the skipper” of the Enterprise.

The title of this epic?

Star Trek: Finnegan’s Island


370. dmduncan - December 16, 2011

369. Harry Ballz – December 16, 2011

I thought you were going to do a Star Trek / Gilligan’s Island mashup where the Enterprise crashes on a plush tropical paradise planet and only the bridge crew plus Dr. McCoy survives. It then turns into a battle among 4 men over Uhura.

Kirk pulls rank and orders the 4 to walk off a cliff, leaving him her only option, because Spock is too busy trying to extract antimatter from coconuts to care.

371. Harry Ballz - December 16, 2011

So, if I understand, while the others act like lemmings to the slaughter and Spock is busy getting his “nuts” off, Kirk enjoys a nice fan dance?

372. TrekMadeMeWonder - December 17, 2011

It still freeks me that someone would use my title here to mock Bob O.
Any idea who that could have been, Harry?

Happy Birthday, Keachick!

373. Phil - December 17, 2011

@363….Happy birthday!

374. Phil - December 17, 2011

@362. Yep, it was all you…..

375. Hugh Hoyland - December 17, 2011

Happy B day Keachick. :]

376. Gary S. - December 17, 2011

Happy Birthday Keachick!
Dont forget to come back and give us a detailed report about the days festivities .

377. Phil - December 17, 2011

@372….your evil twin, Trek Made Me Wander, perchance?

378. Dee - lvs moon' surface - December 17, 2011


It is good to live in NZ and receive congratulations 2 times, right? … at least here …

Keachick, Happy birthday again … this time on this side of the planet …

:-) :-)

379. Harry Ballz - December 17, 2011


Uh, TMMW, I hope you’re not implying that I would do something like that.

There are two reasons I wouldn’t:

1. I’m not into malicious humour. Never have been.
2. That could lead to a permaban by Anthony, and not worth the risk.

380. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 17, 2011

Thanks, all. Not big affair, I’m afraid. Got the DVD Super 8 and the latest Il Divo CD Wicked Game and a huge Toblerone. I had the company of a very polite and attentive dog, watching me as I savoured every mouthful – she likes chocolate, especially Swiss chocolate, nothing but the best for our Shadow…:). With the gift of Il Divo, we just HAVE to get the car’s CD player fixed or replaced…more money…sigh. Ah well, needs must.

I gave myself a month’s subscription to a local council gym, while the usual (mostly free) exercise programmes take a break for the Christmas and Summer holidays. It’s almost summer now, although yesterday (Saturday, 17/12, proved totally the expression/reality of Auckland experiencing four seasons in one day. People tend to talk about the weather more here than I suspect they do up your way, depending on where you live in the US/Canada, of course. The daily question of “What shall I wear today?” is not such a silly question in these parts.

Anyway, gotta go. I need to answer that question above and soon (8.42am, Sunday, 18/12/11). Have a good one, people!

381. Harry Ballz - December 17, 2011


Uh, Keachick, you DO know it’s really bad to feed chocolate to a dog, don’t you?

382. f - December 17, 2011

ensign spyke!

383. Gary S. - December 17, 2011

Inded, it is A VERY BAD IDEA to give chocolate to a dog ,
I hope your dog is okay Keachick .

384. Phil - December 17, 2011


385. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 17, 2011

Yes, I know that it is not good to give chocolate to a dog. However, the fatal dose is 90grams for a small dog. She is a medium sized dog so the dose needed is greater. All she had, was what she could *lick off my fingers – not much at all. The bigger problem for dogs is as it is for people – tooth decay.

However, I have just found out a dog’s liver cannot deal with the toxic components contained in all chocolate the way our livers can and it can build up with each dose of chocolate until it reaches the fatal level and there is nothing a vet or anyone can do for the animal. The liver can eventually break down tiny amounts of chocolate though. The same applies to giving paracetamol to dogs, except that it does not take nearly as much paracetamol as chocolate to kill a dog. You can give some aspirin though to help with pain relief, short term.

* Healthy dog saliva is actually more hygienic than human saliva. It is the same for cats. Dogs will lick a pack mate’s wound in order to clean the wound, help prevent infection and aid the healing process. It is known to work on humans as well. Cats can behave in similar ways towards us and their own kind, but it is more a debriding of a wound, which is good if you can stand the cat’s rough tongue.

386. dmduncan - December 17, 2011

Chocolates, raisins, grapes, grape juice — there are a large number of people foods that dogs should not eat.

387. TrekMadeMeWonder - December 17, 2011

Just teasin’ your Harry Ballz.

388. Chris Doohan - December 17, 2011

I hope everyone has a happy Christmahanukwanzah

389. Harry Ballz - December 17, 2011


At least buy me dinner first! :>)

390. Harry Ballz - December 17, 2011


Chris, I still think it’s quite the distinction that you and Leonard Nimoy are the only two people to appear in both Star Trek:The Motion Picture and Star Trek (2009).

Pretty nice company you kick around with!

391. KL8N - December 17, 2011

All these comments about what they should remake from the old series. I’m sorry, I love the old episodes, but I don’t want to go spend $12 to see a remake of some old episode. I want a new story.

392. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 18, 2011

@Chris Doohan – I know that obviously your father was in Star Trek:The Motion Picture, but I was not aware that you appeared in it as well. You must have been quite young then. Is that true?

393. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 18, 2011

@ Bob Orci – a general question.

There is a discussion going on in our place as to what specifically constitutes an original screenplay for a film. Obviously movies like Harry Potter or LOTR are not, as they were originally found in book form. However, one view is that none of the Star Trek movies are original screenplays as they are based on a TV series. This also applies to any of the Mission Impossible and Transformers movies (also based on TV series) and a number of others, including the Batman and Superman films (comics).

My understanding is that all the Star Trek movies screenplays are original and that applies to the other movies mentioned as well.

What is an “original” screenplay? Would all the Star Trek movie screenplays be considered to be “adapted” screenplays?

394. Harry Ballz - December 18, 2011


Chris Doohan is in the crowd scene when the entire crew assembles on the hangar deck to have Kirk address them about V’Ger approaching Earth.

395. captain_neill - December 18, 2011


Right on. I thought the whole point of a parallel universe to was to not be tied down to canon.

396. Hugh Hoyland - December 18, 2011

#393 Keachick

Maybe Bob can chime in on this one. IMO any screenplay is an original no matter if its an adaptation or not. Different writers would make different stories.

397. boborci - December 18, 2011

All trek movies were adaptations.

398. Christopher Roberts - December 18, 2011

You know if Bruce Greenwood is unavailable for the sequel, they could always ask Ray Liotta to try out for Christopher Pike…

*runs away and hides*

399. Harry Ballz - December 18, 2011


Oh, I’m sure Greenwood can squeeze in the few days necessary to film his part!

400. Harry Ballz - December 18, 2011


Well, Bob, may I say then that you are quite adept at how you adapt Trek!

401. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 18, 2011

So I take it that if the script for this new movie were to be nominated for an Academy and/or Bafta Award (now there’s a cool thought/wish), it would go under the category of “Screenplay adaptation” as opposed to “Original Screenplay”.

I guess my own view was that, although the basic set up (Starfleet, UFP, the Enterprise, characters etc) is already known to people, the story written would be original, in that the particular events told had not happened before to the characters, therefore making it an original screenplay.

There is a British television series just recently screened here called Downton Abbey. The story starts off around the end of the 19th century and I believe is now taking place at the end of WW1. (I never watched it from the beginning – only caught a few episodes – typical fine British drama, it turns out…). As far as I know, there is no such place as Downton Abbey, nor has there been and the characters are all fictional. However, certain known historical events get mentioned, like who the King was, and of course, WW1. One or two of the characters fought in the war. I would have thought that this was an original story, even though it mentions actual events, shows fictional characters wearing the dress of the era and characters expressing beliefs and values known to be held among the majority of people living in that era of British history and so on.

Would this series also constitute an adaptation?

402. Gary S - December 18, 2011

#401 I would imagine it is an original work as long as it is not based on any previous source like a book TV show or film.
Right Bob?

403. AJ - December 18, 2011

I think basing an original work of fiction in a real historical context would not be considered ‘adapting’ if that work is a screenplay.

However, as Bob mentions, all ‘Star Trek’ films are, as written in the credits, “Based upon STAR TREK, created by Gene Roddenberry.” TNG, DS9, VOY and ENT are all adaptations as well. TOS is not, as it’s the one that started it all.

404. Christopher Roberts - December 18, 2011

I disagree with TNG, DS9, VOY and ENT being adaptations. All those characters came into existence beginning with those shows. TAS and the movies are adaptations of original Star Trek.

Battlestar Galactica was adapted by Ronald D. Moore, from the TV series of the same name.

405. Christopher Roberts - December 18, 2011

Apart from movies 7 thru 10 of course, which were adaptations of TNG.

406. Christopher Roberts - December 18, 2011

Adaptation to my mind, means taking specific characters and situations that already existed in literature, doing something new with them. I don’t think writing something intended to exist in the same fictional world, counts as adaptation myself.

407. boborci - December 18, 2011

it’s just a technical distinction within the Writer’s guild which is a necessary distinction for arbitration and other things. It’s not meant to imply that any screen play is not original. It merely implies that there is source material that can be referenced.

408. Craiger - December 18, 2011

Erica Durance or Yvonne Strahovski from Chuck as Yoeman Rand.

409. Craiger - December 18, 2011

Or better yet, Erica Durance as Yoeman Rand and Yvonne Strahovski as Nurse Chapel.

410. captain_neill - December 18, 2011

See until now the Trek movies had the distinction of having the same universe and continuity in both television and movie, we had the same cast in both mediums for the TOS and TNG movies and it was great seeing the stars from your fav TV show appearing on the big screen continuing the adventures they started on the show.

411. Red Dead Ryan - December 18, 2011


Your point being….???

412. dmduncan - December 18, 2011

Aging happens. People die. Some things you just have to adjust to.

New people playing old roles, being an instance.

413. The Original Animated Next Generation Deep Space Voyager Enterprise I-XI - December 18, 2011

Guys…*choke*…please…*glug-glug*…need more sequel news!

*cough* *hack*

You gave us a lot at once then suddenly stopped! DYING!!!!!!!!


414. AJ - December 18, 2011


I would expect a slowdown of hot new info this week through New Years.

Maybe the Abramsverse will hand us a contractually bound Latin actor as a villain, but I would expect ‘The Hobbit’ teaser, and the something they call “Tin-Tin” it is apparently preceding next week in cinemas to be the biggest news.

415. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 18, 2011

Anthony and Bob Orci – Surprise us! (I can easily both you gentlemen looking quite the part in a Santa costume).

We’ve been good, or at least, I’ve been…cough.. er…GOOD Yes, that’s the word…:)

416. captain_neill - December 19, 2011


That it seems that it will be adaptations from now on if the rumours are true.

417. captain_neill - December 19, 2011

Star Trek 1966- 2005 is canon, as we are doing new universe now it is no longer canon but a new canon therefore an adaptation.

418. Janice - December 19, 2011

#398 and #399

No,No—Bruce Greenwood is PIKE and nobody else.

I’m dying on the vine here waiting to know if Bruce/Pike will be in the sequel but there seems to be no news about that at all. That’s the only piece of news that I’m VERY anxious to hear.

What a fabulous Christmas gift if I get to read that he’s there!!

419. Kurak - December 19, 2011

The space seed would be interesting…but, there is so much more to be explored in this re-boot world of Star Trek.

If I am not mistaken, Kirk has become the Captain of the Enterprise, almost 13 years sooner than he did in the TV series. he also, didn’t get the experience of serving on board ships as crew, or first officer.

if they would hold true to the time line, they should go to Talus…where Star Trek all began, and Captain Pike was, it would be Kirk.

420. AJ - December 19, 2011


Kirk was first officer, I believe, on the Farragut, and became the youngest Captain ever in Starfleet at 34 (someone correct me if I am wrong).

Chris Pine is now 31. Shatner was actually 34 when WNMHGB was shot in 1965. While that means absolutely nothing, I think 13 years is a bit of a stretch. But using the actors’ ages, that would mean he was 21 when he was awarded the Enterprise in ST09. As Pine will be 33 when the new film is released, I am happy that he was, perhaps, 28 or 29, when he defeated Nero and got the bump.

Bob Orci, am I in the ballpark?

421. boborci - December 19, 2011

Close. We figure he didnt get into the academy until he was at least 21 (as evidenced by Kirk being in a bar). So he is at least 24 when he is on the enterprise.

422. boborci - December 19, 2011

But he could be much older

423. boborci - December 19, 2011

418. Spoiler alert!

We wrote a part for Greenwood. Let us hope he says “Yes!”

424. Jonathan - December 19, 2011

Greenwood was spectacular. Would love to see much more of that character.

425. Chris Doohan - December 19, 2011

423 You made Janice’s Christmas. I like Greenwood as well. How could he say no!!

426. Harry Ballz - December 19, 2011

Bob, not only is Greenwood a good actor, i hear he’s a hell of a nice guy. True?

427. AJ - December 19, 2011

Get Greenwood in here. Pike from ’09 is one of the best Star Trek characters ever written/acted/directed.

And I’m not the Captain. YOU are.

428. NCM - December 19, 2011

Thanks for the news — and Happy Holidays to you!

(Not to pick apart the part of Pike but perhaps the part’s not Pike:)

429. Basement Blogger - December 19, 2011

@ 423

Bob Orci,

Tthanks for the tip. Hey AJ just posted the trailer for The Dark Knight Rises. The Huffington Post thinks there’s more metaphor for this Dark Knight. Link.

I know the Supreme Court says it looks to The Dark Knight as a goal to go deeper for Star Trek. I hope your summer blockbuster Star Trek has some meat to it, ala “The Doomsday Machine.” Oh, yeah I hope Greenwood says yes, just get him out of the wheelchair. Parallel universe baby.

Before I forget, two requests. If you could get Del Trame’s name in there, that would be great. He meant a lot to the Trekkers on this site. And of course, MORE MCCOY. I miss the Kirk-Spock-McCoy troika. God bless Bones, his heart is always in the right place even if he “loses” the argument.

430. Red Dead Ryan - December 19, 2011

Bruce Greenwood was awesome as Pike! A great mentor and friend to Kirk. I hope Greenwood agrees to come back. I’m thinking unless he’s got personal things to attend to, or is too busy filming another movie, I have to assume he would.

431. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - December 19, 2011

Hey Bob Orci. Were you able to get Del Trame (British Naval Dude) into the Movie.

432. Dee - lvs moon' surface - December 19, 2011

#423. boborci… YES!!!… and I hope Buce Greenwood says YES, too!

….and do not worry about the age of Chris Pine … because he will be with that gorgeous face for a long time… :-) :-)

433. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - December 19, 2011

Hey Bob Orci. From the Terran Empire. I want to wish you and your family a Very Merry Christmas and a Happy and Safe New Year.

434. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 19, 2011

#423 YES!!! Good man!

Chris Pine will only be 32 when the movie gets released. Release date is 17 May, but Chris’s birthday is not until 26 August.

Any chance of getting the very huggable Chris Pine and those other cool dudes and lady for a group photo for Christmas? My desktop is begging for the latest picture of the Trek cast being together. Yes?

435. Red Dead Ryan - December 19, 2011

It’s probably a bit late to get the cast together for a photo by Christmas. Some of them are probably away with their families.

On the other hand, I’d bet Bob, Alex and J.J would be willing to pose for a “Merry Christmas” Trek photo. With phasers and tricorders in hand, wearing red shirts around a lit up Christmas tree!

436. Phil - December 19, 2011

JJ is out on the MI promotion tour, with Mr. Pegg and the rest of that cast, so an Xmas pic of them is iffy, too. This cast won’t be seen together for months, at best….

437. Red Dead Ryan - December 19, 2011

Well, actually, I meant next Christmas. :-)

438. Phil - December 19, 2011

Sorry…lineal thinking and all, just assumed it was the upcoming one :-)

439. captain_neill - December 20, 2011

In the real timeline Kirk becomes captain at age 30 and the five year mission started 2264-2265 according to which Trek timeline you read. Viyager mentioned 2265 whixh is year WNMHGB is set in

The alt universe movie is set in 2258, so Kirk joins the Academy later yet becomes captain earlier by ditching the chain of command.

440. Christopher Roberts - December 20, 2011

About the same time he becomes Captain in the 2009 film, in the Prime universe he’s likely on his first deep space assignment, under Captain Garrovick. See the original series episode, “Obsession”. Cloud creature, U.S.S. Faragutt and all that.

441. Christopher Roberts - December 20, 2011

423. boborci – ” We wrote a part for Greenwood. Let us hope he says “Yes!” ”

Thanks for clarifying that! A lot can happen before the cameras roll, but that really is great news. Greenwood was the highlight of Star Trek 2009 for many of us.

442. Christopher Roberts - December 20, 2011

440. Actually, I think it may have been earlier than that. Both events would’ve happened while Kirk was at the Academy. That three or four year period between scenes where McCoy was introduced and the Kobayashi Maru scene. So with a little wiggle-room, it can still fit in. Part of the training may include being posted to a training vessel (the Faragut?) for a semester or two… Perhaps it was that event in “Obsession”, which got Kirk noticed by other senior instructors… with Pike and Garrovick out of the picture.

443. VZX - December 20, 2011

439: I thought that in the “real timeline” Star Trek is a space-based TV show.

Anyway, to help me get over the fact of Kirk’s extremely rapid rise to Captain in Trek 09, I had always hoped that there was a long time spanse in between the destruction of the Narada and Kirk’s promotion. Like at leat a year or so. The only thing that kills my thinking is that the promotion is also an award ceremony for Kirk’s actions from the events of the movie, but oh well. That is my canon and I’m sticking to it…

444. Janice - December 20, 2011

#423 Bob Orci

“We wrote a part for Greenwood. Let us hope he says ‘yes’!

That little spoiler made my Christmas!! It’s just what I wanted to hear!
Like others, Greenwood was the highlight of the 2009 movie for me and I’m hoping he’ll say “yes” too!

What a great day!
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year everybody!

445. VZX - December 20, 2011

“wrote a part for Greenwood”

Doesn’t sound like much more than a cameo. Is Pike integral to the plot? Would it change the story a lot if Greenwood said no?

The size of Pike’s role in the story is not a big deal to me, just curious.

BTW: I always found it so uncanny how much alike the names of Christopher Pine and Christopher Pike are.

446. Craiger - December 20, 2011

One thing to think about maybe Spock Prime met with the Starfleet Brass and told them he was older Spock from the other Universe and showed them evidence of how great Kirk was as Captain in his Universe and that influenced them to promote Kirk to Captain? Allthough would Spock want to show the Starfleet Brass about future events?

447. VZX - December 20, 2011

Thanks, Orci, for the info. It is appreciated.

448. Phil - December 20, 2011

@446. Doesn’t make sense – why would old Spock interceed on young Kirks behalf like that, but not reveal future incidents where catastrophic loss of life occured? That’s a real twist of the pretzel logic, if you ask me….

449. David - December 20, 2011

@418. Spoiler alert!

“We wrote a part for Greenwood. Let us hope he says “Yes!””

I understand your hint!!!!!!!

Let me guess, it is a question of “beep” for “yes” or “beep beep” for “no”!!!!!!!

That’s no a big, but important part!
Be serious Bob, that is a spoiler and not just a little hint! :-)

Greetings from Germany. :-)

450. Phil - December 20, 2011

Well, it’s a potential spoiler, anyway.

451. Drew - December 20, 2011

Didn’t JJ want the actor locked in for “whatever the once-del Toro role” was by…last week? Surprised there is no news on that…

452. PSB2009 - December 20, 2011

I’d just like to say that this is a great forum, to be able to talk Trek and have input from Bob Orci and others sure makes being a fan a lot of fun. Thanks to all involved who make it happen and for all those who post their comments.

453. Ahmed Abdo - December 20, 2011

#423 Bob Orci,

Thanks a lot, Greenwood was terrific as Captain Pike in the first movie, it would be great to see him in the sequel.

Now, if only you guys give William Shatner a role, even a tiny one, that would be fantastic.

454. Craiger - December 20, 2011

#448 Maybe Spock felt the new Universe should unfold just like the old did? The new comic book series based on the new Universe but are using the episodes from TOS. Maybe this is how Bob and crew are doing the movie series updating TOS for a new generation of fans while still wanting to please the old ones? I am torn between having new stories for the new movies and reintroducing an updated TOS to new fans if Bob and crew are going that way with the movies.

455. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 20, 2011

#435, 436 Yes. I suppose you are right…:((

However, I did mention the idea of having a group photo made of the cast a few weeks ago. I guess it depends on who was paying attention and if they could get it to happen (our man, Bob Orci?).

The photo does NOT have to include all the main cast, just the ones who are available and will definitely be in the sequel, like Alice Eve and whoever gets to play the villain. Until Bruce Greenwood gives a definitive “Yes” to the part written for him, then he would not appear in the photo. Bob Orci would look good in a redshirt holding a phaser…except that we all know what happens to *redshirts…oh dear!

As far as I know, Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Zoe Saldana, John Cho and Anton Yelchin are all “in town”, so they would be available(?). I am not sure about Alice Eve (from England) or Karl Urban (from NZ). They may well be making their way back to their respective homes across the sea.

* Please, Bob, don’t mess with canon when it comes to the fate of some redshirts…:). Oh and I do hope there is a scene where Kirk has an occasion to give Cupcake an order or two…:)

456. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 20, 2011

#454 My understanding is that Bob and co. are updating/re-imagining some of the TOS episodes for the comics, but are doing original stories for the movies.

457. Phil - December 20, 2011

@455. Given the state of the script, I’m guessing the only people available for a group photo is the guy with the leaf blower, the forklift driver, painter, and the shop steward.

458. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 20, 2011

Phil – You clearly like being the stirrer of the group…Yes? No?…:)

You know what, perhaps the reason I want to see an up-to-date, NEW (as of even today) photo of the actors, preferably on the set of the bridge of the Enterprise and why I want pictures of the Quinto shave and pluck, is to do with seeing/knowing that indeed this long awaited sequel is actually about to become a reality.

I really feel that us fans need to see something very definitive. How about it, Bob?

Oh and how’s the puffle hunting going? – the orange and yellow ones shouldn’t be too hard to find…:) (However, if you come across a medium sized purple one, let me know. Having a devil’s of a job finding one here so I can complete my Michelle’s puffle collection).

459. VZX - December 20, 2011

460: Cool! But I am still holding out hope that Nichelle Nichols will be the computer voice….

460. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 20, 2011

#459 – The word “original” is taking on shades of meaning, at least for me. When I first read your post, I thought you meant no Chris, Zach, Karl etc. I guess these actors are the original actors for this sequence of Star Trek films. I felt mortified for a moment, especially at the thought not seeing my Pine/Kirk take the chair again…You had me going there for a minute. Phew!

461. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 20, 2011

#460 Yep! Me too.

462. Craiger - December 20, 2011

#460 I read online that their are some fans that want Marina Sirtis as the Enterprise’s computer in the sequel.

463. Tom - December 20, 2011


That sucks. Big let down that they couldnt get Bill and Leonard in for a scene. Not liking Bob Orci and crew right now :(

464. VZX - December 20, 2011

466: No, it’s smart. It’s important to let the new cast stand on their own now.

465. Dee - lvs moon' surface - December 20, 2011

458. Keachick…

If they actually start filming in January 15 … actors should be preparing stronger now, I guess… I have not seen any recent photo of ZQ… and no comment… but as he also has other projects you never know what he’s working on now…

:-) :-)

466. captain_neill - December 20, 2011

When I said real time line I meant prime time line. poor choice of words.

467. Phil - December 20, 2011

@465. On the other hand, a bunch of us are thrilled…………..

468. Tom - December 20, 2011

469 Phil

such is life. Enjoy

469. Hermioni - December 20, 2011

@ #449 David – December 20, 2011

If I may, I would like to join you and also risk a look through the crystal ball …

Beware the (potential) spoilers:

Based on ….

a) the link* to the IO9/ Trekmovie report citing a seemingly credible source which confirms the definite appearance of one previous TOS adversary (out of five possible choices, namely the Horta, Harry Mudd, the Talosians, Trelane or Gary Mitchell)

b) Mr. Orci´s recent statement that the script in its current state does include Captain Pike (thereby potentially creating an intriguing contrast-and-compare setup with his “kidnapped/sheltered by Talosians” story line in TOS´s ” The Cage/The Menagerie”)

c) Mr. Johnson´s and Mr. Orci´s earlier twitter exchange° alluding to the fact that the new version of “Where No Man Has Gone Before” offers an important clue concerning the identity of the next film´s antagonist (Interestingly, in the course of the comic book narrative, the force/entity which has erased/replaced New Verse Mitchell drops New Kirk squarely into a series of illusion-based recreations of his own past at Starfleet Academy, a quite “Talosian-like” approach to psychological manipulation, come to think of it…)

…. I am getting the impression that the crystal ball might just be trying to sort of show me a glimpse of the Talosians, too …, ;-))

*provided by #129. Jeff O´Connor in the “Google’s “Majel” Voice Assistant”-Thread”

470. VZX - December 21, 2011

466. captain_neill – December 20, 2011
When I said real time line I meant prime time line. poor choice of words.

–I know, I was just messing with ya.

471. John - December 21, 2011

WE ALREADY HAVE an old idea with new actors playing former roles.

It would be the height of cowardice to have nothing original in the movie. For the love of God—has humanity lost all its imagination or are we gonna watch Law and Order 24/7 ?
Think new thoughts.

472. Avi - February 1, 2012

I want to see Kor, Kang and Kolothnjoin kirk and fight a greater enemy and begin the alliance early.

473. Len - February 13, 2012

I think what Pegg said says that Khan will be in this movie. Saying that he “has not seen that name come up” Tells me that in the script, for security reasons,, the name was omitted. The actors considered for the villain is also a dead giveaway is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.