Orci Talks Star Trek Sequel Script “Polish” + Reveals Bit On Time Passed Between Films | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Orci Talks Star Trek Sequel Script “Polish” + Reveals Bit On Time Passed Between Films January 29, 2012

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Orci/Kurtzman,Star Trek (2009 film),Star Trek Into Darkness , trackback

Earlier this week we reported how Star Trek’s new Spock (Zachary Quinto) had made a comment about how the script for the Star Trek sequel currently in production is still going through changes. Now here at TrekMovie, co-writer/producer Roberto Orci has detailed the nature of these new "polishes." Orci also revealed something about the time setting between the two films. See below for more details.

 

Orci explains

As noted in the article earlier this week, it is not uncommon for scripts to go through changes during the production of a film, although it is different than the 2009 Star Trek film, which was mostly shot during a writer’s strike. However, Quinto’s commenting about the sequel script changing created concerns with some fans. Responding to one particularly pessimistic commenter here at TrekMovie, Orci tried to explain how the process for writing the Star Trek sequel has progressed. In so doing, he also revealed that the sequel time setting will not be the same as the four year gap between the 2009 film and the 2013 sequel. Here is his comment:

boborci: First, this movie is by no means written by committee. It has been written by ONE team. Me, Alex [Kurtzman], and Damon [Lindelof]. Thanks to the protective umbrella of the success of our first movie and JJ Abrams, we get less studio interference than almost any other production around. This process is the OPPOSITE of script by committee.

As for a full time trek staff, you should know that we have been working on the video game, the comics, and the story for the last two years. Trek has never been far from our minds. And we were doing all of that without even having a deal with the studio to do so (and our deal is only for script. all other stuff is pro bono to make the universes consistent). We were acting in good faith.

The reason the script wasn’t finished until recently is mostly for strategic philosophical reasons. We were not willing to turn anything in until we knew for sure that we had a start date, based on JJ’s availability. If we had written the script a year ago and it sat on the shelf, it would not have been current. Nothing messes up a script like it sitting on the shelf, because then everyone does get time to second guess and wonder, and then movies fall apart.

Finally, you should know the story hasn’t change, the structure hasn’t changed, and the action sequences haven’t changed. Most changes are minor. The changes I suspect Quinto is referring to are the character interactions as we fine tune the level of their various friendships. How well they all know each other and what they’ve all been through off screen is a nuanced yet essential part of the actors understanding where they are coming from with each other. While discussing the exact same plot elements, what they’ve been through colors their attitude toward each other. And given that the time past in real life is different than the amount of time passed in the movie world, it takes a polish to get it just right. That’s what polishes (a legal contractual word in our contract) are for.

Does any of this mean the movie will be any good? No. But if it’s no good, it will be because we were wrong to execute exactly what we wanted. Not because we changed our minds or someone changed our minds for us.


The Star Trek 2009 crew (except Spock) – Orci says nuances of character interactions are part of the changes being made to script 

Orci then followed up with more info, explaining how JJ Abrams embracing of new technology can call for edits in the script:

boborci: as an interesting addendum, the weirdest kind of changes comes from how JJ wants to move the camera. Thanks to advances in film making, we can move the camera around the ship in ways you couldn’t before — so sometimes lines will change or even who says them may change based on their position on the set relative to the coolest choreography of the camera moves. Keeps you on your toes as a writer for sure, but is is fun and worth it.


JJ Abrams directing "Star Trek" – Orci says some changes to sequel script are based on choices being made on set by the director and where he puts the camera

Comments

1. Harry Ballz - January 29, 2012

Orci shares fresh info? Ya gotta love it! :>)

2. FrancoMiranda - January 29, 2012

Hey Anthony, long shot here, but I studied journalism and creative writing at school and I’m a huge Trek nerd. Looking for anyone? Let me know.

Even longer shot:

BOB ORCI!

Need some Scottish dude around the place? Who’s stitched up more than Kirk after Amok Time? Give me a shout.

3. dmduncan - January 29, 2012

Yeah, well Bob is saying that time passing in the real world is NOT equivalent to time passing in the movie world, so we don’t get much out of that. It might just mean that the actors need to reconnect to how they relate to each other since that could get lost in the interim. It doesn’t really tell me when the sequel starts, sooner or later.

4. Ciaran - January 29, 2012

First?

Well I was never really worried when ZQ stated that the script was still changing. I do have quite a bit of knowledge of filmmaking and screenwriting and I am aware that this happens on practically every movie, some done as minimally as possible (such as this movie) and then others which change drastically so much so that the entire movie ends up being completely different than the script the studio initially greenlit.

Do not be worried, folks! The Supreme Court shall not let us down!!!

5. boborci - January 29, 2012

3 true! Its hard to say so much without saying anything;)

6. Jack - January 29, 2012

5. Tell me about it, I do it here all the time. ;)

7. Anthony Pascale - January 29, 2012

Its true i was digging, but I was thinking there is a pony in there somewhere

8. MJ - January 29, 2012

“We were not willing to turn anything in until we knew for sure that we had a start date, based on JJ’s availability.”

This is the Hollywood equivalent of “the dog ate my homework.” This has got to be one of the lamest excuses for being late on a script that I have ever heard. LOL

9. dmduncan - January 29, 2012

5. boborci – January 29, 2012

Ha! Yeah buddy, well you are really good at it! ;-)

10. Jack - January 29, 2012

8. Why?

11. N - January 29, 2012

I’m probably in the minority here, but I like the fact that we don’t know anything and won’t know until we actually see the film. It worked so well for XI, and I think it’s better in general. I’m one of those people that’s really bad for making preconceptions so I prefer to not know and go in with an open mind.

12. MJ - January 29, 2012

@10. Wouldn’t it really be so much more refreshing if Bob just said the script took a lot longer than anticipated instead of constantly blaming JJ for it?

13. dmduncan - January 29, 2012

At least I know a lot more about Legal Polish than I did before.

14. boborci - January 30, 2012

8. I have no need to lie to you. I could easiky say it is because i was working on my top ten show Hawaii 5-0 for the same parent company, or because we didnt have a deal with Paramount. You can research and find out as well as anyone that JJ was not available to even prep the movie until after finishing press on Super 8 and taking a month off, which was August, and STILL we delivered in time to shoot onky 5 months later, cutting the average prep time of a movie this size by an average of almost 5 months.

Apology accepted.

15. dmduncan - January 30, 2012

Anyway, been a fun night, but I have to wake up in the am. Night all!

16. Jack - January 30, 2012

12. If that’s truly the case, yes. Bob’s usually pretty defensive/cautious on here, though — as I assume he’d have to be. I don’t remember anyone ever bringing up a critical point on here that Bob’s ever agreed with or acknowledged. But, i don’t read em’ all.

But, then again, I’m assuming it’s true.

17. boborci - January 30, 2012

12. I always mistakenly think that people prefer the truth, but more and more, i find Jack Nicholson was right.

18. MJ - January 30, 2012

@14. I’m not going to presume to know exactly how it all went down, but I do recall numerous articles over a long period of this website starting 2.5 years ago in which the script was reported as near completion, the writers were finishing the script in a hotel, etc. etc. So, sorry Bob, I am not quite buying that the delay is all due to JJ. I think you guys will produce on hell of Trek movie, and I am really looking forward to it, but if I want to learn time management skills, let’s just say that I won’t be asking you to lead a seminar on that topic.

19. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

@bob

Are you the kind of person who gets frustrated with annoying comments or questions, or do they not really get to you?

I’m interested because you engage a lot with people. More so than the norm, I think.

20. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

@bob

engage as in speak to them, not engage as in open fire. Just to be clear!

21. Jack - January 30, 2012

14. Always with the “top ten”s and the (paraphrasing) ‘oh yeah, critics? Transformers 2 made a mint!’

Ps. I do like that you come here and interact, but the “hey everything I do is successful!” / “well, you might not like it but jj did” (paraphrasing again) response gets a little…. you know. We already know what you do.

22. MJ - January 30, 2012

@16 “I don’t remember anyone ever bringing up a critical point on here that Bob’s ever agreed with or acknowledged.”

Yep. And I don’t expect it to happen here tonight. But I am sticking with my opinion on this.

23. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

@guys in general

What do you do? I want to be able to contextualise your posts here.

Me: I’m in a band, do some freelance videogame reviews, lots of writing/scriptwriting/dreaming, and looking for something to do more than just pay the bills.

So I’m coming from quite a creative/busy/poor background here ;)

24. The Great Bird of the Galaxy lives! - January 30, 2012

The question I have for you, Bob is: How does the new movie trilogy fit into the original crews history, chronologically?
If it is to span to beyond the five year mission, into the movie era, then it would be safe to assume that several- if not many- years will gap the movies. However, If the trilogy is to cover only the first 5 years (assuming the alternate timeline allows for the historic first five year mission) then perhaps less time will have passed than in real life.
And thank you, Bob, for helping to restore my belief in the franchise’s future.

25. CoffeeProf - January 30, 2012

11

I definitely agree.

26. MJ - January 30, 2012

@21 “I do like that you come here and interact, but the “hey everything I do is successful!” / “well, you might not like it but jj did” (paraphrasing again) response gets a little…. you know.”

Well said, Jack.

27. boborci - January 30, 2012

18. Time management? Given that i have 3 shows on the air, and three movies in production, you might learn something from me about time management. The release dates did not move because of our script. That is just a fact. i told you how to do the math, and you ignored it by calling me a liar. If we had wanted a different director than JJ, thren you may have a point. We could’ve turned in a script he wasn’t available to direct and taken our chances with that the studio would find someone elese instead over his potential objections. You think that’s a good plan?

19. Annoyed is not the right word. I know how lucky i am, and i understand most criticisms. It is more about truth. I dont begrudge anyone their feelings or opinions. But when i think something is untrue, i have a pathalogical need to comment.

28. Jack - January 30, 2012

22. Not that I expect him, or anyone else in a similar position, to. I’m just one guy, but I’m not bothered by the delay. I’ll take the story at face value.

But yeah, it does frustrate me that I’ve never heard a ‘we maybe could have done that better’ on anything. And I’m not tryingto be a dink here, although I’m definitely being one. But, yeah, maybe it really is just honesty. And yes, saying that would be huge news, so I get it.

29. boborci - January 30, 2012

21. Never have i commented on the box office success of TF. And my 5-0 comment was about how i don’t use it as an excuse! Whuch proves no matter what i say, your opinions are your facts.

30. MJ - January 30, 2012

@27. Not calling you a liar, Bob. Perhaps a well meaning stretcher of plausibility though. Hey, aren’t we all at times. :-)

31. Jack - January 30, 2012

“It is more about truth. I dont begrudge anyone their feelings or opinions. But when i think something is untrue, i have a pathalogical need to comment.”

Okay. Fair enough. Have a good night, Bob.

32. N - January 30, 2012

@23 Fine since your question’s open and I have insomnia and nothing better to do at 7 in the morning. I act, I’m only an anonymous youtuber but you can’t run before you can walk. Though I am ready to film a big project I’ve been working on since October-ish (I’m almost a one man production team which is not that fun) but it’s really hard when all you can do is work around your mate’s schedules.

So I’m coming from a creative and poor background too, I guess. Hopefully I’ll get into uni this year.

33. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

27.

There’s nothing wrong with that. In fact, I’m exactly the same.

The need to please everyone just leads to mediocrity, I find. And a boring life.

34. boborci - January 30, 2012

24. Wish i could answer!

35. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

N:

Good to know I’m not the only one in this situation posting here. PS: school didn’t really help me ;)

36. Ahmed Abdo - January 30, 2012

@boborci,

One of the things that I enjoy about Star Trek is the sense of continuity & interconnection in that universe. So, I was wondering if you are planting any Easter eggs in the movie like you did in the last one ?

37. roy - January 30, 2012

@14,

I just wanted to say I really enjoy the current version of Hawai Five O on the small screen as much as I did the original classic tv show from all those years ago. It’s also nice to see Terry O’Quinn being peppered in the current season every so often. It was also nice to see Robert Englund in one of the episodes from earlier this season. I wish that James MacArthur was still with us and it would have been nice to hear his take on the current show and who knows if he might have been interested in making a cameo role let alone a vist to the tv set. It would have been special. For what it’s worth, I hope the current show carries on for many more years to come.

38. NanoTechDudeLA - January 30, 2012

@11. I agree with you wholeheartedly (is this even a word??:))
@ Mr. Orci – I cannot believe your perseverance! No wonder you are so successful in what you are doing! What’s your secret??:)

39. alphantrion - January 30, 2012

Hey Bob, how are you?. I have a question of a different nature. It seems most of the Trek films do not do so well outside of North America. I was wondering if you guys considered more advertising for other countries. I live in Turkey and here almost no one knows Star Trek. Only the older generation know of the Original Series. It would be sweet if you could advertise the movie over here and get some of the guys to promote the movie over here. Anyhow, rant over. Have a nice day on set. (you do go the set don’t you? I know of some films where the directors ban the writers :D)

40. boborci - January 30, 2012

36. We can’t help ourselves when we see an opportunity.

41. Jack - January 30, 2012

23. Me. Journalist/writer/reporter. Been off sick (depression) and draining my savings after a layoff and, as you can tell on here, get a little frustrated/over my head. Wanting to be more creative/ trying to make some sort of difference and am working on some fiction along with working on bill-paying freelance stuff.

42. The Great Bird of the Galaxy lives! - January 30, 2012

@Bob,

I’m sure you do! I’d have bitten my tongue clean off by now. Perhaps we could all use a healthy dose of Thorazine to help ease the anxiety a bit.

43. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

@boborci

I’m most intrigued to see the elements of this universe that HAVEN’T changed, especially visually. For example, other races’ ships, locations, all of that.

There were hints of that in the comic books that we recently saw.

Am I on the right track here? I’m not sure how to phrase this. Is this something you’re interested in exploring as well?

44. boborci - January 30, 2012

39. We are taking steps to make the Trek known to international audiences. Hopefully, you will see that pay off.

And yes, the set has been fun, since i am also the producer, i cant be banned;)

45. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

@Jack

Sorry to hear things are tough.
Maybe some of us writers here should get together and start something. (This sort of broad statement is where ideas begin.)

46. SharSmiley - January 30, 2012

Yeah and the Spock Uhura love plot sucks! The story should be the three! Kirk, Spock, McCoy. Don’t blow it .

47. Jack - January 30, 2012

45. Sorry, too much information. Just trying to explain my high-strung posts. And things are getting better. But, yeah!

48. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

46:

Oh come on. So you’d go back to the days when the rest of the cast barely got a damn line?

Thank God you’re not running the production.

49. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

@Jack

It’s cool! I’m just nursing a head injury, hence my curt responses and barely contained sense of rage ;)

I’m not always like this. Normally I’m as delicate as a newborn petal, trembling in the morning br… actually, I’ll stop there.

50. SharSmiley - January 30, 2012

48 : yeah good thing!

51. The Great Bird of the Galaxy lives! - January 30, 2012

@Boborci

Oh, and can u tell me where all the familiar chirps, whirs, and whistles that were clearly audible on the bridge in the original series? And what of those spaced-out candy-coated knobs, and switches? Are these not staples of Star Trek? It’s like hearing a male computer voice on the Enterprise. That would freak anybody out!

52. boborci - January 30, 2012

Jack

Just for you:

The first movie coukd have been better.

tramsforners sucks.

Hawaii 5-o is a derivative lesser rip off if the original.

Trek 12 is in shambles because we could not get our act together.

Soon i will be exposed as a fraud.

Feel better, man.

53. Ahmed Abdo - January 30, 2012

I think one of the ways to reach international audiences is by having reruns of Star Trek series on their local TV stations.

When I was working in Egypt, I made sure that I introduce Star Trek to my friends there & it was really fun.

54. NanoTechDudeLA - January 30, 2012

@46 Smells like a troll :)
Kirk-Spock-McCoy triangle? Spock-Uhura thing sounds much more appealing that this “Threesome on the Brokeback Planet” ;)

55. boborci - January 30, 2012

Good night and good morning. Until next time.

56. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

Night, Bob.

57. MJ - January 30, 2012

Goo night, Bob.

58. Ahmed Abdo - January 30, 2012

@55.boborci

Good Night & Good Luck :)

59. N - January 30, 2012

“I’m most intrigued to see the elements of this universe that HAVEN’T changed”

Just a thought about this. It’s always said when you change the past you change the future but in this instance it created an alternate universe, so would it be that this reality was never the same reality and the Nerada and the Jellyfish(?) were brought to a different time and a different universe, like the Defiant in In a Mirror Darkly? Or could there have been some meddling by a timeship like the Relativity? Nero’s incursion being too big to fix so it was manipulated into creating another universe in some pre-genetor paradox thing? That would be an interesting pilot for a series set in the 29th century actually and keep the passing-the-torch thing…

Sorry for the rant.

60. Jack - January 30, 2012

52. Lol. I knew it! ;).

Most of that is untrue.

61. USS Enterprise C - January 30, 2012

Thanks for the words of wisdom Bob! Looking forward to the next tidbit (or a picture from set?)

62. MJ - January 30, 2012

@52. Jack loves Trek and Trek 09, so he’s got a right to be critical from time to time. Would you rather we didn’t give a shit about Trek, or perhaps you’d rather we only had rosy positive things to say about it at all times?

WE CARE and we lover your effort on Trek, Bob, and we owe you thanks for that. But that does not mean that we are going to bow down to 100% of what you tell us. And you shouldn’t take it so personally when we don’t agree with EVERYTHING you tell us.

63. SharSmiley - January 30, 2012

54 : you called me a troll cause I stated my opinion that I didn’t like the Spock Uhura love line? There was nothing gay about the close friendship with the top three. Really now have you ever even seen Star Trek? Btw I was totally hurt by you calling me a troll, I would say ” get a life ” but that would just continue the nonsense . Goodnite ;)

64. Visitor1982 - January 30, 2012

@boborci The only thing I hope is that the third movie will be released before 2017 and that somewhere in the next three years a new Trek TV series will be launched.

Trek is more a TV thing me thinks, so CBS should get their act together!

65. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

59.

I would have thought some of these, but the (supposedly canon) comic books that are supposed to be taken as a ‘stop gap’ between the movies had things from TOS that were exactly the same, such as the Valiant pod, etc.

66. Jack - January 30, 2012

49. ;). So this is basically, “what brings you to the meeting tonight?” Nice. Well, swell to meet you.

67. captain_neill - January 30, 2012

Perhaps some litttle tweaks during production would have made a few things flow better in the last movie that I felt did not work.

I am open to tweaks during production andI wish you well bob with the upcoming film.

I look forward to getting back to a story that can only be done in Trek.

68. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

@Jack

Likewise! Hopefully there are ways to keep in touch outwith these comment sections, otherwise discussing ideas for projects could get a little… odd.

69. captain_neill - January 30, 2012

I mean something that appeals to everyone but a story that is unique to the vision of Trek.

I look forward to it

70. Brody - January 30, 2012

Bob, as a HUGE fan of the first movie and classic Trek in general, I have only one favor to beg of you: please, don’t reveal anything about the movie before release. The way the first movie was teased was fantastic.

71. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

I feel like everyone looks at ‘old’ Trek with rose-tinted-specs. Anyone remember Spock’s Brain? Or Threshold? Or The Fight? To name but three (in my opinion, and probably a lot of people’s) dire episodes. Sure, I love them and find them hilarious now, but I’ll never EVER see Trek as something that was perfect in the past.

72. Toonloon - January 30, 2012

Hey Bob! Greetings from London. Don’t let some of these whingers kick you around here, mate. You guys pulled off the impossible with ST 09 and I cant wait for the sequel. I went to drama school with Ben and he’s a fantastic actor. Another mate of mine was/is going out with Alice and she’s also a very talented lady so I can’t wait to see them in the movie. Just one quick question though… Will we see the return of a red shirt named Olson? I have a crazy theory about this.

73. MJ - January 30, 2012

@72. Nice name dropping, dude. Some of my best friends are working on the new movie. LOL

74. boborci - January 30, 2012

mJ and Jack.

I love you guys just the way you are and i dont want anythung but your true opinions. I dont mean to sound defensive. I just like good debate, and dont want to pander to you guys. I mean it as a sign of respect, truly, by just reacting without censoring myself too much. You guys keep me up at night and i appreciate it. You may notice that i soend more time reacting to negative comments. Your time is as valuable as mine, and i am grateful that you spend some time here interacting with me. No joke. Wish you all the best, and thank you for your insights.

75. Bart - January 30, 2012

@boborci, hi bob, a bit off-topic but i’m curious to know what your thoughts are about TNG remastered? Good luck with the new film!

76. NanoTechDudeLA - January 30, 2012

@63 I’m sorry if I hurt your feelings! It sounded like trolling continued from the previous topic about Spock-Uhura… Triangle thing was just a joke, relax :) Goodnite to you too, sleep tight, don’t let the bed bugs bite! ;)

77. Iva - January 30, 2012

“the time past in real life is different than the amount of time passed in the movie world”

That kind of…. goes without saying, no?
But thanks for the hint, meant a lot. Really. lol

78. MJ - January 30, 2012

Likewise, Bob. All the best on the new movie. I am pulling for you bro!

79. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

Shit, am I the only person here who isn’t working on the movie or knows someone who is?

80. boborci - January 30, 2012

77 no. Four years later couldve been the case both on and off screen.

81. NanoTechDudeLA - January 30, 2012

@79 No, you are not! :)

82. Iva - January 30, 2012

@63. SharSmiley

Relax, you are far from the only one.

When the voting was done on this site, more than 5 000 people voted and Spock/Uhura was declared a mess, right next to the brewery.
But the writers like to pretend it never happened, and keep talking about S/U like it was a good idea and people like it.

The thing is, anybody saying that gets declared a troll, and over the years I have seen a lot of people banned or posts deleted for saying they didn’t like it either.

So, relax. And don’t fall for provocations.

83. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

The first movie was serious and dark, yes, but it didn’t FEEL serious as a movie. Does that make sense? It was quite light hearted.

I would like to see a generally more serious tone. I suppose if the crew has matured in terms of the storytelling, then it makes sense. Gravitas? That might be the word I’m looking for.

I always liked Trek VI – the crew were veterans. When I went to see it in the movies I remember feeling safe with the cast; there was something nice about seeing experienced, realistically aged people in charge.

84. MJ - January 30, 2012

@82. We said, Iva, given that you are the Queen of Trek Trolls.

85. Commodore KorTar - January 30, 2012

@boborci

Don’t listen to the haters. You guys made an excellent film back in 2009, and I have faith that Star Trek 2013 will be just as good, if not better. Keep up the awesome work and we’ll keep paying for our seats in the theater, and buying the comics, games, and other Trek related action.

86. Iva - January 30, 2012

80. boborci – January 30, 2012

Could have, but it’s not common.

It would be good if you didn’t skip the effect destruction of Vulcan has had on people and interspecies relations inside the federation. As well as how it affected the image of fed. in the outside circles.
I know it can’t all fit in a movie but – try?

87. boborci - January 30, 2012

82. We dont pretend it never happened. We just know that only 3 percent of trek fans even post, and of that 3, less than half didn’t like uhura/spock, and the half of the three represents less than one percent of the general audience. Sorry.

88. Anthony Thompson - January 30, 2012

80.

Bob. A writer question. Do you or Alex (or Damon, for that matter) ever harness ideas / visual images from dreams that you’ve had and incorporate them into your work?

89. boborci - January 30, 2012

82. And you never answered for 243. Why? Because there is no answer. You made a blatantly sexist comment which makes any of your conclusions about sexism suspect. Nice to hear from you anyway.

90. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

Sorry, but I’m spluttering with laughter here at the juxtaposition of people discussing how they’ll be good commercial automatons, and others talking about the Star Trek universe as if it’s a real place. Just got me laughing.

Sure there are some great points here but damn, some of you are priceless.

91. boborci - January 30, 2012

88. Absolutely!

92. Anthony Thompson - January 30, 2012

91.

Thanks. I thought so! : ) It’s after midnight LA time now, so maybe you’d better hit the sack. You have another exciting day ahead of you!

93. Iva - January 30, 2012

89. boborci “”””””””””””””””””””””””””””

What was the question? Feel free to ask again.

87. boborci – January 30, 2012
82. We dont pretend it never happened. We just know that only 3 percent of trek fans even post, and of that 3, less than half didn’t like uhura/spock, and the half of the three represents less than one percent of the general audience. Sorry.”””””””””””””””””””””””

Oh, I’m sorry, I assumed that more than 5 000 people who come on the site, read, take time to vote are also here because of Star Trek.
They must have confused the site title with something else. Another fandom perhaps.
Funny how their opinion of brewery was accepted though, but the equally strong dislike of Spock’s character deviation isn’t a valuable opinion.

94. Mike Thompson UK - January 30, 2012

Thanks for your time Bob, interesting read.

95. boborci - January 30, 2012

93. Quoting you:

Way to avoid the question.

For the, what is it now, 4th time?

96. NanoTechDudeLA - January 30, 2012

Hi Iva, I’m new here so please forgive my ignorance… Why is it that you dislike S-U thing (that much)?

97. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

93.

We never saw Spock at these young ages before, with the exception of The Cage, in which, as you may recall, HE SMILED, and showed emotions. Therefore as a fan, I can honestly say that I didn’t feel Trek 2009’s interpretation of Spock was particularly ‘wrong’ in any way.

And do you honestly – honestly, I repeat – believe that the opinion of 5000 people is going to matter when compared to the general opinion of the movie going audience?

I think anyone with any perspective has realised that Trek was gone. Anyone going to see it fresh (which is what Trek needed) was not going to appreciate the kind of Trek that was on TV for all those decades.

It sounds harsh, but I’m a fan and I can reconcile the hard fact that this is a business as much as its a labour of love.

98. boborci - January 30, 2012

93. Boring me now. Thrashing like a trapped rat. Is that sexist.

99. NanoTechDudeLA - January 30, 2012

Hi Mr. Orci, maybe it is better that you hit the sack as Mr. Thompson said, we don’t want the new movie to suffer because of some of us :)

100. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

@boborci

Talk to me instead? I think I made some good points. (Looks around pensively.)

101. NanoTechDudeLA - January 30, 2012

@97. Coudn’t agree more! The most important thing is that the franchise that we all love so dearly is ALIVE again and that its future looks very BRIGHT!

102. MJ - January 30, 2012

Yea Bob, Iva has never bothered to answer that question of yours AGAIN.

LOL

103. boborci - January 30, 2012

99. You r right. I cant help it! Turning off iphone…. Now!

104. Iva - January 30, 2012

97. FrancoMiranda – January 30, 2012
93.

We never saw Spock at these young ages before, with the exception of The Cage, in which, as you may recall, HE SMILED, and showed emotions. Therefore as a fan, I can honestly say that I didn’t feel Trek 2009’s interpretation of Spock was particularly ‘wrong’ in any way “””””””””””””””””””””””

It was explained (by Gene Roddenberry) that Spock we see in episode Cage, was not the same character of Spock that we see later because he was a different character at the time – only the name and actor were the same.
After the pilot(s), he was merged with the character of the first officer Majel and it was decided only over the course of the next few episodes what his personality will be like. What Vulcan species is like and so on. He (Gene) made sure to mention that, as well as the Charlie X episode out of character behaviour, if those episodes happened later in the series – when his character was already decided – that kind of behaviour would have never happened.
So, no – that is not canon Spock behaviour. As said by the creator of Star trek himself.

””””””””””””””””””””””””And do you honestly – honestly, I repeat – believe that the opinion of 5000 people is going to matter when compared to the general opinion of the movie going audience?””””””””””””””””””””””””

How come they are not movie going audience when they go to see the movie?

“””””””””””””””””””””””””I think anyone with any perspective has realised that Trek was gone. Anyone going to see it fresh (which is what Trek needed) was not going to appreciate the kind of Trek that was on TV for all those decades.
It sounds harsh, but I’m a fan and I can reconcile the hard fact that this is a business as much as its a labour of love.””””””””””””””””””””””””””

Yes, we agree, as I have said before – this movie was made for people who neither like not watch ST or SF in general. Like Abrams himself admitted, he did neither before working on the project. (though he likes other SF – like Star Wars)

It is a shame though, because people who are dedicated enough – like Peter Jackson – can make even the “nerdy” material appealing to general audience, without it losing everything but its name.

105. Salvador Nogueira - January 30, 2012

@boborci

Bob,

I’m from Brazil, and I’ve catched your early comment about making steps to get more attention for international markets. I could see this over here first hand, because a Brazilian actor (Selton Mello) told the press here he was invited to be in the film, but refused (he said it was an honor to receive an invitation from JJ, but didn’t feel the offered role would be much more than a cameo).

My question: did you give up in any Brazilian actor? Could I suggest Wagner Moura, from the two Elite Squad films? If you managed to get him into some action scenes (he wouldn’t mind using red shirt :-)), you could tap into his popularity with Elite Squad over here in favour of Trek.

Either way, I was happy to see you’re giving us attention! I know Trek isn’t big in Brazil, and I’m impressed at you guys for trying to turn the table, instead of just giving up the market. Hope you can pull it off!

Cheers,
Salvador

106. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

104.

Not replying to everything here in massive detail, not sure if you read this earlier but I recently suffered a head injury and I’m not 100% with it right now.

But: Roddenberry never liked Star Trek V or VI, either. In fact, he never really liked II either. Those interpretations weren’t part of his vision.

Taking Trek as a whole, you have to concede that elements of non-canon material will be taken into consideration: especially since post-Roddenberry TNG Trek (and, indeed, many of the movies) either never met with his approval, or never would.

Does that make sense? I’m not sure if it does, myself. I’m a terrible writer when I’m post-beating.

107. Paul - January 30, 2012

Bob please can you confirm Ben Burtt is back doing the sound FX he made some terrific choices for you before……

Thanks

108. Iva - January 30, 2012

98. boborci – January 30, 2012
93. Boring me now. Thrashing like a trapped rat. Is that sexist.””””””””””””””

Oh, there you are. How nice, you could have just asked again instead of making me dig through the posts in other topic.

No, men who deny the existence of male privilege can not speak of sexim against women or men.
Men ignorant of it neither.
Educated men can – the key word being educated.

If you wish to educate yourself on the matter google sociology papers that deal with the topic.
Social sciences have dealt with this topic, and still do, very often.

Thank you.

Now, why people who are attacking other posters are tolerated on this site,
while anybody who expresses dislike of any Abrams move related issue is attacked, called a troll, has their posts removed to fix the statistics of fan opinion and/or threatened with being blocked.
A mystery.

109. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

108.

Don’t forget my post: 106!

110. Iva - January 30, 2012

106. FrancoMiranda – it’s ok, relax.

The difference is that he doesn’t “fix” anything about Spock by doing that,
because what you see is not his mistake or a change of mind but a completely different character that just happened to be called Spock.

He gets recycled because it’s easier than re-shooting all of it again with the correct version of Spock.
“Gene Spock” qualities are the very base of Spock character’s definition.

To change them is making a non-Spock character. Like the pilot “Spock” was.

There is no logical or canon reason for the level of deviation you propose and we see in the freshly created Abrams timeline,
short of brain trauma.
It is canon that Spock with affected brain will act like the pilot “Spock”.

111. DJT - January 30, 2012

Bob, thank you for stopping by.

112. Iva - January 30, 2012

continued:

It is canon that Spock with affected brain will act like the pilot “Spock”.

And after that obstacle is removed, he returns to being himself, Spock, again.
Deviated behaviour only lasts as long as his brain is affected.

113. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

110:

I grant that Spock’s life was not so drastically changed by events in the timeline as to fully reflect his new character in the movie. I did consider this myself.

We know that Spock struggled with his human side – and emotional rage – in TOS, and I suppose I allowed myself the leeway to accept the new Spock (or vision of Spock), hoping that he may be shown to grow into a Spock I recognise more in the next movie.

The inclusion of Spock Prime, and his dialogue with New Spock also softened the blow, so to speak.

I suppose I should stress that my opinions are more my own methods of dealing with change in what I find to be a positive way, that allows me to enjoy the new incarnation of Trek.

Otherwise I’d just drive myself crazy.

114. Orly - January 30, 2012

Bob needs to stop responding to these nit pickers on here. Give more attention to developing pr channels with NON treckies.

Make sure that there’s enough pr money set aside to advertise well outside of the US.

The treckies wont be able to resist seeing the film so its everyone else he has to worry about.

115. Iva - January 30, 2012

@ 114. Orly. The treckies wont be able to resist seeing the film so its everyone else he has to worry about.”””””””””””””””

The trekkies can download the movie anytime – in fact it was the most downloaded movie of the year.
They lost much there.

The bigger the time difference between USA premiere and other continents/countries, the bigger the chances people will just download the thing.

Because in that time gap, fellow viewers have already seen it and posted the rants. And you can decide watching it right away for free vs paying for it later when it comes to the local theatres.

116. Iva - January 30, 2012

@113. FrancoMiranda – January 30, 2012

I feel you. Oh, I feel you – especially on the crazy. :(

117. chrisfawkes.net - January 30, 2012

I am just excited for the upcoming trailer at this point.

Remember how good that first couple of minute trailer was last time with the music from two steps from hell (i think that’s the name).

As for long shots i’d love to think a premier at the Sydney Opera House would be on the cards again.

118. chrisfawkes.net - January 30, 2012

At any rate would it be worth offering a prize to everyone invited to the premier for the best trek outfit on the red carpet.

Maybe include a booklet of characters with invites for those less cultured in the Trek universe to help them out.

Perhaps a way to raise interest in the film in Europe or countries where it did not fare so well would be to pay a group of local actors to pretend to be religious zealots and have them picketing cinemas with placards complaining that Spock looks like the devil. Nothing gets people onside more than having someone else to react against.

If setting it up seems unethical i’d think an anonymous donation to wesborough baptist from a concerned brother to get 20 of them to fly over to do exactly that would get the same result from those who actually believed in what they were doing.

119. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

You know, I actually preferred the style of music in the trailer to the music in the movie itself. Much more epic.

120. Trekman - January 30, 2012

New TNG trailer.

Different packaging to that previously released.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdWuAicuDXY&feature=player_embedded

121. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - January 30, 2012

I can’t BELIEVE the way some posters act on this forum! It happened with the Okudas, and it’s happening with Bob Orci.

These insiders have absolutely NO REASON to tell us anything! We’re just a bunch of fans shooting the breeze amongst ourselves for free. There is therefore NO REASON for them to LIE to us!

Stop looking the gift horse in the mouth, for frak’s sake!!!

122. Buzz Cagney - January 30, 2012

Bob looking like he’s had a bad day in the office!
Its why Alex avoids these sites I understand? lol

123. CmdrR - January 30, 2012

Bob Orci, I’ve only gotten through the first dozen or so posts and can see the temperature of this thread is a tad high.

Just make a good story, with characters front and center. Let the audience come to it. And, thanks. It’s not as though others are doing Trek on a guhzillion dollar budget and actually trying to resonate with a 50-year-old tv show we all loved as kids.
ps- As a tv news producer (multiple shows per day) I know something about time management. Get your excercise and don’t forget to love on the family.

124. Devon - January 30, 2012

Hey Bob/Anthony, I know we’re only into a couple of weeks into shooting, but are there any plans to do any live-from-the-set fan Q&As like was done during the first film?

125. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - January 30, 2012

I think it’s a great honor that this site gets exclusives with insiders like Bob Orci, and that Mr. Orci will even come here to converse with us.

I’ve never addressed Mr. Orci directly, but after reading the heinous, sophomoric abuse he suffered even while imparting a little exclusive, inside information to us, I feel I must.

@boborci, on behalf of all respectful and gentle Star Trek fans, I want to apologize for the deplorable behavior of some of the posters here. Not all of us necessarily agree with all of your choices in the writing of Star Trek 2009, and surely not all of us will agree with all of your choices in the writing of Star Trek 2013, but nevertheless we deferentially acknowledge the difference between you and us: You are a successful Hollywood writer, and we are just consumers, most of whom will never amount to anything. You have managed to do the thing that most artists never achieve – make a living from your craft – whereas we are lucky to have had a single aspiration in our lives. When you type at a computer, you are creating something that millions will witness, whereas when we type at our computers, our navel-gazing armchair philosophizing is lucky to be read by the very next poster.

So, if you end up reading this, please take heart that some of us appreciate what you’re doing, its real worth for the fans and the franchise, and how difficult it must really be.

126. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

Well yes, a lot of the messages were annoying, but I always try to remember that people are people, and Bob is (while successful) another human being whom I’ll treat with respect.

There’s a fine line between being respectful of another person and inspiring contempt by lying down and saying yes constantly because of the perception that they’re somehow better or more successful.

I’m sure Bob (and anyone else involved in the project) would appreciate thoughtful conversation about the project on an equal level. Nobody likes yes men, you know? You never know, one of us humble posters could come up with something they might find useful.

But yes, some of the posts were embarrassing.

127. Pinsent - January 30, 2012

@120 Thanks for the link… nice seeing some new footage.

@ Bob Orci – please keep us posted when you can. As a fan it’s great to have someone so involved with the process keeping us posted – it is very much appreciated. It’s embarrassing to see what some people are getting on with on here.

128. KHAN 2.0 - January 30, 2012

bob orci

did you do any particular special Trek research in preparation for the script/whilst writing> – i.e. re reading some of the novels, some you had never read before? re-viewing the entire TOS eps or TNG? other SF movies or novels?

if so which particular novels or eps stood out in helping with the script in a similar way to how stuff like Prime Directive, Yesterdays Ent, Spocks World, Best Destiny, Star Wars OT, etc were said to have influenced the first movie

that is if you can allude to any without giving spoilers of course

129. Embarrassed to be a Trek fan - January 30, 2012

It’s a shame that the Web has given an audience to the socially inept. Bob Orci is making himself available to Trek fans, and instead of appreciating that and speaking civilly to him, many of you are acting like petulant five-year-olds with Asperger’s syndrome. I’m not saying you should worship the man–call him on his mistakes, sure, but remain adult about it. Some of you are so smarmy, arrogant and rude. And I’ll bet that in the real world, without the anonymity of the Internet to hide behind, you’d be far too cowardly and awkward to speak to him the same way. Grow up. Yes, Star Trek XI had some problems, and yes, I worry that Star Trek XII will have those same issues. Scotty was written too buffoonishly, and didn’t seem like the same Scotty from the series. Uhura was a completely different person than she was ever portrayed before. The brewery look didn’t work. Delta Vega is nowhere near Vulcan. Chekov is the wrong age. The very idea of Spock exiling Kirk on an ice planet is absurd, and what happens once he gets there is so monumentally coincidental as to strain believability. This is how I feel about these plot points, and I’m fine with pointing it out to Mr. Orci. But I’m not going to insult him or his fellow co-writers. Transformers aside, I think they’ve all proven themselves to be very good writers, and I have a lot of respect for Mr. Orci, for his willingness to hang out in this forum, knowing that the socially inept are likely to descend upon him like a bunch of geeky vultures. Despite the above flaws, I thought the last Star Trek film was wonderful. Were mistakes made on the writing and directing fronts? Indisputably, yes. But SO MUCH of the film was fantastic: the acting for Kirk, Spock and McCoy (especially McCoy). The inclusion of Leonard Nimoy. The inclusion of dialog from the animated series. The use of Sarek and Amanda. The characterization of Christopher Pike. The Kobayashi Maru scenes. The character of Nero. Kirk’s birth. The entire opening sequence. The use of humor. The bar fight. Is it for everyone? No. No film is. But I love Star Trek XI, warts and all, and will never understand why, when given the rare chance to interact with the man who wrote it, some of you continuously choose to act like jackasses instead of discussing your qualms civilly.

130. Bob Mack - January 30, 2012

Yea? Why are we jumping on Bob Orci? What’s the point?

131. Bob Mack - January 30, 2012

To be clear – I just mean let’s give the guy a break. All he did was make a really good movie and I’m guessing he’s got another really good movie in process right now. We can nitpick it for little things we don’t like (engineering, for me), but overall the movie was really good. Nine out of ten other writer/producer/director teams would have made a lesser film.

By the way, it isn’t Trek 1966. It isn’t written/produced by Gene or even D.C. If it’s authentic Trek 1966 we want then let’s get out the Blu-Ray versions and watch them again. I don’t see how it’s even remotely fair to expect Trek 2009 or 2013 to be exactly the same in all respects.

132. Ned Kelly - January 30, 2012

@boborci

Thank you for the insights you provide and for responding to so many questions.

I have been a Star Trek fan since I first saw UK reruns in the early 70’s and have enjoyed every incarnation since, including STV!

I worry that the near abuse you receive from some posters may discourage you from future posting. Please do not let the seemingly ungrateful posters put you off, for every one of them there are hundreds like me who simply read the posts and hardly ever post themselves.

I loved ST2009 and am really looking forward to ST2013. I thought what you did with the alternate timeline to enable you to reboot without losing what had gone before was very clever and very special, I cannot think of anything like it being done in cinema before.

I accept that this allows you a lot of latitude with the characters in terms of alternate character development and I am sure this makes some fans feel a little insecure, but I for one welcome it.

It gives you the ability to take the new ‘original’ crew into places we have not been with them before both physically and emotionally and of course, none of them is safe now, anyone could get killed!

LL&P

133. El Chup - January 30, 2012

Not really impressed by all this ranting from Orci on here. I’m not sure I buy his “I like a good debate” comment as a way to explain it away. But he seems to just be biting and feeding te trolls. If I were him I wouldn’t react like this to a couple of nerds on the internet whp have made it their life’s objective to trash a project they haven’t even seen (or even know what the script is, what the sets look like and who the supporting characters are).

There is a difference between constructive criticism, and responding to said criticisim, and mud slinging. Certain individuas in this “debate”, it seems, can only do the latter. It’s very sad and it only serves to reinforce the general idea that Star Trek fans are losers who take things too serious and need to get a life somewhat. Well, I for one, resent those who help to reinforce such labels. I have been a fan for over 30 years. But I also have a very successful life and career. I am not socially awkward. I know some very esteemed people. I have been involved in international newsmaking events. I know politicians, celebrities and diplomats. Star Trek is something that, from time to time, I use to unwind if I am having a quiet couple of days in the house. I may not enjoy all the Trek I see, and I certainly felt that the 2009 outing had problems, but there is more than enough Trek to keep me amused whenever I feel like watching it. It’s a bout time that the public new that most fans are like me, and not rabid, socially inept internet dwellers who have nothing better to do in their lives. So when I see this sort of nonsense I feel very sad indeed.

I mean, what is the whole objective of this? That some geeks can get together at some point and say “hey, I told that Orci fella where to get off”. Well gee, what an achievement. But at the end of the day, that Orci fella has his Hollywood career and those trying to get under his skin has…um…what exactly?

So my message to Mr. Orci is, don’t feed the trolls. You simply don’t need to. It doesn’t matter if 99% of fans ultimately despise this next movie. You can only do what you think will make a good picture. Therefore there is nothing to defend. Biting into what a few internet trolls say only makes for posts that are undignified in their reading. If I were you, I would stick to answering comments about the making if the picture and ignore the attempts to wind you up.

134. chris pike - January 30, 2012

I think it may be fair to say Spocks character has been changed by the trauma of his race being wiped out..thus a different Spock to that we see in any of TOS. What would be nice …even dramatic..is if that could be referred to in a spoken line or two in this movie?

135. Soonerdew - January 30, 2012

Boborci.

FWIW, here’s one Trek fan who appreciates your time here, tries not to take the Trek world so seriously, and enjoys it for the fun escapism its supposed to be (okay, okay I admit I don’t like engineering :) ) .

For those of us who used to snoop for movie updates in the back pages of the old Starlog magazine, your willingness to share tidbits here is appreciated. Here’s hoping you don’t get too derailed by the folks who obviously take this stuff WAY too seriously.

136. TMM - January 30, 2012

HEY BOB!

The opening sequence of ST2009 had fantastic coherent feel, you guys really squeezed “cinema” into a few minutes. I hope the new movie will have some moments like that, or better, be like one big sequence.

Good luck.
TMM

137. Captain Otter - January 30, 2012

Wow. Some folks woke up on the wrong side of their mon’s basement!

Mr. Orci, keep on rolling. The majority of us trust you. You must be as big a Trekkie as the rest of us if you are willing to taking the abuse you get around here.

138. DevlinC - January 30, 2012

God, so many ingrates on here!

@boborci – thanks for taking the time to come here and talk to us. I didn’t agree with everything you did on the last one but I agreed with much of it and I’m glad we’re going to see another couple of Treks with you and your team at the helm.

139. NYC Enterprise - January 30, 2012

Boborci is a prince among men in the Star Trek universe. Although not quite as good looking as Kurtzman, clearly he’s the superior intellect. Thank you man for your generosity!

140. P Technobabble - January 30, 2012

Since it’s an open forum, you can’t stop some people from going off on their own little head trips and taking the opportunity to take a bash at Mr. Orci — a rather pleasant, humorous and thoughtful guy who sits near the very peak of the Star Trek totem pole. Like what he says, or not, the bottom line, nay-sayers, is that he’s one of the guys in charge and you are not (and you know who you are). I, too, sometimes wonder why Bob Orci even bothers responding to the so-called critics, who, IMO, simply want to argue with Bob because they’re anonymous and can get away with it — at least until Anthony boots their butts outta here .
Apart from keeping the story a secret, I don’t see any reason why Bob would tell us any lies, or brag about his accomplishments, or whatever you think he’s doing. Why should he? Again, he’s already got the job. He doesn’t really need to justify anything he does for our sake. His final justification is the work he has done. It speaks for itself.
I’d suggest some people be a little more respectful, but I realize being anonymous also means no one has to listen.
PS: Sorry, Bob Orci, I don’t mean to wave a flag with your name on it, but some of these comments make my blood boil. And I have to watch my blood pressure…

141. Josh - January 30, 2012

How many other producers would take their time to keep fans updated on the process of a new movie? Bob, you and whole crew are absolutely awesome! Keep up the great work guys!

142. Do You Wanna Dance - January 30, 2012

Hello, Bob. I know a lot of people have nitpicked the lens flares, Engineering, and even where the Enterprise was being built. I didn’t care for any of that. In fact, I liked the lens flares a lot. But, out of all the things I need to nitpick on ST09, I only have one: The number of times Kirk was placed in a chokehold.

Spock did it. Nero did it. Ayel did it.

There’s gotta be some other way to put Kirk at immediate physical threat without having to choke his lights out.

If there’s a call for Kirk to be choked or strangled, please leave that open for some change. Maybe almost getting his face pressed into a blade or high-powered beam, or trying to be shoved out an airlock or off a ledge or something.

143. Craiger - January 30, 2012

Bob, I am looking foward to the Hawaii 5-0/NCIS LA crossover. Those are two of my favorite shows. Can’t wait to see how Hetty, interacts with McGarrett and Danny.

144. Hugh Hoyland - January 30, 2012

I’m envious of Bob, just imagine, he’s on the set right now, watching what he wrote and imagined (along with his co-writers) get filmed by a top notch Hollywood director! How cool is that!

And you know he’s playing around with some of the props just for fun to lol

145. Niall Johnson - January 30, 2012

At the risk of sounding like a petulant five year old, (tip of the hat to @129); and before I say anything, I am one of those who would like something like a movie to take a long time to make and be done right, as opposed to the alternative.

One phrase that amused me in the article however was a reference to how Mr. Abrams would want to move the camera. After the last Star Trek, I’m inclined to hope that he doesn’t move the camera at all! With due respect to all involved in the production, off the shoulder camera work, while workable on the small screen (such as Law and Order), on an IMAX, it brings on a whole new level of motion sickness. Please Mr. Orci! Leave tripods and dolly tracks lying around Mr. Abrams!! Dramamine can only do so much! :-)

146. SciFiGuy - January 30, 2012

I too am glad Bob Orci is here. We can disagree on creative decisions, etc. without being rude jerks!!

Bob — thanks for ALL you do for Trek!! You are the man!!

*cyber handshake and pat on the back*

147. mojomonkey - January 30, 2012

I just hope ST2 will be more cerebral than ST1. It doesn’t have to be The Motion Picture or Nemesis, but at least something on part with the more actiony eps of DS9 would be welcomed by me.

148. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - January 30, 2012

Hey Bob Orci. I read some of the earlier post on here and I feel bad the way some of these posters treated you. It’s one thing to disagree but to keep going after someone who Wtites for the movie and who is on the very inside of said movie and who never has to come on here and talk to us but who loves Trek as much if not more then most of us is just crazy. Yes. We may have some disagreement’s about a few things but that is just nature.
Bob. I want to thank you for coming on here and talking to us sometimes crazy fans. I also hope you decide to Write the next Star Trek Movie as well.

149. rm10019 - January 30, 2012

This thread reminds me of last week’s Parks and Rec ep. Leslie is focused on winning over a single voter who for whatever reason just doesn’t like her.

I’m sorry that bob spent some of his time defending the facts of the Trek production. Who are you to call him a liar? I’m insulted by that, just as a rational human being. You few owe him an apology.

150. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - January 30, 2012

#147. I agree. I think several people on this Site owe Bob Orci a BIG Time apology.

151. Hugh Hoyland - January 30, 2012

I think people have some different ideas as to what “cerebral” is. I thought Star Trek 09 was very cerebral. Heck, the story itself is set in an alternate universe. It had Black Holes, a full on Mind Meld, RED matter, on and on. Pretty esoteric stuff, the stuff solid Sci-Fi is made of IMO.

Unless one is thinking that in order to be cerebral a movie has to have the same pace as 2001: A Space Odyssey. But it moved just fine for me.

152. Blake Powers - January 30, 2012

@BOB Thank you for the input.. It’s amazing how much you can learn about the process in these comments.. I have the utmost confidence in your movie making abilities.. Saw ST09 14 times in theatres so hopefully my opinion counts.

153. Old Geezer - January 30, 2012

147: Your post makes me laugh, but in a good way. I had just scrolled down past many posts to get to the end and make a comment, but then I read yours and have decided that mine will now be in support of yours.

I guess for some it is fun to get to say they ‘interacted with’ Bob Orci.

Peace.

154. VGer23 - January 30, 2012

I agree #139. For a franchise that preaches tolerance, diversity of thought, and brotherhood…Star Trek has some of the most closed-minded, immature, mean-spirited fans I’ve ever seen. I know they’re a vocal minority…but they really are rude, entitled brats. I’m sorry that guys like Bob Orci and JJ Abrams have to endure this kind of crap.

@bob: I, for one, have been a Trek fan my whole life (since the mid-70s) and I’m as confident and happy as ever with the direction of the franchise. Keep doing good work, gentlemen. You are the ones that recognized that the franchise needed to evolve stylistically and thematically in order to generate a new, mnore viable audience and survive the next 10-15 years. You are the ones that recognized that catering to the fans ONLY is a death-sentence to what was already a stagnent and limping franchise…and you created a new kind of Trek that could be embraced more broadly. You are the ones that got Trek back on the map after the limp-noodle performances of Insurrection, Nemesis, and Star Trek Enterprise.

I look forward to the work on this film the same way I did on the last- with optimism and an open mind. You didn’t disappoint in 2009, and I suspect now…with all that time to think about the characters, the universe, the themes, etc…we’re going to have an even better product to enjoy!

Good luck, have fun, and don’t listen to the basement-dwellers. They’d be disappointed in anything…and if you ever filmed the movie THEY wanted to see, it would make 3.7 million dollars domestically and get murdered by the critics…so don’t sweat it! :)

155. Nony - January 30, 2012

Thanks, Bob, if you’re still reading. I appreciate you taking the time to come on here and interact with everyone. I’m sure everyone else does as well, though some of us are assuredly not giving that impression.

156. cw - January 30, 2012

After all the shit that was said to Bob Orci in this thread, I wouldn’t be shocked if he changed Chekov’s character to a female and have Katee Sackoff play her just to shake things up a bit.

157. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - January 30, 2012

Hey Bob Orci. On Behalf of the vast majority of the Trek Movie posters. Please Accept our Apologies for some of the comment’s that happend here on Trekmovie. Those poster’s only speak for them seleves and not for the rest of us.

158. TonyFielding - January 30, 2012

@Iva… Regards to spock in the cage… Sorry, but spock in the cage WAS spock in the series from then on. The 2 part episode The Menagerie clearly shows this. I’ll take the that those episodes and what they clearly showed over what someone said, even the creator himself.

Anyway @boborci, looking forward to the new film. I’m delighted you took your time with it. You guys are busy and obviously don’t want to rush out a dud. I’ll forgive you Transformers 2 ;-).

159. Hat Rick - January 30, 2012

Just one request — more and grander starship battles, please.

160. Do You Wanna Dance - January 30, 2012

One more thing, Bob…

Can you have a redshirt named Ensign Berman? I’m sure you know what to do with him in a throwaway scene. I think it’s only fitting.

161. Iva - January 30, 2012

@ 156 “I’ll take the that those episodes and what they clearly showed over what someone said, even the creator himself.”””””””””

Very interesting.

To question Abrams or Abrams-writers is not allowed.

To say GR doesn’t know what he is talking about when it comes to Spock….. perfectly reasonable.

162. Leen - January 30, 2012

I like this comment section, it’s exciting!

All I can say is don’t bite the hand that feeds you- Orci is bringing us Trek, he can just as soon take it away.

163. CarlG - January 30, 2012

@161: “To question Abrams or Abrams-writers is not allowed.”

Nope, it’s perfectly allowed, just as long as you’re not an insufferable jackass while doing it. This does not seem to be within your capabilities.

164. Pensive's Wetness - January 30, 2012

Whatever we say, Mr Orci, just make the damn film. you guys had me at 2009, when some evil-duer got a russian bootleg of the 2009 film floating around Ike during our 2009 war cruise … pretty sure it came from some pilot in the airwing, migrated down through maintainance cause the pilot loved his maintainers [and AZ's with magic pencils], got into AIMD because those AZ’s always BSing in Production Control, eventually getting into my hands because i was owed favors of a non-dishonorable kind due to my skills at jumping thru flaming ropes, for God, country & the MO.

It was either getting the video or beers at our next liberty port and i dont drink much beer as i used to…

For the record, i did go see the movie at the big screen off base, when we got back to Norfolk AS WELL as buying a Blueray when it came out on disk…. derp. Love you.

165. Iva - January 30, 2012

@163.

Why, thank you.

Another interesting fact of this site.
It is perfectly acceptable to try to abuse people who offer critique of Abrams or Abrams-writers.

166. Buzz Cagney - January 30, 2012

#162 I’m sure Bob would be the first to say Trek is bigger than him. He know’s he’s lucky to be playing in this particular playground. If he doesn’t want it there will be plenty other’s out there that will.

167. TonyFielding - January 30, 2012

@Iva (comment 161)

What is seen on screen contradicts what Gene said. I’ll take the visual over that. So now, it’s canon, as the 2 parter of The Menagerie clearly shows.

168. Phil - January 30, 2012

Well, it looks like a few people continue to fail to understand that opinion isn’t truth. It says a lot about a persons character that someone continues to visit this site when there are small people out there that can only seem to build themselves up by trying to tear someone else down. It’s one thing to disagree, it’s another to be petty about it.

169. Iva - January 30, 2012

167. TonyFielding – January 30, 2012
@Iva (comment 161)

What is seen on screen contradicts what Gene said. I’ll take the visual over that. So now, it’s canon, as the 2 parter of The Menagerie clearly shows.””””””””””””””

Which is the very reason he came out to explain why it is not canon Spock. He made it clear that re-shooting was not acceptable to Paramount after all the funds already used,
and he had no choice but to leave it like as it is.

170. Iva - January 30, 2012

“like as it is.”

Oh, dear, my age is catching up with me.

171. Thorny - January 30, 2012

The big danger of the “movie time doesn’t equal real world time” is that the actors are aging here in the real world. Most obviously, Anton Yelchin is maturing into an adult more and more each movie, such as from “Charlie Bartlett” to “Star Trek” to “Fright Night”. If Star Trek 2013 takes place any less than a year after the first movie, it is going to be obvious that Chekov has grown up a lot from the 17 year old character in Trek 2009. (Yelchin is almost 23 now.)

Of course, Trek has survived worse. We went from Kirstie Alley to Robin Curtis playing Saavik between two movies, and Shatner’s toupee kept changing. But the time differential is a complication that Bad Robot brought on itself.

172. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

I reiterate that there’s a fine line between respectful, equal dialogue and contemptuous foot kissing. I had a good chat with Orci last night, I like the guy. But I wasn’t typing out my messages while in tears of gratitude that the Fates had given me – ME, a mere mortal – the chance to converse with a Prince Among Men, indeed, a man on the level of the exalted Khan…

Come on, seriously. Bob is going to think half of the fans are delusional, blinkered and dogmatic, and the other half are blubbering brown-noses with a rather unhealthy lack of belief in their own ability to achieve what they want in life.

Me? I prefer to be an average, normal guy, and I’ll talk to him like he’s just another guy (yes, a cool guy), because he’s probably fed up being a) treated like crap AND b) treated like someone who isn’t a normal human anymore.

I hope some of you pick up on this.

173. Daoud - January 30, 2012

Whoa. GR created Star Trek. But he isn’t H. Gene Hubbard. This isn’t Trekanetics. He’s not the only interpreter of characters and characterizations. Sure, his statements through the years are key, but not the end-all be-all. Still more, he is unable to comment at all about Bad Robot’s version of Trek, although GR did say that someday Trek would be remade, that even he wished he’d taken a shot at doing just that. To suggest that his statements on Spock now are the pre-eminent gospel truth, after GR’s death, and without him having an idea of how Trek would be redone, is ludicrous.
.
I’d take what D C Fontana and Leonard Nimoy, and also David Gerrold, have to say about Spock with quite a bit more weight than even GR. Particularly their comments now.
.
It is indeed a reasonable extrapolation from The Cage, Yesteryear, and other bits of information that Spock was not always in control of his emotions. He has a strong human half. EVEN in TMP: it’s specifically his human emotions which betray him during Kohlinar. And hey, who takes the credit for writing TMP?? GR.

174. Ciaran - January 30, 2012

“Hey Bob Orci. On Behalf of the vast majority of the Trek Movie posters. Please Accept our Apologies for some of the comment’s that happend here on Trekmovie. Those poster’s only speak for them seleves and not for the rest of us.”

Here, here! I am appalled by some of the posts that people have written to Bob Orci. How dare they think that it’s right to act like a complete jackass to one of the biggest supporters of not only the film but of this site too. Mr. Orci has been nothing but completely gracious to us fans in regards to giving as much info on the movie as he LEGALLY can. Remember, he’s also bound by the several confidentiality agreements as well.

So what if it took four years for the sequel to start production? At least we know that the writers were taking their time crafting the best, most intriguing storyline they can imagine. They were working their arses off with their other projects that they had in the works (just because they worked on one Star Trek movie doesn’t mean that their entire life has to be dedicated to the franchise from here on in 24/7). And I know a lot of people want to hear JJ Abrams be held accountable as the main reason that the film is delayed, and I also think that is wrong. He had a career before Star Trek, he has a career alongside Star Trek right now and he will have a career when he is done with Star Trek.

175. rm10019 - January 30, 2012

Anthony, can you open a poll as to whether you should ban this troll or not? :)

176. TonyFielding - January 30, 2012

169 Iva

I would have just said ‘The character was young and not in full control of his emotions yet’.

Sorry, but in the episode, it suggests it’s the same character 10/15 years earlier… a YOUNGER spock. That’s how I see it, and many others.

Again, what I see on screen, I’ll take as Canon.

By the way, you can criticize boborci. No one’s saying you can’t. Just like I will criticize Gene. We all have opinions.

177. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

175.

Honestly? If it’s a troll, it’s the lamest troll I’ve ever seen. You guys should hang out where I normally do online. Maybe some of you do.

This is nooooooothing.

178. DP McGuire - January 30, 2012

What a bunch of jerks and you know who you are. Bob has the kindness and consideration to come on her and BS with us and some of you guys run your mouth like you know something. You are being critical for what purpose, to prove your are somehow the man? You treat him like crap, and yes you have, and he will avoid this site. Thank him for the data and keep your BS crap to yourself.

179. TonyFielding - January 30, 2012

I have nothing but respect for Bob Orci. Not many in his profession will talk with the fans like this. So 100% respect for the man and his team.

Again, I support their vision of Trek.

180. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

178.

God, come ON. You do realise you’re making the guy out to be a complete loser by insinuating that he’d run off crying because some people on a website were nasty?

He’s better than that!

I’ll keep saying this until it sinks in: if I were him, I’d be more concerned about posts like yours than the nasty posts.

I just… don’t even…

181. Chris Doohan - January 30, 2012

174 Ciaran

I was going to say the same thing. So…ditto

182. Iva - January 30, 2012

176. TonyFielding

Seems like what we two have here, is just a different view of the creative hierarchy, nothing more.

To me, what the creator of ST and the original writers say will always be more important than what Paramount wants as far as TOS is concerned.
And that episode being incorporated with no re-shooting was a Paramount move, original creative people had no choice, and made that clear.

To other fans on the other hand – the actors are canon deciders, even when they too -like Paramount, directly contradict either GR or original writers.

Personally, I’d be mad if Liv Tyler had more say on canon than Toliken :D But there you go.
It was nice talking to you.

I’m off to read the first 80ish comments I skipped before posting mine.

183. CarlG - January 30, 2012

*Sigh*

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/WhyFandomCantHaveNiceThings

I’ll just leave this here.

184. jon1701 - January 30, 2012

Bob Orci is a Star trek fan, he knows as well as anyone that you can’t get two Star Trek fans to agree. On any topic…

One man’s Apple-inspired-modern-take-on-the-TOS-bridge is another man’s lens-flares-make-me-sick-and-why-is-the-viewscreen-now-a-window.

Different strokes for different folks and all that. I doubt he would take the personal attacks from the “hide behind the keyboard” brigade to heart. There’s plenty of love around this place. The vast majority of us are intelligent and/or civil and understand how difficult it is to write a multi-million dollar movie that appeals to everyone, including the many different hardcore Star trek groups (there are a lot of them!)

I couldn’t do it (although I’ve always secretly wished I could have a go) so I can’t wish him anything but the best

I’ve watched Star trek the last 35 years, seen every episode of every show and every movie.

I thought Star Trek 2009 was great,.

Keep up the good work Bob & co!

185. Pinsent - January 30, 2012

@183… Nice little write up. It couldn’t be more true and it’s unfortunate that it often works out that way. Trek fandom hasn’t had this kind of interaction with the creative team of Trek before and it’s going to be ruined by “fans” who either genially did not like the film and can’t criticize constructively, or think that they’re really clever and have something to prove.

186. TonyFielding - January 30, 2012

182. Iva

Out of curiosity, can you provide me with a link to the quote please? I still don’t agree with it, as like I said, I don’t consider it canon. You could argue that DS9, Voyager, ENT, and most of the feature films aren’t canon, as they didn’t have Genes input.

187. TonyFielding - January 30, 2012

@boborci

Just curious, if we will see a more serious, more hand to hand capable Kirk in the new film? And if we’ll also see a more serious scotty who gets into some scraps himself?

188. Will - January 30, 2012

Wow. Great to hear that camera “choreography” can dictate what characters say and where they say it. Sounds less like a movie and more like a music video when you phrase it like that.

189. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - January 30, 2012

Remember. Bob Orci comes on here because he loves to chat with us Hard Core Trek Fans and get some ideas from us. Yes I know he has gotten some Ideas from us here at Trek Movie. But. Also remember. He can just as easily never come here again. How many other Writters of other shows or Movies go to Sites like this one and do that. Does Lucus to that for Star Wars. Did J Michael Starzinsky do that for Babylon5. Did Rick berman do that for any of the Trek Series he was on.
NO!!!!! to none of them.
I think it is pretty Coll that a major player in Hollywood would come on to our site and talk to us and answer a lot of our question’s.
Thank you Bob Orci.

190. Embarrassed to be a Trek fan - January 30, 2012

Anyone who says the Spock seen in “The Cage” is not the same character seen elsewhere needs to check and make sure his or her head is actually attached at the neck. That is so ridiculous as to leave me speechless. As for Roddenberry, he was well-known to fudge the truth, so you really can’t take his word as gospel. Genius? Yes. God? No.

191. Tanner Waterbury - January 30, 2012

Wow… I think this article is the MOST I’ve seen Bob comment on in all of the Trekmovie history.

192. I'm Dead Jim! - January 30, 2012

Hey Bob! Feel free to send a pic from the production anytime. It can be ANYTHING! Doesn’t have to be too revealing, even just a chair with Chris Pine’s name on the back. Throw us a visual bone puh-leaze!

193. Nemesis4909 - January 30, 2012

45
Maybe some of us writers here should get together and start something. (This sort of broad statement is where ideas begin.)

I’m an aspiring writer and think this is a great idea, how should we all proceed?

194. Elias Javalis - January 30, 2012

14.

Mr Orci, you and your team did a wonderful job for trek 2009, I suspect many of us want to see more of your good work.

195. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - January 30, 2012

Oh and Bob Orci. I love Hawaii Five O. One of the best shows on TV. Can’t wait to see the N.C.I.S L.A and Hawaii Five O crossover. Like I said to you a few weeks back on another thred. Would love to see Both N.C.I.S and L.A and C.S.I and Hawaii Five O in a Major C.B.S. Show’s Crossover of Epic proportion’s. Just think of the rating’s. Lol.

196. Trekker5 - January 30, 2012

Wow! I’ve never seen Bob talk this much to us on here!! Very cool of him to put up with some it;after reading some the crap thrown at him I’m surprised he stayed around!! Hope you come back soon Mr.Orci and thank you!! :)

197. Captain of the USS Monte Carlo - January 30, 2012

It would be amusing to see some of the people on this site come up with better stuff than Bob Orci is doing. I am a avid fan of the prime universe, but i agree as everyone else that Star Trek needed new life. Sure, it would be nice to CORRECT Berman’s stupid killing of Kirk, but Bill Shatner (THE BEST EVER) still did agree to it, so let it go. Star Trek 2009 wasn’t a perfect movie, but it was better than 3/4 of the crap i read on here about people’s ideas. I certainly don’t have the talent to write a script like that better than they can! So I accept that we have TWO universes and that they will eventually merge back together. Keep up the great work, Bob!

198. Trekker5 - January 30, 2012

Oh,and I mean no offence to anybody,so please don’t be mad. I’m just stating my mind is all.

199. Ciaran - January 30, 2012

@Chris Doohan

I have no doubt you agree, sir. It’s people like those trolls that give Star Trek fans a bad name.

And thanks for replying to my post specifically! :D

200. Captain of the USS Monte Carlo - January 30, 2012

People are also amusing when it comes to ‘Well Chris Pine doesn’t look like Bill Shatner’ and so on. Well I am sorry, but this is about the CHARACTERS, NOT what the actors look like! Sure, we will always know that Bill Shatner IS Capt. Kirk, but so is Chris Pine. And so is James Cawley at Phase Two. Sure, in that series James doesn’t LOOK anything close to Shatner, he’s more like Elvis in Space, BUT its his character interpretation that submerses you, you just have to have some imagination. Most of the people who complain on here have NO imagination. Phase II is a great online saga and it has some bad acting and some effects are bad, but they love what they are doing and intrpret it to be as in the spirit, that’s what bob is doing also! Great work Bob.

201. Captain of the USS Monte Carlo - January 30, 2012

only i didnt mean the acting was bad and that the effects were bad, Bob, LOL

202. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - January 30, 2012

I like James Cawley over at Pase 2. He does a pretty good job.

203. Dee - lvs moon' surface - January 30, 2012

boborci is a tough guy … he can handle it for sure… walking under the pressure from trekkers……;-) :-)

204. MJ - January 30, 2012

Bob is open to legitimate critical responses, and enjoys responding to them and having a legitimate back and forth with fans.

That being said, crap posts like Iva and the likes of her though is uncalled for. I join many of you in saying that I have also had enough with those types of negative mean-spirited comments. Bob deserves better than that here.

205. Embarrassed to be a Trek fan - January 30, 2012

James Cawley? Yike. I think his performance and look are both horrible, as is the writing in his series.

206. MJ - January 30, 2012

@172 “I reiterate that there’s a fine line between respectful, equal dialogue and contemptuous foot kissing. I had a good chat with Orci last night, I like the guy. But I wasn’t typing out my messages while in tears of gratitude that the Fates had given me – ME, a mere mortal – the chance to converse with a Prince Among Men, indeed, a man on the level of the exalted Khan… Come on, seriously. Bob is going to think half of the fans are delusional, blinkered and dogmatic, and the other half are blubbering brown-noses with a rather unhealthy lack of belief in their own ability to achieve what they want in life. Me? I prefer to be an average, normal guy, and I’ll talk to him like he’s just another guy (yes, a cool guy), because he’s probably fed up being a) treated like crap AND b) treated like someone who isn’t a normal human anymore. I hope some of you pick up on this.”

Well said, Franco!

207. PSB2009 - January 30, 2012

I’m curious to see if the new movie is used as a vehicle to make a comment on some current social or political issue. Some of the best, not all, of the shows and movies dealt with current topics under the veil of Sci-Fi. I’d love to see that blend of characters and a message brought back to the franchise- I didn’t see a grand message in the last film, even though I thought it was great Trek (and there were a few, like friendship, the need to take risk and explore, accepting new ideas and opinions of others)

208. Praetor Tal - January 30, 2012

188. I’m a priest IRL, and the word I use is kinaesthetics. Every church I work at has a different sanctuary, a different set of customs. Does it change the Mass? Not essentially. But the footwork is different and the needs of the community are different and my interactions with the ministers and acolytes at the altar are different. Things change, often on the fly.

The amount of petulance and impertinence in this thread is just stunning, and rather uncharacteristic of this website (I’ve been visiting daily for at least five years). It would be a shame if we were to run Bob Orci off, but I wouldn’t blame him in the least.

209. trekprincess - January 30, 2012

Boborci good to see you here on Trekmovie I loved the last movie and so looking forward to the sequel :):)

210. TonyFielding - January 30, 2012

188. Will

No, that’s just part of the process of film making.

211. NuFan - January 30, 2012

87

Bob, I’m glad you realize the people posting here do not represent Star Trek fans.

From what I can see, they only represent the aged and/or the mentally ill. So it’s even more special that you’re willing to come here and tolerate it.

Thank You!

212. Keachick - rose pinenut - January 30, 2012

#108 – “No, men who deny the existence of male privilege can not speak of sexism against women or men.
Men ignorant of it neither.
Educated men can – the key word being educated.”

You really need to express yourself better, especially if this is meant for white educated males who have “privilege”. There you go again – talking about “privilege”. You also accused me of “privilege” simply because I am white.

Iva – this is what you seem to do. So it seems that males and people of fair skin have “privilege”, therefore anything they may say about issues like racism and sexism are deemed invalid and unworthy of consideration, even if they happen to be relating something from their own personal experiences.

You are the proof that there is reverse discrimination when it comes to racist and sexist comments and behaviour. Such racism and sexism is just as unfair, presumptuous and odious as the more commonly understood racist and sexist behaviour. I am just wondering who might be the victims of such odious discrimination in the future. Perhaps dumping unfairly on white people and men might become the norm. I hope not, but with people like Iva about propagating their brand of selective sexual and racial putdowns, who knows…

213. Alice - January 30, 2012

@211

And you are upset that people just don’t swallow anything up with the words Star Trek on it? Shake your head! Not all fans who posses some good questions (and some dumb ones) are not any less of a fan then you or anyone else!

I am hoping they fix the mess they created in the last one. They said they went back in time and now everything has been altered. It is NOT an alternate universe. One line in the movie to address this problem is simple “What happened to Spock Prime? Answer: He want back to his universe.” But we know they won’t say that because they went back in time not another universe.

I do find it hard to believe that Spock Prime would say “Oh well” to the destruction of Vulcan and the death of billions of people. I am surprised that Leonard Nimoy even agreed to do that movie with such a fundamental lack of knowledge about his character and Star Trek in general. Spock would never allow that to happen. Especially if he was involved in the destruction.

214. Alice - January 30, 2012

some random thoughts. I do hope that this movie is not going to follow more of the Star Wars prequel wanna be formula again. The last one was so obvious. Stop mentioning Star Trek II as your “blue print”. If you can’t make your OWN Star Trek II via Star Trek XII then maybe you shouldn’t be doing any Trek films. Maybe we can get Nicholas Meyer to do the movie instead.

You erased the entire Star Trek universe (except Enterprise which now has major contradictions) in order to “start a new”. All from what we have seen now is and keep hearing is “rehash”. To quote Homer Simpsons “Borrrinnnggg”. So nothing new just someone giving us their “take” on something. Sorry but that is truly boring.

If every movie has to be treated so that somebody off the street can follow it (aka dumb it down) then that is too bad. It is a Trek movie and it has been around for over 45 years. If they never heard of Star Trek then tell them to say Hello to Ginger and Mary Ann for me!

Are we going to see Scotty become more of the “Jar Jar Binks” of Trek in this next movie? Because Trek is not about having the “comic relief” character etc. Again pandering to the masses that are not Trek fans won’t make you money. The very idea of “Sci Fi” and you will see people go “No thanks”. They are just not interested. They would rather see more “Twilight” instead.

On more thing…Bring back Captain Kirk..aka William Shatner! Sorry but Pine can’t and didn’t cut it.

215. OneBuckFilms - January 30, 2012

@213 – Q: What Happened to Old Spock?
A: What relevence does it have to any story currently running?

– It IS an Alternate Reality, spawned in 2233 –

Uhura: An Alternate Reality
Spock: Precisely.

There simply is no “mess” to clear up.

216. OneBuckFilms - January 30, 2012

214 – It was NOT erased. Multiverse is Canon (per this movie, and Parallels).

217. I am not Herbert - January 30, 2012

great… all we need is more cinamatographical gimicry for JJ to play with…

let’s see if we can out-gimic lens flares!! ROFLMAO =D

218. SciFiGuy - January 30, 2012

#213 — It IS a parallel timeline!!!! Damn, why is that so hard for people to understand? It is NOT the same timeline as the one where Kara the Imorg stole Spock’s Brain…

Spock Prime went to the past in a parallel Trek universe.

219. Will - January 30, 2012

RE: #210 TonyFielding

As a film maker myself I can understand camera moves and blocking and all that fun stuff having an effect on the flow of a scene. But from the description put forth about choreography of the camera changing lines of dialogue and who says what based on where they are relative to what the camera is gonna do, it seems the camera is dictating the story in these, hopefully limited, parts of the movie. It comes back to flash over substance versus substance over flash. Hence the music video comparison.

I *hope* the movie chooses substance over flash but given the current world of cinema I *fear* it will choose flash over substance. In the end it *may* end up being a middle ground between the two extremes. From the description, though, it concerns me, not as a cynic who likes old Trek and had issue with Trek 2009, but as a working film maker who has had the (mis)fortune of working with all-flash-no-substance-hacks like Brett Ratner.

220. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - January 30, 2012

Hey Alice. Fist of all. The Origibal Universe is still there. It was not Erased. 2nd of all. Trek 09 was a great Movie. Also. Trek needed to get going again because before Bob Orci and the court came along. Trek was pretty much DEAD!!!. Scotty was no where close to being a Jar Jar Binks. Nimoy did the movie because it was fun and exciting and a great script which turned into a great movie. ALso. I have been a hard core trek fan since the mid 70s.

221. Keachick - rose pinenut - January 30, 2012

#133 – “Not really impressed by all this ranting from Orci on here. I’m not sure I buy his “I like a good debate” comment as a way to explain it away.”

Who says Bob is ranting? Besides he has as much right as anybody else to debate, converse, discuss as any other poster. What has him being the writer got to do with anything? It is wonderful that he spends time and also writes the Star Trek sequel, but he is still a person like everyone else here, with his own perspectives and reasons along with a bit more inside knowledge about how scripts get written and films get made. The explanations Bob Orci has given has helped clear up confusion that many people can and do have about aspects of the film making and the writing process etc. It is just that some posters can be rather rude…

So, you are not “socially inept”, you are successful, you have rubbed noses with celebrities, politicians, diplomats, journalists etc. Whoopdeedoo. What a rude presumptuous post. I have no idea who you are and more importantly, I doubt you have little idea of who the majority of us are who regularly post here, what sex they are, what race/culture they come from, how old they are, whether they have a family or not, what work they do, where they live…

222. Desstruxion - January 30, 2012

Will James Cawley be in the new flick? Just wondering.

223. Alice - January 30, 2012

@215

It is NOT an alternate reality. Do you forget the comments Spock Prime says to him on the moon?

-129 years from now. A star will explode…that is where I am from Jim….the future!

-Scotty…”Are you from the future?”
-Kirk:Yes he is, I am not.

NOT an alternate reality.

224. Alice - January 30, 2012

-Hey Alice. Fist of all. The Origibal Universe is still there. It was not Erased.

The time line is changed so TOS does not exist.

-2nd of all. Trek 09 was a great Movie.

To some but not to others.

-Trek needed to get going again because before Bob Orci and the court came along. Trek was pretty much DEAD!!!.

Trek needed a break from TV and new writers. Berman and Braga stayed too long at the party. S4 of ENT showed you what could happen when you get new blood via Coto.

-Scotty was no where close to being a Jar Jar Binks.

That whole scene after Spock steps down as Capt. “I like it here”. and the “tube” scene was from Willy Wanka. Sorry but every line that came out Scotty was pure Jar Jar.

-Nimoy did the movie because it was fun and exciting and a great script which turned into a great movie.

He got paid a boat load of money and the movie revolved around him. Ego speaking. It did the trick.

-ALso. I have been a hard core trek fan since the mid 70s.

So what? I have been a fan as well and I thought the last movie pandered to the Star Wars crowd.

225. SciFiGuy - January 30, 2012

I think Spock is assuming the same star will explode in THAT timeline as well. Spock’s conversation with Uhura (as mentioned above) is the final word on the alternate timeline….

Alternate timeline, in the past…

226. I'm Dead Jim! - January 30, 2012

@223 Watch the movie again and play close attention to the conversation on the bridge about the “alternate reality” brought on by Nero’s little excursion. So yes, Spock prime is from the future but it’s an alternate future.

227. cdp - January 30, 2012

@223

Spock also tells Kirk where he is from his father sees him become captain of the Enterprise while in this time line kirks father dies on the Kelvin.

228. SciFiGuy - January 30, 2012

#224 — Nimoy didn’t do the film for the money. If that were so, he would have appeared in Generations. Why is the concept of a parallel universe so hard to grasp? The JJverse no more “erases” the TOS timeline any more than the mirrorverse did.

229. Jack - January 30, 2012

172. Good point, indeed. And, yeah, I agree with you earlier that TOS had a lot of stinkers — that’s why I get a little frustrated with some posts about how Trek 09 should have been a current events allegory with a message, just like Roddenberry would have wanted. In reality, most TOS episodes weren’t allegories, and the few allegories included some of Trek’s worst, clunkiest episodes. We all have different ideas of what made the Trek “that worked” work. I think it’s interesting to talk about it.

Heck, even those making it have had different ideas about it — but I think whenever they tried to get back to what “made Trek work” — instead of focusing on a great story and a character arc — they started looking at a checklist of what Trek needs to include and we got things like Trek V, Insurrection and Nemesis. And I know I sound like I’m constantly bashing Berman, and I probably am, but it’s more that Trek became a franchise by then — like McDonalds or Starbucks — where each show/flick had to fit the brand. They were well engineered, but they weren’t adventures anymore. They weren’t great storytelling. There was no wonder. They felt like an obligation — the equivalent of opening up a new franchise store in that part of town because there isn’t one there yet.

What I liked about Star Trek ’09 the most was the confidence. it looked like they knew they weren’t going to please everybody, but were trying to be faithful to what they thought was the spirit of the best Trek stories and the Trek universe in general. Yep, I have quibbles and always will, but I support what they’re doing.

People like nufan and adolescent nightmare? Awesome that you’re here — but, what, everybody should just be saying “Trek ’09 was great!” and anybody who disagrees is, well, a fossil or a nut? I liked the movie a lot. But, as a fan, I find it neat to discuss, with other fans here, what we think worked and what didn’t. That, and I can’t stop being baited by people who say Trek ’09 was Star Wars. ;)

Yours,

“The old” (over 29) and “the mentally ill” (a little, justifiably I hope, depressed after a layoff from a job in a “dying” [but not really] industry)… :)

230. JOHNNYB807 - January 30, 2012

@boborci

I know you’ve signed off long ago, but I just wanted to take this opportunity to comment on my personal observation that you’re taking a lot of flack from a bunch of monday morning quarterbacks that seem to be “shotgunning” what little they know (and that’s not much) at you. I personally enjoyed ST: 2009 a great deal, and considering the writers strike that you all had to endure i’d have to say that the final product was a wonderful production, something that the box office returns (and the presence of ST:2012) would seem to reflect. What’s more, from what i’ve read about the choices that the “Supreme Court” seem to have made on ST: 2009, it gives me full faith & confidence in the ST: 2012 team. Given the success of ST:2009 you now have all the time & creative flexibility you wanted before. Given previous comments about wanting to have something epic and different (Think Empire Strikes Back) as well as everything i’ve just said, I’d just like to say thank you for your hard work & the care that you’ve all taken to respect the ST franchise, without which there would be no ST at all (IMHO). So work hard, keep your nose to the grindstone & don’t take any wooden nickles. I believe in you.

231. Adolescent Nightmare - January 30, 2012

87.

3% BwaaaaaaaaaHaaaaaaaaaaaHaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!!

Lick it, whiners!!!!!!!

232. Craiger - January 30, 2012

IVA, just making a Trek movie for Trek fans would not bring in ticket sales. Wasn’t their even controversy about how many Trek/Scifi that their actually was in the 60’s and that they were lying about the number of letters that were being sent into the NBC?

233. Commodore Adams - January 30, 2012

“Thanks to advances in film making, we can move the camera around the ship in ways you couldn’t before.”

I am very curious as to what those advances are and what is really meant by moving the camera around in ways you couldn’t before.

I am not going to read all the comments, so I am not sure if this was answered before or speculated about.

Can any one care to speculate or enlighten me? Thanks.

234. cw - January 30, 2012

I can only say this about Phase II: I had pretty much NO interest in TOS, since compared to TNG, then DS9 then VOY THEN FINALLLY ENT, it paled in comparison. But then I discovered Phase II on Youtube and its frickin’ awesome! I love every episode, think the production value is really good and I really admire James Cawley (and he is most definitely James Kirk in his rendition)
This production got my interest in TOS back and that’s all he was probably trying to accomplish anyway: get some of the fan boys his own age to see what they say as kids. Good shit, for sure.
Then the new TOS special effects eps came out and they are awesome too.
Don’t disregard Cawley’s contribution, he’s made my interest return and I am sure I am not the only one.

235. Adolescent Nightmare - January 30, 2012

I thought the new universe has no canon. Go back to the old universe where you belong.

236. Pauln6 - January 30, 2012

The Butterfly Effect is not only part of Trek Canon but the whole basis for the movie. It’s one thing to say that you don’t like the direction of the movie; it’s another thing to allege that the writers have behaved in bad faith by corrupting the characters somehow. What about the Mirror Universe? This is all part of Many Worlds theory, which is all part of Trek Canon. What matters most is that an awful lot of people enjoyed what they saw on screen!

Now I thought a lot of the stuff in the movie was far too silly, albeit my main issue with the Uhura relationship was the risk of unprofessional behaviour while on duty (like the excruciating kissing in the transporter room scene but I’m sure the scene melted the hearts of many causal female viewers who aren’t anally retentive about military protocol). A balance has to be struck and you can’t please all of the people all of the time.

If they maintain roughly the same level in the sequel while making it a lot less sexist, I’ll probably forgive them a lot of minor transgressions.

Although I will still complain about them on the forums. ;)

237. Charla - January 30, 2012

Great article and loved hearing about the other things going on as well. Thanks Bob. I find it interesting to hear how things are managed and had no idea you and the others were doing other Trek projects. I’m going to break down and hit the comic book stores now with my teens, and I am anxiously awaiting the new game as well! STOL just didn’t do it for me though I still occassionally play it.

PS I agree with you 211 – NuFan- I wouldn’t usually infer to anyone being mentally ill for their opinions, but it is tiresome to see how many posters want to belittle the very people who have brought our beloved franchise back to us, and it is hard to take these posters seriously when they are constantly on “attack” mode.

Thanks again Bob, there are many more of us that appreciate your time than others, even if we disagree at times, your a class act- which is why your where you are today, I suspect. You play well with others! :D

238. Jack - January 30, 2012

PS. The folks saying things along the lines of “how dare you (loser who will never amount anything, at home on a computer) talk to a successful writer/producer this way?” Well, we’re not prank calling his house or marching with signs in front of the Paramount lot. He’s here and I’m (and I can only speak for myself) bringing up things that trouble/interest me.

There’ve been previous discussions and back and forth. The talk here last night was extended from a talk that started on another post. Bob seems more than capable of defending himself and his movie(s). And, yeah, it’s super swell that he comes here — but, what, are we supposed to not have discussions because Bob’s worked hard, made a lot of money and written/produced myriad hit projects? And, yeah, he does get a lot of “Transformers 2 sucked!” “Gene’s rolling in his grave (er, in space)!” crap on here. I don’t like the tone of those either.

I wasn’t trying to be a dick, but was wondering if there was stuff, say in Trek 09, that he wasn’t happy with, honestly, because he’s always quick with a good comeback/explanation for past gripes about minor things like the two Delta Vegas. I didn’t expect him to answer. If he admitted to things he’d wished had worked better, some of us and the press might jump all over him.

Last night we got into the question of possible sexism in Trek and in Trek ’09. It was interesting stuff to talk about, especially while procrastinating on work/stuff needing to get done in the real world. Do we know what the heck we’re talking about? Well, I don’t.

Many on here say they want Trek to be about issues, we want it to matter, we want it to trigger thought and discussion — well, the fact that some people are still thinking and talking about Trek generally and about Trek ’09, three years later, kind of shows that, yeah, it did give us stuff to think about.

239. Chris Doohan - January 30, 2012

233

He’s likely referring to the Steadicam

240. Charla - January 30, 2012

234 I too really loved the original side effects too! Especially the transporter room, then phasers and communicators- Perfect.

241. Mel - January 30, 2012

I really wish there are more women in not stereotypical roles in the next movies. I especially like to see more women in power.

We had in the last movie only those more prominent female characters:

Uhura: a big part of her screentime was about being the love interest of Spock and Kirk

Winona: mother, wife

Amanda: mother, wife

Gaila: sex partner of Kirk

There was really not much more to the roles of Winona, Amanda and Gaila. Uhura was shown doing something work related, but she is only one women in a cast full of men. Otherwise there were only some background female characters, but they hardly spoke at all and we don’t know their names.

And in regards to people in power we had the following characters:

the leader of the villains (Nero) – male
first officer of the villains – male
captain of the Kelvin (Robau) – male
first officer of the Kelvin (George Kirk) – male
the most prominent admiral (Pike) – male
(acting) captain of the Enterprise (James Kirk) – male
first officer of the Enterprise (Spock) – male

In the scene, in which Spock neglects to go to the Vulcan Academy, there are 7 people in the council. The old Vulcan, who leads it and speaks for the most time, is a man. The people sitting right and left to him are men, too. Only 2 of those 7 are women and they aren’t sitting in the middle.

There are 10 people (I don’t count those more at the sides) sitting in a row at Kirk’s hearing shortly before the emergency call of Vulcan. I assume most or all of them are admirals or other important people of Starfleet. Only 2 of those 10 people are women. The only admiral of them with a speaking role is of course a man (Admiral Barnett). The two admirals to his left and right, who get more screen time than the others thanks to sitting next to him, are of course also men.

And shortly before Vulcan gets destroyed, Spock beams down to the planet and goes into the cave to the Vulcan high council. I count 7 people there. Only 2 of them are women and 1 of those women is Amanda. I doubt that Amanda is a part of the council. The Vulcans in Spock’s youth and at the Vulcan Academy hearing seem to not really like humans. It looks like she is only there because of Sarek. This means that only 1 of 6 members of the Vulcan high council is a woman.

All in all there is a very meager amount of women in leader positions in the last movie. None of them spoke a line.

242. boborci - January 30, 2012

188. Will – January 30, 2012
Wow. Great to hear that camera “choreography” can dictate what characters say and where they say it. Sounds less like a movie and more like a music video when you phrase it like that.

——

I suppose that could sound bad, but it really is minor, and worth it because you’ve just never seen a camera move through the bridge of a starship the way JJ and his amazing team of camera operators are doing it. It also means that some additional bridge crew that might never get a line actually do, and it gives it a more realistic, big feeling. Agree with you that camera moves shouldn’t dictate the story, but that is hardly what is happening.

243. OneBuckFilms - January 30, 2012

Alice, if you don’t like the movie, at least get the facts straight in your criticism.

– Well established in dialogue (Uhura’s break-the-fourth-wall “Alternate Reality” line), hinted at in circumstance (The Changes openly acklnowledged by spock re: Kirk’s dad seeing him take command, and the old-spock/young-spock conversation about universe-ending paradoxes) and the simple fact that causality has not broken down, firmly establishes that an Alternate Reality (aka Alternate Universe) was spawned in 2233.
– Spock mentioning being from “The Future” is still correct by the fact that time travel did occur. It wasn’t THEIR future, but the one spock CAME FROM.

Spock did not break out the diagrams etc., because this is something somewhat secondary to the general story.

244. boborci - January 30, 2012

184. jon1701 – January 30, 2012

Yes, exactly. If some of you ever stop complaining, I will know you don’t care anymore.

245. Charla - January 30, 2012

234 again : ) About the camera, did you watch all the extra footage on the making of the movie on the Blu Ray version? Some of the special effects in regards to the way the cameras were utilized in more difficult scenes were talked about, and I enjoyed watching the creative ways they shot the film using such high-end film equipment.

246. boborci - January 30, 2012

166. Buzz Cagney – January 30, 2012
#162 I’m sure Bob would be the first to say Trek is bigger than him.

—————-

Yup.

247. boborci - January 30, 2012

152. Blake Powers – January 30, 2012
@BOB Thank you for the input.. It’s amazing how much you can learn about the process in these comments.. I have the utmost confidence in your movie making abilities.. Saw ST09 14 times in theatres so hopefully my opinion counts.
—-

Wow!! Thank you!

248. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

Thanks MJ!

Guys who want to write together: any ideas where we could do that? Any forums you run/know of that would be suitable?

@boborci

Hey man, how’s it going?

I know it’s been done in a TV episode, but: don’t you think a Year of Hell type story would be cool? Say, for example, the Enterprise is trapped behind Klingon lines for a year, the crew pulling through by sheer luck and dedication. How’s that sound?

249. boborci - January 30, 2012

142. Do You Wanna Dance – January 30, 2012
Hello, Bob. I know a lot of people have nitpicked the lens flares, Engineering, and even where the Enterprise was being built. I didn’t care for any of that. In fact, I liked the lens flares a lot. But, out of all the things I need to nitpick on ST09, I only have one: The number of times Kirk was placed in a chokehold.

Spock did it. Nero did it. Ayel did it.

There’s gotta be some other way to put Kirk at immediate physical threat without having to choke his lights out.

If there’s a call for Kirk to be choked or strangled, please leave that open for some change. Maybe almost getting his face pressed into a blade or high-powered beam, or trying to be shoved out an airlock or off a ledge or something.

————

Fair enough and duly noted.

250. Keachick - rose pinenut - January 30, 2012

@ Bob Orci – I know – you are no doubt on set working feverishly alongside JJ Abrams, the actors et al to get a scene or two “in the can” – Go Orci!

Anyway, just a couple of little things – Has the beagle been cast yet? I hope so. I doubt that I will have my Pine/Kirk meet and fall in love with a lovely Menosian lady (or she with him) in this film. However, there still could be a little scene with cameo of Scott Bakula (Archer) giving Kirk one of his fine beagles as captain’s mascot in order to continue a fine tradition begun by Captain Archer – first captain of the Enterprise.

Please, Bob. Write the scene. Show it to JJ Abrams. Get Scott Bakula. Find the beagle. I am pretty sure CP likes dogs so it should be a doddle…or perhaps, it’s done already. Well, in that case… uh, never mind… Good man. Carry on!

Another teeny thing – I would think that all starships would have a chain of command, if only a temporary one, as would have been the case for the Enterprise in Star Trek 09. So why did Dr McCoy say that once Spock removed himself as acting captain, that the ship had no captain or first officer? That did not make much sense. It surely would have, the only difference is that Captain Pike decided to slot Kirk into becoming acting Captain Spock’s first officer, instead of whoever it was meant to be – Chief Engineer?, Sulu?, ?. Just make sure that there is a legitimate chain of command in the next movie…Just saying.

Good man, Bob! Carry on!

251. boborci - January 30, 2012

139. NYC Enterprise – January 30, 2012
Boborci is a prince among men in the Star Trek universe. Although not quite as good looking as Kurtzman, clearly he’s the superior intellect. Thank you man for your generosity!

—–

Alex is gonna love that. You sure you know which is which?;)

252. Craiger - January 30, 2012

I loved the reboot movie. My favorite scene is Kirk and McCoy seeing the Enterprise for the first time. That music was incredible!

253. Craiger - January 30, 2012

I mean for the first time actually built. Kirk saw I forgot Kirk saw in earlier when it was still under construction.

254. jas_montreal - January 30, 2012

Thanks boborci,

We can always use some more juicy updates :P

255. Admiral Archer's Prize Beagle - January 30, 2012

#249

… was hoping for a scene where Admiral Archer inspects Enterprise – in particular engineering – where he and Scotty come face to face…

256. TonyFielding - January 30, 2012

@boborci

Hi bob, just to bring some questions forward to ya, if you can answer that is (spoilers and all that hehe :-) ).

-Will kirk be more competent in hand to hand combat than he was in the first film? I know he wasn’t trained in combat at the start and he was still a cadet by the time he was on the drill platform and facing nero, but just curious.

-Will scotty be more serious and himself show he can handle himself? Less comic relief maybe?

257. MJ - January 30, 2012

@221 (Keachick, responding to post @133) “So, you are not “socially inept”, you are successful, you have rubbed noses with celebrities, politicians, diplomats, journalists etc. Whoopdeedoo. What a rude presumptuous post.”

I agree completely, Keachick. Nothing in worse that anonymous people name dropping on espousing their supposed importance. This is as bad as that guy earlier in these posts who claimed he knew several of the actors personally, with one being someone a friend dates. Reminds me of the great line from Spaceballs:

“I am your father’s brother’s nephew’s cousin’s former roommate.”

People who post anonymously and name drop or say how important they are are LOSERS.

258. boborci - January 30, 2012

128. KHAN 2.0 – January 30, 2012
bob orci

did you do any particular special Trek research in preparation for the script/whilst writing> – i.e. re reading some of the novels, some you had never read before? re-viewing the entire TOS eps or TNG? other SF movies or novels?

if so which particular novels or eps stood out in helping with the script in a similar way to how stuff like Prime Directive, Yesterdays Ent, Spocks World, Best Destiny, Star Wars OT, etc were said to have influenced the first movie

that is if you can allude to any without giving spoilers of course

——–

YES! can’t list all, but I reread Prime Directive because I always thought the voices in that movie were pitch perfect. One of my favorite books.

259. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - January 30, 2012

Hey Alice. As Scotty said. Everyone is Entitled to there opnion. You are as well. But your opnion is in the vast Minority. Mine is in the more Big time Majority.

260. Nick Cook - January 30, 2012

So it’s all JJ’s fault. Someone bring me my torch, pitchfork and collection of villagers.! ;)

261. boborci - January 30, 2012

125. 4 8 15 16 23 42 – January 30, 2012

@boborci, on behalf of all respectful and gentle Star Trek fans, I want to apologize for the deplorable behavior of some of the posters here. Not all of us necessarily agree with all of your choices in the writing of Star Trek 2009, and surely not all of us will agree with all of your choices in the writing of Star Trek 2013, but nevertheless we deferentially acknowledge the difference between you and us: You are a successful Hollywood writer, and we are just consumers, most of whom will never amount to anything. You have managed to do the thing that most artists never achieve – make a living from your craft – whereas we are lucky to have had a single aspiration in our lives. When you type at a computer, you are creating something that millions will witness, whereas when we type at our computers, our navel-gazing armchair philosophizing is lucky to be read by the very next poster.

So, if you end up reading this, please take heart that some of us appreciate what you’re doing, its real worth for the fans and the franchise, and how difficult it must really be.

——–

I appreciate the sentiment from you and so many others, but there is truly no need to apologize. I get it. I have been there and felt similarly about others before I went behind the curtain (or sold out, depending on how you look at it;). And though it can get heated on occasion, it is all part of the fun of the internets.

262. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - January 30, 2012

Hey Bob. Thanks for coming back here. After last night. Don’t know if I would have. Lol
Bob. Any Chance you can get us at least one leaked pic from the set. You know. Maybe J.J doing a Lens flare or a pic of the bridge with no one there. Something. Anything. Please!!!!!!

263. boborci - January 30, 2012

124. Devon – January 30, 2012
Hey Bob/Anthony, I know we’re only into a couple of weeks into shooting, but are there any plans to do any live-from-the-set fan Q&As like was done during the first film?

——

We’ll make it happen.

264. boborci - January 30, 2012

123. CmdrR – January 30, 2012

“Get your excercise and don’t forget to love on the family.”

——-

such good advice, thank you. Easy to forget.

265. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - January 30, 2012

Hey Bob. Have you put any thought into writting the next Star Trek Movie.

266. Craiger - January 30, 2012

Bob, I read the Destiny series that was good. They are also continuing the Enterprise series with the Romulan War that book was good. I think their was another old Trek book that had time travel in it where the 1701 and the 1701-D saw other in a time rift and the 1701-D had some of the 1701 crew members on I think one was Admiral Checkov.

267. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - January 30, 2012

Hey Craiger. I think that book was Star Trek. Federation. It had Zeferen Cochron and the companion being rescued by the Enterprise as they were being chased by someone from Cochrons past. It did have the Enterprise and Enterprise D meet face to face. Great Book.

268. Charla - January 30, 2012

237 Jack, I hear you- I agree with you for the most part. I know Bob can fend for himself, and that Trek fans will disagree on many topics in regard to Trek. What I hate to see is a disrespect for Bob (and/or anyone taking time to post for that matter) while voicing their opinion. I may take it too far to the Star Trek’s ideals in wishing we could resolve the differences we have amongst ourselves respectfully and tactfully, in reality huh LOL

While we’re on the topic of disagreeing, I am about to make a statement that goes against my own beliefs in present day and talk about the sexist Trek we all grew up with. (I imagine that the studio thought they were being plenty “pro-women”already with Uhura, etc) I did and still do find it sexist as to how the women were treated. I am all for women working in a predominately male occupation as long as they can pull their own weight. (just as men should too) I know b/c I was 1 of 2 women on our local FD. I could work circles around the men and I wasn’t a brute. I also knew my limitations. 12 yrs of bustin it to keep my reputation- so I understand very well what is required of women to make it in a mostly male dominated profession. It is good to see others speak up for this endeavor as well.

But back to Trek- The Star Trek that is being presented now, is not the one where Janeway is Capt. and wearing pants, kickin you know what, but the one from the 60’s. I think it highly appropriate, given the era of the crew we are now observing be in what made them stand out in that generation. If it is changed to where women have more authority and even clothes, lol it won’t feel like TOS. Though I still appreciate women getting to let it be known that no one can victimize them even if they aren’t superhuman.

269. section9 - January 30, 2012

Somehow, for all the carping he gets here, I have a feeling that @boborci likes it here better than he liked his experience on the AICN Talkback boards.

Galley slaves and orcs, the lot of them.

270. Craiger - January 30, 2012

Star Trek: Destiny Series

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_i_0_16?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=star+trek+destiny&sprefix=Star+Trek+Destin%2Caps%2C164&x=0&y=0

I found the name of that other book it was Star Trek: Federation

http://www.amazon.com/Federation-Star-Trek-Unnumbered-Paperback/dp/1416530991/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1327955393&sr=8-1

Enterprise Romulan War Series

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_i_0_14?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=enterprise+romulan+war&sprefix=enterprise+rom%2Cstripbooks%2C161

271. Daoud - January 30, 2012

Shhhhh, everyone… Bob is in the forest. :)
.
Must be lunch break on the set this fine Monday? @Boborci: A new week, so the Amanda to Spock question, how do you feel?

272. boborci - January 30, 2012

270.

I feel… fine.

273. MONGO - January 30, 2012

Mongo not bother read all post. Mongo think some people forget manner when on internet. Mongo think more people make attempt at civility world be better place.

Mongo same as some at Trekmovieinternets.com and itch for behind scene. Mongo have weakness for the things….what they call? Spoiler? Mongo not help self. It like Christmas present. Mongo like surprise but always try sneak a peek.

Mongo say hi boborci mans. Hope boborci mans have fun make movie. Sorry for people who say mean thing. Mongo tell people not take movie personal. Mongo like thing in Star Trek movie and not like some thing in Star Trek movie. But Mongo feeling not hurt by thing not his favorite. Mongo know boborci mans not mad at Mongo if not like everything.

274. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - January 30, 2012

Hey Bob. Still going to get Anthony Pascales name into the new movie.

275. Jack - January 30, 2012

29. @boborci

“21. Never have i commented on the box office success of TF. And my 5-0 comment was about how i don’t use it as an excuse! Whuch proves no matter what i say, your opinions are your facts.”

Sorry, Bob. I somehow missed this.

I was remembering a long ago comment from someone on here who was being a dick about Transformers 2, and your response was to give its rank on a list of top box office earners of all time.

I can’t remember what number it was — but the message, I thought, was, oh yeah, well, obviously a lot of people liked it. Which is true.

But I guess I let that rub me the wrong way and stick with. I decided: “Hey, Bob Orci answers (jerky) criticism with (you never actually said this) “Oh yeah, well, I’m insanely successful.”

I tried to look it up and can’t find it. And, yeah, it may have only been one comment ever.

So, yeah, when I saw (paraphrasing) “my top 10″ show — I thought it was more of the (beyond paraphrasing to fictional, apparently) “Hey, I’m successful! Screw you guys!” Which, of course, you’ve never actually said.

And, of course, I’ve only ever read a fraction of what you’ve posted on here.

So I apologize for deciding that two mentions of success was a pattern. And, by the way, that (“Hey, I’m success… etc.) would be a completely valid response to some of the name-calling and personal attacks on here.

So, without taking time to think, I got a little annoyed and I decided to be an impertinent jerk and call you on it. :)

And, like I said, I hope you don’t take any of this on here too seriously.

But, honestly, and I don’t need you to answer, but my larger point was the question(s) — does some of this criticism get to you? Was there anything in Trek ’09 that you think was a gaffe? Because your responses are swift.

And your counterpoints are generally quick, witty, sometimes cutting, and usually darned effective. Yeah, the distracting romance some people are griping about did indeed just take 120 seconds or so of screen time.

It’s a weird forum because some posts are made with an eye toward you being in the background, reading this all — and some aren’t. That’s a good thing, that you come here. Some people come here just to give you input/messages. Some of us hang out like regulars in a coffee shop who congregate in the same corner and gripe about the government and taxes.

Anyway. For what it’s worth, I take what you say on here as the truth. And I think it’s important to look at what was actually in Trek ’09 as well as what was in TOS while having these discussions. Trek 09 wasn’t all about explosions. TOS wasn’t always about philosophy. And thanks for interacting. And, heck, you’re a fan, so I’d expect you’d be here even if you weren’t making the darned thing.

276. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - January 30, 2012

Hey Bob Orci. You Ignoring me. Lol. I’m used to it.

277. Factchecker - January 30, 2012

@ 270 Daoud

Dear Daoud,

Do the HOOSHNOCK still exist in the alternate timeline, or did you wipe them out with a mere thought?

278. boborci - January 30, 2012

269. Read those, too!

279. Embarrassed to be a Trek fan - January 30, 2012

Thankfully, Alice’s opinion is very much in the minority.

280. boborci - January 30, 2012

274. No, you just gotta stop being so… supportive!

I keeed!

281. MONGO - January 30, 2012

Craiger mans

Mongo reading first book of Destiny now. Mongo at part where Federation ship….oh…..maybe Mongo not give away spoiler.

Like boborci mans and JJ mans!

282. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - January 30, 2012

#278. I agree. V

283. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - January 30, 2012

Hey Mongo. You will very much Enjoy Star Trek. Federation.

284. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - January 30, 2012

Hey Mongo. If you get a chance. Read Star Trek Invasion Series. It is a 4 book event that spans Tos,Tng,Ds9 and Voyager.

285. MONGO - January 30, 2012

Hi Commodore Mike mans!

Mongo get to Federation after Destiny. Lot of book read for Mongo.

Mongo have time.

286. cdp - January 30, 2012

HI Bob are yall taking a little break from filming while Chris Pine is off promoting his new movie or are camera still at warp speed with scenes not needing Kirk. Thanks and keep up the good work.

287. boborci - January 30, 2012

273. Jack – January 30, 2012

Appreciate the thoughts. In Trek 09, I do wish we could’ve more effectilvely dealt with Nero’s time in the movie. I feared we might have to cut his jail time, and we had other options we were thinking about, but at the time, what we wrote and shot seemed like the best fit.

I wish we could’ve made more of the Kobayahsi Maru test, and how he cheated exactly. In a perfect world where everyone would sit through a 3 hour star Trek, I wanted to see him and bones sneak into the simulator control room the night before or something. Kind of a mini-mission at the academy.

We had some cool lines from Spock Prime about quantum maechanics that explained the seeming coincidences better through science wish I wish we had kept.

And of course, last, but not least, I wish he had gotten William Shatner to do the scene we wrote for him.

288. CmdrR - January 30, 2012

Shout out for Alcatraz.
Hoping for less random death, more character moments.
When do we get to see another Jack Sylvane-centric ep?

289. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - January 30, 2012

Hey Bob Orci. Have you read the Star Trek Invasion Series. If so what did you think of it.

290. boborci - January 30, 2012

correction: KobayaSHI!

291. boborci - January 30, 2012

287 — I haven’t. Do you recommend?

292. boborci - January 30, 2012

286. I have nothing to do with Alcatraz, but I’ll pass it on!

293. boborci - January 30, 2012

272. MONGO – January 30, 2012

Boborci think Mongo hilarious!

294. Factchecker - January 30, 2012

Bob,

Any chance we’ll see the exploring of strange new worlds in the sequel?

295. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - January 30, 2012

Hey Bob. To have Shat for that Scene would have brought tears to all of us. But as Kirk said in Trek 3. C’est la vie”,

296. Jack - January 30, 2012

249. Keachick. Er, no Archer or beagles please. One Enterprise mention in the series is enough. It was a (good) throwaway line from the last movie — but having a beagle suddenly materialize, plus-or-minus four years later would be a WTF moment. No pets in the movies (other than that creepy Klingon dog-thing from TSFS, which was swell) please – I didn’t pay $12 (or whatever it was in 1994) to see Data weep for Spot. Yes, I do indeed live in the past.

No inside jokes carried over from the last one please (although I’m all for “I have a bad feeling about this…”). Isn’t this about making Trek accessible and less convoluted?

Man, I love that this is a democracy!;)

297. Salvador Nogueira - January 30, 2012

@boborci

Bob, please see 105.

Cheers,
Salvador

298. Charla - January 30, 2012

#269 Craiger…Might see you on “live” but if I don’t, thanks for the links (though I know they weren’t meant for me exactly) Will send for a few of those tomorrow! You guys have kept me busy- gotta go now, head is splitting now but overall it’s getting better!! Certainly easier for me to type in these posts than live for some reason. Gotta get that fixed.

Be good everyone~ :D

299. CmdrR - January 30, 2012

290 – My bad. Good show, though.

300. trekprincess - January 30, 2012

Alice if you don’t like new Trek then why do you post on this website :/?

301. boborci - January 30, 2012

264. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire – January 30, 2012
Hey Bob. Have you put any thought into writting the next Star Trek Movie.

—–

Just a little. Damon and I keep fighting about what it would be. Will wait to hear what you guys think after new movie

302. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - January 30, 2012

Hey Bob Orci. I do Recomend the Invasion Series. The First book is called Star Trek First Strike. The 2nd is called Star Trek Tng. The Soldiers of Fear. The 3rd is called Star Trek DS9. Times Enemy and the 4th is Star Trek Voyager The Final Fury. You start reading and you won’t be able to stop

303. SciFiGuy - January 30, 2012

Bob,

What does NCC stand for?

304. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - January 30, 2012

Hey Bob. Good to know you are considering writting the next movie and have some ideas. Can’t wait for that one now. Lol.

305. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

Invasion was excellent. Especially enjoyed the TOS book. The TNG one was weaker, DS9 was a bit pointless, the VOY finale was a nice novel but not the greatest end. So the TOS book is the one to read.

306. Simpleton - January 30, 2012

@boborci. After reading through some of these post I think you have held yourself very well considering all the bashing you have taken. People need to remember that you have other obligations to your other productions. Another note to mention is that when STAR TREK was under the leadership other another production crew thats all they had to deal with. I can only commend you and the other producers that you Are taking your to time and putting the quality first rather than a fast buck.

Another final note I must say is you should be proud for yourself for having such an amazing job. Hawaii five o and all your other productions have been of top notch quality in my eyes

307. MONGO - January 30, 2012

#291 boborci mans

Mongo get that a lot. Even when Mongo not try be funny. Like movie with Cher ladies and Christina Aguilera ladies.

Mongo laugh at wrong spot all time.

(Mongo excite to hear from boborci mans!)

308. Gerhard - January 30, 2012

Bob, any chance we’ll see some absorbing scientific exploration/investigation in the new Star Trek? The science has always been a big part of the appeal behind Star Trek, especially in TOS

309. Adolescent Nightmare - January 30, 2012

I can’t think of anything offhand I would change about the first movie. Maybe after the next one I will have a suggestion.

310. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

@boborci

My dad never believed we spoke earlier on. How the heck do I convince him? (He’s the sort who thinks everything online is fake.) Sigh.

311. Jack - January 30, 2012

285. Hmmm. Thanks. Interesting that most of that fits in with what a lot of fans have said they thought was missing, especially the Nero and Spock stuff. Wait, you still stand by the supernova? ;) I keed!

I would have liked to have seen a little more of Kirk’s drive/ self-punishing streak in the academy. I assume he pushed himself like crazy and really did wow them — so his ultimate advancement wasn’t just based on aptitude tests, destiny and a feeling Pike had. This Kirk had to develop a shell that the original version hadn’t, presumably, needed (although who knows?) and the bravado masked a lot. Chris Pine was able to, I think, convey a lot of that with just a few looks.

What will surprise us most about this next movie? ;) We won’t tell anyone.

312. Simpleton - January 30, 2012

PS @boborci. If your going to film at the Bud plant again could you please snake some out for me please

313. NuFan - January 30, 2012

309

I can’t believe you didn’t say Khaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan!!!

314. KHAN 2.0 - January 30, 2012

boborci since your back heres some random stuff i really wanna see in Trek 2 (if theres still time to put any of this stuff in):

Klingon BOPs..mushroom spacedock..ripped shirts/drop kicks/Kirk-Fu..TOS/Goldsmith/Horner musical nods..lengthy phaser beams…new TWOK style uniforms/field jackets…new hand phasers more TOS like…Ent refit more sleek like TOS movies…engine room less Bud more TOS like….Trek III style Klingons..Twilight Zone/Outer Limits/early TOS style eeriness..unexplained wonder/unknown stuff left to the imagination which is far more powerful than any explanation…transporter malfunctions..federation starship vs. federation starship stuff…big name cameos (e.g. H Ford)..‘Obsession’ level redshirt deaths – plus a whole chunk of Trek stuff cameoing/referenced/easter egging (but not centre stage) – e.g. Doomsday machine, gorns, cloud killers, corbomite, tholians, wild west, rand, No 1, C Marcus, S Collins as Matt Decker, Reliant/Excelsior, the borg, PStewart as Picards ancestor, Bakula as Admiral Archer, Shat as grandpop Kirk

oh and KHHHHAAAN!!!!

now obviously some or most of that wont/cant be there but just thought id post some quick random thoughts in case anything may be of use!

315. NC Trekker - January 30, 2012

All well and good but are we supposed to think that Nimoy Spock just faded away into the background without anyone checking into him? Especially after “coming out” in the public eye with the Vulcan colony thing? He can’t tell the surviving Vulcans that he is their “cousin” Selek like in Yesteryear.

His knowledge of future tech alone will make the Vulcan colony a power to be reckoned with in a short while. And Spock doesn’t have to even write it down, just mind meld and in a short while, all Vulcans know the secrets. If you think future tech is no big deal, look at the TNG episode Relics. The advances baffled Scotty himself.

Not to mention all the threats that are homing in on Earth and unknown to anyone at that time. Even if Spock tried to keep a “temporal prime directive” which would be ridiculous considering this is a different reality etc. the survival of his race would outweigh those concerns.

316. Factchecker - January 30, 2012

@314 – you just described Classic Trek.

317. AJ - January 30, 2012

295:

Jack:

The Klingon ‘dog’ in TSFS has a name: Fifi Rebozo (look it up).

I, for one, would love to see a scene where Archer’s beagle just randomly appears on the pad, and walks out of transporter room.

318. lemrick - January 30, 2012

Mr. Orci,

I don’t have any complaints about the last movie (I loved it all), just an observation/question…..

Will Quinto/Spock be put in makeup this time to give him a darker appearance? Spock is from a desert planet so I wouldn’t think he would be as pale as the actor playing him. A bit of a tan wouldn’t hurt while keeping in mind that he also has green blood. Quinto’s complexion could reflect these character traits if not prominently….minutely.

319. T'Leba - January 30, 2012

@boborci I’ve been a trekker almost all my life, watching syndicated TOS. I loved the first movie. I had a lot of confidence in your writing of that first movie because you brought Leonard Nimoy to bless the script. Knowing that you are a trekker gives me that same confidence for this next movie.

I am grateful that you and the team are taking your time. Star Trek has been extremely influential in my life, as I learned ethics from Spock when I was a kid, and I’d like to see that whole philosophy of ST continue.

BTW, I love the Spock/Uhura relationship. It was hinted at in TOS, and I’m glad you are giving us some insight in this new alternate reality.

Also, I’m very grateful that you take the time to come here and talk to the fans. You’re awesome! Thanks so much!

320. KHAN 2.0 - January 30, 2012

@316 – yes i want Trek 2 to be even more TOS like than the last one! (or any of movies I-VI)

321. nano - January 30, 2012

Greetings Bob, have you ever considered writing your own Trek Novel?
Any chance of seeing Zorro again???

322. nano - January 30, 2012

Wait – I suppose Sulu has some Zorro skills & traits!

323. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

Just tossing this into the mix as a wish:

I’d love to see the red uniforms from Trek 2 – 6 return at some stage in the future, they were beautiful designs.

A question @boborci, if you spot this:

Was TMP a visual influence on Trek 2009? I felt the ship had a very TMP feel to it, especially with the colour palette.

324. Adolescent Nightmare - January 30, 2012

313.

He’s already in it.

325. boborci - January 30, 2012

310. FrancoMiranda – January 30, 2012

Does he believe twitter? Should I post a pic of myself holding a sign that says, HI FRANCO!

326. KHAN 2.0 - January 30, 2012

323 – yeah id like to see more Khanlike uniforms at some point – or at least going that way..foreshadowing whats to come (like Pike at end of ST09 with the TMP admiral uniform) i guess the cadet uniforms werent totally unlike them too.

327. Craiger - January 30, 2012

No, Posts pics from the set. :)

328. NuFan - January 30, 2012

324 Good Point

329. Craiger - January 30, 2012

First proptype phaser?

http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/30/us-navy-ship-mounted-railgun-built-by-raytheon/

330. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

@boborci

I think that would blow his mind. Therefore, PLEASE DO IT! (I’d love it too, of course.)

326.

Agreed.

331. Jack - January 30, 2012

317. Wow. I’d had no idea about the name, although that dog looked like it would hang out with Nixon. Yep, I had to google Bebe Rebozo (remembered the name but only from Carson jokes when I was a kid).

Or just a random puddle of urine in front of the transporter pad?

318. Wow, I’d never thought of Vulcans tanning before. :) Neat. Fan rationalization — some odd melanin-like substance that turns, er, chalkier to protect them from UV rays? Needs work. An atmosphere that filtered them out, except where Tuvok is from? They all lived near the poles, where it was more habitable but less intensely sunny? Maybe they age so slowly because, like immortal, pale Califonia-dweller Cher, they all piled on the suncreen? Sorry, three lattes today.

Er, although now he has no home to tan on, other than Earth.

Anybody here like Vonda McIntyre’s stuff? I liked the way she wrote younger Kirk and Spock in her prequel novel (not comparing it to Trek 09, just musing). In the Trek movie novelizations she had some really alien aliens and some interesting future tech. She was a little obsessed with Sulu, though (but made him an interesting character).

332. Trekker5 - January 30, 2012

Mr.Orci,when are you gonna tell us the full title of Trek12?

333. Drew V. - January 30, 2012

Well scrolling through all of this is 25 minutes of my life I will never get back…

BOB ORCI, thank you for taking the time to come here and keep in touch with the fans and please try to remember to not feed the trolls… :-D

I would be lying if I said that I was trilled to her the bud plant will be back… I only saw Star Trek on the IMAX screen once (someone here said they went to the theater 14 times… really?) but I took a colleague of mine who had ZERO prior trek knowledge… and the loved the movie but actually turned to me in the theater and asked why the engine room looked like that… She had never seen a single episode of Star trek before and even she noticed that it made no sense for engineering on the Enterprise to look like a beer factory (which it very much still did… sorry…) I have to say that “budgineering’ was my only issue with the first film… tho I wish the scene with Kirks stepdad and George leaving would have been left in… the whole Car scene mad little sense without it in also… Seeing the deleted scene cleared everything up… So keep in mind that audiences will sit though an extra 3-5 minutes of movie if it is a quality film… dont feel that it ‘must’ be not a minute more than 105 or 110 minutes… No one has the bladder for a 3 1/2 hour titanic-esque film (despite the fact that titanic’s engine room is equally advanced as the Enterprises… ha ha) but it is ok for a movie to come in at 120 or 125 minutes… I don’t know why Hollywood sees so stuck on the 92-102 minute range… (is it future network broadcast-ability)

***Also loving what y’all have done with the new Hawaii Five-O, couldn’t stand the original (which i’ve only known in re-runs, I wasn’t born till ’82), but I love the new one!

So in summary, Thank you for coming here, don’t feed trolls, boo to ‘budgineering’ don’t cut all exposition for time, and Five-O rocks!

Best of luck and thank you!

334. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

Ya know, I’ve been watching a lot of Voyager lately, and I had this dream one night…

In which the new movie Enterprise was grabbed by the Caretaker, and Kirk manages to find a way to save the Ocampa and also get back to the Alpha Quadrant. Yes, all in one movie.

It was an awesome dream. I kind of loved it. I was upset when I woke up and it wasn’t real.

335. boborci - January 30, 2012

332. Trekker5 – January 30, 2012
Mr.Orci,when are you gonna tell us the full title of Trek12?

——

when we come up with it!

336. Drew V. - January 30, 2012

***And my typing skills lying on the sofa in this position stink… but I think you get the main ideas :-P

337. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

@boborci

As long at it’s not Star Trek 12: So Very Tired, we’ll all love it.

338. KHAN 2.0 - January 30, 2012

title wise i like ‘The Next Frontier’ – sort of a play on TNG and ‘Final Frontier’

339. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

In a way, I almost want it just to be ‘Star Trek’ again – so that all the movies are tied together. I suppose legally it could be titled Star Trek 2013, but on the box, the very stark and simple statement ‘Star Trek’ would be lovely.

Kind of like The Thing and the prequel that was recently released.

340. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - January 30, 2012

332. Trekker5 – January 30, 2012
Mr.Orci,when are you gonna tell us the full title of Trek12?

——

when we come up with it!

Ohh. Bob Make Funny. Me Like.

341. rm10019 - January 30, 2012

@boborci – Boldy Go! Thanks for all the hard work.

342. SciFiGuy - January 30, 2012

What does “NCC” mean? Lol!!!

343. Will - January 30, 2012

re: 242 boborci

Awesome! I got a reply! =)

I said it in a second post to someone else, but yeah, it was mostly the wording that had me worried about it. Too often I’ve seen good scenes get destroyed on set by overly complex and unmotivated camera work! I do look forward to seeing the end result as I love motivated single shot sequences(I’m not certain there’s a set term for it but I call it “Follow the Ball”)!

Thanks for the reply, that made my day!

344. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

I know this is a little off-topic, but I’ve been reading the Enders Saga a lot lately and have been struck once again by the richness – and relative simplicity – of its universe.

I’m excited to see the Ender’s Game movie when it comes out, but I’m also wishing that some of the Enderverse tone could creep into this new Trek. I like the idea of a totally alien, implacable foe, whose destruction becomes a tragedy. Such a beautiful idea.

345. boborci - January 30, 2012

344. Okay, twitter pick is up.

346. Aurore - January 30, 2012

335. boborci – January 30, 2012
“when we come up with it! ”
________

Someone suggested “T. R. E . K.” , once.

What do you think ? Would you even consider such a title?

347. Tom - January 30, 2012

#287 boborci

Couldn’t get a Shatner scene in the sequel? Seemed like it would be one of the things on the sequel wishlist after missing the great opportunity in the first

348. Jack - January 30, 2012

345. boborci:

:)

349. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

@boborci

Oh sweet! Thanks man! That was fantastic!
Really cheered me up =)
When my new album comes out, you’ll see on Twitter:
When it does, PM me and I’ll send you a copy out! ^_^

PS: My dad’s mind = blown. In fact, his beard fell off.

350. Mikey - January 30, 2012

@boborci

I just wanted to say that I loved the last movie and I can’t wait for the sequel! I’m definitely in the minority here but I loved the engineering set and I genuinely cant fault much in the movie (not even some of the coincidences in characters meeting). Gotta ask- whose idea was it to turn
Spock’s “Live long and propser” to the Vulcan Science Academy into the Vulcan version of “eff you”? Always makes me
Smile!

351. SciFiGuy - January 30, 2012

Hmm…not worthy of a response I guess. Maybe if I posted in pirate speak or broken English I’d get a response.

Asses.

352. boborci - January 30, 2012

347. Tom – January 30, 2012

Harder in the sequel. I fear we missed our chance.

353. Craiger - January 30, 2012

Bob, any thought on doing a new Trek TV series either live action or something like using Star Wars: The Clone Wars tech? If so when would something like that happen after the movies? I wonder if a new Trek TV series could be done because of the cost?

354. boborci - January 30, 2012

scifiguy

NCC stands for NAVAL CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT.

355. Jack - January 30, 2012

349. FrancoMiranda

Awesome.

And thanks for the thoughtful posts on here.

PS. Feel free to PM me on Twitter anytime about the Trek stuff or whatever — rocketchir Same goes for anybody here.

356. Andrew - January 30, 2012

Hello Mr. Orci. A few months back there was a contest to have a small cameo appearance in the new Star Trek film. Do you know when they will announce a winner? Or if they already have contacted the winner? Finger’s crossed! Also, I would like to thank you for taking the time to interact with fans. Very few people in a position like yours would do so.

357. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

@Jack

No problem! And thanks, I just figured I’d toss in my two cents now and again. I’ll add you right now! I use my band’s Twitter mainly as my own, so if you see Hypertensioners, you’ll know who it is =)

358. AJ - January 30, 2012

STAR TREK TITLE REPOSITORY (File 12B)

Star Trek: The Meaning of Life
Star Trek: No Sleep ’til Nimbus III!
Star Trek: Three Men and a Baby (please,no!)
Star Trek: The Romulan War (as if we’ll ever be so lucky)
Star Trek: Fast Times, Green Broads and Warp 8.
Star Trek: A Reading of ‘The Empath’ script by Lawrence Luckinbill
Star Trek: Spock groks Kirk
Star Trek: Balok vs. Blalock Grease Wrestling

God, that was awful.

359. Jack - January 30, 2012

358. Awful or awesome?

360. captain spock - January 30, 2012

N.C.C stands for navel construction class . U.S.S stands for united space ship. been said several time on the origonal series.by captain Kirk, would like to hear some one say beam me up scotty in maybe this film or the next film please!
Bob you never answer my question on twitter , who won the super 8 contest ?

361. boborci - January 30, 2012

360. Not aware of the super 8 contest.

362. G - January 30, 2012

Mr. Orci,

You’ve mentioned a number of novels that you enjoyed, and which influenced the first film. One I haven’t seen mentioned is The Kobayashi Maru by Julia Ecklar, which had wonderful character work for Scotty, Sulu, Chekov, and Kirk regarding their experiences with the titular scenario and other tests of character. Did it happen to be one of the novels you’d read?

363. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

Right guys I gotta go for a while, have a song I need to work on.

@bob, jack, DM

I’ll see you on Twitter. Thanks again Bob, that picture really meant a lot to me.

Until later! Good luck with all your projects everyone – it’s good to know a lot of us are busy with something. Best way to be, right?

364. G - January 30, 2012

On a similar note, are any of the writers fans of the Horatio Hornblower novels/TV series?

365. Newman - January 30, 2012

Bob you’re the man

366. Quatlo - January 30, 2012

Godamighty… I don’t check this joint for a coupla days and near total all out noo-clear combat with our main cat Bob breaks loose. Good percentage of stress evident in the space cadets these days.

Somebody said Kirk was choked too many times in ST-09; maybe in the next film they’ll have him repeatedly barely hanging onto a cliff or ledge of some very high structures. Kind of a running gag (sarcasm alert for those who need it).

Bob and his crewe know all kinds of stats on us fans, like the 3 percent who post or whatever. Obviously Bob knows how many zeroes go in front of the first whole number percentage wise of that 3 percent of us who are social misfits/insane/stoopid.

That said, hope the JFK assassination time travel story filming aspect is working out, Bob O. Heard that JFK lookalike actor was hired 3 months ago… and the part about JFK having himself assassinated was exactly what I thought all along. Right on, sawright.

367. Tom - January 30, 2012

#362 boborci

Thanks. Agreed on the missed opportunity. Still trying?? Seems like that touching message in the hologram sums up the very heart of Star Trek and could be applicable. Just my thought..

368. Phil - January 30, 2012

@353. George Lucas is supposed to be bringing live action Star Wars to TV…soon. I suspect that CBS will be holding off on any Trek return to TV until they see how Star Wars performs. Sci-Fi on network TV has been a bit of a disaster or late, and with reality broadcasting getting huge ratings at a fraction of the cost it’s not hard to see the networks sticking to that business model for the time being. Sci-fi is very expensive to do on TV…

369. Andrew - January 30, 2012

Star Trek 2013 possible titles.

Star Trek Part 2

Star Trek 2

Star Trek II: It Turns out that Khan’s A Pretty Nice Guy in This Time Line.

370. Sugar Rush - January 30, 2012

Holy crap that Mongo guy sure is a dedicated, somewhat peculiar hybrid Star Trek-Blazing Saddles fan.

371. Andrew - January 30, 2012

So Mongo, why are you talking like a cave man out of curiosity? It’s hilarious – just wondering.

372. Radioactive Spock - January 30, 2012

Mr. Orci, you have no idea how in awe of you I am that you participate in these comments. It’s a nerd’s dream come true. It feels very much like we’re part of the movie making process, and I have to tell you, that feels really, really great. Thanks for taking it all in stride when the eggers on take their shots at you, though I feel it’s mostly because they want the satisfaction of knowing that you are giving them your undivided attention when you respond to it.

373. GG - January 30, 2012

@ Bob Orci

Hello, Bob

So, you think we may see a Briefing Room scene? It was a very common set piece in the original series. The center of many great speeches and debates. TNG and Voyager always used a Briefing Room, too. But, for some reason, the original crew got away from that in their movies (never saw it once, actually). I feel that it made the (movie) Enterprise-A a much less.. personable ship, and more formal/sterile without scenes like that (Usually, just the bridge, engineering, and some boring corridors in between.) I feel that the Briefing Room needs a to make a comeback. It’s the “heart” of the ship, if you will, where the crew voices their passions and opinions (and, the Enterprise is listening, and she always brings them home).

374. Andrew - January 30, 2012

Hey Bob Orci, I also wanted to say thank you for getting me into Trek with this new film. I am of a younger generation to have never watched any Trek before Star Trek 2009. I absolutely love the movie, and now I am happily watching TNG. This movie also had a large influence on my career decisions.

375. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - January 30, 2012

Hey Bob Orci. How would you rate the filming of the new movie so far.
1 Fantastic.
2. Great.
3. Good.
4. Fair.
5. Everyone hates everyone.
Please do tell.

376. n1701ncc - January 30, 2012

bob O

Any chance you can answer this question. Will the new movie be related to any of the first season TOS eposides? I also agree with you about the quote that you used early on in this message board from one of my favorite actors Jack Nick ” you can’t handle the truth”. You are a good man Bob and you have a job that we all wish we had.

377. Go-cart Mozart - January 30, 2012

#371

You’ve never seen Blazing Saddles?!!!

378. NCM - January 30, 2012

114. Orly – January 30, 2012:

“Bob needs to stop responding to these nit pickers… Give more attention to developing pr channels with NON treckies… The treckies wont be able to resist seeing the film so its everyone else he has to worry about.”
———-
Wrong! Trekkies resisted “Enterprise” and rejected TNG movies. They’ll see the next film, but if it isn’t Trek to Trekkies, they won’t sign on to the new U., won’t pay to see it multiple times in theaters, won’t purchase DVDs, comics, etc., and may well skip the third one (TNG, again).

“NON treckies” (sic) won’t keep the franchise alive. Loose Trekkies/ers or fail to cultivate THEM among the young (not everyone who likes a Trek film has it in his/her nature to become a Trekkie) and you’ll dead-end the franchise that’s outdone every other TV/film franchise in the nation (perhaps the world?). TOS has burned brighter, outlasted all of its incarnations. Why so, do you suppose?

The court can create a fun flick and fill seats. LOTS of writers/directors/films do just that; many even spin off a sequel or two. Even when they Oscar and/or enter the collective American (or other) conscience, they don’t achieve what Trek did. They don’t inspire the ire you see here, nor the long term interest.

I am genuinely curious about what the ‘please the masses’ people see as the quality that has or will hook people on Trek.

379. Killamarshtrek - January 30, 2012

Hi Bob,

I’ve always thought what a dream job it would be to be actually involved in producing Trek but there does seem to be a down side. I like watching Star Trek without knowing exactly what it will look like & what happens (apart from the scant bits of info you’ve so far FAILED to let slip!). You’re the only Trek fan in the world who can’t do that!

Is that frustrating?

Do you wish there were some Star Trek around not involving you?

380. Anthony Pascale - January 30, 2012

If we can make the live thing happen from the set, this time the tech and server will be ready for it. Last time I know there were some issues with people hitting refresh refresh refresh and slowing server to a crawl

381. robbysteve64 - January 30, 2012

@bob
I think you and your team has done a woderful job on everything hawaii 5-0 and all your projects (esp Cowboys and Aliens) keep up the great work and take as much time as your team need to do what you feel is right and I will at least will like what ever the outcome will be

I do love H5-0 great storylines and also Fringe too even like alcatraz
keep up with those nice storylines esp the ones that make you think
keep it up even tho you probably heard all that before

382. Anthony Pascale - January 30, 2012

Bob, I have to differ with you on seeing more on the Kobayashi Maru. I think in this case less is more. Also I am very glad the scenes were cut showing Gaela in the control room and Kirk talking to the wrong green girl. Taken together with the bedroom scene they add up to Kirk being a bit of a d-bag. Its better not to know who he screwed over literally and figuratively to cheat

383. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - January 30, 2012

Sorry Anthony for all the times I hit refresh. I think I hit it about 10,000 times. Ill try to keep it a little under 10,000. Lol.

384. Go-cart Mozart - January 30, 2012

Anyone else see some contradiction in the “not a committee” comment and the fact they’re referred to as “The Supreme Court”? Kinda odd.

Who came up with that Supreme Court nonsense anyway?

385. Red Dead Ryan - January 30, 2012

WWWWHHHhhhhheeeeeewwwwwww!

HHOOOOO—–EEEEEEEEYYY!!!!

I just spent the last couple of hours reading all of the posts on this thread, while sipping on a can of Coke and listening to some Moby!

Most of the comments were well thought out and constructive, but “fans” like Iva continue to make offensive, asinine, dumbass remarks that are also factually inaccurate.

I appreciate Bob for taking valuable time out of his day to chat with us nerds!

And on an unrelated note, I’ve been fantasizing (for the past couple of hours) about having the ability to shoot fire from my fingertips. :-)

386. Andrew - January 30, 2012

Wow, there was some live event on the set of Star Trek 2009 or something? (Sorry, I wasn’t interested in Trek at the time).

387. dmduncan - January 30, 2012

149. rm10019 – January 30, 2012

This thread reminds me of last week’s Parks and Rec ep. Leslie is focused on winning over a single voter who for whatever reason just doesn’t like her.

***

lol

388. Robert Asbury - January 30, 2012

Bob, I never thought Kirk, Spock and the rest could be replaced. It could not be done. Period. You did it. You have my full support for wherever you guys take this in the next movie. I need to see Khan at some point though, in the same way I needed the joker in The Dark Knight. What if the Klingons found Khan and he fought his way to to rule the warrior culture of the empire? Holmes needs Moriarty. Van helsing needs Dracula. And Star Trek needs the one man that neither Kirk or Spock could beat alone. And will we ever see a continuation of the prequel story from the comics? Kinda left Worf hanging there at the end…

389. Anthony Pascale - January 30, 2012

if we do the live event, it will be with a chat thing that requires no refreshing. It will stream the chat live. It is the same tech that I used to live blog at the Vegas Star Trek con and other cons.

390. dmduncan - January 30, 2012

287. boborci – January 30, 2012

And of course, last, but not least, I wish he had gotten William Shatner to do the scene we wrote for him.

***

Hell yeah.

391. Nony - January 30, 2012

Bob, I have a Vitally Important Question for you, if you are legally permitted to answer it.

Does McCoy play a bigger part in this movie than in the last one? You don’t have to say what he does, just…if he’s there. Doing things!

You could make or break my week with your answer, just so you know.

392. punkspocker - January 30, 2012

Yes! A Blazing Saddles reference: “Where da green women at!” BOB!Thanks for spending time here.

393. Craiger - January 30, 2012

I think FX is going to show the Star Trek 2009 soon. They showed a new ad showing the new movies coming soon.

394. Craig - January 30, 2012

Hey Anthony, Any plans on a site redesign or update?

395. Red Dead Ryan - January 30, 2012

#380.

Just don’t name your server “HAL” or “Skynet” and it’ll work just fine! :-)

396. Dee - lvs moon' surface - January 30, 2012

Captain Fine is absolutely GORGEOUS… absolutely KIRK….

http://www.redcarpet-fashionawards.com/2012/01/30/chris-pine-in-ralph-lauren-this-means-war-london-premiere/

I’m sorry to interrupt Mr. Orci … but just for a moment and for good reason……. .. KIRK IN…

;-) :-)

397. Craiger - January 30, 2012

I sometimes think Anthony should turn TrekMovie into a general Scifi news site since when a Trek movie isn’t shooting their can be a lull in Trek news.

398. Go-cart Mozart - January 30, 2012

Can anyone answer my question: Just what is the distinction between “team” and “committee” writing? I’m not up on my Hollywood speak, so any clarification would be helpful.

399. Keachick - rose pinenut - January 30, 2012

#296 – “but having a beagle suddenly materialize, plus-or-minus four years later would be a WTF moment. No pets in the movies (other than that creepy Klingon dog-thing from TSFS, which was swell)”

This is another beagle, not the one that Scotty lost in the transporter experiment which materialized later. So no sudden materializations of any beagles –

unless, of course, Bob Orci deems it necessary…:)

“No pets” eh? unless they are ugly and dangerously carnivorous? Huh? I don’t recall my mentioning about having a scene where Kirk is weeping when he finds his beagle pet –

unless, of course, Bob Orci deems it necessary…:)!

400. Basement Blogger - January 30, 2012

@ 273

Hey Mongo!

We have a Mongo sighting. You’re my favorite pawn in the game of life. By the way, I agree with the things that you said in his post about Star Trek 2009.

Hey, Mongo many young people have not seen Blazing Saddles. (@ 371)
But we know a bunch of them have seen Twilight :-) Today’s questions are:

1) How do we encourage young people to see the classic movies like Blazing Saddles?

2) Should Hollywood remake Casablanca with the cast of Twilight?

3) How does Mongo feel about Newt Gingrich’s idea of building a moonbase and does Mongo believe if there are about thriteen thousand people living on the moon, would Mongo support the moonbase become the new state for the United States?

401. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

What we want to avoid – I think – is a slip-slide into the post Voyage Home habit of shoe-horning humour into the movies. It got a bit cringeworthy and seemed forced at times. After the fantastic Wrath of Khan, I felt such moments, rather than inspiring affection in the characters, rather made me feel like I was watching my Dad and his mates tell crap jokes or laugh at stuff that wasn’t funny.

Humour can be a great tool but, like all complicated tools, it can cause great harm. Fingers can be chopped off, etc.

One of my favourite bits of TOS-movie humour was very incidental and natural. Spock and Kirk in the turbolift:

Kirk: I could use a shower.

Spock: (A pause.) Yes.

I adore that scene. It almost made The Final Frontier worth it.

402. Keachick - rose pinenut - January 30, 2012

#396 – Absolutely! The man looks gorgeous…oh that smile and love his hair. Such a honey!

Hate the suit – those jackets never look like they fit the wearer properly. It looks like some cheap knock off. Dear, oh dear, oh dear. Just as well Chris does not need to wear (great looking) clothes in order to look lovely.

I hope he keeps the hair style and colour for Star Trek – a real winner.

Bob Orci – Are you getting this?
Good man!

403. Andrew - January 30, 2012

@ 400

I am 19 and can happily say I’ve never seen or read Twilight. I enjoy watching many older films, and albert brook films (modern romance). I’ve just never seen blazing saddles!

404. Anthony Pascale - January 30, 2012

Craig,

As it happens I just got off a phone call talking about site There is actually a project underway as we speak.

405. Craig - January 30, 2012

@Anthony
Oh cool, what timing. lol

406. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

Anthony,

Will there be a fully fledged forum?

407. Craiger - January 30, 2012

Anthony is it just going to be about Trek news or both Trek and Scifi news?

408. Corvette king - January 30, 2012

Boborci.
Please, please do not kill anymore corvettes. Promise me. Its one of those icons, aside from star trek that makes me feel young, as when the earth was new. My kids call them the mummy rides and almost died when you guys sent the 63 off the clff.

Kill a porsche this time. There are more of them on the road anyway.

409. USS Enterprise B - January 30, 2012

@352. boborci

Make Shatner an easter egg! I think that’s the only way to make it work…

410. MONGO - January 30, 2012

#370 Sugar Rush persons and #371 Andrew mans

Mongo say hi. Mongo also type, not talk. But Mongo know what mean. It long story why Mongo this way. Mongo think get point across. Mongo enjoy Blazing Saddles movie. That not this Mongo. Mongo get name from people. Mongo remind people of Alex Karras mans from movie. Mongo pretty sure this not meant as compliment. But look at people now and look at Mongo. Mongo do OK.

Mongo say hi Basement Blogger persons. Mongo try answer question.

1-Mongo think give away free popcorn. Or maybe tell them in text message watch old classic movie. That seem only way they communicate.

2-Mongo think this not good idea. Humphry Bogart mans good actor. And not sparkle in sunlight.

3-Mongo see something about this. Mongo think it good idea colonize moon if it help keep Newt Gingrich mans away from Mongo. (This joke Mongo see on internet. Mongo hope not hurt Newt Gingrich mans feeling. But that funny)

411. MJ - January 30, 2012

Mongo, I love you in those Geico commercials!

412. MONGO - January 30, 2012

Mongo say hi MJ persons.

Mongo think you confuse Mongo with little green lizard mans.

413. AJ - January 30, 2012

MONGO!

You’re getting pretty popular ’round these parts, sir.

Along with BND (Del Trame) as a tall ship or Admiral, and Anthony Pascale as a massively infectious intergalactic genital disease, if you could get referenced in the next film, what would you aspire to be?

(BTW, Anthony, if BND were still alive, he’d trade with you in a minute!)

414. Spockanella - January 30, 2012

317: Awesome idea. At the end of the movie,right before (or during) the credits, to have the beagle appear and just walk off the transporter pad…

415. Quatlo - January 30, 2012

Andrew (403) Blazing Saddles can be summed up by watching the clip at the link below. You can see there is a Star Trek (ST:V) connection of sorts. Mel Brooks stole the bean scene from the “Trinity” movies and did what he always did when he stole an idea, overkill. But that’s Hollywood, rub the nose in it flicks for the hicks in the sticks.

http://youtu.be/VPIP9KXdmO0

416. MJ - January 30, 2012

@350 “I just wanted to say that I loved the last movie and I can’t wait for the sequel!”

He likes it! Hey Mikey!

:-)

417. Keachick - rose pinenut - January 30, 2012

#413 – …and head straight for the Captain’s quarters. Ahhh…the possibilities!

418. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

MJ, you on Twitter?

419. Anthony Pascale - January 30, 2012

a forum is also in the works yes

A podcast is also in early stages of discussions as well.

and a Facebook page is already being worked on

no word on timings

2012 is a year for onward and upward for TM

420. FrancoMiranda - January 30, 2012

419.

Excellent. Would love to contribute somehow, but not sure how I’d begin that process.

421. Red Dead Ryan - January 30, 2012

Anthony,

Will you be bringing back the science and sci-fi articles?

We really miss those!

Thanks!

422. Anthony Pascale - January 30, 2012

hopefully will be bringing back more scifi and science coverage. My writers had life intervene and so trying to work something out. again thanks for all the thoughts but now I feel i am diverting the actual subject of this thread. I am self-hijacking and must warn myself!

423. Craig - January 30, 2012

@ Anthony

Good to hear. Trekmovie is one of my top 5 fav and everyday visited sites. I do miss all the movie and tv show news. This was the only place I was getting all that news. Are you going to be bringing those back or where they just to time consuming and something of the past?

424. Craig - January 30, 2012

Ya I was thinking the same thing. This thread has taken a couple different turns but I wanted to ask you while we had you here.

425. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - January 30, 2012

Hey Anthony. We at the live Chat would like to know if you can re set it but keep it in honor of Del Trame. We are almost at post # 5,000. Lol.

426. Craiger - January 30, 2012

Will it still be called Trekmovie or will the name change?

427. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - January 30, 2012

I can’t wait to see more of the Sci fi Coverege. That was one of my Faves. Thanks Anthony.

428. MONGO - January 30, 2012

Mongo like the Trekmovieinternets.com. Mongo here from when Star Trek movie first announce.

Warning to Anthony mans derail thread. No more hijack, Anthony mans. (Mongo make joke.)

429. Richard Daystrom - January 30, 2012

354. boborci – January 30, 2012
scifiguy

NCC stands for NAVAL CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT.

Watched ’09 Trek with the commentary for the first time the other day and was suprised you didn’t know what NCC meant then. I guess some fans are nerdier than others. LOL!

430. Capt. of the U.S.S. Anduril - January 30, 2012

Bob, gotta ask. I’m glad to see the game mentioned again, and I’m wondering if the game’s initial 2012 release will be pushed back the same as the film.

431. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - January 30, 2012

boborci, so does that mean that the comics and the game are considerd to officially be a part of cannon?

432. Basement Blogger - January 30, 2012

@ 410

Thanks Mongo. The moonbase answer made me laugh. I know you say you’re not THE MONGO but no matter, you will still be my favorite pawn in the game of life. (Blazing Saddles reference to you teenagers.)

433. MONGO - January 30, 2012

Mongo pawn in game of life. Elvis the King.

434. Basement Blogger - January 30, 2012

Hey Bob Orci,

Okay this is a cheap way to get back on this thread but watched CNN Piers Morgan tonight. A digitized copy of the JFK tapes made the night of his assassination were just donated to the National Archives. today. It looks like you can get the tapes online! Stuff includes the search for General LeMay and confusion as to where they took Kennedy’s body when they came to Washington. I have no idea what any of this means. We just know you love this stuff. Sorry Anthony for digressing. I tend to do that, hopefully in amusing and interesting ways.

1. Story
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20120130/us-jfk-tapes/

2. National Archives story and tapes link
http://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/air-force-one-tape.html

435. Captain Karl - January 30, 2012

heh, to those who are nitpicking on boborci, I have only this to say… leave boborci alone, folks. He doesn’t have to come here to interact with us, the fans, but he does, which shows he cares about what we the fans have to say. Is he a busy man? Heck yeah, does everything he touches turn to gold? I would have to lean towards, no because, although he has brought some quality entertainment, it’s just not realistic to say everything will be a hit…there will be misses…his track record thus far? Pretty darn good…my family enjoys quite a bit of what he has brought to the entertainment world (my wife though I suspect only watches 5-0 to see Alex O’Loughlin without a shirt).
Thank you boborci for taking the time out of your busy schedule to interact with us (and no, I am not kissing up just because I am friends and a neighbor of one of your family members;))

436. NanoTechDudeLA - January 30, 2012

@419. “… 2012 is a year for onward and upward for TM…”

Hi Mr. Pascale,

it is soooo nice to hear this! I’ve started posting only recently, but have been visiting the site for a long time… Btw. I loved the “round table” on the new blu-ray disks with TNG-era movies!!!:)

Wishing you the best of luck for the upcoming challenges! Godspeed! :)

437. captain spock - January 30, 2012

BoB
The super 8 contest was held in november of last year on the super 8 website, the two winners will win a walk on role on trek 2…..ask J.J he mite know something about that.

Fellow trekkers.. star trek:11 will be on T.V.. on Febuary 15th 2012 on the F.X. channel @ 7pm.

F.X. network.com

438. moauvian waoul - aka: seymour hiney - January 30, 2012

5. boborci – “Its hard to say so much without saying anything;)”

Hell, I do it all the time.

Good luck Bob, and Godspeed. Thanks for stopping by.

439. moauvian waoul - aka: seymour hiney - January 30, 2012

382. Anthony Pascale – “…I am very glad the scenes were cut showing Gaela in the control room and Kirk talking to the wrong green girl. Taken together with the bedroom scene they add up to Kirk being a bit of a d-bag. Its better not to know who he screwed over literally and figuratively to cheat”

Wow. I liked that scene and was going to comment to that effect. Now I’m glad I didn’t.

440. china - January 31, 2012

All I ask boborci is that we have Cumberbatch/Quinto/Urban scene in the next film. You’d make a lot of fangirls very happy.

441. Keachick - rose pinenut - January 31, 2012

Keachick could be on a rampage here – (yeah, I know – like when isn’t she? I hear some of you say)

I said that I liked Chris Pine hairstyle, until I saw it from the back from photos taken from the This Means War movie premiere in London. It has a very short, military like look to it.

I’m concerned now –

am I going to see a normal, healthy human male and captain of a starship on a peaceful mission to explore space or heavens forbid

some bulked up muscle clone packing ammunition on a more aggressive mission to invade space?

Please, Bob Orci – what say you? Am I overreacting? Just wondering…

I really hope Chris’s hair grows fast because it needs to!

442. Tom - January 31, 2012

#352 boborci

Thanks. Agreed on the missed opportunity. Still trying?? Seems like that touching message in the hologram sums up the very heart of Star Trek and could be applicable. Just my thought..

443. Tom - January 31, 2012

#390 dmduncan

Read Bob’s comments at 352. Looks like it won’t happen with Shatner. Its too bad it would have been great

444. Toonloon - January 31, 2012

Hey Bob! Did I get lost in the crossfire??

Is there any chance you can tell us whether or not we’ll see another redshirt called Olson?

MJ – namedropping. Cute. Here’s some namedropping for you… last time I saw Ben, I was out with Ian McKellern and his friend Sean Mathias in Soho House in london. Ben was with a blonde girl whose name escapes me. I remember the night very well because a) I was talking about Coronation Street with Sir Ian and b) Ben was extremely complimentary on a final show that I was in which I thought I was rather terrible in. We both trained at LAMDA although we were in different years. How’s that for name dropping?

445. Christopher Roberts - January 31, 2012

My title suggestion:
http://i696.photobucket.com/albums/vv330/Christopher_Pike/STARTREK2.jpg

And if Shatner-Kirk is out of the question, can we please have that Bakula-Admiral Archer cameo?

446. La Reyne d'Epee - January 31, 2012

@408 Corvette King They’re welcome to kill a BMW any time. Those are the ugliest cars in existence.

Re Spock’s colour: I read that in TOS anyway, Len’s make up was green-tinged to give him a more alien and distinct look. Maybe they decided to give Quinto a break having enough to contend with re bowl haircut and ears…

447. KHAN 2.0 - January 31, 2012

one thing ive been thinking lately is as ST09 was more ‘TOS’ 60s trek in regards to the whole design, look and feel (uniforms, equipment, nancells, sound FX, lighting, logo etc) then maybe the sequel or the third one will be more movie 80s trek inspired in relation to all that stuff

Obviously there were a lot of references, nods etc to the movies in ST09 but really it was a big budget updating of the 60s tv show – telling the origin that was never told (even though it was an alternate origin) so perhaps the sequels might be like a big budget updating of the 80s original crew movies I-VI (or more specifically II, III & IV) maybe telling the untold story post 5 year mission (with ‘Ongoing’ filling in those years – so we’ll see them at the time we never did in TOS – after the mission, just like the way we never saw the characters come together/begin the mission in TOS but did in ST2009) or even post TMP/pre TWOK…im not saying the crew will be decked out in TWOK uniforms with Pine sporting a thick black ‘fro but the uniforms could be more of that style (and have similar field jackets) the look of the bridge could be less bright/more Khan, the Ent looking more sleek like TMP Ent, the sound FX of the warps/beaming/phasers could be more movie style, the warp FX could leave that lingering rainbow trail behind, mushroom style spacedock with the massive blue lit interior housing all the ships (instead of the K7 style), movie characters like Decker, C Marcus, Terrel, Kruge and movie ships like Excelsior, Reliant, Grissom, Klingon BOPs, more Horner-esque music etc…maybe even use the movie font instead of TOS font on the posters/opening credits?

perhaps thats what the end of Pike in the TMP style admiral uniform was suggesting/foreshadowing – that the movie version of star trek has been fast tracked (due to neros interference)?

guess it’ll depend on how far the sequel is set – if 5-10 years then maybe, if next day after nero not so much

448. dhead - January 31, 2012

When will have a teaser trailer

449. tubular_trekkie - January 31, 2012

I’d like to see the film essentially be a TOS-style story on a movie budget. The biggest opportunity this reboot provides is to show KIrk, Spock and McCoy as young men again in their prime. Rushing to put them in TWOK-style uniforms and start re-doing or incorporating elements shown in the classic films is missing the point IMO.

Pine’s Kirk is a young man. Let him run around exploring the frontier, getting into fist fights and getting his shirt ripped. I’d love to see a ‘landing party’ (not an ‘away team’) beam down to an unknown world, get embroiled in some mystery or other and have to deal with some NEW aliens. Zap the red shirts! Spock and McCoy banter. But something fresh plot-wise. Save the gravitas and the stately uniforms and the Klingon peace deals until they’re a bit older.

450. Daoud - January 31, 2012

@447. I think they figure ST2009 was the teaser!

451. KHAN 2.0 - January 31, 2012

@448 hmmm yeah maybe too early now so save movie stuff for 3 (or 4)

TOS is where its at

452. Daoud - January 31, 2012

@Keachick: Maybe Chris Pine has a short haircut so that he can wear a toupee? That would be a great way to work Shatner in after all! Shatner’s Kirk Toupee!

@Factchecker: Sorry, you’ve dialed the wrong Douwd. Called Kevin up though and he said he’s not scheduled to think away the Husnoq until 2366. Don’t spill the beans he said though.

453. KHAN 2.0 - January 31, 2012

@447 – surely a teaser wouldnt be out until at least the summer?

possibily attached to GI Joe (Paramount) or maybe Prometheus?

then again everythings online now so who cares what movie it will be with

454. Robert Asbury - January 31, 2012

I would like to see spock create an A.I program called D.A.T.A for the ship and have Brent Spiner become the voice of the Enterprise from here on in. Some nod that a version of TNG will still be possible.

455. KHAN 2.0 - January 31, 2012

453 yeah id def like to see more nods to TNG in sequel. ST09 had a few but more please

456. jas_montreal - January 31, 2012

The greatest villains always ask for the ultimate sacrifice at the end of the story. Joker in The Dark Knight. Khan in Wrath of Khan. And hopefully Cumberbatch in Star Trek 12.

457. Jeyl - January 31, 2012

“Thanks to advances in film making, we can move the camera around the ship in ways you couldn’t before”

I would hardly call shaking and banging on the camera to make it look like it was a documentary an advancement in film making.

458. sunfell - January 31, 2012

Bob, thank you for continuing to come by and talk to us. Its clear that some do not realize (or appreciate!) what a rare thing this is, but I do, as do many others here. I am enjoying the comic series- which is good- it will make the wait for the movie much better. And I might even try out the new game- and I’m not a gamer at all.

Again, I trust you and your colleagues to create a kick-ass story for us to enjoy.

And I trust TrekMovie to keep us informed on actual happenings.

459. Daoud - January 31, 2012

@Bob… hope the day’s going well. Guess we’ll see you again around lunchtime in a couple hours. What’s on the table for lunch today? How about a picture of the lunch spread on set? Surely, that won’t raise the ire of secrecy? We can make Star Trek: The Lunch Generation jokes in the meantime.
.
“-Hey, you’ve got a pepperoni on your forehead!
—Nah, just prosthetics, I’m playing an alien.”

460. Anthony Pascale - January 31, 2012

moauvian waoul,

Hey its just one man’s opinion, feel free to express yours.

One reason I don’t comment a lot is that I dont want to imply that my opinion is the “right” one, it is just my opinion. Feel free to disagree

461. Chris M - January 31, 2012

Mr Orci
Since you havn’t settled on a title for the new movie yet may I suggest Star Trek XII: So Very Tired
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UfzuRMthMzk
Could work lol.

Seriously though I loved Star Trek (2009), I saw the film ten times at the movies and a local theatre here in Melbourne recently had a showing so that made it eleven!

It’s a tough ask trying to top the previous film but I am confident that the new movie is going to be fantastic!! I am curious to know what your thoughts are on the movie being released in 3D as well as 2D?
I know it was a studio driven decision rather than a creative team decision.

462. Al Roberts - January 31, 2012

Does anyone know what game this refers to? I’m assuming either STO or some adaptation of the 1st movie.

463. Gary Makin - January 31, 2012

Hey Bob – you could always shoot the Shatner cameo now, and have an extended cut of Trek 09 released on DVD (with the cut scenes included too).

Maybe even shoot some stuff from the Countdown comic; though I doubt Paramount wouldn’t spring for that.

Countdown was great, by the way.

464. FrancoMiranda - January 31, 2012

Name droppers beware: those who don’t name drop probably know more people than you and have a higher level of self confidence, given that they don’t have to prove anything to effectively anonymous strangers on an internet message board.

Just sayin;.

465. Anthony Thompson - January 31, 2012

@ Chris Doohan

Is our favorite Transporter Tech going to be making an appearance in the sequel?

466. Toonloon - January 31, 2012

@ 464. Tit. I thought I might be able to offer some insights into the man who is playing a major role in the next film, but if all you see is me taking an opportunity to namedrop then I pity you. Haters love to hate.

467. Anthony Thompson - January 31, 2012

373. GG

Agreed. I, too, missed having briefing room scenes in the TOS films. They were great opportunities for both character moments and necessary exposition to move a story along. Bob, can you bring that tradition back in this film series?

468. Toonloon - January 31, 2012

There was a bridge conflab that was reminiscent of those scenes. I don’t imagine JJ will be swooping a camera around a briefing room, but you never know.

469. FrancoMiranda - January 31, 2012

466.

It was a more general comment on the name dropping throughout the thread but if you want to start throwing insults about then that’s your choice.

I’m not going to say anything about my other posts, since there’s no way I could assume you would have read them in this ‘long chain’ messaging format, but if you had you would realise I’m in no way a ‘hater’ at all.

My final point, which I’m sure will annoy you (but is true nonetheless) is that you yourself flagged up a name dropper, called them cute, and proceeded to one up them with your own post.

You can’t deny that your post was framed in such a context. Whether this was intentional or not, you can let me know, but you can’t blame anyone for finding that particular framing rather petty.

(Shrugs.)

I don’t disbelieve you, but I’ve taken the time to explain why I read your post a certain way and I’ve given you the benefit of the doubt – as in, recognising that you might not have meant it in as petty a manner as it appeared.

470. VZX - January 31, 2012

422. Anthony Pascale – January 30, 2012

Careful, you might have to instaban yourself.

471. Toonloon - January 31, 2012

Petty manner. Indeed.

472. FrancoMiranda - January 31, 2012

471.

Fine! Was it just me that read it that way? Is it because I’m new and don’t really know the community or people’s writing style? Hey, at least I’m willing to entertain the possibility that I could have read it in a way it wasn’t intended to be read.

Ah, whatever. You’ve pegged me as something and that’s that, I guess there’s no point in trying to explain where I was coming from.

473. Red Dead Ryan - January 31, 2012

#466.

“@464. Tit.”

“Tit”? Are you hoping to be “tit-illated” by tit-dropping in the next movie?

474. Alice - January 31, 2012

Please! TOS,TNG, DS9 and VOY have all been erased.

Spock came back in time and now the time line has been altered. There is NO alternate reality. Spock himself in the movie tells Kirk “I am from the future”. Kirk tells Scotty, he is from the future. Your so called “alternate reality” is a nice cover up for “timeline change” If I go back and kill Hitler thus preventing WWII. I changed the past and thus the future is now changed. It is that simple.

The very idea that Spock would allow Vulcan to be destroyed and billions of Vulcans to bite it goes against everything we have seen and know about Spock.

I would hope that the plot holes in the next movie are not so big as you can drive a bus through.

475. FrancoMiranda - January 31, 2012

474.

Is it not possible that the new timeline is both just that, and also another universe, like the Mirror Universe?

For example, in Enterprise, we see Defiant travel both backward in time, and into another universe.

476. moauvian waoul - aka: seymour hiney - January 31, 2012

460. 460. Anthony Pascale – “Feel free to disagree.”

Wha? Me disagree? Never. ;)

477. cdp - January 31, 2012

474
http://trekmovie.com/2011/12/22/jj-abrams-star-trek-2009-was-dream-project-plus-talks-alternative-v-prime-timelines/

For those who fear the new movie destroyed the original time line here is a link to a post where jj abrams talks a little about the new movie time line and down in the comment section bob orci said they used the multiverse theory of quantum mechanics so according to these guys who are now in charge of the star trek canon star trek 2009 takes place in a parallel universe and the original time line is not destroyed So there is nothing to worry about just sit back relax and just enjoy the new movies.

478. Robert Asbury - January 31, 2012

Since Enterprise was unaffected by the time change and theoretically leads into both universes, could we see some reference to t pol or shran? Even Dr. soong? And I dont feel that the 24th century has been erased, just altered. Data, Picard, and Worf are as important to me as Kirk, spock, and McCoy. And if Picard traveled back to meet Cochrane, does that mean that the Enterprise-E and the Borg are a part of the past in this new universe? Or did that create yet another timeline? OR…er…??? Couldn’t Q just snap his fingers and fix all this?

479. duke nukem - January 31, 2012

if someone working on the film says there are changes afoot then you can be sure that is the case

480. FrancoMiranda - January 31, 2012

478.

Who says there’s anything WRONG with it? The many universes idea has been in Star Trek since almost the beginning. The way I see it, if it happened and it wasn’t altered back, then it was meant to be.

Another case: Admiral Janeway going back in time, altering the timeline, introducing new tech to the 24th Century, and getting Voyager home earlier than it would normally have been able to. NOT ONLY THAT! Destroying the Borg, anyone? Or at least, severely damaging them.

Didn’t see anyone from the Q popping up to tell of Admiral Janeway. No Braxton, no 29th Century time ships, nothing. Why? Why is that okay and the new movie under constant attack from people saying it either ‘shouldn’t be’ or ‘couldn’t be’?

Not that I’m saying you attacked it, I’m just continuing the discussion.

481. boborci - January 31, 2012

474. Alice – January 31, 2012

If what you are saying were correct, then Spock Prime would have no memory of his past. He would not remember Kirk’s father living to seem Kirk become Captain.

The multiverse theory of quantum mechanics explains all this well. Check it out!

482. boborci - January 31, 2012

454. Robert Asbury – January 31, 2012
I would like to see spock create an A.I program called D.A.T.A for the ship and have Brent Spiner become the voice of the Enterprise from here on in. Some nod that a version of TNG will still be possible.

—–

Cool idea. Maybe in part 3!

483. VZX - January 31, 2012

474. Alice – January 31, 2012

Wait, what?

Are you serious or sarcastic? I can never tell. But if serious, then, really? It is an ALTERNATE reality, not the only reality. According to the offical canon, as stated by the Abrams himself, the events that happened in the original shows did not cease to exist. They are not erased. I mean, I can watch them on DVD or read the books whenever I want. Also, the very presence of the unaltered Spock Prime proves that they happened, otherwise he would not be the same, or even cease to exist at all.

There is a saying according to the laws of probability (in QM) that whatever can happen, does happen in some dimension. There are many different “realities” in existance, not just one.

Yeah, you’re right that there were plotholes, but this was not one of them. I think the whole alternate realty thing was the most genius thing the writers did for this movie. It was a way of revisting the characters but with keeping the drama and suspense of not knowing their futures for certain. It is actually more of a sequel (because of Nero and Spock Prime) than a prequel or a reboot.

484. moauvian waoul - aka: seymour hiney - January 31, 2012

BOB! Sorry man, just needed to say that.

485. VZX - January 31, 2012

Crap, Bob beat me to it.

Dang it, Bob, stop stealing my thunder!

486. Daoud - January 31, 2012

Hey, I got to sit and chat with Edward Teller one afternoon in 1979 after a talk, and he was THE BOMB! Literally. :)
.
Name dropping is only good for the humor quotient.

487. boborci - January 31, 2012

434. Basement Blogger – January 30, 2012

Nice. Now we’re talking.

The confusion around JFK’s body in Washington leads some to believe that the body had to be taken and altered by the conspirators to make it look like the kill shot came from behind. That is why you have to sets of witnesses in D.C. honestly reporting two different times for the arrival of the body!

488. VZX - January 31, 2012

Here’s another connection to various timelines: Spock Prime mind melded with Pine Kirk, right? Also, Spock Prime melded with Picard, Shatner Kirk, Kelley McCoy, Hortas, whales, etc. It was stated in the TNG episode Reunification, I think, that every meld always leaves a little behind. (eww) That said, then Pine Kirk has a connection with all those old school Trek characters via Prime Spock’s meld.

Does that help the purists? Probably not, but it’s something…

489. tubular_trekkie - January 31, 2012

@488. VZX.

Does anyone need to worry about this stuff? I’m not that bothered about the reboot trying to offer ‘tie-ins’ to the original continuity – as long as they tell a great story (hopefully with Cumberbatch in a prominent role too) that’ll be FANTASTIC.

490. FrancoMiranda - January 31, 2012

488.

Never thought of that. Pretty interesting implications.

@boborci

Enterprise recast Spiner as Arik Soong. Is it possible that we’ll see other Trek-alumni appearing as their own ancestors in this timeline? Not that I particularly care either way, but it could be fun to see.

491. Daoud - January 31, 2012

@487: Wish Rose Cherami hadn’t been ‘struck by a car in a 1965 accident’ so we could ask her what she knew. Someday, maybe we’ll find out what Operation 40’s involvement really was. Is it 2029 things are locked away until, I guess?
.
It all went south with Mossadegh.

492. Keachick - rose pinenut - January 31, 2012

#452 – NO NO NO NO NO NO

Beside, I read that Hollywood hairstylists love Chris Pine’s good head of hair because they can do so much with it and it grows back fairly fast. Just as well.

Chris could probably grow his own toupee and one for William Shatner as well.

Cripes – I’ve just had a thought. Chris could have Menosian genes and is some sort of throwback…:) I keeeed.
(Menosian hair grows so fast that they actually harvest it and turn it into clothing, blankets etc for when the weather turns a bit cooler and the babies’ and children’s hair has not grown enough to keep them warm/protected.)

I see, Bob Orci, you have not answered my query (#441) or at least given a little reassurance…I hope I haven’t thrown you a curve ball. Anyway, there’s still time…

493. NanoTechDudeLA - January 31, 2012

481. boborci – January 31, 2012
474. Alice – January 31, 2012
The multiverse theory of quantum mechanics explains all this well. Check it out!

Hi,
many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics is a neat hypothesis that resolves some problems e.g. action at a distance (Einstein called this “spooky action”), but introduces a universe of other problems :) As far as I know, it has been so far impossible to test this theory, which makes it no more correct that the mono-universe hypothesis…

I just wanted to clarify this for the readers, because none of the leading theories has a precedence…

Sorry for my professional deformation! :):)

494. Quatlo - January 31, 2012

491: Why lock away anything when you can simply destroy it, like RFK did with JFK’s brain and other medical artifacts including the real autopsy photos.

Nixon should have learned from that and destroyed his tapes.

495. Harry Ballz - January 31, 2012

487. boborci “JFK’s body….had to be taken and altered by the conspirators”

And the only person who had the authority to orchestrate that would be Lyndon Baines Johnson!

LBJ murdered JFK and actually got away with it! Case closed indeed!

496. boborci - January 31, 2012

485. VZX – January 31, 2012

Oops! Thanks for chiming in!

497. VZX - January 31, 2012

496. No problem. Now, let me at NanoTechDudeLA.

I got this one.

498. Keachick - rose pinenut - January 31, 2012

I am trying to work out how the bitching and confusion came about between MJ, Franco and Toonloon.

At post #133 El Chup wrote about *himself being successful, not socially awkward and having been at major international events, had met journalists, politicians, diplomats, celebrities. This person also commented how socially inept many posters here seemed to be and went on to assume these posters were generally unsuccessful, losers etc.

I answered this by calling the comments rude, presumptuous, and conceited. What did El Chup knowing celebrities, diplomats etc have to do with anything? It was not the fact that this poster may have met and even know some of these people that stuck in my craw. It was how this information was related to people here – with an air of superiority. He seemed to be doing the very same thing that he was accusing others of doing – raising himself up somehow while, at the same time, putting others down.

MJ agreed with my original comments made about post #133 and used the term “namedropping”, although El Chup had not actually mentioned any actual names.

Unfortunately, Toonloon, you make the silly mistake of being sarcastic towards MJ use of the word “namedropping” and then proceeds to tell people about his knowing Ben Cumberbatch, Sir Ian McKellan etc. I think that if you left out the sarcasm towards MJ’s “namedropping” which was made in connection to a different situation, then you would not be receiving the ire of posters like MJ and Franco.

I have no reason to doubt that Toonloon may not have met and talked with the actors he mentioned and may even know them quite well. Actors are not islands unto themselves, especially when you are as old, accomplished and well travelled as Ian McKellan.

The whole issue could have been handled differently and we could actually have enjoyed reading about the interactions between yourself, Toonloon, Ben Cumberbatch, Ian McKellan and others there that evening and not doubted the veracity of your story in the same way. We still can!

Anyway, that’s how I see it.

499. Go-cart Mozart - January 31, 2012

Mr. Orci, steering away from conspiracies for a moment, just to clarify… what is the difference between a writing team and committee writing in Hollywood? Is there a specific number of writers involved to become what’s considered a committee, or does that mean outside input, i.e. studio suits, fans, family and friends, your mailman, etc., etc., must be involved?

I’m interested in screenwriting and was wondering…

500. FrancoMiranda - January 31, 2012

498:

Yeah. As you might have read, I’ve commented a couple of times on the difficulty of following a discussion when it’s presented in this format, and especially when the person is new – like me. I guess posts get lost along the way, and misunderstandings take place.

Anyway, I thought my response in the end was fair.

Thanks for the post, it removed some of the fog of war, so to speak.

501. VZX - January 31, 2012

493. NanoTechDudeLA – January 31, 2012

Yo. Schoedinger’s cat is alive in some universes and dead in others. The Many-Worlds Interpretation is not just a convienent way of explaining things like spooky variables (Einstein) affecting single electrons forming diffraction patterns. There is an actual, physical reality to these other universes. The wave-function does not collapse.

I am of the view that it can be sloppy science to assign some made-up BS just to explain away a model. Visions of the luminiferous aether come to mind. But I am won over by the fact that so many scientists, like Steven Hawking, defend the MWI, even if its just by doing the math.

502. Craig - January 31, 2012

@ Bob

I imagine you guys have all your actors cast already but I need you to remember a name… Jeffrey Combs. Get him in the movie please. He is by far one of the best all time Trek favs. I have loved every character he played through the years especially Cmd. Shran in Enterprise. He needs to be in the movie. Pass this along to everyone involved.

503. Daoud - January 31, 2012

@499: Remember, this is a world where “&” and “and” have two very different meanings. An ampersand indicates people who worked together as a team, whereas the word “and” does not indicate that. Then again, I think I’ve seen some who work as a writing team even use /. Somewhere on the interwebs is a Writers Guild FAQ explaining committee, etc.

504. FrancoMiranda - January 31, 2012

503.

You can see it in the names of law firms, for example. And shops: Wilson & Co., as a made up example. It must have a pretty broad legal context when it comes to business/money making.

505. Pauln6 - January 31, 2012

@502 – I’d love to see some andorians in the foreground too. I always thought a female andorian security guard would be a cool concept. How does Rosario Dawson feel about antennae?

506. boborci - January 31, 2012

499. Go-cart Mozart – January 31, 2012
Mr. Orci, steering away from conspiracies for a moment, just to clarify… what is the difference between a writing team and committee writing in Hollywood? Is there a specific number of writers involved to become what’s considered a committee, or does that mean outside input, i.e. studio suits, fans, family and friends, your mailman, etc., etc., must be involved?

I’m interested in screenwriting and was wondering…

———-

Normally, when a script is said to have been written by committee, it means that the producers, and the studio and the actors and everyone but the writers got into the process, going through various writers hired one after to other, to try an generate a script that pleases everyone which usually pleases no one.

In this case, one team has been writing the script from beginning to end with little destructive interference from outside sources.

507. NanoTechDudeLA - January 31, 2012

@501. VZX – January 31, 2012
493. NanoTechDudeLA – January 31, 2012

1. Regarding the Schrödinger’s cat: that’s true only in MWIofQM theory. It is easier to describe its quantum state as a superposition of states. Occam’s Razor?
2. Spooky variables and diffraction patterns: you lost me here :)
3. Physical reality to paralel universes: if you prove this “physical reality”, you will win the Nobel Prize.
4. So many scientists…: I personally prefer the MWI, but that’s only my opinion, and until the experimental proof any scientist’s opinion is just that – an opinion, and any hypothesis is just that – a hypothesis. Any scientist, including Professor Hawking, will agree.
5. …doing the math: you can do as much math within a theory/formalism as you want, that doesn’t mean that the theory/formalism is correct, it just reveals some possible “truths” given that the theory is “true”. I think that Professor Hawking will agree :)

I repeat that i like MWI – however, saying that it’s more correct than other competing theories is simply not true.

VZX, are you a physicist or in a related field?

508. VZX - January 31, 2012

505. Pauln6 – January 31, 2012

“How does Rosario Dawson feel about antennae?”

So…easy…to make a dirty joke…..But I will resist!

509. Pauln6 - January 31, 2012

Resistance is futile.

510. FrancoMiranda - January 31, 2012

@boborci

‘In this case, one team has been writing the script from beginning to end with little destructive interference from outside sources.’

Sounds like a dream scenario to me!

Although, it’s only a dream if there are destructive influences to keep at bay… I wish I had some, I’d know I was doing well in that case haha.

511. boborci - January 31, 2012

507. NanoTechDudeLA – January 31, 2012

I am not a scientist. Nonetheless, it is my understanding that the MWI interpretation of QM is preferred for the following reasons, from Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:

The reason for adopting the MWI is that it avoids the collapse of the quantum wave. (Other non-collapse theories are not better than MWI for various reasons, e.g., nonlocality of Bohmian mechanics; and the disadvantage of all of them is that they have some additional structure.) The collapse postulate is a physical law that differs from all known physics in two aspects: it is genuinely random and it involves some kind of action at a distance. According to the collapse postulate the outcome of a quantum experiment is not determined by the initial conditions of the Universe prior to the experiment: only the probabilities are governed by the initial state. Moreover, Bell 1964 has shown that there cannot be a compatible local-variables theory that will make deterministic predictions. There is no experimental evidence in favor of collapse and against the MWI. We need not assume that Nature plays dice. The MWI is a deterministic theory for a physical Universe and it explains why a world appears to be indeterministic for human observers.

The MWI exhibits some kind of nonlocality: “world” is a nonlocal concept, but it avoids action at a distance and, therefore, it is not in conflict with the relativistic quantum mechanics; see discussions of nonlocality in Vaidman 1994, Tipler 2000, Bacciagaluppi 2002, and Hemmo and Pitowsky 2001. Although the issues of (non)locality are most transparent in the Schrödinger representation, an additional insight can be gained through recent analysis in the framework of the Heisenberg representation, see Deutsch and Hayden 2000, Rubin 2001, and Deutsch 2001. The most celebrated example of nonlocality was given by Bell 1964 in the context of the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen argument. However, in the framework of the MWI, Bell’s argument cannot get off the ground because it requires a predetermined single outcome of a quantum experiment.

Another example of a kind of an action at a distance in a quantum theory with collapse is the interaction-free measurement of Elitzur and Vaidman 1993. Consider a super-sensitive bomb which explodes when any single particle arrives at its location. It seems that it is impossible to see this bomb, because any photon that arrives at the location of the bomb will cause an explosion. Nevertheless, using the Elitzur and Vaidman method, it is possible, at least sometimes, to find the location of the bomb without exploding it. In the case of success, a paradoxical situation arises: we obtain information about some region of space without any particle being there. Indeed, we know that no particle was in the region of the bomb because there was no explosion. The paradox disappears in the framework of the MWI. The situation is paradoxical because it contradicts physical intuition: the bomb causes an observable change in a remote region without sending or reflecting any particle. Physics is the theory of the Universe and therefore the paradox is real if this story is correct in the whole physical Universe. But it is not. There was no photon in the region of the bomb in a particular world, but there are other worlds in which a photon reaches the bomb and causes it to explode. Since the Universe incorporates all the worlds, it is not true that in the Universe no photon arrived at the location of the bomb. It is not surprising that our physical intuition leads to a paradox when we limit ourselves to a particular world: physical laws are applicable when applied to the physical universe that incorporates all of the worlds.

The MWI is not the most accepted interpretation of quantum theory among physicists, but it is becoming increasingly popular (see Tegmark 1998). The strongest proponents of the MWI can be found in the communities of quantum cosmology and quantum computing. In quantum cosmology it makes it possible to discuss the whole Universe avoiding the difficulty of the standard interpretation which requires an external observer. In quantum computing, the key issue is the parallel processing performed on the same computer; this is very similar to the basic picture of the MWI.[9]

Many physicists and philosophers believe that the most serious weakness of the MWI (and especially of its version presented here) is that it “gives up trying to explain things”. In the words of Steane 1999, “It is no use to say that the [Schrödinger] cat is ‘really’ both alive and dead when every experimental test yields unambiguously the result that the cat is either alive or dead.” (Steane dismisses the interference experiment which can reveal the presence of the superposition as unfeasible.) Indeed, if there is nothing in physics except the wave-function of the Universe, evolving according to the Schrödinger equation, then there are questions answering which requires help by other sciences. However, the advantage of the MWI is that it allows us to view quantum mechanics as a complete and consistent physical theory which agrees with all experimental results obtained to date.

512. boborci - January 31, 2012

507. NanoTechDudeLA – January 31, 2012

And in response to your invocation of O’s Razor, from same source:

It seems that the majority of the opponents of the MWI reject it because, for them, introducing a very large number of worlds that we do not see is an extreme violation of Ockham’s principle: “Entities are not to be multiplied beyond necessity”. However, in judging physical theories one could reasonably argue that one should not multiply physical laws beyond necessity either (such a verion of Ockham’s Razor has been applied in the past), and in this respect the MWI is the most economical theory. Indeed, it has all the laws of the standard quantum theory, but without the collapse postulate, the most problematic of physical laws. The MWI is also more economic than Bohmian mechanics which has in addition the ontology of the particle trajectories and the laws which give their evolution. Tipler 1986 (p. 208) has presented an effective analogy with the criticism of Copernican theory on the grounds of Ockham’s razor.

One might consider also a possible philosophical advantage of the plurality of worlds in the MWI, similar to that claimed by realists about possible worlds, such as Lewis 1986 (see the discussion of the analogy between the MWI and Lewis’s theory by Skyrms 1976). However, the analogy is not complete: Lewis’ theory considers all logically possible worlds, many more than all worlds incorporated in the quantum state of the Universe.

513. boborci - January 31, 2012

513. But again. I am no scientist. Just a dumb screenwriter.

514. MJ - January 31, 2012

@466 “@ 464. Tit. I thought I might be able to offer some insights into the man who is playing a major role in the next film, but if all you see is me taking an opportunity to namedrop then I pity you. Haters love to hate.”

The boards are for anonymous posters. It your are anaonmous, then let’s face it, people are just not going to believe your statements of supposedly knowing famous people/actors and having inside information. If you want to share with us who you are, and direct me to to web links that demonstrate you are who you say you are, then I will concede your post is legitimate.

Otherwise, I am not buying what you are selling…i.e., “trust me folks, I know these famous individuals, and I am important., so trust me.” Sorry, but I am very skeptical of anonymous posters who say this kind if stuff. For all I know you could be a 14-year old kid who just wants his opinion noticed more here, and so you are making this all up. Additionally, I’ve notice that you post at what would seem to be middle of the night hours for London, so I have doubts that you are really living in the UK.

515. Go-cart Mozart - January 31, 2012

#506

Thanks for the clarification, Mr. Orci.

Though I did see a movie recently where something like six or seven writers were listed in the credits. I couldn’t help but think, ‘Does it really take that many to come up with a good story?’ Guess not. The movie wasn’t that good, but I guess that could’ve been any number of reasons other than the script.

Anyway, when it comes to writing teams, do you find there’s an optimum number of writers to be successful, two? three?, or does it more or less come down to who is attached?

516. boborci - January 31, 2012

515. Three is the maximum, as one team, that is viable in my opinion.

Or two teams of two.

517. Pauln6 - January 31, 2012

@ 511 ‘A sphincter says, ‘What?’

My understanding of Many Worlds is that they exist in parallel states so when a being from one universe moves to another, s/he isn’t ‘creating’ a new universe any more or less than they were ‘creating’ a universe by their actions in the universe they came from. Just think, to create a universe you would need the energy of the Big Bang!

518. boborci - January 31, 2012

From Kaku:

He says:”there are vibrations of different universes right here, right now. We’re just not in tune with them. There are probably other parallel universes in our living room – this is modern physics. This is the modern interpretation of quantum theory, that many worlds represents reality.”

519. boborci - January 31, 2012

517. Could be. Not inconsistent with our movie.

520. Vultan - January 31, 2012

#516

Interesting. Thanks for the input.

I saw on another website you were talking about maybe doing a Wyatt Earp TV series. Is that right? If so, can I play a Curly Bill? ;)

521. MJ - January 31, 2012

Wasn’t Kaku a character in “Mork and Mindy”? Or was it “3rd Rock from the Sun?”

:-)

522. boborci - January 31, 2012

520. Ha! You can surely read for it!

523. MJ - January 31, 2012

Ah, OK. I think I have seen that guy on Larry King in the past. And interesting dude.

524. MJ - January 31, 2012

Which brings to mind how truly awful Piers Morgan is. Too bad Larry could not have gone a few more years.

525. NanoTechDudeLA - January 31, 2012

Hi Mr. Orci,

thank you for your posts, its is great to have all that info about MWI on the same place.

My intention wasn’t to doubt the MWI theory, but just to make it clear that it is not the only one, not the “correct” one, not the preferred one…

HOWEVER, I personally like it for many reasons, mostly because it is so frutiful for scientific speculations and fantastic for developing sci-fi imagination – just like Star Trek.

Sci-fi has shaped my life in such a way that today I’m a researcher in the field of nanoscience. Please don’t underestimate your importance as a writer of science fiction…

526. boborci - January 31, 2012

525.

Agreed.

And thanks!

P.S. Could nanites theoretically turn the whole world into swiss cheese?

527. FrancoMiranda - January 31, 2012

Would it amuse anyone to know that MWI, in Scotland, is short for ‘mad with it’ (or as we say it, ‘mad wae it’), which basically means trashed?

An example:

Person 1: “What are you daein’ the night mate?’

Person 2: “I’m gettin’ MWI, pal. MWI.”

Person 1: “Aw aye?”

Person 2: “Aye.”

528. Harry Ballz - January 31, 2012

526. boborci “Could nanites theoretically turn the whole world into swiss cheese?”

Gosh, that wouldn’t be gouda, now would it?

529. FrancoMiranda - January 31, 2012

528:

The plot of Prey by Michael Crichton. (Well, sort of.)

Look it up! =)

530. Toonloon - January 31, 2012

498 thank you. Well put.

MJ – Patrick Stewart booked a ticket for me for a matinee of his play in Newcastle which also had Ian Mckellern in it and Simon callow who sponsored me to train at drama school. Speaking of which, Alexander Sidig went to LAMDA as well, as did Jamie Bamber from BSG. Oh, and one last one, because I know you’re enjoying this, I taught Alec Newman a Geordie accent for a film before he went to America and starred in enterprise.

531. Keachick - rose pinenut - January 31, 2012

#514 – “Additionally, I’ve notice that you post at what would seem to be middle of the night hours for London, so I have doubts that you are really living in the UK.”

Lots of people can be on their computers and posting at all hours of the day or night. Occasionally, I have been reading stuff on various sites (and posting sometimes), wonder why I feel cold and tired, look at the clock and it’s saying 4.00am or something. It doesn’t happen very often, but it can.

Insomnia is a common problem, especially since the introduction of 24 hour television and internet and higher light levels at night being experienced by people living in cities etc.

Your comment about posting in the middle of the night would not really qualify as a legitimate reason to dismiss Toonloon’s posts, certainly not on its own. If I had just met somebody (like CP) I had always wanted, I probably wouldn’t be able to sleep anyway and would be dying to tell someone about the meeting…

532. Toonloon - January 31, 2012

Oh, and it’s 23:09 here and I’m watching Family Guy on
BBC 3, in which, I know absolutely no one personally. :)

533. FrancoMiranda - January 31, 2012

530.

So yes, this is interesting.

My sister studied at Guildford, finished a year ago. She’s living in that area still, doing okay. You never know, maybe someday she’ll come home at Christmas with stories like these…

Apologies by the way, for being rude. Seeing the whole picture (post 498) made me realise I was in the wrong.

534. NanoTechDudeLA - January 31, 2012

526. boborci – January 31, 2012
P.S. Could nanites theoretically turn the whole world into swiss cheese?

I think there is a higher probability of developing warp drive in the next 500 years :):)

P.S. However, lot of people are working on different kinds of nano-devices (nano-mechanics, medicine, electronics)… Usually, they are designed to do a very simple action and are still very “primitive” :) In my field, nano-electronics, situation is far better and we actually fabricate working nano-devices with sizes under 10 nanometers :)

535. Diego Simão Rzatki - January 31, 2012

HI Bob!

Like another brazilian trek (coment 105) i ask if we can see on this movie some reference to Brazil. O think then we have here more brazilians reading this site all the time and whant for more atencion for us.

On the last movie we have in Brazil small promotion for fmovie, but, anyaway, the numbers of trekkers here in Brazil i not soo small.

Well, i think, os too late for some brazilian actor, but, just a One little referece will be very aprecieted here.

Well, o wish for you and all people who make the sequel more sucess than on first movie. Was great and i really happy seen the trek universe go up again.

Good look and thanks for your atencion!

Diego

536. boborci - January 31, 2012

534. But seriously, can a nanite theoretically change a molecule from one to another. I now not possible today, but in theory? Truly curious.

537. Toonloon - January 31, 2012

533 my ex went to Guildford. I nearly went there because I really liked it down there but I was advised to go to a London school.

538. boborci - January 31, 2012

535. Diego Simão Rzatki – January 31, 2012

Sure. I’ll make sure Brazil is vaporized in the new movie.

I KEEEEEED! Just kidding.

539. Toonloon - January 31, 2012

Mr Orci – does Olson return in the sequel, please?

540. FrancoMiranda - January 31, 2012

537.

I’ve stayed there a few times, was ace. My sis house shared with three gorgeous girls and the local area was lovely. Suffice it to say I had a good time.

541. Toonloon - January 31, 2012

I bet! My best friends sister went there. He’s out in LA now for pilot season.

542. FrancoMiranda - January 31, 2012

That’s excellent. I wish my life was as exciting as half the people I know =P

Anyway, I better stop being off topic before I get slapped.

543. NanoTechDudeLA - January 31, 2012

….sorry for the double post, I thought that I lost the previous one…

544. NanoTechDudeLA - January 31, 2012

@536.
Sorry, my post is not coming through… here’s another try…

YES, in theory it can, but only if “nanite” means “anything that can change a molecule”… Nanites as nano-robots, less than 1 micron, with arms, processor and memory, are hardly achieveable. However, nanite as a designed molecule to interact with other molecules (and do something with them) is possible even today…
Single atoms or molecules can be manipulated with using atomic force microscope (AFM) or scanning probe microscopes… It’s not nanites, but it’s doable…
P.S. I am really enjoying this! You have no idea how rarely I can talk about things that inerest me… :):)

545. Diego Simão Rzatki - January 31, 2012

Hahaha

Man, if this happend Kirk and crew will lose a great vacation spot :) Hahaha

Thanks Bob!

546. Will Decker - January 31, 2012

@boborci
First, I got to say love Five-0 and watch it every Monday night when I can. I can’t wait for the next movie and loved ’09.

@Alice
The original universe is still there and thriving. PLUS they have even made an online game about it called STAR TREK: Online which takes place thirty years after Nemesis. There are stories being told in the Prime Universe last I checked though not on TV or Movies.

547. FrancoMiranda - January 31, 2012

If anyone discovers transmutation, can you let me know?

I got stacks of junk that would serve me better as gold.

548. NanoTechDudeLA - January 31, 2012

@547.
Do you have enough room for a nuclear reactor and/or particle accelerator? :)

549. Zwebz - January 31, 2012

I hope that this gets through to Bob Orci since he’s been posting here but it if doesn’t, oh well, I still got it out of my system.

Mr. Orci,

Since I am exactly one month and 3 days older than Classic Star Trek (really!) and have been watching Classic Trek since I was like 4, I feel qualified to give my opinion on the latest turn in the Trek Universe.

I really, really liked your last movie. I loved the special effects and I loved the “alternate universe” timeline….stroke of genius. It opens up so many possibilities for story lines and ideas for all sorts of Trek media ventures. The characters were all interesting and I could tell that between the writing and the actors’ styles a lot of time was spent giving respect to the original roles AND fleshing out what the original series didn’t have the ability to do on ’60’s television.

However, there are a couple of points about your movie that I would like to bring to light that kind of bother me.

1. I watched the movie a few times start to finish. Now when I watch the movie I always find myself skipping to the Academy scenes. However, I fully admit that this may be because I’m a guy and I want to get to the action scenes or the “Star Trek” scenes.

2. Since your movie came out, there’s something that has bothered me about the theme of the story. Basically the story can be broken down to this: Introduce the characters, get the characters to interact, give the characters a common purpose to solve and have them solve and react to that solution. BUT, one thing that was missing from your movie, as fun as it was, was the feeling of the Human Condition that Gene Roddenberry spoke of so much. He spoke of the Enterprise being “Starship Earth” and that the premise of the show was to get to the essence of what it really means to be human, good and bad and in between. This is what the last movie lacked to a large degree.

I’m hoping that when future Trek projects come along, be what they may, they always try to keep this essential Trek truth in mind .

Thank you for listening, Sir and I wish you well….not only with the new Trek but in all of your other projects as well.
Thank you for your time.

Zwebz

550. FrancoMiranda - January 31, 2012

548.

If someone lets me pay in advance, I can have all the room in the world ;)

551. FrancoMiranda - January 31, 2012

548.

* oops, I meant pay AFTER the transmutation. Haha.

552. NanoTechDudeLA - January 31, 2012

@550

BUT… if you produce too much gold, it will saturate the market and the price will fall rapidly… :):):)

553. FrancoMiranda - January 31, 2012

552.

Yes but I’m sure we can do what the current power-brokers do, and lie, and cheat, and pretend, and only reveal what gets us the greatest return…

…and of course, turn the gold we’re given by others wanting to buy things FROM us into useless junk, so the amount of gold is always, always controlled by us…

Mwahahaha…HAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!

554. NanoTechDudeLA - January 31, 2012

@553.

You evil economonster :)

555. FrancoMiranda - January 31, 2012

ECONOMONSTER!

Now THAT is a name.

BOB! BOBBBBBBBBB!

I THINK WE’VE FOUND THE NAME FOR THE NEW MOVIE!

556. dmduncan - January 31, 2012

536. boborci – January 31, 2012

534. But seriously, can a nanite theoretically change a molecule from one to another. I now not possible today, but in theory? Truly curious.

***

Good question! Would nanites be strong enough to break chemical bonds. I imagine it depends on how much energy the nanites would have access to and be able to use for that purpose.

557. dmduncan - January 31, 2012

Could the energy be transmitted to the nanites from a remote source? Interesting for a SF story, anyway. Isaac Asimov once pointed out the flaw in Fantastic Voyage: The miniaturized people would have a tough time breathing in those giant air molecules.

He still wrote the book.

558. dmduncan - January 31, 2012

544. NanoTechDudeLA – January 31, 2012

Cool!

559. FrancoMiranda - January 31, 2012

557.

Didn’t they comment on that in that DS9 episode where the runabout was shrunk down? I seem to remember that coming up.

560. Trek Tech - January 31, 2012

@BobOrci You cant please all of the people all of the time. There were things I definitely didnt like about the last movie but also things I very much enjoyed. Im one of those OCD fans that obsesses over things like the outside of the ship not matching the inside of the ship and breweries for engine rooms lol. I loved the cast. I loved the music. I find fault with a lot of things in that movie but I still find I enjoyed it. Dont let Uhura just walk away from her station everytime Spock gets mopey…you cant do that in a crisis…militarily very unprofessional. If you do another freefall sequence through a debris filled atmosphere keep helmets on ur characters. They would have been DEAD long before they hit they ground. :) Shoot a blooper with Scotty filling a pint glass out of the warp core injector (please…just for me). I saw in the first movie what appeared to be the E throwing out Chaff /Flak while fighting the Narada (Great idea…loved it although Im not sure many other folks noticed that). More McCoy! Urban did a bang on job! Heres hoping the next movie learns from the last and we keep the flame alive. Looking forward to seeing the relationship between the triumvirate evolve.

561. dmduncan - January 31, 2012

558. dmduncan – January 31, 2012

What about what I said in 556, 557? Nanites not as molecules but as tiny robots, maybe themselves using molecules to do the work, to break chemical bonds and move the atoms around, maybe even replacing them with others?

562. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - January 31, 2012

Hey Bob Orci. Have you done any research on a couple of Conspiricy theroies I spoke to about. Amelia Airhart and the Phillidelphia Experiment.

563. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - January 31, 2012

Oh and Bob. What do you think about The Bermuda Triangle.

564. NanoTechDudeLA - January 31, 2012

@561. dmduncan – January 31, 2012

Hi, dmduncan!
The feasibility of nanites depends heavily on their size – smaller they are supposed to be, smaller the probability of building them! I guess that under nanites you suppose less-than-micron-size robots? If yes, that will be EXTREMELY DIFFICULT to make if you want a micro-robot with a processor, memory,… Within forseeable future, I can’t see any technology that could allow that…

Regarding the remote energy source: the fundamental problem of wireless energy transmission is that the power of the EM signal decays exponentially with distance…. google Professor Marin Soljacic (MIT), he’s been dubbed “new Tesla” for his work on wireless energy…

565. Quatlo - January 31, 2012

It is a Gibson SG double neck style universe at present, and oh by the way, the strings need changing.

566. NanoTechDudeLA - January 31, 2012

@561. dmduncan – January 31, 2012

An example.
Say that high end processors have 10^9 (billion!) transistors per cm^2 (check the Intel site, i’m not 100% but i’m close).
That means 10^7 per mm^2.
Finally, that is only 10 transistors per micrometer^2.

10 transistors are enough to store only 1 byte of memory! And you need a lot lot lot more to design a complex robot…. memory to store command code, more transistors for the processor etc.

In my opinion – not so bright future for nanites, unfortunately… :)

567. FrancoMiranda - January 31, 2012

566.

Layman question: is there a way to rethink the data storage itself? For example, layering, or a way that the data could be in some sort of flux where it changes constantly, occupying the same space?

Or even just finding a way to reduce the amount of physical space a byte of data takes up?

568. NanoTechDudeLA - January 31, 2012

@567. FrancoMiranda – January 31, 2012

Yes, people are working on 3D stacking of processor/memory. So far, with limited success due to over-heating problem (difficult to remove heat due to 3D structure).

Current technology, i.e. planar semiconductor technology (in silicon etc.), gives the smallest possible working nanoelectronic devices – transistors with channel lengths under 30nm! Even smaller devices have been demonstrated by IBM, Samsung, Intel, etc. but are still not in production due to various problems…

Reducing the physical space has been the driving force of the semiconductor industry – today we are well below 50nm, and some people have shown that even 5nm-long transistors would work!

Other competing technologies, e.g. spintronics/magnetoelectronics, have shown poor results so far, having demonstrated only very large
nanodevices (>100nm)…

As the famous Professor Feynman said, “there is plenty of room at the bottom” :) We have started playing with the nano-world only recently…

569. jeff - January 31, 2012

To Bob Orci:

Please, please, please, don’t judge all fans by the insane rantings of a few. There are those — a very small minority — who will never be satisfied with anything. It makes them feel happier about themselves to tear down the work of others. It makes them feel somehow powerful to become self-appointed defenders of “canon.”

But most of us know, from your body of work (you, collectively and singularly) that Trek is in responsible hands. More importantly, it’s in creative hands. We’ll get an entertaining new chapter in the end. Only the most ignorant and naive fail to realize that scripts get tweaked as work progresses. The same holds for almost any kind of project of substance, creative or otherwise.

Personally, I’d be worried if you guys were so locked into an idea that there was no room for creative adaptation. It would speak to huge egos and people who think their work is etched in stone.

Can we just let these guys work, quit fretting over things like who says “Beam him up” in a given scene, and keep things in perspective?

Anyway, thanks for the work you do.

570. dmduncan - January 31, 2012

566: “10 transistors are enough to store only 1 byte of memory! And you need a lot lot lot more to design a complex robot…. memory to store command code, more transistors for the processor etc.”

“In my opinion – not so bright future for nanites, unfortunately… :)”

***

What about memory distributed across the entire mass versus each nanite being a self contained unit, so that any given nanite can perform a function, draw command code from a neighboring nanite, perform new function, and on and on. Keep in mind, I’m talking SF here. I know this is beyond what we know how to do, but what would you think if you read that in a SF story?

571. dmduncan - January 31, 2012

Think of the code as “floating” across the mass, or “rotating” so that each nanite isn’t responsible for containing all the code or memory it needs.

572. MJ - January 31, 2012

@530 “MJ – Patrick Stewart booked a ticket for me for a matinee of his play in Newcastle…..”

It is now the middle of the night in Great Britian and you are still up posting with your name dropping, and now you are a friend of Patrick Stewart as well??? LOL

Wait, hold on a minute…sorry, got to go, President Obama is calling my on my cell phone.

PS: If you are going to attempt to name drop “Ian Mckellern” on us, at least spell his name right so you can come across as somewhat convincing. LOL

PS2: Leonard Nimoy and I are going bowling tomorrow.

573. FrancoMiranda - January 31, 2012

568.

Fascinating! Thank you for the answers there!
It’s all very exciting, isn’t it?

574. NanoTechDudeLA - January 31, 2012

570. dmduncan – January 31, 2012

Ok, if you want to store command memory somewhere else so that all nanites can reach it, you solve the problem of ROM memory – BUT, then you need to develop a system in each nanite that will communicate with the “queen” and/or other nanites – these systems are usually much much larger than whole memory and processor because they are analog (mixer, VCO, RF part, antenna…)… As you can see, this complicates the thing even more.

However, let’s strech it a wee bit :)
Suppose we find a way to store data as spin in single atoms
AND
suppose we find a way to make logic circuits based on spin of single atoms
AND
suppose we find a way to make use of quantum entanglement (e.g. for fast communication)
THEN
we could make a less-than-100nm nanite that could maybe do “something” and maybe communicate with other nanites.

I would definitely LOVE to read about it in a story, especially if it is at least remotely plausible – just as Star Trek ;)

575. NanoTechDudeLA - January 31, 2012

573. FrancoMiranda – January 31, 2012

It is indeed very fascinating! I really like my job :)

576. FrancoMiranda - January 31, 2012

MJ:

Added you on Twitter, dunno if you knew it was me: @hypertensioners

577. MJ - January 31, 2012

Cool! Thanks

578. moauvian waoul - aka: seymour hiney - January 31, 2012

506. Bob Orci – “…destructive interference from outside sources.”

Is that how you refer to us? ;)

579. VZXq - January 31, 2012

NanoTechDudeLA: I was going to discuss about MWI some more, but Bob beat me to it…again.

To answer your question about me: I am currently a physics teacher (also some math and astronomy). I used to be an engineer (for a foundry). I’m not a physicist, but I have a degree in physics. Cool?

So…yeah. What Bob said. But the whole “spooky” variable thing has to do with some famous experiments from the 40s when single electrons were fired and yet still produced a diffraction pattern as if they were going through a slit. The thought at the time was the “parallel universe” thing but Einstein dismissed such BS. The point of the experiments were to prove the duality of particles acting as waves, but it also showed electrons interacting with some ghost particles from a “parallel universe.” Many scientists think that it is due to some subatomic particles that are just not discovered yet.

Personally, I’m on the fence about it. You’re right that math formulations can prove anything if you try, but still. BTW: your job seems mad cool, yo.

580. NanoTechDudeLA - January 31, 2012

579. VZXq – January 31, 2012

Hi VZXq!

Thanks for the details about that experiment, I’ve never come across it and it sounds very interesting, i’ll definitely ceck it out later!

I asked about you being physicist because your post seemed like you know stuff :) So I wanted to check that, and if you were, I wanted to propose to discuss the matter further… But you are right, lets wrap it up :)

YOUR JOB is mad IMPORTANT! I will never forget my math/physics/geography teachers in primary school – they made me fall in love with science!

581. steve-nyc - January 31, 2012

I’m just glad that we have Bob (and company)! No one could have pulled off what they did for the first movie. The second will also be terrific.

582. Xai, Star Twek: The Pursuit of the Wasscally Wabbit - January 31, 2012

@ BobOrci. And all I want (in reality anyway) is the title. Or when it will be announced…or something like that.

Thanks again and always for joining us in this dog pile

583. TrekkerChick - January 31, 2012

@511

“Magic”… Got it. LOL

I haven’t read through all of the comments, yet. Did I miss anything controversial? (/kidding)

Wow. Scanning through the comments explains why my Blackberry started smoldering when I opened-up TM.com..

584. dmduncan - January 31, 2012

574. NanoTechDudeLA – January 31, 2012

However, let’s strech it a wee bit :)
Suppose we find a way to store data as spin in single atoms
AND
suppose we find a way to make logic circuits based on spin of single atoms
AND
suppose we find a way to make use of quantum entanglement (e.g. for fast communication)
THEN
we could make a less-than-100nm nanite that could maybe do “something” and maybe communicate with other nanites.

I would definitely LOVE to read about it in a story, especially if it is at least remotely plausible – just as Star Trek ;)

***

Thanks! That’s what I was fishing for!

585. VZX - January 31, 2012

580. Thanks, brah. Teaching does have its rewards. BTW: it’s just VZX. Stupid q…

The experiment can also be done with single photons, I believe. I gotta do some digging.

586. VZX - January 31, 2012

513. boborci – January 31, 2012
513. But again. I am no scientist. Just a dumb screenwriter.

…I love it when Bob references himself in the same comment!

Anyway, Bob, you’re not a dumb screenwriter. OK, there’s a joke in there somewhere, but I’m spent. But, you’re cool, brah.

I know you like Kaku, have you read David Deutshe?

http://xxx.lanl.gov/pdf/quant-ph/0104033v1.pdf

Dude talks about actual structure of the multi-verse.

587. Harry Ballz - January 31, 2012

Bob

can you tell us, the filming so far….just “second unit” stuff, or have there been scenes filmed with the core principals, such as juicy scenes with the main bridge crew?

Throw us a frikkin’ bone here! :>)

588. boborci - January 31, 2012

587. All juicy bridge stuff!!!

589. NanoTechDudeLA - January 31, 2012

588. boborci – January 31, 2012

Juicy bridge stuff, while Mr. Pine is in UK?? You must be joking, what’s going on?? :):):)

590. boborci - January 31, 2012

549. Zwebz – January 31, 2012

Noted! thank you for posting!

591. Harry Ballz - February 1, 2012

588.

Well, now I’m excited! Thanks, Bob!

592. Keachick - rose pinenut - February 1, 2012

Yes, Bob Orci. How can there be juicy bridge scenes without the fine Captain Pine/Kirk? Surely a contradiction in terms?

Has Chris landed back in LA yet? No time to lose – get that man back on his bridge; there’s a ship to run; space to explore; and juicy stuff to be had. I assume the juice is good, tasty and real. Health is important…;)

593. USS Enterprise B - February 1, 2012

Hey Bob, I just finished reading the comics 1 – 5 of the re imagining of the original series in the new timeline leading up to the new movie. If I remember correctly, it was mentioned earlier that a “hint” to the movie was in the 4th comic in this series. Was that hint the moment where Uhura broke protocol and left the Enterprise to save Spock? That moment really stood out for me…

594. MJ - February 1, 2012

All, simple answer — they are filming the non-Kirk bridge scenes while Pine is absent for a few days.

595. Anthony Thompson - February 1, 2012

572. MJ

You should be a Private Investigator. LOL! But I don’t know that “posting in the middle of the night” is necessarily a reason to be suspicious of his authenticity. A LOT of folks (including myself) do that. It’s 3AM in Minnesota right now. I know I should be safely tucked into bed, but I ain’t! : D

596. Jack - February 1, 2012

560. I know this isn’t your point, but I think the outside of the ship does , arguably, match the inside of the ship — the saucer section has windows and is where quarters/labs etc. are and the main section (has there ever been an accepted name for this, did TNG call it the stardrive?) has, as I recall, few to no windows — so there really is room for all that stuff (and maybe there are few actual decks in the section).

Me, I liked it. Engineering. And I like Trek ’09 generally. And I watched Lost, watch Fringe, really liked MI:4…. Heck, I even watched Transformers 2 more than twice — it wasn’t terrible, it was definately a Michael Bay film, and, heck, who doesn’t like testicle jokes? Not a huge fan of the lady decepticon (another excuse for a hot chick but has raised the question of why didn’t they just infiltrate everywhere with human decepticons) or (like the writers, apparently) of the jive-talkin’ robots. Does my opinion matter? Not really. But I’ma fan of Trek, a fan of writing, a fan of movies and am really interested in looking at how things do and don’t work.

Yep, we shouldn’t call names here and we should indeed stick to what’s really onscreen, but there’s room for plenty of opinion. Which is why I’m surprised (but shouldn’t be) at all the “hey, sorry for those crazy jerks” posts on here that then go on to say, “well, I’m a normal fan… but I didn’t like…(and the list starts)…

597. Toonloon - February 1, 2012

MJ – you’re really funny, man. I love it when people pretend to be ignorant just to raise a laugh.

I still have sir Patrick’s mobile number and the text messages he sent to thank me for the present I bought him to say thank you. Look it up. The play was “waiting for godot”. Actually, look up the play too as something tells me you don’t go to the theatre very often. Simon callow made a very funny joke about all the fans at the stage door. He referred to them as picardians and gandalfians. Sir Ian didn’t leave the theatre but Patrick went out for lunch after signing autographs for 5mins. The company manager, an old boy I worked with in ’99, had to be strict with the fans otherwise he wouldn’t have got a break.

What a fertile imagination I have, eh MJ? Oh and tell Michelle Obama I was disappointed not to meet her at leavesden when her and the kids visited the Harry potter set.

598. Hugh Hoyland - February 1, 2012

ToonLoon, can you text Sir Patrick and tell him Harley says hello from Florida? And thanks for all the great work he does!

599. Toonloon - February 1, 2012

I’d love to but as I only met him once three years ago, I think it would be inappropriate me texting out of the blue, especially after he sorted me out a ticket for his show. If you’re wondering why that happened, my mate has worked with him and he said I should leave a note for him at the stage door. He rang me up a day later to say he’d arranged a ticket. Nice guy, but I was too nervous to ask about star trek.

600. Jack - February 1, 2012

599. Cool. That would be an insane phone call to get.

Er, why was all this relevant? Meh, never mind, I’d be sharing too.

MJ, are you crankier than usual lately ;)? Don’t get me wrong, but I remember a year or so back when you seemed pretty gee whiz positive on here. ;) Both are fine.

601. Daoud - February 1, 2012

We’re just all antsy for the sequel to get here… or at least a few bits of information in the meantime. That’s probably it.

602. captain spock - February 1, 2012

356 Andrew
your talking about the super 8 sweepstakes that was in november of last year , i also entered in that contest so i dont know who won the sweepstakes ,it was because of the movie super 8 coming out on DVD,blueray disk on november 21st.2011
i went on the super 8 website a week ago it has no information in any winners of the super 8 sweepstakes . oh well if i had won they would have contacted me by now.

603. Arthur - February 1, 2012

Hi,

Any chance that this time the production could take the time to take an official publicity photo of the ‘acting’ crew, let’s say on the Enterprise bridge set. For the first movie you didn’t have a ‘crew’ shot anywhere as I never saw a photo with them all in there. There was one but without Zachary in the shot, but this was a still from the film and not an exclusive publicity photo. Make sense ?

Arthur

604. VZX - February 1, 2012

603: Yeah, I wondered about that as well. Although, I do like the “action” from a still from the movie as opposed to a cheesey group shoot, it’d be cool if we could get such a shot from the movie with the magnificent seven crew members.

605. Jai - February 1, 2012

Pauln6, re: #517:

“My understanding of Many Worlds is that they exist in parallel states so when a being from one universe moves to another, s/he isn’t ‘creating’ a new universe any more or less than they were ‘creating’ a universe by their actions in the universe they came from.”

Bob Orci, re: #519:

“517. Could be. Not inconsistent with our movie.”

That’s a much neater, much better, and much more straightforward explanation of the universe depicted in the new ST movies.

It’s also far more consistent with the way that parallel universes, alternate timelines and time-travel had been depicted in ST canon before ST09; the only difference is ST09 combining all three concepts.

Think about it: Spock Prime didn’t necessarily “create a new universe”. He just managed to punch through to an existing parallel universe, jumped back in that universe’s timeline, and the presence of both Spock Prime and Nero changed the future of that timeline.

Makes much more sense. Why unnecessarily overcomplicate things ? ;)

Now, it does leave the question of whether the parallel universe was identical to the Prime universe until Nero’s incursion, or whether it was different in some ways, eg. perhaps the Eugenics Wars occurred more than a century later than they did in the Prime universe, which would neatly solve the “problem” of the Eugenics Wars (and Khan’s conquest of a quarter of Earth) not actually happening during the 1990s in our real timeline; or perhaps Starfleet technology in the alternate timeline was more advanced than the Prime timeline, which would neatly solve the problem of the bridge of the Kelvin appearing much more advanced than the TOS Enterprise.

606. Jai - February 1, 2012

Keeping the parallel universe identical to the Prime universe pre-ST09 solves a lot of potential issues and keeps the whole thing hassle-free.

On the other hand, deciding that the parallel universe was fairly similar to the Prime universe pre-ST09 but different in some ways (like the examples I’ve just given) would give the Supreme Court considerably more freedom for story creativity, but it obviously comes with its own complications regarding the tricky question of events and people which would still be canon in the parallel universe pre-ST09…

If you wanted to be mischievous, you could suggest that the reason for the inconsistencies between the Prime universe’s 1990s timeline and real life is because the Prime timeline actually occurs in a parallel universe to our own.

If you wanted to be even more mischievous, you could also suggest that the events of ST09 (and the sequels) actually occur in the future timeline of our own universe, unlike the Prime timeline. It would give Bob Orci & co the ability to exploit the creative freedom offered by the idea of the years between 2012 and ST09 being a relatively “blank slate” history-wise.

Depends on how Bob Orci & co want to play it. Over to you, Bob ;)

607. Jai - February 1, 2012

^^ “Mischievous” is the wrong word; I’m not trying to mess anything up for anyone. “Applying some lateral thinking” is a better way to describe it.

608. MJ - February 1, 2012

@597. OK Toonloon, you have passed my Bullshit filter test. I believe you, dude. And my apologies, but I think you can see why skepticism is in order on these boards concerning some claims that anonymous posters make here.

609. Toonloon - February 1, 2012

I’m more concerned why Mr Orci won’t answer my question about Olson.

610. Mark Lynch - February 1, 2012

@609
Perhaps because Olson was vapourised if my memory serves… ;)

611. Jai - February 1, 2012

Re: #605:

“Now, it does leave the question of whether the parallel universe was identical to the Prime universe until Nero’s incursion, or whether it was different in some ways, eg. perhaps the Eugenics Wars occurred more than a century later than they did in the Prime universe, which would neatly solve the “problem” of the Eugenics Wars (and Khan’s conquest of a quarter of Earth) not actually happening during the 1990s in our real timeline;”

I’ve just had a better idea than placing the Eugenics Wars in the late 21st/early 22nd century: In the parallel universe of the new movies, perhaps “Eugenics Wars” could simply be another name for “World War 3”.

So, everything that’s supposed to have happened with Khan and the other genetically-augmented superhumans still took place; it just occurred several decades later than it did in the Prime universe, and the global conflict included Colonel Green etc.

This neatly merges the Eugenics Wars with WW3, and it also doesn’t interfere with the 2060s timeframe of Cochrane, warp drive, first contact with the Vulcans etc.

612. Jack - February 1, 2012

@ Jai wrote “If you wanted to be mischievous, you could suggest that the reason for the inconsistencies between the Prime universe’s 1990s timeline and real life is because the Prime timeline actually occurs in a parallel universe to our own.

If you wanted to be even more mischievous, you could also suggest that the events of ST09 (and the sequels) actually occur in the future timeline of our own universe, unlike the Prime timeline. It would give Bob Orci & co the ability to exploit the creative freedom offered by the idea of the years between 2012 and ST09 being a relatively ‘blank slate’ history-wise.”

So Spock and Nero ended up in a timeline/universe different from the one they came from? Hmmm. Neat.

My Trek opinion has usually been: the less pre-TOS Earth history, the better. Better to avoid things like Khan’s sleeper ship coming from the year 1996 or that kind of wacky, pre-utopian dystopian future shown in TNG’s pilot. Or all of Enterprise. Of course, writers then couldn’t have known that we’d be discussing all this 45 years later (and some even called themselves futurists… [kidding]).

I still like the idea that the Trek ’09 Spock was at least a decade younger than the Spock we knew on TOS (and the same with everyone else), hence the emotion etc. Maybe a chain of events started by the Kelvin meant that this Spock actually met Uhura in the academy, while the TOS Spock didn’t actually meet her until much later (say he went straight to a ship after the academy because his job at teh acadamy was taken by someone who had served on the Kelvin [and been killed by Nero]), when he was no longer young and restless. I know. I’m stretching.

And I suppose one could argue that this Chekov is older than TOS Chekov (who was an ensign ten years later in TOS), presumably, because his parents were either on the Kelvin and survived and/or heard the news story of the woman giving birth as her husband perished and decided to have their firstborn a few years early — and they’d always intended to name him Pavel Chekov. Meaning that this Pavel will still have his own hair in 30 years. I know, again, it’s a stretch.

Or maybe the TOS Pavel was a genius at 17 but didn’t make it to the academy for a few years (lacking the inspiring story of the sacrifice aboard the Kelvin). Heck, Koenig was in his 30s when he played him (I know, Kirk said he was “younger” than the young officers in Generations). Or, maybe he started the decade-as-ensign trend
that Harry Kim later followed.

Yep. With time travel anything can be explained.

613. VZX - February 1, 2012

612: Jack and 611 Jai: Are you the same person?

Anyway, I never understood why the Trek purists stated that the Eugenics war, Khan’s sleeper ship, etc. all MUST occur in the 1990s. Sure, this is the date given in Space Seed, but it obviously didn’t happen. I would rather just change the date to 2090’s and be done with it. No need to retcon it, either.

I prefer Star Trek to my future. The future of this Earth.

614. Hugh Hoyland - February 1, 2012

599 No problem, and I can see why. Thanks anyway!

And that is pretty cool actually, I’m a big fan like you to (He’s a major reason I stuck with TNG).

615. Toonloon - February 1, 2012

@ 610 I know but I’ve been wondering why a writer would pick that name. Those are clever men we’re discussing here, and they were handed most of the character names. But things like the Kelvin have significance and possibly other names like Olson. I’m just curious. Especially as I bet you any money Olson wasn’t written as a Brit, even though they cast one.

616. Harry Ballz - February 1, 2012

Bob Orci

on the news today thy’re talking about the audio tape being released of Lyndon Johnson calling Rose Kennedy from Air Force One after the assassination. He was calling to express his condolences for her son’s death. This call was placed right after LBJ was sworn in as President, while his buddy Congressman Albert Thomas winked at LBJ in congratulations for pulling off the perfect murder!

617. Daoud - February 1, 2012

@616 Harry, note how too, the tape documents the attempts to locate General Curtis LeMay. Still kinda fishy there, eh? I’m still expecting someday to find Operation 40 behind the Three Tramps, etc.

618. dmduncan - February 1, 2012

616. Harry Ballz – February 1, 2012

Surely you don’t think it was merely LBJ or that simple?

619. Toonloon - February 1, 2012

This is a bit off topic, but just about everyone who believes that JFK was killed by a conspiracy has NOT read the Warren Report.

And if you can’t be bothered to read that, read a superb book by Vincent Bugliosi called “Reclaiming History”. I defy anyone to read that cover to cover and not feel stupid at it’s conclusion for believing anything other than Lee Harvey Oswald shot Kennedy. A tragedy that is only made worse by the refusal across the world to accept the truth. I find it way more disturbing that we as a people can instantly dismiss historical fact in the blink of an eye and accept a fabricated half truths as gospel.

I wonder if it has something to do with the horrors of the second world war and not wanting to believe that such terrible things can still go on in the world…

620. dmduncan - February 1, 2012

619. Toonloon – February 1, 2012

This is a bit off topic, but just about everyone who believes that JFK was killed by a conspiracy has NOT read the Warren Report.

***

Lol! Oh boy did you just step in it. Go easy on him boys. He’s new here.

621. boborci - February 1, 2012

619. I have read it. Did you get that meme from Vincent Bugliosi?

622. boborci - February 1, 2012

619. Read that book cover to cover. The other book to read to truly reclaim history is JFK and the Uspeakable.

623. boborci - February 1, 2012

Correction. Unspeakable.

624. boborci - February 1, 2012

616. Heard it. Another case of things being released that shed no light on anything.

625. boborci - February 1, 2012

Here is just an teaser of where thngs really stand. Seen it before?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XY02Qkuc_f8&feature=youtube_gdata_player

626. Basement Blogger - February 1, 2012

@ 619, 616

Toonloon,

Oh, oh. You are going to incur the Wrath of Orci. :-) And watch out for Harry Ballz! :-)

Harry Ballz,

I linked the tapes of communications of the night of the assassination for Bob Orci. They were just digitized by the National Archives on Monday. I’ll link them for you below. Bob explains why it’s important that there maybe two different times of arrival of Kennedy’s body in Washington. He indicates the body could have been altered. Bob’s post at 487,

I’m not a follower of consipracy theories on Kennedy’s death. But I’m very suspcious of the lone gunman theory.

National Archive Link.

http://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/air-force-one-tape.html

627. boborci - February 1, 2012

620. Lol!

628. boborci - February 1, 2012

Incidentally, did i ever tell you guys that Nimoy told me that when he was a cab driver in Ny, he once drove JFK!

629. Basement Blogger - February 1, 2012

@ 628

Fascinating.

630. boborci - February 1, 2012

And I’m akways amazed that people forget that our own government’s final word on JfK is that he was probably killed by a conspiracy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_Select_Committee_on_Assassinations

631. Keachick - rose pinenut - February 1, 2012

I see that you, Bob Orci, have more than 10,000 twitter followers, so pictures please. Good pictures – if you would be so kind!

632. boborci - February 1, 2012

631. Allow the deadline was technically missed, will see what i can do.

633. Neftoon - February 1, 2012

Mr Orci, will there be Orion woman in the new film, quite enjoyed Gaila in the first one.

634. VZX - February 1, 2012

628: Wow. He must have drove JFK before he was in office, but still that’s fascinating.

BTW: I’m reading Steven King’s 11/22/63. Even though it’s fiction, it’s really opening my eyes to the events surrounding the assassination. This warrants further investigation.

635. boborci - February 1, 2012

634. He was a Senator.

636. dmduncan - February 1, 2012

628. boborci – February 1, 2012

I DO remember you telling that! And I did get Unspeakable (thanks to you). Reading two books at once right now (taking a break, in fact) but that one is on my shelf and now in the queue. Looking forward to it.

I did watch an interview with Bugliosi, I think on Leno some time ago. And I recall thinking at the time that he argues his case like a prosecutor, which is to say that he targets your emotions in his style of speaking and argumentation, which can be very persuasive to a lot of people (not me).

637. Vultan - February 1, 2012

#619

I think the bigger question is: does the Kennedy assassination still matter in the greater scheme of things? Sure, it’s a fascinating bit of history, but at this point it’s just that—history. Even if new evidence could be presented, such as a document or tape that undoubtedly connects A to B to C, the conspirators are either dead or very close to it.

Furthermore, I can’t help but think it’s the larger than life personality that was John F. Kennedy that keeps these theories going. A man such as that—a handsome war hero with a beautiful wife and two darling children living in “Camelot,” bedding Marilyn Monroe, etc., etc.—has to have a death in equal or greater magnitude to his life. He can’t have been just cut down by a lone nut with a rifle! Could he…?

Maybe this is why there aren’t so many conspiracy books or movies on James Garfield and William McKinley. Not to mention there’s a theory that Warren G. Harding was poisoned. But those guys just aren’t worth our attention. They weren’t important enough. They didn’t cut a deal with the Soviets and save the world from nuclear annihilation, didn’t put us on a course for the Moon, and definitely didn’t look as good in sunglasses.

638. boborci - February 1, 2012

637. Yes, it matters. Big time.

639. VZX - February 1, 2012

Not for nothing, but that’s so cool that you got to speak with Nimoy. I think there are very few people on this planet that I would get starstruck over, and Leonard Nimoy is one of them.

640. Vultan - February 1, 2012

#638

Beyond the matter of a definitive historical record, which is always good, why does it matter…? Or better yet, why does it matter to you?

No really. I’m not trying to be facetious or anything. This interests me. What does JFK mean to you?

641. boborci - February 1, 2012

637. Read JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why it Matters.

Also read Deep Politics by Peter Dale Scott.

642. dmduncan - February 1, 2012

625. boborci – February 1, 2012

Yeah, I’ve watched that over and over.

643. Vultan - February 1, 2012

#641

Okay, thanks, I’ll look for it next time I’m at the library.

But is there some personal interest, which may be covered in those book—I don’t know—you have in JFK? Does he represent something to you?

Anyone else?

644. Vultan - February 1, 2012

Correction: “in those books”

645. boborci - February 1, 2012

640. Deep Politcs gives good non hit you over the head reasons.
The chapters in this book explore many processes of politics at levels usually not acknowledged or reported and indeed repressed and denied. Normally, these deep political processes are not brought to the public eye: for example, the way in which major drug traffickers are recurringly protected by the U.S. Justice Department, or the way in which some of the top traffickers have been recurringly named in connection with the systematic sexual corruption of members of Congress. Such arrangements are in fact widely known, but rarely written about. One way or another, scholars and journalists learn to back off.

Unless you understand the conditions that allowed a sitting president to be murdered in broad daylight without our system os justice uncovering it, then you can’t understand how things work today.

646. boborci - February 1, 2012

643. As an immigrant to this country, JFK represents the best this country can be. As someone adopted by this country, I feel a responsibility to contribute postively and not forget “our dying King…”

647. Vultan - February 1, 2012

#646

Ah, good answer!!!

648. dmduncan - February 1, 2012

The accidental view of history is nonsense. Pure. Nonsense. Vetruvian Man is upside down. On his head. The truth is called nonsense and lies are called the truth. And because information is costly to acquire, store, retrieve, and REVISE, then once it’s in their heads, people tend not live with it just the way it is.

649. dmduncan - February 1, 2012

vetruvian = vitruvian

650. dmduncan - February 1, 2012

not = to

651. dmduncan - February 1, 2012

Sorry for typos. Back to reading.

652. Vultan - February 1, 2012

But Mr. Orci, if conspirators have figured out “the system” you mentioned, surely they—someone—must have created a plan by now, beyond outright anarchy of course, for implementing reforms within the government, so that “our dying King” didn’t die in vain.

Any ideas?

653. Vultan - February 1, 2012

Correction: conspiracy theorists, not “conspirators.”

654. boborci - February 1, 2012

652. I fear the reverse. A coup occured in 63 and the Deep State became more entrenched. Conspiracy theorists have been marginalized and attacked and have not been able to take gov back.

655. Daoud - February 1, 2012

But Bob, did you specify the time zone? I mean, we could have thought you meant Aleutian Time or something like that…. Or we could be following the Russian Orthodox calendar? But congrats on hitting that many followers on Twitter! :) I think I’m up to 7.
.
Happy Groundhog Day UTC everyone! Sonny and Cher are playing on the radio!
.
JFK, RFK, MLKJ, and Elvis. None of it makes sense.

656. boborci - February 1, 2012

Elvis?

657. Daoud - February 1, 2012

And had a few dead not voted in Chicago, and other miscountings in Illinois, Richard M. Nixon would have been the 35th President…. and well, if a 70-year old Ike wouldn’t have made the flat joke when asked by reporters at the end of a press conference to list one of Nixon’s policy ideas he had adopted, “If you give me a week, I might think of one. I don’t remember.” Kennedy used that film in ads which made Nixon seem like a prototype of how we looked at Dan Quayle. That and Nixon’s refusing makeup before the debate because he thought it silly. _A 5 O’Clock Shadow, A Septuagenarian Joke, and A Chicago Cemetery_ there’s a trilogy of fate.

658. Daoud - February 1, 2012

@656 The William Campbell connection…. and ask Richard Belzer…

659. Vultan - February 1, 2012

#654

Well, theorists are almost always attacked and marginalized by the establishment when theories are presented, not just conspiracies but in the fields of science, exploration, medicine, etc. And evidence is always the solution. Not just some. As complete evidence as possible.

It’s the only way theories become facts, and the establishment changes its tune.

Plus, some of the more outlandish theorists over the years haven’t exactly helped the cause. You know which ones I mean….

660. boborci - February 1, 2012

True. However, when the evidence we need is classified by the perpetrators, it is hard to get ahold of!

661. captain spock - February 1, 2012

Bob was just on twitter you have 10,082 followers are you going to take a picture of the bridge…..preety please, one thing hope its not the same bridge from 09 .

513. But again. I am no scientist. Just a dumb screenwriter.

no BoB your a very good screen writer

what up with hawaii five -o on some episolds i see this in the begining of the show #50 when the theme music is on

662. Bender Bending Rodriguez - February 1, 2012

Just a quick moment to say thanks to boborci to taking time from his schedule to blog with fans! Good luck with production, and I wish you a lot of success. I’m looking forward to seeing the final product in 2013.

One quick question and pardon me if you’ve already answered this: in ST:09 there were a lot of references to ST:TOS. Will we see something similar in ST:13?

663. Red Dead Ryan - February 1, 2012

The picture that Bob is promising to send us will probably be of an empty stage with a note saying “I.O.U., Love J.J”.

664. dmduncan - February 1, 2012

So much of the evidence is hidden in plain sight. To GRASP it all at once would make the hair on your head, assuming you still have hair, stand up and shoot off in every direction like rocket fired porcupine quills.

665. dmduncan - February 1, 2012

663. Red Dead Ryan – February 1, 2012

The picture that Bob is promising to send us will probably be of an empty stage with a note saying “I.O.U., Love J.J”.

***

I was thinking the plumber’s crack on a 250 lb key grip.

666. Vultan - February 1, 2012

#660

Ay, there’s the rub.

667. NanoTechDudeLA - February 1, 2012

@513. But again. I am no scientist. Just a dumb screenwriter.

I also hope that there is a joke somewhere inside, because you are insulting one of my favourite screenwriters :)

I know it’s been a while, but I hope you saw my replies about the nanites :)

Looking forward to that photo from the set! So exciting!:)

668. NanoTechDudeLA - February 1, 2012

@663. Red Dead Ryan – February 1, 2012
The picture that Bob is promising to send us will probably be of an empty stage with a note saying “I.O.U., Love J.J”.

That’s a good one!!! ROTFL

669. Harry Ballz - February 1, 2012

618.

dmduncan

No, I don’t think of it as being simple. I’m simply stating that LBJ headed up a cabal of men who wanted to seize the power of the presidency by killing Kennedy. It was a long time in the planning, staging and (pardon the expression) execution. If you study any information about Lyndon Baines Johnson, you will discover that he was a scumbag/criminal all of his life.

670. dmduncan - February 1, 2012

LBJ was a low level Free Mason as well. Unlike Ford or Truman.

671. moauvian waoul - aka: seymour hiney - February 1, 2012

637. “Maybe this is why there aren’t so many conspiracy books or movies on James Garfield and William McKinley. Not to mention there’s a theory that Warren G. Harding was poisoned. But those guys just aren’t worth our attention. They weren’t important enough. They didn’t cut a deal with the Soviets and save the world from nuclear annihilation, didn’t put us on a course for the Moon, and definitely didn’t look as good in sunglasses.”

True. But they also didn’t die as dramatically, blown away in front of the cameras.

672. Harry Ballz - February 1, 2012

What’s interesting is that I have, after many thousands of hours of research, concluded that LBJ and his cronies killed Kennedy. To me it’s beyond a reasonable doubt.

What I haven’t got enough proof to conclude, is whether there was someone ABOVE Johnson orchestrating the whole thing. People speculate about involvement by the Jesuits who took direction from the Black Pope, but I’ve never been able to corroborate or confirm such a hypothesis. It IS an interesting theory.

673. boborci - February 1, 2012

anyone know who Thomas Arthur Vallee is?

674. Harry Ballz - February 1, 2012

673.

I know, Bob, but that’s only because you recommended the book to me, so I won’t spoil it for the others. Anyone?

675. moauvian waoul - aka: seymour hiney - February 1, 2012

Okay, will one of you tell us?

676. Harry Ballz - February 1, 2012

Bob, I mentioned the Black Pope to you a few months ago and you said you were going to check into it.

I know you’re busier than a hooker at Charlie Sheen’s house, but did you ever read up on it?

677. Vultan - February 1, 2012

#671

True. And that goes back to my point. Great man + dramatic death = a need for an equal or greater force behind the death. A skinny loser ex-Marine can’t fit into the equation. Not alone.

But the real people behind it all—these guys:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dSpOjj4YD8c

678. Quatlo - February 1, 2012

Evidently Vallee knew what a real rifle was. An M1 Garand would have done Dealy Plaza without a scope, easily.

679. moauvian waoul - aka: seymour hiney - February 1, 2012

Ah, the Simpsons. Used to be great.
Your explanation is most likely correct, if he was in fact killed by a lone gunman. Mass psychology is fascinating. But not being the conspiratorial type, I still find many of the questions surrounding the events of that fateful day intriguing. Don’t you?

680. Keachick - rose pinenut (F) - February 2, 2012

I remember hearing way back when I was a lot younger that the reason some people think JFK was assassinated was because he was Catholic and there were quite a lot of people who could not stand the fact that a Catholic had been elected President of the United States. Even then, it was believed that Lee Harvey Oswald had help.

I have no idea how true this might be, but theories have abounded since that fateful day as to why JFK was assassinated.

681. boborci - February 2, 2012

680. Doubtful. Follow tbe money, as they say. War is the most profitable enterprise on earth. JFK demonstrated his desire for peace. Thats why he was killed.

682. Toonloon - February 2, 2012

@621 No. I did not. But thanks for the pithy insinuation. When JFK came out in ’91 I was fascinated by it and wrote my final history paper on the assassination. My teacher, who is sadly no longer with us, got the condensed version of the report from a colleague who was nuts for conspiracies. It took me weeks to plough through it. I’ve never read anything so thorough.

Oh and I agree with you when you say “follow the money”. Oswald didn’t have any!! So where was his CIA payroll? How come he lived barely above the poverty line? How come he was taking driving lessons if he was planning to kill JFK and disappear? Why did he get a rifle that was traceable within hours? Surely the CIA or any other group can get a non traceable weapon? Why did he leave his wedding ring with his wife and tell her to keep what little money he had to buy shoes for his daughter? Why did he take a shot at another public figure and miss if he wasn’t already unhinged? Why did he try to shoot and kill the arresting officers at the movie theatre? How come he wouldnt even have been at book depository if the guy in charge had assigned him to a different building across town, which was 50/50 where he could have gone? Surely the mob or the CIA or the industrial complex could be a bit more organised than relying on the whim of a works foreman?

Jim Garrison called it a “homosexual, sadomasochistic plot” after finding kinky stuff at clay shaw’s house, then when it was pointed out that Oswald was married with kids, he called him a “switch hitter”. This is the guy who most pro-conspiracy buffs champion.

There’s a great book I read a couple of years ago about the psychology of denial. I’m frustrated that I can’t remember the author but it was a fascinating look at how we can refuse to believe that certain tragic events happened the way the actually did, and the psyche invents outlandish tales because the simple truth is too hard to stomach, I.e. a great leader who symbolised hope and change for the entire world was cut down with so much promise by a lonely, angry little man who decide to kill the president on a whim.

683. Toonloon - February 2, 2012

But I will certainly look up the books you recommended. I’m current reading Nixon & Kissinger by Robert Dallek and a great trek novel called The Case of the Colonist’s Corpse, but I’ll look those books up and see if I can reserve them through our libraries.

684. Toonloon - February 2, 2012

@ 636 He is a prosecutor. He prosecuted Charles Manson. I’m going to get his book Helterskelter on the case when I get some money. Spent my last on the TNG HD sampler.

:)

I’ve been offered a play this morning but that’s not until July. Skint until something else comes up.

685. Bob Tompkins - February 2, 2012

I notice after my criticisms about Boberto Orci he is in full backdown mode, changing the signals at the line of scrimmage, pulling out the aubibles stating that Zachary Quinto’s commentas about the script chages are cursory changes that don’t alter the action sequences or the direction the nmovie goes- it’s all; character moments, even if Quinto showed some ‘why are they doing this to me? It was suppoosed to be ready!”
I sincerely hope that is true, the script was ready and little things change.. We will never know since the script is kept secret under pain of death and torture if JJ likes you…..we will;, however have a pretty good idea if the good ship Lollipop sinks into the morass of wempty theaters in 2013 or 2014.
I woud still like to hear what Mr. Quinto has to say in defense of this ever- changing script.

686. Toonloon - February 2, 2012

@ 660. What is classified? If you are referring to the half truth that Earl Warren ordered the files locked away, then that is not true at all. He is always misquoted on that. The truth is that your National Archives have that 70+ years rule for ALL their records of this nature. This is not just a special case. And the only stuff being held back would be names of field agents or operations that could compromise the safety of individuals and the security of your nation. I’m going to ruffle a few feathers here, but the National Archives 70+ rule was to protect from exactly the same thing that happened when Julian Assange posted his wikileaks, a deplorable action in my book.

@ 678 Oswald most likely didn’t use the scope. It was proven to be faster if you use the iron sights. His marine record shows that he was more accurate when firing quickly and it wasn’t that difficult a shot, as testified by several expert witnesses in the Warren Report.

687. Jai - February 2, 2012

VZX, re: #613:

“612: Jack and 611 Jai: Are you the same person?”

Nope. Unless Jack is my Indian Sikh doppelganger on the other side of the Atlantic. (Jack, are you “Evil Jai”, complete with Mirror Universe goatee ? ;))

“I would rather just change the date to 2090’s and be done with it.”

That’s what I originally suggested in #605, but the problem is that it would completely contradict major events that have been depicted as occurring in the 2060s, as I said in #611.

That’s why it would be better to just merge the Eugenics Wars with WW3, including the involvement of Colonel Green, and with no change to the supposed timeframe for WW3 as presented in ST canon. It also opens up the intriguing possibility of Green himself being one of the genetically-engineered supermen who seized power.

In fact, if the Eugenics Wars/WW3 was presented as a global conflict with the main enemies being Green and ruler-of-a-quarter-of-Earth Khan, it all comes together very nicely; particularly since Green is supposed to be a psychopathic Hitler-type, whereas Khan (although power-hungry) is supposed to be a “benevolent autocrat” like a latter-day Caesar or Alexander the Great.

Okay, none of this has anything to do with JFK ;) So, enough from me.

688. Chris Doohan - February 2, 2012

673 Boborci
674 moauvian waoul

For those of you who want to know about Thomas Arthur Vallee, I found this.

“former Secret Service agent, Abraham Bolden has told WLS-TV there was a plot to kill President Kennedy in Chicago three weeks before he was assassinated in Dallas.

Lee Harvey Oswald would never have had the chance to kill Kennedy in Dallas, had an assassination plot in Chicago succeeded three weeks earlier, a plot that has been mentioned over the years.

Kennedy was due to arrive in Chicago the morning of Nov. 2 to attend the Army-Air Force football game at Soldier Field and ride in a parade. Newspapers had even printed JFK’s detailed travel plan from O’Hare airport to the Loop.

Although police were preparing to line the motorcade route, Secret Service officials in Chicago were deeply troubled about the visit because of two secret threats.

Thomas Arthur Vallee was chosen for the same scapegoat role that Lee Harvey Oswald would play three week later in Dallas.
While most of the Chigaco Secret Service agents were scrambling to locate an arrest all four members of the snipers team before the president’s Saturday, November 2 arrival, two agents were acting on another threat.
The Secret Service office had also received a tip that Thomas Arthur Vallee, an aliened ex-Marine, had threatened to kill Kennedy in Chicago.
Thomas Arthur Vallee was quickly identified from intelligence sources as an ex-Marine who was a disaffiliated member of the John Birch Society, a far right organization obsessed with communist subversion in the United States.
Vallee was also described as a loner, a parnoid schizophrenic, and a gun collector.
He hit perfectly the *lone nut* profile that would later be used to characterize ex-Marine Lee Harvey Oswald.

Two Chicago police officers, Daniel Groth and Peter Schurla , were assigned to task.
After watching Vallee for hours, both men arrested him on Saturday, Novemver 2 at 9:10 am. 2,5 hours before
JFK was was due in at O’Hare Airport.
Thomas Vallee had been led along a trail that LHO would follow after him.
Vallee told that he had been assigned by the marines to a U2 base in Japan. Vallee thereby came under the control of the CIA, which commanded the U2, just as Oswald would come under the CIA controls as a radar operator at another CIA U-2 base in Japan.

In August 1963 as Oswald was preparing to move from New Orleans back to Dallas, Valle moved from New York back to Chicago.
Just as Oswald got a job in a warehouse right over Kennedy’s future motorcaderoute in Dallas, so, too, did Vallee get a job in a warehouse right over Kennedy’s future motorcaderoute in Chicago”.

689. Stephan - February 2, 2012

@boborci:

628:

And bob, did I tell you that my aunt was working as a stewardess on several pan am flights when Senator Kennedy was on board? When she was still alive she told my parents that he was always flirting with the stewardesses. ;-)

Greetings from Germany and enjoy your time on the set,

Stephan

690. boborci - February 2, 2012

686.Oswald’s tax records, for starters, are classified.

http://www.jfklancer.com/LNE/taxcode.html

Bugliosi claims there was no connection between the CIA and Oswald despite the base he was working in Japan being run by CIA, and his connections to De MorenSchildt. Those two things aside, his tax records may show if he was ever paid by the CiA or other sources that alloed him to travel oddly given his pay as a marine. Whose privacy is being protected by not releasing these records. Most researchers believe tge truly damning stuff has been destroyed anyway.

691. boborci - February 2, 2012

682 toonloonOh and I agree with you when you say “follow the money”. Oswald didn’t have any!! So where was his CIA payroll? How come he lived barely above the poverty line? How come he was taking driving lessons if he was planning to kill JFK and disappear? Why did he get a rifle that was traceable within hours? Surely the CIA or any other group can get a non traceable weapon? Why did he leave his wedding ring with his wife and tell her to keep what little money he had to buy shoes for his daughter? Why did he take a shot at another public figure and miss if he wasn’t already unhinged? Why did he try to shoot and kill the arresting officers at the movie theatre? How come he wouldnt even have been at book depository if the guy in charge had assigned him to a different building across town, which was 50/50 where he could have gone? Surely the mob or the CIA or the industrial complex could be a bit more organised than relying on the whim of a works foreman?

——————

Everything you just said above is evidence for Oswald being a PATSY and knowing he was set up to take the fall soon after shooting.

692. boborci - February 2, 2012

689. Wow. Smaill world! Greetings!

693. boborci - February 2, 2012

Speaking of rifles:

If you dont want to sit through all the videos i linked to, just the first four minutes of part 4 of Evidence of Revisions maybe worth your time.

The set up is that Dallas Detective who was at Dealey that day and who was on the sixth floor of the book depository when A rifle was found, but no THE rifle that ended up in the Warren report. Watch CBS and others report that they found a MAUSER for a full two days before they are “corrected.”

694. boborci - February 2, 2012

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDAiC8Bb75M&feature=youtube_gdata_player

695. boborci - February 2, 2012

688. Right on!

Exactly!

696. Toonloon - February 2, 2012

@ 690 Oh come on Bob! Are you honestly saying his tax records would prove that he was receiving secret payments from the CIA to be an assasin??? That’s laughable. If he was on the payroll, there would be cash payments at a drop somewhere which he would NEVER claim on a tax return. The very evidence that proves that this didn’t take place was because he never had two nickles to rub together. His rifle had a homemade sling for Godsake! And if you still believe he was getting money from a secret source, then why the hell didn’t he rent more private lodgings with a private phone so his handlers could contact him, even though his landlady testified that he never received phonecalls from anyone at the rooming house.

There were plenty of other personnel at the same base in Japan who did not have security clearance; just because Oswald was close to sensitive radar equipment, doesn’t mean he was CIA. I’ve worked at whitehall but that doesn’t make me a member or Mi6 even though I probably had higher security clearance than Oswald did at his job(!)

And De MorenSchildt was a troubled, man, who was very mentally deranged and tried to take his own life several times and eventually succeeded. He was harangued by conspiracy nuts and was either coerced into telling them what they wanted to hear or was confused or led them on. He’s a very poor figure to sight as proof of LOH the great double agent/assassin.

697. Stephan - February 2, 2012

692. @boborci:

By the way, may I ask you if there are plans to promote the movie in a bigger way than the previous one here in Germany? Although Germany has a lot of trek fans the general audience didn’t see the last Star Trek movie. Instead the number of sold tickets was about the same as Nemesis. So the German audience loves Batman, Spiderman, Pirates of the Carribean, etc., but Star Trek is still kind of a nerdy thing where only die hard fans go to the cinema. And when the last movie came out, nearly no one knew about it. And even if they knew, they were like “oh, another Star Wars or Trek something movie, I won’t see”.
So are there plans to promote the new movie in Germany as a must-see-movie like dark knight, etc?

Finally, I want to thank you for stopping by and answering here so often.

Stephan

698. Toonloon - February 2, 2012

@ 691. No it doesn’t.

@ 693. And they said JFK was still alive when he wasn’t. I suppose that was a conspiracy as well?

There are often mistakes in the chain of evidence. Any lawyer can tell you that. And human testimony is always the most fragile. Boone and Weitzman made an honest mistake. I just re-read a section in a book I have on my shelf by Matthew Smith called “JFK The Second Plot” and there’s a picture of a Mauser and the Mannlicher-Carcano and they do look a like. Oswald was pictured holding that rifle and a pistol (the one he shot officer Tibbett with) and some communist or marxist literature. Marina Oswald burnt it in a hotel room because she feared it would be used against him. She knew it was his. It didn’t just appear out of nowhere as Oliver Stone would have you believe.

But let’s go with your assertion for a moment… let’s say that the rifle recovered from the book depository was a Mauser. That means you don’t contest that there was a shooter up there or at least someone who planted a sniper’s nest up there. And yet, no one except Oswald was seen there. So he must have planted the Mauser or fired the Mauser.

Then it passes into the chain of evidence when the officers find it, and somewhere along the line it gets switched for a rifle that ballistic tests match the bullets recovered from the President to the ones fired from the Mannlicher-Carcano. Why would they do that? If Oswald could be linked to the scene and placing a rifle, then he would be guilty in a conspiracy. And of course, this ignores all the pathology results which state that the bullet game at an elevated angle and from behind.

It just doesn’t make sense what you are suggesting, like just about every single nitpicked inconsistancy that conspiracy theorists seize, there is no big picture that all your little ‘facts’ fit into. I doubt even a man of your considerable writing talents (and I am in awe of you, sir) could weave together all the inconsistancies into one coherent plot. I’m not being facetious, btw, just in case you read that last comment as me being spiteful. I genuinely do admire your work and am greatly enjoying Star Trek Ongoing at present.

699. Vultan - February 2, 2012

#679

Oh yes, it is intriguing, but I’d be lying if I said it doesn’t make me more than a little uncomfortable that a man’s death has been turned into an overblown Hardy Boys mystery. But… intriguing nonetheless.

And yeah, “The Simpsons” used to be something really special. Good hand-drawn animation. Great writing. I miss those days.

700. boborci - February 2, 2012

696.Hi tax records may show if he ever worked for the CIA or FBI, or an anyone with connections to intelligence, or mob, or whatever. Not as a secret assassin, but as a legitimate employee. Are you saying everyone in the CiA is paid in cash stuffed in parks? The only reason to withhold Oswald’s tax records is that they may show a compromising connection to the official theory. And again, I was responding to a point in Bugliosis book, that Oswald had no connection to the CIA. Without having the full records of his life, this statement is meaningless.

But back to the point, you asked what was classified, and I answered.: Oswald’s tax records. And your response, essentially, goes like this:

“oh, come one! What possible relevance could be gleened from looking at the records of who paid the alleged assassin of the president?”

As for the rifle, did you watch the first four minutes i posted up there?

701. boborci - February 2, 2012

On the rifle:

Essentially, if we were on a jury, you would have to weigh Detective Craigs’s testimony. Seeing as he was right there, and READ the word Mauser, as did several weapons savvy cops right there on the scene, and committed their finding to paper, i think most reasonable jurors wpuld conclude that Craig’s testimony is sound.

Since the bullets found came from a different rifle, you at the very least now have proof of a conspiracy. And since the discovery of this other rifle was dropped compketely, we now also have evidence of a coverup.

702. Toonloon - February 2, 2012

@ 700. No I didn’t, but I will do that right now.

I still can’t go along with you on the tax records. If he was working for any sort of secret government, they would never have left a paper trail, so I don’t see why you want to see his records. I think you only want to see them because the IRS says you can’t. Out of curiousity, because I don’t know how it works in your country, but could I get your tax records if I thought you were a secret assassin sent by the Romulans to alter earth’s history? (again I’m not being facetious, just trying to insert a bit of Trek into this post). :)

I’ll go watch the clip now. BRB.

703. boborci - February 2, 2012

You said:

“But let’s go with your assertion for a moment… let’s say that the rifle recovered from the book depository was a Mauser. That means you don’t contest that there was a shooter up there or at least someone who planted a sniper’s nest up there. And yet, no one except Oswald was seen there. So he must have planted the Mauser or fired the Mauser.”

Also not a logical derivation of what I said. If three bullet casings were found with a rifle that could not have fired them, then you actually have evidence that they were planted.

704. Toonloon - February 2, 2012

All I see here is the news media getting their facts wrong. Happens on a daily business these days.

That guy is very convincing, I’ll give you that, but he goes on to say that someone blew his car up to silence him. Sounds like someone is buying into the celebrity of the assasination community.

BTW, if you haven’t already seen “JFK: 3 Shots that changed America”, treat yourself and buy it off Amazon. It’s a superb documentary put together with footage from the actual day, as it happened, without any sort of commentary. It’s an incredible experience. You really feel transported back to that dreadful day in 1963.

705. Daoud - February 2, 2012

I often think Oliver Stone was encouraged to make 1991’s JFK simply to marginalize anyone doing any research into the conspiracy.
.
This allowed media to write off anyone with alternate views to the Warren Commission as being some sort of fruitcake or nutcase who took the movie too seriously. Oliver Stone, you suck!

706. boborci - February 2, 2012

702. You are not understanding the point. Oswald may have been a legitimate emoloyee of CIA or FBI who was framed. You mentioned denial earlier, yet you sound like the fabled contemporaries of Galileo who refused to look through his telescope because they “knew” it was impossible.

How on earth could you argue that knowing how much Oswald made and where his money came from is irrelevant?

707. boborci - February 2, 2012

705. Talk about a conspiracy!

708. Toonloon - February 2, 2012

@ 703. So who “planted” them? There has never been any testimony other than they saw Oswald floating around up there. If Oswald was indeed a patsy, then your conspirators would need someone else to work in there to implicate him. Did any other staff disappear after Oswald’s arrest?

709. Toonloon - February 2, 2012

@ 707 LOL

710. Toonloon - February 2, 2012

@ 706. Wow! I’ve never been compared to a contemporary of Galileo before (although I’m aware that wasn’t a compliment).

On the contrary, if I had to compare myself to an historical figure it would St Paul on the road to Damascus. I used to buy into all this stuff until I actually started feeling uncomfortable that I was getting too much ‘enjoyment’ out of a man’s death and I started to read the other side of the arguement. Bugliosi’s book was the final nail in the coffin for my conspiracy believes, ones that started in ’91 when I was at high school.

I’m not missing the point that a tax return could prove that maybe he had a low level job with the FBI or CIA, but I really don’t believe he did. YOU’RE missing the point when it’s painfully obvious that he didn’t have any money. If he worked for the FBI as a copy boy, he would have had more money to exist with.

I argue it’s not relevant because the very thing you want, i.e., proof that he was part of some super secret operation, would NEVER be in a tax return.

With the greatest of respect, all you are looking for is something that you can raise your hand in the air and say “A-ha!” and claim because something isn’t what it appears there must be a larger conspiracy afoot.

Okay, answer me this one… why did he attempt to shoot General Walker? Isn’t that a bit odd for an agent who is being prepped for the biggest assignment of his life?

711. boborci - February 2, 2012

704. Poor detective Roger Craig Was shunned by his fellow cops for his testimony, was shot at, run off the road, his car did explode, and finally he was found shot dead in his house of a “self” inflicted gunshot wound. Does that really sound like a man who was reveling in celebrity? How much celebrity could he have been revelling in if you didnt even know who he was until today?

As for all you seeing being the media getting it wrong, Cronktie doesn’t makeup rifle names for fun. That is the report they got from the cops on the scene.

712. boborci - February 2, 2012

Toonloon

Okay, answer me this one… why did he attempt to shoot General Walker? Isn’t that a bit odd for an agent who is being prepped for the biggest assignment of his life?

———-

When you say biggest assignment of his life, are you referring to him assassinating the president? Because i am arguing he was a patsy. As such, if he shot at Walker, he is the PERFECT patsy.

As for the fact that he had no money, I agree that if the official stroy is true, then he had no money. So how did he travel to Mexico, to Russia and back, and all the places he was claimed to have been with no money.

And for the thrid time, i am not claiming that his tax returns are going to include a copy of a check that says “for killing JFk.” I am arguing that if he had any legitimate work for them, then many of Bugiosi’s claims fall apart, inculding his assertion that Oswald had NO ties to the CIA.

713. Toonloon - February 2, 2012

@711 I never said they made it up for fun. I just said that the media gets it wrong on an almost daily basis. There was so much confusion on that day and the country, nay, the world wanted to know what had happened, so any reports went out to a waiting and nervous public. People make mistakes, get over it.

714. boborci - February 2, 2012

708. Toonloon – February 2, 2012
@ 703. So who “planted” them?

——

Now you are asking the right questions!

Can we at least agree, as a matter of pure logic, that if a rifle was found with three empty bullet casing that could not have been fired by that rifle, then the scene was staged? Is there any other explanation?

715. boborci - February 2, 2012

713. Again, the media did not get it wrong, THE COPS ON SCENE TOLD THE MEDIA THE TYPE OF RIFLE FOUND. Do you dispute this basic fact that is PROVEN in the video with shows the copy of the POLICE REPORT with the Mauser listed as the weapon found?

716. Toonloon - February 2, 2012

I’ve changed my mind once about the assassination, I’m quite prepared to change it again if you can convince of the validity of that statement.

So you are saying that a rifle, be it a Mauser or the Carcano were found on the 5th floor (can’t remember if that was correct) and that bullet casings that could not have been fired from said rifle were found near or nearby?

If I understand you correctly, why do you believe that the bullets could not have been fired? Is it because of Craig’s assertion that they were Manlicher casings with a Mauser rifle?

717. Toonloon - February 2, 2012

@713 I saw your video. I know the police reported that to the news reporters and then onto the news desks. What I’m trying to say is that they were mistaken. None of us can understand the intense pressure and scrutiny of that day. They had evidence in their hands that they had to get to safety and avoid as much contamination as possible. If one guy says that looks like a Mauser and a second guy over hears him, pretty soon everyone is saying it’s a Mauser. When they get it back to the station and examine it properly it is easy to see how a mistake COULD have been made.

The media misreports things all the time, from the best of sources. I mean, Christ, they still can’t stop from calling your President “Osama” in some reports(!)

718. boborci - February 2, 2012

716. Ive changed my mind, too! When the Posner book came out, i thought that was the end of it.

Anyway, yes, exactly. I had to watch the video a few times for it to sink in.

If you believe Detective Craig, who paid a huge price to tell his story, that he and all the gathered Dallas detectives on the 6th floor of the School Book Depository found a rifle that had the word 7.65 MAUSER stamped right on the barrel (which means if they got it wrong, it is because they cpuldn’t read!), while nearby, they found empty shells that can only be fired by a different rifle (the Italian Manlicher), then the scene had to be staged.

We know Craig is not lying after the fact, because the initial police report says they found a Mauser, and the media reported as such. So clearly, we should accept his testimony that all the gathered cops found a rifle that had its make “STAMPED RIGHT ON THE BARREL.”

Of the thousands of other bits of evidence we could go through, this one alone, which has video to prove it, proves the official story cannot be true.

719. boborci - February 2, 2012

By the way, Bob Thompkins, i don’t understand how i have time for all this on line chatting since I am clearly up to my eyeballs trying to fix our shitty script. I must be like Oswald who apparently had the ability to be two places at once;)

720. Toonloon - February 2, 2012

@ 719 ROFLMOL!!!

@ 718. I’ll watch that video in it’s entirety. You’ve swayed me from sceptical to doubtful. I have to admit, the way you worded your last post is a lot more convincing than some of the other so called evidence.

I’ll try to watch those web docs and have a look through my assasination books with either a grovelling concedance (if only that was a word!) or more debunking from the antiv revisionists.

Catch you later. And if you see Ben, tell him Geordie Scott from LAMDA says “hi, and good luck! Don’t let this old Trekker down!)

:D

721. Toonloon - February 2, 2012

@720 So many typos. Sigh. Must be time for my dinner…

722. boborci - February 2, 2012

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-04WjMkO1arw/TjXoK_4QU-I/AAAAAAAAAOY/WqPqvzoaHno/s1600/MauserBreech.jpg

A photo of a mauser, which says MAUSER right on it.

723. boborci - February 2, 2012

Toonloon

Thanks for honest debate. Appreciated!

724. Toonloon - February 2, 2012

My pleasure, Bob.

That is a very clear stamp on the rifle. I think Craig said it was on the butt, butt, but I take your point about it being clear. I’m going to look into those documentaries tonight while I’m eating dinner. Thanks for turning me on to them.

Don’t forget about JFK 3 Shots that Changed America! Superb documentary.

725. FrancoMiranda - February 2, 2012

@boborci

Ever seen the Red Dwarf episode Tikka To Ride? It’s all about the JFK assassination.

You should check it out.

726. Chris Doohan - February 2, 2012

It’s a shame that JFK didn’t live long enough to see Star Trek.

727. boborci - February 2, 2012

And I quote, “Stamped right on the barrel of the rifle…”

728. boborci - February 2, 2012

726. True, but at least he met SPOCK!

729. Chris Doohan - February 2, 2012

728

That’s right!! JFK to Nimoy, “There’s always room for one more good one.’

730. Toonloon - February 2, 2012

@727 I’m watching your documentary and I realise he said barell. My bad. Craig was very convincing about the rifle identification but I don’t believe he was eliminated. I think he was depressed due to his injuries.

The mention of the plastic bubble is misleading. It was not bulletproof. It wouldn’t have stopped that calibre weapon.

731. dmduncan - February 2, 2012

719. boborci – February 2, 2012

By the way, Bob Thompkins, i don’t understand how i have time for all this on line chatting since I am clearly up to my eyeballs trying to fix our shitty script.

***

Say WHAAAT!?!

732. boborci - February 2, 2012

730.

Been watching the first few minutes of your doc on youtube. Good stuff. Actually has some of same footage. Like the breakfast with Kennedy and Johnson, only they show different parts. Can’t wait to finish it, thanks for the tip.

As for Craig’s demise, i have no belief one way or the other. I could easily imagine that if people are shooting at you and running you off the road, you may be depressed enough to commit suicide.

733. boborci - February 2, 2012

731 — responding sarcastically to 685

734. dmduncan - February 2, 2012

Clearly, Bob knows the JFK material.

735. Toonloon - February 2, 2012

@ 732 I found it quite alarming how much I felt like I was watching this dreadful day in history unfold before my eyes.

I’m not sure if I’m watching this documentary in sequence. I’ll try to get the full thing off a torrent site tomorrow. It appears to be public domain.

I’m not sure I agree with its premise JFK was killed ‘cos he wanted peace. Read KENNEDY by Robert Dallek. It’s incredibly detailed and avoids the affairs to focus on the 1000 day presidency and JFK’s life leading up to it. Some of the most common misconceptions about JFK are challenged. He certainly wasn’t all out for peace, although one of the great things he did was the peace corp. Chomsky has some interesting ideas on this that are worth looking into, especially u.s. involvement in south America.

736. dmduncan - February 2, 2012

So why the hell were the secret service men pulled off the rear bumpers of the car? That surely came as a surprise to the guy frustratedly throwing his arms in the air.

Let me guess. It’s explained away as a misunderstanding?

737. dmduncan - February 2, 2012

720. Toonloon – February 2, 2012

@ 718. I’ll watch that video in it’s entirety. You’ve swayed me from sceptical to doubtful.

***

Mmm-mmm-mmm. Sir, you have come a long way since post 619!

738. dmduncan - February 2, 2012

684. Toonloon – February 2, 2012

Yes, I know Bugliosi is a prosecutor. Which is my criticism. The rules for argumentation in court are not the best set of rules for determining the truth or falsity of a given claim. They resemble persuasions rather than inquiries. Trying to settle a question using a prosecutorial argumentation style as if it produces the better founded conclusion of an inquiry, is misleading.

When I watched him on Leno, I got the sense from his style of arguing that a lot of viewers would come away feeling there was absolutely nothing to the JFK case except the official story. Clearly, Bugliosi believes his story. But the search for truth frequently requires that we demolish the structure of our beliefs and start over. Some people can do that better than others. True believers don’t do it too well. Bugliosi strikes me as a true believer.

739. Harry Ballz - February 2, 2012

Bob

Why not tell them about Mac Wallace’s fingerprint being found in the “sniper’s nest” on one of the packing boxes. Wallace was a killer-for-hire and long-time buddy of LBJ’s and his lapdog Bobby Baker. That throws the “lone nut” scenario out the window right there!

740. moauvian waoul - aka: seymour hiney - February 2, 2012

688. Chris Doohan, thank you sir. BTW, loved your dad’s work. Hope to see you back again in 2013.

741. Quatlo - February 2, 2012

736: The question of whether JFK actually ordered SS agents to stay off the rear steps of the limo is debatable. SS agent Clint Hill (assigned to Jackie) is pictured in both still photos and newsreel footage riding on the rear step during the Dallas motorcade. One of those photos is at the link below.

Supposedly, during or after a November 18, 1963 motorcade in Tampa, FL, JFK told SS agent Floyd Boring to, “Keep those Ivy League charlatans off of the back of the car” (p.37, The Death Of A President, William Manchester)

Obviously Clint Hill didn’t get the message.

1. Clint Hill on the rear step in Dallas:

http://www.jfklancerforum.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=3&topic_id=90218&sub_topic_id=90220&mesg_id=&page=

2. More about JFK and the SS detail:

http://www.jfklancer.com/LNE/limo.html

742. boborci - February 2, 2012

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/palamara/factsheet_vmp.html

Jfk never ordered detail to stand down. One of the myths to cover the truth. In fact, the day before, in Houston, he had side motorcycle cops and full detail surrounding him. Wake up!

743. dmduncan - February 2, 2012

So, Emory P. Roberts called the agents off, filed three incorrect reports about it, did not assist the president, and made a radio transmission that we have no transcription of and “which is unaccounted for in the record.”

And no Wikipedia entry on him. What’s the guy’s history?

744. boborci - February 2, 2012

Don’t know off the top of my head. Will have to do more homework.

745. Harry Ballz - February 2, 2012

Bob, if you want the real scoop on Emory Roberts go to:

http://www.jfklink.com/articles/EmoryRoberts.html.

The guy was in it up to his eyeballs.

746. boborci - February 2, 2012

745. Thanks!

747. dmduncan - February 3, 2012

I previously saw that article you linked to, Harry, and we still don’t know much about Roberts. The article ends with “I intend to follow-up on these leads (and more). …Stay tuned….” But it was written 13 years ago, in 1999!!! It also claims that Roberts died in the late 60’s!

I literally just found that the author of that article has a blog site and a book on the Secret Service related to Kennedy:

http://vincepalamara.blogspot.com/

748. dmduncan - February 3, 2012

You can download Palamara’s book free, chapter by chapter, from that site. This question is apparently a subject of great interest to him.

749. Harry Ballz - February 3, 2012

748.

Thanks, dmduncan!

750. AJ - February 3, 2012

Guys…

Wasn’t this thread supposed to address why Bob wrote the sequel script in Polish? What’s with all the JFK stuff?

751. Quatlo - February 3, 2012

750: Well, JFK was Polish – or was it LBJ? AND… it could be worse; some long JFK posts here from me vanished like UFO’s. Anyway, Cheers. You were a hell of a race car driver, hope you’re feeling better.

752. Fubamushu - February 5, 2012

Back to the beginning of this thread… Re: International Audience

@39 @44 @boborci

I don’t think Star Trek will ever have much appeal beyond the borders of the USA because Star Trek is a reflection of our cultural values and these values don’t translate into other cultures.

I was reminded of this just the other when watching TOS streaming in HD on Netflix. The episode was, “The Omega Glory.” White Yankees, Asian communists, the U.S. Flag, and a very dramatic reading of the Preamble of the U.S. Constitution. And while not as blatantly patriotic as that episode, blatant overtures to American and western culture are found in the episodes, “A Piece of the Action,” and, “Bread and Circuses.”

I lived in Japan for several years. While I was in Japan, I recall reading some commentary from Leonard Nimoy. He was relating an experience he had while in Japan promoting Star Trek. Mr. Nimoy was traveling with a Japanese translator who worked on either translating Star Trek films or books, I forget that particular detail. At one point during their time together, the Japanese translator told Mr. Nimoy that he *hated* translating Star Trek into Japanese. Treknobabble issues aside, the command structure aboard the Starship Enterprise was completely alien to Japanese culture. A subordinate in Japan would never challenge or refuse the commands of a superior. A superior would not ask subordinates their opinion about orders or if a particular tactic was wise or appropriate. This is not just limited to government or military structures, but applies to the entire culture. (Even though a foreigner, my students never questioned me in the classroom, even when I made obvious mistakes.) As a result, while the translator could translate the words to some degree, it was next to impossible to translate context and meaning.

What makes Star Trek so successful here in the U.S. is that it speaks to our cultural values. The rest of the world does not share those values.

753. Admiral Archer's Prize Beagle - February 5, 2012

One one level, James Tiberius Kirk – JTK – was JFK, or, perhaps better put, a (subconscious, albeit fictitious) surrogate for JFK.

Robert April didn’t really click until he morphed into Kirk.

Kirk embodied attributes many associated with Kennedy.

He presented Americans with a way, imaginatively, to still have the young, dynamic leader they had lost so suddenly that awful day in Dallas.

754. moauvian waoul - aka: seymour hiney - February 7, 2012

752. Fascinating.

755. me over here - February 9, 2012

Please, no more shots that look like they were done by a cameraman with a severe case of palsy.

756. Tom - March 9, 2012

It would be interesting to see how Spock and Uhura develops their relationship further. Proud to be one of those who were pleasantly surprised by the pairing.

757. Jem - April 10, 2012

82: you mean: when the voting was done on this site more than 5000 people voted against Spock/Uhura AFTER the slash fans literally made an internet campaign for it on their livejournal community (posts made “members only” after someone here had linked to point this up) and other sites asking people to purposely vote against S/U (no matter if it actually was their main issue with the movie) in attempt to tell the writers how to write the sequel? Hell even at youtube there’s a K/S fan that spammed everywhere about it (yeah I saw some of those “make the sequel right vote on the trek site to stop the S/U romance” comments left on some fanvideos. :D )
You know after all that huge propaganda made against S/U 5000 votes aren’t that many I guess that it didn’t work so much and even the majority of slash fans didn’t care to “tell the writers how to write their movie”…

Do you realize that the same person can vote more than once in the same poll so those aren’t even 5000 individual people but virtual numbers?
Do you realize that fans with an agenda can vote using their daddy’s pc too or they can change their IP address using hacks? How do you think that Twilight and Vampire diaries win all the polls of the net?
Do you realize that EVEN people that didn’t watch the movie can vote here if a friend asked them to? Do you realize that if only 5000 people went to the cinema to watch the movie we wouldn’t get a sequel now?
Another poll here wanted S/U to get married should the writers listen to that too?
I’m sure that the webmaster of this site doesn’t add the polls thinking that we’ll get the real opinion of ALL the fans or even the majority of them, for that matter. I doubt that he believes that all the trek fans read this site and if they do so they will vote in every little poll he adds.
People seriously thinking that a poll can tell the writers how to make their movie are naive.
PS: I love the lens flares.

97: amen.
121: amen.

758. edward boughton - June 17, 2012

That was the most stupid StarTrek movie script ever, JJ Abrams is a good director, he had a great cast, a ton of money and the only thing this script was created to do is destroy the timeline of the previous 44 years of scripts. Like his Mission Impossible movies nothing make sense. If you were on a “habitable Ice Moon” in a Solar System with two Suns, dodging giant crabs. Would you wait till after your whole race was destroyed before calling for help from the nearby Star Fleet Base. Why is there a Star Fleet Base next to a populated civilization with warp technology? Where was the Vulcan Defense Fleet? Can no one defend against a mining ship? If the new Scotty is so much more brilliant than the first, why is he alone with baby Greedo and completely unaware of the attack on Vulcan less than 250k miles away. Last the set sucked… ALMOST everything was filming a the Van Nuys Budweiser Brewery (yes, the same one use in Lavern & Shirley). Which may account for the stupid sight gag of beaming inside a water tube. This made the production value look like the Buck Rogers TV Show. Though the Bridge look nice, they should have adhered to updating the original set with the care they took with the Costumes and Enterprise. He only care about the action and not the story telling, which is why the TV Series 1/100th the budget, will always be better. What makes Twilight Zone and original StarTrek Series timeless classics, was NOT the action, but that they were commentaries about us. All JJ has is that a shaking camera adds tension. Sounds like the new script will be worsted than the last

TrekMovie.com is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.