Quinto: Star Trek Sequel Is ‘Bigger and Bolder’ + Actors Collaborated With Writers | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Quinto: Star Trek Sequel Is ‘Bigger and Bolder’ + Actors Collaborated With Writers February 10, 2012

by TrekMovie.com Staff , Filed under: ST09 Cast,Star Trek Into Darkness , trackback

Recently Star Trek’s new Mr. Spock Zachary Quinto sparked a lot of discussion when he talked about how the script for the Star Trek sequel currently in production had been evolving. Now he is saying that the actors had some input into this process.

 

Quinto: Star Trek Sequel Is ‘Bigger and Bolder’ + Actors Collaborated With Writers

Star Trek’s new Mr. Spock Zachary Quinto gave some comments to NBC LA’s Popcorn Biz. First up Quinto talked about what it is like getting everyone back together for production:

Getting back together with everybody was amazing. It was a little bit awkward because we’ve been away for four years, so for all of us to kind of find our footing again, just in relationship to shooting the movie [was a challenge]. But there’s such a great connection between all of us that we were able to find our way pretty quickly.

While he of course can’t divulge details, the actor did talk about the story in general:

Well, it’s bigger and bolder. And I think in some ways more dynamic. And it’s so exciting to be back. And the first time there was a writer’s strike when we were shooting the movie so nothing was able to be changed – the script was locked. And this time Bob [Orci] and Alex [Kurtzman] and Damon [Lindeloff] and J.J.[Abrams] are really getting in and working on the story and sort of allowing it to expand and evolve – and bringing us into the process. So there’s a real collaboration that wasn’t even legally permitted the first time that I feel really grateful for. We’re having a really great time.

More from Quinto on his life outside of Trek, including American Horror Story, at nbclosangeles.com.


Zachary Quinto with director JJ Abrams filming 2009 Star Trek movie – says actors have been able to collaborate with writers for sequel

 

 

Comments

1. Snugglepuff - February 10, 2012

OMG, stop giving us photos from the 09 movie and give us ones from the new movie, holy crap.

2. saavik001 - February 10, 2012

Despite the lack of pictures its still good to hear from Quinto on this… The most anticipated movie of 2013! Can’t wait!!

3. Naver Drol - February 10, 2012

@ #1 – I hear ya.. but it’s nice to be able to see parts of the 09 movie that we couldn’t actually see in the movie itself. You know… without the lens flare. ;)

4. Nony - February 10, 2012

Interested to see how the actor collaboration and the constant revision affects the character of the script. Wasn’t it Karl Urban who came up with the great ‘all I got left is my bones’ line?

5. TheOtherRosie - February 10, 2012

I can hardly wait, I’ve been dreaming of a sequel to the prequel ever since I saw the prequel. Is that confusing? Well I’m a Trekkie, & I’ve got it bad.

6. saavik001 - February 10, 2012

4. Hadn’t heard that before? Awesome if true… Urban rocked it in the last one…

7. Deflector Dish Guy - February 10, 2012

Well, I’m a purist and while I wasn’t much of a fan of this reboot / prequel, Zachary Quinto’s Spock was spot on. I am looking forward to seeing what the writers have come up with.

8. intruder - February 10, 2012

Yeah, we remember the actors collaboration on the TNG movies: Data has emotions for more acting range, Laforge lost his visor so he could have better closeups, Riker’s role in the enterprise got smaller so Frakes could direct, Diana Troy goes completely out of character to be ‘herself’ (and drives the ship?!), and Picard becomes some sort of Bruce Willis in space. Not even Star Trek V got this bad.

The TNG movies almost ended trek for life because the actors played the producers/directors/writers roles, and they all seem to forget that not everyone is Nimoy, someone that knows heartily what Star Trek is all about… Nimoy was the exception, not the rule, just remember Shatner’s direction. This is bad news, folks.

9. Shilliam Watner - February 10, 2012

Bigger and Bolder is fine and dandy, but it must also be Better. And I wish they’d stop blaming the writer’s strike for what they must view as story flaws.

Just please make a good movie, guys.

10. Sebastian S. - February 10, 2012

Agree with Shilliam (hee hee; love the name!);

Bigger/bolder is great, as long as there is the same standard of quality we saw before. Many a sequel has failed by assuming that a more epic, splashier movie equals a better story. Sadly, it does not….

I’m pretty sure that won’t be the case with ST 2.0, but I’m crossing my fingers too.

;-)

11. j_randomuser - February 10, 2012

@8

This is why I love trek fans. NOTHING IS EVER RIGHT! Jeez, can’t we just be happy that we have new trek on the screen again? I mean, I don’t know ably you, but I was getting a little sick of watching the same movies over and over again.

12. dmduncan - February 10, 2012

He said it was in some ways MORE dynamic than ST.09?

How is that possible?

13. GarySeven - February 10, 2012

#12
Maybe there are even fewer, or none, scenes like Pike and Kirk in the bar. No dialogue scenes, just fighting scenes. You know, like every other movie…

14. chrisfawkes.com - February 10, 2012

The last Star Trek was the first decent Trek movie in 15 years and yet still some find cause to complain.

I loved the last trek film, so many great moments and a return to the great characters of Star Trek. Who could have asked for more.

15. chrisfawkes.com - February 10, 2012

Of course we all want more but more movies, not more from the last one.

16. Commodore Adams - February 10, 2012

“Bigger, bolder, more dynamic”…..pavlov drooling to the max!

17. Gabriel Bell - February 10, 2012

11. Thank you. Exactly.

18. Vultan - February 10, 2012

Bigger and bolder?
So they’re going to blow up the galaxy in this one?

19. Seleya - February 10, 2012

Well, I have mixed feelings about ‘bigger and bolder’. So much of what holds up about Trek over decades comes from introspection by the characters, particularly Spock. Trek was willing to do this while so much of contemporaneous broadcast science fiction was not.

Action is the backdrop across which the journey of the characters is written. Special effects and bold stories lend energy to the events, but what true challenges and life changing experiences (not just ‘foes’ and space anomalies) will the individuals face? Even the small screen was able to revisit this ground many times. I hope the movie remains true to the characters and keeps ‘bigger and bolder’ in perspective.

20. GarySeven - February 10, 2012

19. Right with you.

21. Hat Rick - February 10, 2012

Bigger and bolder is great, in my book.

I would welcome a sense of grandeur in this new movie, and an idea of the scale of the Federation and Starfleet.

Events are overtaking our previous conceptions of reality. Whereas a mere decade ago, it was unclear how many planets there were in our Galaxy alone, now it is thought that there may be many millions, including several candidates for what in Trek would be called “M Class” planets. The reality of an interstellar alliance could be far more spectacular than we had dared hope.

By the 23d Century, in the universe of Trek, there should be all manner of indicia of the expansion of humanity into the stars. Interstellar conveyances should be to the current century what airline travel is to the 19th. Not a single 19th Century author accurately predicted the sheer ubiquity of airline travel; it would have boggled the mind of even Jules Verne that more commercial aircraft take off in a single hour around the world than all the passenger steamships and all the airships ever to have crossed the Atlantic, by orders of magnitude. The numbers of people travel by air EACH YEAR exceed the total population of the entire Earth up until historical times.

Starfleet, to say nothing of the Federation, should be a place full of activity, full of starships and star travelers, and a place of wonder and wonders.

The magic of the future can be conveyed by the magic of theater. Bigger and bolder is one road to that end.

22. Seleya - February 10, 2012

@21, agree with you, and the vision you describe can coexist with great character development as dark or radiant futures, look for example at Philip K. Dick or Arthur Clarke. Or if you are patient :-) Stanislaw Lem.

Hoping Trek will keep its rudder in the deeper currents and not fully accede to the comic book trend in current SF/fantasy movies, fun as that is.

23. Hat Rick - February 10, 2012

Indeed, character development is part of the quintessence of Trek. Excellent point.

The Wrath of Khan was essentially a “submarine movie,” with two ships dueling it out in the dark. And yet we correctly see it as one of the best SF movies of its time. Why? Kirk, Spock, and Khan. How they interacted touched us, moved us, angered us, and made us better for it.

Bigger. Bolder. And best of all, still Trek. That’s all we want.

24. pilotfred - February 10, 2012

bigger ideas
bolder charactors

i would go with that
however not with
bigger fx
bolder fight scenes

given its been shown in 3d i guessing the later

25. Harry Ballz - February 10, 2012

21. Hat Rick

Gawd, you are one eloquent bastard!

And, of course, I mean that in the best sense of the phrase.

26. Seleya - February 10, 2012

There is certainly room for Trek to open a peek into one or two doors of where the next cycle of SF could go. Its true that Asimov’s Multivac has long been surpassed, and I suspect many folk today see virtual reality as ‘why is it taking so long’. Events catch up with the fiction we know so quickly. What insight to the future might be offered in new Trek? A bit of it would be very cool.

27. Seleya - February 10, 2012

As far as a grander Federation, I guess we are still flying on speculation there. Lots of planets yes, but lots of consciousness which can find common ground in how they identify what matters? Jury still out. And I often wonder if there are so many conscious beings out there, why none of them seem to have modulated their solar winds to show a bit of intelligent signal over a few thousand years. Perhaps we will see detectable planets in orbits which are obviously artificial, since planetary detection seems to be a capability that comes long before interstellar travel.

28. Randomosity - February 11, 2012

All I know is I am super stoked for Benny-baby playing the villian. That alone makes this my most anticipated film (after the Avengers.)

29. Buzz Cagney - February 11, 2012

Quinto ‘helps’ with the script? Can we expect to see Spock die falling down a Turbo-Lift shaft just as Joey did in Friends when he let slip that same line? :D

30. Vultan - February 11, 2012

#29

That happened to Dr. Pulaski, you know:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ov7aTXqMKfY

31. PEB - February 11, 2012

@23 yes twok had lofty themes, but no matter how you spin it, when you hold it up against all the trek movies before the reboot, it (along with first contact) are essentially the action/adventure films of the bunch and coincidentally the top two picks. makes a point for the bigger & bolder approach. oh and since nobody else said it, everybody’s taking the “big & bold” thing too far. wait for at least a trailer before making some of these comments.

32. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - February 11, 2012

Let’s have a reality check, shall we?

Production is still in its early stages, and Quinto is an ACTOR. So, ZQ is not talking about explosions, he’s talking about the characters. Okay, to some degree, the script may involve relevant big events (e.g. destruction of Vulcan), but from his point of view, “bigger and bolder, … more dynamic” is more likely to refer to the scope of the action and the depth of the characters.

33. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - February 11, 2012

Notwithstanding all the “big” stuff that happens in ST2009, a lot of the runtime is occupied (albeit entertainingly) with all the characters’ origin stories (mostly Kirk’s & Spock’s but the others’ too), which are by their nature more personal.

If ST2013 is more like wall-to-wall main plot storyline, then there’s more time for the Enterprise to, I don’t know, maybe go out and explore something!? That’s the kind of bigger, bolder and more dynamic I’m hoping for.

34. Seleya - February 11, 2012

@32, good point. And the fact that ZQ says they are having a great time collaborating does suggest they are *not* spending that time coreographing a Borg invasion fleet, but digging into what they care about :-)

35. Buzz Cagney - February 11, 2012

#30 i’d forgotten about that. I quite enjoyed LA Law but surely it was before your time?

36. captain_neill - February 11, 2012

With no writers strike at least we should get a stronger story this time.

Of course sacrifices to what we love about Trek have to happen unfortunately to keep the damn mainstream interested I am hoping that Star Trek XII will have a bit more Trek to it.

Too bad they are putting more of the Spock and Uhura relationship in there, all I can ask is pleae don’t make Uhura a bitch like in that scene were she manipulated Spock to get her assigned to the Enterprise.

37. Buzz Cagney - February 11, 2012

#36 or that scene where she made herself look like a slapper in the Turbo-lift. The funny thing about it was she could have pawed Spock all she wanted but he was still 4 years away from Pon-Farr. So no nudey prod for a while i’m afaid Uhura. I’d look elsewhere love. ;) Maybe Scotty? lol

38. boborci - February 11, 2012

29lol!

39. Ian B - February 11, 2012

“We’ve been away for four years”.

This is a real problem Hollywood has. Production times and gaps between movies get longer and longer, but the human ageing process has not changed. How many new ST movies will we get before we’re back in the jokes about Old Men In Space? Remember, there was only ten years between the end of TOS and TMP, and the “too old” jokes were being reeled out right back in 1979. Ten years further on, some of the cast were looking positively ancient and the series was ended.

Take a look at the original James Bond franchise in the 1960s; there was virtually a movie every year. You can pack in a lot of stories before you’re thinking about recasting. Nowadays, it seems you can manage a trilogy at best before it’s time to start again; a good example is Spiderman. Three movies, and we’re back to a reboot and, oh lawks, another retelling of the origin.

I just don’t understand why it has to take this long. I am sadly not a fabulously wealthy Hollytwood producer, but if I were I’d be trying to get a production line mentality going. One movie being shot while the previous one is in post-production. We’d all happily pay to see a movie every year, like we did with Bond. And, it means each movie has less pressure on it. If one is a bit of a miss (like, for me, Thunderball or Moonraker), not to worry, there’ll be another one along shortly.

It’s going to be all wigs, corsets and botox again before we know it. I’m really looking forward to the sequel, but I really do feel I should have seen it by now. How many more can they do with this cast? Two, maybe? It’s not enough, is it?

40. Remington Steele - February 11, 2012

#38

Hey bob…any chance of giving us any form of wee hint about something in the new movie please??

Just for lolz???

41. Iva - February 11, 2012

In other words bigger explosions & bolder lens flare. Nothing else.

42. Tomi_SI - February 11, 2012

@boborci
I wonder when is the timeframe for a trailer to be released?
How long in adwance of a movie releas is it common to release a trailer?

i remamber that the teaser trailer for trek09 was out long befor ther movie was.

43. VulcanFilmCritic - February 11, 2012

Sounds like Mr. Quinto has been talking a lot to Leonard Nimoy.
Nimoy is always tweeting about them seeing each other and having dinner together a lot. I guess he’s kind of adopted him as a godchild.

And I can guess he’s been telling him about HIS contributions to the Spock character. In his memoirs Nimoy writes a lot about all the memos he sent to the producers about the integrity of his character, blah, blah, blah.

According to Solow and Justman’s book, Gene Roddenberry’s response was most of the time to listen but do nothing. For although many of Nimoy’s suggestions were very good, this self-directed Method actor had from time to time some really bad ideas. So after being ignored, Nimoy would then go to Mr. Justman who would then listen and take his case back to Mr. Roddenberry. Roddenbery would make changes to the script sometimes, but grudgingly. This led to some real everlasting enmity between Nimoy and Roddenberry.

This is the wisest course, rather than lock the actors into a set script, let them explore their characters up front. They will feel a greater investment in the characters and later they won’t have too much to complain about.

I have no idea what it must be like to be an actor. I don’t think as an adult, I could adjust to being given orders to jump and saying “How high, boss?”
Most of us are just not used to being treated that way, and Hitchcock famously remarked that actors should be treated like sheep. Many actors have written that the relationship is more like being children. Not all directors feel this way, though.

44. VulcanFilmCritic - February 11, 2012

Sounds like Mr. Quinto has been talking a lot to Leonard Nimoy.
Nimoy is always tweeting about them seeing each other and having dinner together a lot. I guess he’s kind of adopted him as a godchild.

And I can guess he’s been telling him about HIS contributions to the Spock character. In his memoirs Nimoy writes a lot about all the memos he sent to the producers about the integrity of his character, blah, blah, blah.

According to Solow and Justman’s book, Gene Roddenberry’s response was most of the time to listen but do nothing. For although many of Nimoy’s suggestions were very good, this self-directed Method actor had from time to time some really bad ideas. So after being ignored, Nimoy would then go to Mr. Justman who would then listen and take his case back to Mr. Roddenberry. Roddenbery would make changes to the script sometimes, but grudgingly. This led to some real everlasting enmity between Nimoy and Roddenberry.

This is the wisest course, rather than lock the actors into a set script, let them explore their characters up front. They will feel a greater investment in the characters and later they won’t have too much to complain about.

I have no idea what it must be like to be an actor. I don’t think as an adult, I could adjust to being given orders to jump and saying “How high, boss?”
Most of us are just not used to being treated that way, and Hitchcock famously remarked that actors should be treated like sheep. Many actors have written that the relationship is more like being children. Not all directors feel this way, though.

45. VulcanFilmCritic - February 11, 2012

Gee, I don’t know why my post got duplicated. I must be in the Matrix.

46. Orly - February 11, 2012

I hope the writers dont add in lots of vanity moments for the actors. Having said that if they beef up Cumberbatch’s role I’ll be happy.

47. Buzz Cagney - February 11, 2012

So Bob just how much of this script did you come up with?
What with us being ‘Consultants’ and the actors apparently writing their parts I really do have to wonder!
Let me guess, you are doing the title? Take yer time buddy…. ;-)

48. Iva - February 11, 2012

Good luck with finishing that script once the fights and blackmailing over what actor wants to do what and how much screen time it should take start. =) Like in the good old days.

49. Hugh Hoyland - February 11, 2012

I hope Bob wrote the script with Kirk being a proud Libertarian. ;)

All joking aside I think TOS Kirk was very much in that vain. A freedom fighter for sure.

50. Douglas - February 11, 2012

#39 It’s going to be all wigs, corsets and botox again before we know it.

That’s a little rough but I know how you feel. A lot of time was wasted not using the TOS cast. As a ST fan I used to have to defend the franchise using them as they changed appearance and aged, to non ST fans. The new cast is all in their prime an all considerably talented. I hope the powers-that-be can at least see the sound business decision of producing stories with this fine cast with less time between films. Perhaps film 2 back to back.
On the other hand it must also be understood that productions today are far more involved than decades ago. The number of episodes of an entire season of a show is half what it was in the TOS era. I am so grateful for more ST, I just hope for more in a bit less time.

51. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - February 11, 2012

Hey Bob Orci. On a scale of 1 to 10 with 10 being the Actors Wrote the Script. What would you give on that Scale.

52. Hat Rick - February 11, 2012

25, Harry, thank you. I appreciate that.

It is Trek that brings that out in me. I am at my best when I am passionate; I am passionate about Trek. For Trek is among the things in which I believe.

53. Vultan - February 11, 2012

#35

Nah Buzz, you’re right, I never got to see LA Law, but I do remember the joke going around among Trekkies when Dr. Pulaski suddenly disappeared in Season 3 without explanation—of course, she fell down a turbo-lift shaft!

54. Ensign Ricky - February 11, 2012

#39
That’s why Star Trek should be a TV series instead of a series of movies.

55. Adolescent Nightmare - February 11, 2012

I also helped Bob with the script. I typed The End when he was finished.

56. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - February 11, 2012

Hey. Maybe we here at Trek Movie can help with naming the new movie title.

57. Bob Tompkins - February 11, 2012

Even with a writer’s strike, the actors would have been allowed to ad-lib lines, which is what I understand that Urban did on the ‘all I got left is my bones’ line.
The broad strokes of the story were unalterable and writers’ input was not allowed under the union rules, which was a most unfortunate circumstance due to the gaping plot holes, which I have mentioned in several posts.
Here’s hoping the new one is not a ‘check your brain in the lobby and try to just enjoy the movie’ sort of experience. Far too many movies are made on that basis these days.

58. Buzz Cagney - February 11, 2012

#53 I really like Dr Pulaski. But that was mainly because I really didn’t like Dr Crusher. Mostly because she brought Wesley into the world.

59. NCM - February 11, 2012

I’ve got a good feeling about the sequel. I predict it will be full of action and character moments. We’ll see the coming together of the dynamic threesome, with room for Uhura to be a strong character in her own right. My biggest concern is for how they’ll accomplish all of this–and I think they will–with all the new characters to introduce and flesh out.

60. mojomonkey - February 11, 2012

I’m very happy to hear them acknowledge that the ST2009 script could’ve used a little more work. I hate to be a Luddite old-school fan buuuuut…there’s a continuity in the writing style of all the previous incarnations of ST and I didn’t feel that it was present in the 2009 film. Not that it has to be dead from the neck down, but a wee bit of extra stimulation upstairs wouldn’t hurt…

61. Dee - lvs moon' surface - February 11, 2012

Bigger and bolder…………………………………………..and nothing faster………I’m think I’m in bad mood today….. sorry…………..

ZQ……………….

62. Battle-scarred Sciatica - February 11, 2012

Hey Anthony!

Any chance that there is going to be some sci-fi movie and TV news soon?

Lots of (kind of) Trek related news of late but I really miss the wonderful movies and TV articles. An update on what is going on in movie and TV land would be great – and it always help me to decide what I am going to download next as you guys in USA land (and quite often UK land) get the new shows way before we do here in NZ land (if we get them at all!)

Not a complaint. Just a query

Throw us a Science Mon/Tue/Weds/Thurs/Fri/Sat/Sun (delete as applicable) article too.

I miss those as well.

I know i can source this info from other areas (and often do) but I love this site and it used to be a one-stop-shop for much of the sci-fi world.

Keep the Trek news (?) coming.

Live long and Prosper Trekulators!

63. TwilightTrek - February 11, 2012

With this bigger and bolder approach I hope the movie stays realistic and doesn’t turn into a live action cartoon. I enjoyed Trek because the action / fight scenes were all within actual human limits. Yeah by today’s “action movie” standards they seem simple but that’s reality. I don’t want to see Sulu jumping off a wall to give someone a flying dropkick. I didn’t mind seeing Kirk getting his butt kicked in most of the 2009 movie because well that’s probably what would would have happened. I was bothered by the space jump and following fight that took place on the “planet drilling” machine. That started to get too cartoonish. But that’s just my preference for showing humans being bound by their physical human limitations. Today in movies we see the hero’s get into a crazy car accidents that flip the car 20 times and then explode only to see them walk out with nothing but a few touch up scars. And of course they pick right up to the next fight scene as if nothing happened. It feels like I’m watching the A-team from the 80’s at times. Because of this crap there’s no real fear that the “good guy” is going to die anymore no matter what he goes through. We practically see a nuke dropped on someone and they walk away… come on bring things back to reality please.

64. Keachick - rose pinenut - February 11, 2012

#23 – “Kirk, Spock, and Khan. How they interacted touched us, moved us, angered us, and made us better for it.”

How did those scenes makes us better for it? Perhaps you were referring to yourself, which is great, but if you are referring to society in general, then how exactly?

#57 There were no gaping plot holes in the last movie, just one or two small holes which a small darning needle could have easily mended. People often have a tendency to call anything they don’t like or understand a plot hole where none exist.

See the IMDb Star Trek (2009) where incidences of supposed plot holes have been discussed and explained in detail very carefully by posters, some of whom have degrees in English etc, over nearly three years. It has gotten boring because the same old ignorant comments come in from another set of people and yet again get illuminated by education and reason.
**************************************************************************************
Yes, Leonard Nimoy has been seen lunching with Zachary Quinto lately. It is said that the two have become good friends, which is great. However, I have to wonder if Leonard Nimoy is not trying to control how the Spock character get played from a distance. And people say that Wiiliam Shatner is some sort of control freak… I wonder how many conversations are had between William Shatner and Chris Pine about how Kirk should be played. Shatner has publicly said that he thinks Chris Pine is a lovely guy who is very talented and it appears that he is confidently leaving Chris to get on with being a young James Kirk in the alt. universe, without peering over his shoulder, unlike Leonard Nimoy with Zachary Quinto.

Anyway, that is how it comes across to me from where I am.

65. Daoud - February 11, 2012

We’re missing it… we have the title:
S T A R T R E K:
Bigger and Bolder

66. No Khan - February 11, 2012

#39 You hit the nail on the head. Its taking too long. And those old timer jokes in every movie were a real turn off. It was like they were setting up an excuse to end them.

67. Keachick - rose pinenut - February 11, 2012

#63 I agree with you about the unreality of many of the fighting/action scenes shown in many movies.

Perhaps that is what I like about the McG movie Charlies Angels. The action scenes were so over-the-top and so much fun to watch, but you knew that nobody was presenting them as being anything akin to reality. I suspect that McG’s This Means War is similar in style and it is billed as a romantic/action comedy. It feels like McG is spoofing the current spy/cop thriller action drama genre bs that we see so much of and I love this apparent spoofing!

I really hope that the writing/production team for this Star Trek keep the brutality and violence to a minimum. I can’t believe that outer space is necessarily as violent as some believe or indeed wish it to be. Actually it is not exciting or awesome or whatever to be violently injured, anything but. My better half lives with the reality 24/7 and I can’t help but not be affected by it…

68. dmduncan - February 11, 2012

59. NCM – February 11, 2012

I’ve got a good feeling about the sequel.

***

Me too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ba9wzs0IehU

69. Keachick - rose pinenut - February 11, 2012

I hate this laptop. The cursor is all over the place. I am not touching anything, yet words get typed three lines above where they should be typed and my post just deleted itself…Grrr

Here goes again – I agree that there should not be as bigger gap between this movie and the third movie. Ideally the third movie should be released in 2016 – Star Trek’s 50th Anniversary. Paramount – eyes on the ball, on the prize!
illan
As for the actors ageing, Chris Pine will only be 36 in 2016, still a younging by some standards. Karl Urban turns 40 this year – 7 June 2012 and Simon Pegg turns 41 this month. JJ Abrams is 45. None of these guys look ancient. I see no need for botox – just some hair dye in the case of Simon and Chris in order for them to more resemble the characters they are playing. Ironically, in Chris’s case, this beefing up has actually made him look a bit older than himself…go figure – below is a picture of Chris with his dad in September 2011.

http://justjared.buzznet.com/photo-gallery/2579408/chris-pine-dad-robert-
pine-02/

70. Vultan - February 11, 2012

#58

Yeah Buzz, I liked Pulaski too, though we may be in the minority opinion on that one. Of course, she was pretty much a Dr. McCoy ripoff, but… I like Dr. McCoy!

They could make a movie just about him for all I care—“Star Trek: Frontier Doctor the movie” starring Karl Urban!… and some other people. ;)

71. Dee - lvs moon' surface - February 11, 2012

#64. Keachick…

If I’m not mistaken one of the conditions imposed by Mr. Nimoy to be “Spock Prime” in Star Trek was that he would approve the actor who was going to do the young Spock … but I think he can, right? …;-) :-)

72. murt - February 11, 2012

I don’t trust Nimoy’s judgement really…. I mean the last move didn’t even have a plot. Though I enjoyed it, it was an action movie, not a scifi movie, yet Nimoy endorsed and was a part of it.

73. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire. - February 11, 2012

Ok. Here is the title to the movie.

STAR TREK. NO KHAN HERE.

74. VZX - February 11, 2012

3. Yeah, it looks soooo much better without the lens flares.

BTW: That pic with ZQ and JJ is so freakin cool. The transporter set is the best the of the movie, so perfect. Combined with the classic Spock look and JJ directing, it just gets me jazzed!

75. VZX - February 11, 2012

73: I hope there is no Khan. But lately I’m thinking there is.

I’ve got a bad feeling about this.

76. Aurore - February 11, 2012

Exactly, Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire.

And, I would go so far as to say….

T.R.E.K. : In Space No One Khan Hear You Scream ( Captain )

77. John from Cincinnati - February 11, 2012

Big bold special effects and action shots are nothing if not set against an interesting story with good characterizations and good dialogue.

78. Red Dead Ryan - February 11, 2012

Bigger explosions, bolder visual effects!

Bigger scale, and bolder exploration!

And oh yeah, Khan as well!

79. Aurore - February 11, 2012

“I’ve got a bad feeling about this.”
_________

I don’t.

:)

80. Craiger - February 11, 2012

We still don’t know if Khan is the villain.

81. Aurore - February 11, 2012

“I hope there is no Khan. But lately I’m thinking there is.”
________

It’s certainly a matter of perspective, I presume….

But, to me, “Bolder ” implies something other than a Khan Noonien Singh storyline.

82. Hat Rick - February 11, 2012

64, perhaps you are right and perhaps I am presumptuous to believe that they elevated society in general. But speaking for myself, it was moving to see the sacrifice Spock made for the good of the many. It reminded me of the power of the spirit and of altruism. That, to me, was elevating. In that, it was unprecedented in Trek — the death of one of the Great Trio would hardly have been believeable in the days before Wrath.

I hope this answers your question.

83. Hat Rick - February 11, 2012

^^ meant for 64, Keachick, not 65.

84. The Red Shirt Diaries - February 11, 2012

I just watched SUV again. As horrible as it was, I give Shatner kudos for trying to emphasise the closeness of the trio. I hope the new movie executes this. As horrible as the movie was as a whole, there were some awesome moments among the big 3. Don’t let Zoe circumvent that because JJ likes it! Accentuate the big 3. Especially with how good Karl Urban is! Dint short change Mccoy because you’ve decided Saldana is the hotter property.

85. CarlG - February 11, 2012

@73: How about:

STAR TREK. NO KHAN DO

(Sorry.)

I seriously doubt Khan will appear… after all this is the 21st century, we can deal with actual Indian actors on our screens. They’re not going to cast someone even whiter than Ricardo Montalban as a Sikh, for pity’s sake!

86. The Red Shirt Diaries - February 11, 2012

I just watched STV again. As horrible as it was, I give Shatner kudos for trying to emphasise the closeness of the trio. I hope the new movie executes this. As horrible as the movie was as a whole, there were some awesome moments among the big 3. Don’t let Zoe circumvent that because JJ likes it! Accentuate the big 3. Especially with how good Karl Urban is! Dint short change Mccoy because you’ve decided Saldana is the hotter property.

87. Baroner - February 11, 2012

I should change my name to “GET SHATNER IN THIS MOVIE.”

If the actors are in on the writing, too, I don’t understand how they are not lobbying to get Shatner in somehow. I have said before that he is beyond iconic, and he won’t be with us much longer. I can’t imagine how the cast and writers don’t want to include the original JTK in the great resurgence of Star Trek, one last time before he dies. This just isn’t right. It would be a totally cool inclusion and the right thing to do.

88. Vultan - February 11, 2012

#85

Agreed. To use Sherlock Holmes to play Khan would be an odd choice… unless they’re changing Khan’s ethnic background, which would be an even odder choice….

89. Spock/Uhura Fan - February 11, 2012

Glad to see that Zachary and the rest of the bunch got a word in. I wish them all the best.

@ Keachick and dmduncan

Here is the response I promised on this thread: http://trekmovie.com/2012/01/28/zoe-saldana-talks-star-trek-sequel-hints-at-more-uhuraspock/#comment-4527374

It double posted for some reason.

#368

90. Spock/Uhura Fan - February 11, 2012

@#64

From the interaction that I saw between the two, Leonard is not at all trying to control anyone. Zachary Quinto gave his own thoughts and opinions about the Spock character when he and Nimoy did the Secret Selves thing together and he was quite good at having what I think is a great handle on the character. Nimoy asked him questions and seemed very supportive of Zach having his iwn answers and thinking for himself.

He gave Zach a nice piece of advice/info when he talked about the actor and his part in the process. I wouldn’t read too much into two friends having lunch. It happens. :-)

91. DJT - February 11, 2012

Boborci,

Can I get a walk-on role in ST: bigger and bolder?

please and thank you.

92. dmduncan - February 11, 2012

I’m with Aurore. It’s not about Khan. And if it is, I’ll eat this post.

93. Keachick - rose pinenut - February 11, 2012

#89 Now you are even talking about mood rings? Huh? Sheesh!

I have not pigeon-holed myself. You mentioned the Stepford Wives. There are two movies that I hate above all else – Stepford Wives and Rosemary’s Baby. The very thought of them make feel sick and very upset. That’s me. Let’s just say you stepped on a *sore* spot. There was no need to liken someone’s casual observations about a group of people to such a vile idea and film!

94. Spock/Uhura Fan - February 11, 2012

@#93

Yes, mood rings, because that’s how you sound.

You did pigeon-hole yourself, and I am sorry that you still do not see how. I don’t like the Stepford Wives either, but that is what it sounded like to me and, consequently, exactly why I took issue with it. So there was every reason to address it.

Like I said, I had a problen with both ‘types.’

Apparently, you did not and still don’t. :-/

95. Red Dead Ryan - February 11, 2012

#94.

There was no call for you to bring some issues you had with somebody else on another seperate thread to this one. Totally uncalled for. Nice try with the attempt at hijacking.

96. Spock/Uhura Fan - February 11, 2012

@#95

I’m not trying to ‘hijack’ anything, Ryan.

I was not sure if either person I said I would respond to would be checking that thread at this point, so I LINKED to that thread in a visible spot. Attempted hijacking would gave been if I had posted my reply here. I did no do that.

Keachick could have responded to me on the thread I linked to, but since she responded here, that’s where I in turn responded to her.

You can always overlook our posts. :-)

But, if you’d like something more on the article above, then I’ll say that I like the pic of Zachary and JJ. :-)

97. Spock/Uhura Fan - February 11, 2012

Well, forgive the typos. You know what I meant… :-/

98. NCM - February 11, 2012

It was long ago established that a friendship arose between Nimoy and Quinto–Where’s the sin? Nimoy’s repeatedly made it clear that he wished to pass the torch to Quinto, felt he’d done so, and believed the iconic character to be in capable hands.

To suggest that these two guys having lunch and pursuing a friendship must mean one’s imposing on the other, and the other is fool enough to keep going back for more is… Sheesh, indeed!

99. Red Dead Ryan - February 11, 2012

#96.

Yeah, but c’mon, you were the one who posted the link. Everybody moved on from that thread weeks ago. You didn’t need to do that. But now you laid the bait, and Keachick bit, and so here we go again.

100. Spock/Uhura Fan - February 11, 2012

@#99

No bait, dude. Just fulfilling a promise. It’s that simple.

@ NCM

I agree.

101. Keachick - rose pinenut - February 11, 2012

No, Spock/Uhura Fan, YOU don’t get it.

Just suppose that the observer went to a place where most of the fans there were a similar age, exhibited similar confidence and had dark hair, would you have likened them to the Stepford Wives? I doubt it!

Mood rings? Really? Am I supposed to know what they are, let alone care? WTF?

RDR – Threads get “hijacked” all the time by people going (completely) off topic.

102. Spock/Uhura Fan - February 11, 2012

I’m not going in circles with you, Keachick. ‘The observer’ didn’t say that he/she went somewhere ONCE and just happened to see AN audience of Kirk fans that looked/seemed a certain way. Same thing goes fir the Spock fans.

You seem to need to cling to the stereotypes he/she provided (for what reason(s) is beyong me), and for your benefit, if it helps, I’ll just go along and leave it be. Okay?

:-/

103. Keachick - rose pinenut - February 11, 2012

#98 Yes, except that Leonard Nimoy is back on the Star Trek set again… by invitation, of course. I wonder who, among the original series, has been *invited* back on 2012 set for a second time? Actually, if there was one person who might put in an appearance on the set this time round, it would be William Shatner, but not so far…but there’s Lennie again…just can’t keep away, can he?

Or that’s how it does seem to me. No big deal really. Of course, it could be just me and those mood rings…

104. Spock/Uhura Fan - February 11, 2012

Oh, and it would help if you knew what mood rings are. Sorry, I just assumed that you did or would google it. I know you’ve dobe that before.

Here’s a link if you care: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mood_ring

105. capt howdy - February 11, 2012

I always wondered why people hated Dr. Pulaski when Gates Mcfadden wasn’t exactly bringing any personality to her role, not in the least. Pulaski’s character may have mirrored McCoy in some ways, but that’s good! The doctor needed to have some sort of a personality…..

I believe it was Maurice Hurley who wanted Mcfadden off the show because he felt she was such a crappy actress, and rightfully so, she sucked!!! Balls out sucked. I never understood why Patrick Stewart and the gang wanted her back when she didn’t add anything at all to that program.

106. Keachick - rose pinenutock - February 11, 2012

Post #338 by VulcanFilmCritic – 31 January 2012 on a thread about Zoe Saldana –
“@332 Keachick
Star Trek is a huge banquet and everyone is free to sample what they like. I am convinced that the world could be divided into Spock fans and Kirk fans and there would be very little overlap. I wish I could do an experiment at a Star Trek convention. Spock fans on one side of the ballroom, and Kirk fans on the other. Then give them some psychological testing to see what defines them. I bet they’d be as different as chalk and cheese.

I have found Kirk fans to be invariably blond and attractive. They tend to be more extroverted than introverted and have a sense of humor. If I could find one word to describe them it would be: confident. Optimism also seems high among Kirk fans. I guess the captain is a kind of avatar for their inner being. One might go as far as to say among women, Kirk is a reflection of their inner male self, their animus.”

You referred to this theory/observation of this poster by describing it as being something akin to the Stepford Wives. To me, that was offensive and uncalled for. I posted a link to what the movie, the first 1975 Stepford Wives, was about and still you persist…

It was a positive comment made by this other poster as were the observations generally made about Spock fans and saying that they varied a bit more in age, physical make up etc than the Kirk fans may do. It was your take on her theory about Kirk fans that shocked and threw me. How you could even relate anything that the poster wrote to the Stepford Wives is beyond me and to the poster herself. She told us that we were crazy to even entertain a Stepford Wives notion. I told her it was not an idea I came up with. It was all S/U Fan’s stuff – your interpretation, your take, your narrow pigeon-holing of a group of people, to the point of comparing them to robots.

I don’t need to cling to anyone’s stereotyping. All I am asking is what if these theories/observations turned out to be more or less correct? What then? Would you still see these people as being like Stepford Wives? It was you who cruelly pigeon-holed people like ME!To coin a phrase, Spock/Uhura Fan – F*ck You!

107. SoonerDew - February 11, 2012

@105

Everything I’ve read about Pulaski was that the character was personally axed by Roddenberry, and he personally fired her.

It was an idiotic decision.

Roddenberry may have created Trek, but he was also at times its worst enemy. This was a prime example.

108. Hat Rick - February 11, 2012

What if they named the next movie, “Star Trek: The Sequel”?

Kind of obvious, I know.

Or, “Star Trek: The Next Movie.”

Bland, I know.

;-)

109. Jack - February 11, 2012

64. Keachick, again with the speculation…:)

It’s a big leap from being spotted together to “Nimoy is a puppetmaster!” Anything else behind the theory — has Nimoy said stuff somewhere?

If they’re hanging out now but don’t usually, and this is also total speculation, maybe Quinto’s asking about the character?

And, once again, gotta say I wish they cast would be quiet during filming. It’s just me. But I’m worried this generic best movie yet talk will jinx the darned thing ;). Actors say that while filming some pretty awful stuff, er, like, Nemesis.

I’m still working on my 2012 resolution to stop bringing up the Trek past on here. This new movie doesn’t have to be connected to the previous ones, or the mistakes of the previous ones, in any way, just like Nolan’s Batman flicks are in no way related to Schumacher’s, or even Burton’s.

Heck, the weakest parts of Trek ’09, in my opinion, were Twok, generations, etc. homage scenes. Well, just the interrogation scene.

110. N - February 11, 2012

87 Why would they? Besides the character of Kirk is dead. And Shatner would refuse just a cameo as some random old guy.
This film already has one coffin nail actor as it is.

I never liked Pulaski, I feel the opposite to 105

Can someone from the older generation tell me why you love TWoK so much? I’m not saying that in a sarcastic way, I genuinely want the perspective on it.

And yeah blaming the writer’s strike is a bit of a cop out, but then if he blamed the writers (who else can you really blame for a weak script?) he may lose his job and it could hurt him getting other roles if he becomes known to badmouth production teams.

111. Spock/Uhura Fan - February 11, 2012

@#106

Aaaand, now you’ve gone over the deep end. I won’t say f-you back, because I sincerely would not mean it.

Anyway, take care, Keachick….

112. Keachick - rose pinenut - February 11, 2012

Jack – As I noted, Leonard Nimoy is also on the set of the Star Trek sequel. Yes, it is speculation.

A lot of speculation happens around here and a lot of it can attributed to the Bob Orci and co. team (Bob – are you getting this?) with their supply of information that is really no-information. Given that Bob often frequents this site, it might mean that he enjoys all our theorizing, speculating, arguing, ranting, scaremongering, and whatever else takes our inner writer’s fancy… OMG, where was I? Is it possible that Bad Robot’s favourite reference book might not be George Orwell’s 1984, especially relating to newspeak? Another horrible book.

George Orwell’s book 1984, the movies the Stepford Wives and Rosemary’s Baby have all given me recurring nightmares for some time after reading/watching same. Seriously. Something really horrible and evil about all three!

I went to the link about mood rings. Still I ask – What the hell have mood rings got to do with me or any of the threads here?

113. MJ - February 11, 2012

For Christ’s sake, another photo from Trek 2009? Come on JJ and company, give us some at least throw away shots from the new movie? This is getting ridiculous.

114. Keachick - rose pinenut - February 11, 2012

#111 Yeah, maybe. I have been known to go off the deep end sometimes. Nearly drowned once when I was 16 – didn’t know it was the deep end.

I just think that you are being rude, especially when you bring up nonsense distractions like talking about mood rings (mood rings? whaaat?). Despite your noble words about not wanting to stereotype, standing up for the individual, you liken a potential group of people to the worst kind of stereotype, a Stepford wife. Not good at all.

115. Vultan - February 12, 2012

#112

It’s a horrifying book, not a horrible one. As are the movies.

116. Spock/Uhura Fan - February 12, 2012

The reference to mood rings was very clearly spelled out, but whatever…

I like seeing new pics from the old movie, or at least new to the public. Hey–Never seen by the public before is new to me. :-)

Still, new pics from the next movie to come out would be nice too, especially of a certain pointy-earred and stunningly beautiful Vulcan and his fiancee. :-D :-) ;-) And not a small one, either. I’m talking one of those 50 footers like what Pine’s been getting here lately. :-)

117. Spock/Uhura Fan - February 12, 2012

@#115

I agree.

118. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - February 12, 2012

#105 & #107 – I’ve always been a little more on the fence regarding Dr. Crusher versus Dr. Pulaski; I honestly liked them both just fine. But having spoken to other Star Trek fans, I always got the impression that Dr. Pulaski was more highly regarded. I was under the impression that Diana Muldaur simply left to pursue other opportunities. I never knew she was axed, least of all by GR himself. I must say, that’s particularly odd to me, since Ms. Muldaur had acted on TOS, so he already was familiar with her work.

One reason I like coming here, is we get nice little tidbits like what ZQ has to say about the production, and it starts to get me more excited and hopeful that this upcoming movie is going to be great.

On the other hand, coming to this site means having to read all the negative, completely off-topic comments by the JJ-hating, purist party-pooper faction. *sigh*

119. VulcanFilmCritic - February 12, 2012

I just love TrekMovie! It’s better than playing telephone.

@43,44 (Myself) You know Leonard and Quinto talk to each other. Zachary Quinto has said so. And what do they talk about? Yeah, sure they talk about personal things, money, gossip, etc. But Zachary Quinto is the only person in the world (other than the 5 guys in STIII and little Jacob Kogan, and they don’t count) who would know what it’s like to be Spock. You KNOW they talk about how to play him, because they have discussed it in public.
As a psychologically oriented actor who references Carl Jung and Carl Rogers, this must be way BETTER than therapy for Mr. Nimoy. After 45 years misunderstanding, he finally has someone he can unload on.

That being said,
@98 NCM, having lunch (or dinner together) does not mean one is “imposing” on the other. Zachary’s a big boy now and can take care of his acting roles himself. Still to have access to the best acting coach in the world regarding the portrayal of Spock is an opportunity not to be missed.

@109 Jack: “It’s a big leap from being spotted together to “Nimoy is a puppetmaster!” Anything else behind the theory — has Nimoy said stuff somewhere?If they’re hanging out now but don’t usually, and this is also total speculation, maybe Quinto’s asking about the character?”

Yes! Exactly! the imagery is just so funny. Nimoy the puppetmaster!
LOL, FOFL, LMAO. I can just see him trying to secretly mind-meld with the younger actor in order to hijack his brain and his portrayal of Spock so as to preserve his legacy forever. “Um, excuse me Zachary, I believe there is a leaf on your forehead. Don’t move! Let me, um, get it for you…”

P.S.-As for the ongoing epic battle between Keachick and Spock/Uhura fan (which I’ve apparently touched off with my cogent opinions regarding Kirk vs. Spock fans) I’m just going to don my Cloak of Invisibility and curl up in front of my computer screen with a nice cup of tea and enjoy the show.
Zoooons! Methinks the ladies doth protest too much.

120. Tom - February 12, 2012

#87 Baroner

Totally with you on this. However I don’t expect the new actors to lobby for it. I would have thought JJ, Bob and team could have got something done with this,

121. Will - February 12, 2012

#39 – Spot on. You would think Hollywood might try something like that (just for something different) and perhaps start a new trend.

122. Hat Rick - February 12, 2012

Or, “Star Trek: Your Speculation Was Completely Wrong!”

Or, “Star Trek: Not the Wrath of Khan.”

Or, “Star Trek: Shut Up Already About Khan!”

Or just “Star Trek 2.”

Personally, I like “Star Trek 2013: The Mayans Were Wrong!”

123. Craiger - February 12, 2012

One could actually say is rebooting Star Trek again a good idea? Even though I liked the reboot movie. How many times has Star Trek been basically rebooted with TNG, DS9, Voyager and Enterprise? Voyager and Enterprise were attempting to reboot TNG.

124. Craiger - February 12, 2012

Unless you should look at the other Trek shows as spinoffs and not reboots?

125. VZX - February 12, 2012

122. I actually like the title “Star Trek 2″

Sure, it will piss off the purists, but it’s simple and straight to the point.

But, yeah, I can see your point about how there’s too much Khan talk. I hear ya.

126. VZX - February 12, 2012

79. Well, I meant I had a bad feeling about who the villain is, not about the movie itself.

I’m pretty sure it will be good. But can they catch that lightening in the bottle again?

127. Aurore - February 12, 2012

“Well, I meant I had a bad feeling about who the villain is, not about the movie itself.”
________

I understood your point.
Mine was that I was/am convinced that it won’t be Khan.

128. Craiger - February 12, 2012

Star Trek 2009 premiers on FX on 2-14 at 7PM Eastern / 6PM Central.

129. Hat Rick - February 12, 2012

Yup, 125. I think “Star Trek 2″ would be a simple, elegant, and doable title.

It would be technically different from “Star Trek II,” by virtue of the fact that it doesn’t use a Roman numeral.

Of course, there’s always “Star Trek: Part Deux,” although another movie series (a comedic one) has already used that conceit.

And remember the one from “Spaceballs” — “Spaceballs: The Search for More Money.” Hey, at least they were honest! ;-)

130. Buzz Cagney - February 12, 2012

No no no, there’s already been a second Trek movie. For goodness sake how many more times do I have to remind you! ;-)
There is no distinction when you say II or 2 anyway. :-p

I’m coming to like Bigger and Bolder though! :D
Or how about Star Trek: The One Written by the Actor’s?

131. dmduncan - February 12, 2012

@130: Star Trek Too.

That settles it.

132. Aurore - February 12, 2012

@131. Star Trek TWO ? ( The Wrath Of ?……….)

THAT settles it

133. Aurore - February 12, 2012

Star Trek T.W.O. ? ( The Wrath Of…..? )

MUCH better.

134. Hugh Hoyland - February 12, 2012

Star Trek : Beyond Top Secret!

135. Aurore - February 12, 2012

T.R.E.K.: Two Good to Be II

136. Daoud - February 12, 2012

Star Trek T.W.O. (Three Writers’ Offering)
.
and if we don’t like it,
(Three Writers’ Offing)!

137. Buzz Cagney - February 12, 2012

LOL yea, ST:Too will do nicely.
That being said there is still no distinction when you say either 2, II or Too. This is a real problem. No wonder the writer guys can’t come up with a title.

138. Aurore - February 12, 2012

….Or :

Star Trek : 2 Good Two Be II

139. Iva - February 12, 2012

Star Trek: Not Really

140. Jai - February 12, 2012

Star Trek 2: The Vindication of Giorgio.

Behold: http://knowyourmeme.com/photos/158329

141. VulcanFilmCritic - February 12, 2012

Star Trek: x +1
Star Trek 2.0
Again, Star Trek
Star Trek XII
Star Trek, Star Trek
Double-Star Trek
Star Trek: New Testament
Star Trek: Deja Vu

142. Buzz Cagney - February 12, 2012

If only Quinto would tell Bob what the story is about he could tell us and we could help with a title.

143. Iva - February 12, 2012

141. VulcanFilmCritic – February 12, 2012
Star Trek: New Testament””””

lololololol. :D

144. Jai - February 12, 2012

I see that someone has designed a couple of spoof Giorgio “Ancient Aliens” photos specially for our friend Bob Orci:

http://memegenerator.net/instance/12990497?urlName=Ancient-Aliens&browsingOrder=Popular&browsingTimeSpan=AllTime

http://memegenerator.net/instance/11791220?urlName=Ancient-Aliens&browsingOrder=Popular&browsingTimeSpan=AllTime

;)

145. Aurore - February 12, 2012

T.R.E.K : 2 Boldly Go Stuff In Space

146. Aurore - February 12, 2012

2 Boldly Go Do Stuff In Space

:))

147. Admiral Archer's Prize Beagle - February 12, 2012

Star Trek: Worlds Apart

148. DeShonn Steinblatt - February 12, 2012

Star Trek 2: The Wrath of NuKhan

149. Red Dead Ryan - February 12, 2012

“Star Trek: You Only Live Long And Prosper Twice”.

150. Buzz Cagney - February 12, 2012

ah Star Trek: Twice. We have a winner!

151. Red Dead Ryan - February 12, 2012

Or “Star Trek Again”, “Star Trek Yet Again”

And for the belated Shatner-centered flick, “Star Trek: Never Say Never Again”! It’s where Shat-Kirk returns to Starfleet, but gets suspended from duty for being out of shape and is sent back to the gym for a rigorous workout regimen! Strictly for the fans, of course!

152. Hat Rick - February 12, 2012

“Star Trek ^2″ then. ;-)

Not just Star Trek, but Star Trek to the second power.

Or, “Star Trek: Squared.”

“Star Trek: Star Trek”

“Star Trek: Again!”

“Not Your Father’s Star Trek.”

“Star Trek: Twice as Nice!”

“Star Trek: New and Improved.”

“Star Trek: Bigger, Bolder, and Less Fattening.”

“Star Trek: In Space, No One Can Hear You Scream … KHAAAAN!”

;-)

153. AJ - February 12, 2012

Star Trek Part Deux
Again with the Star Trek
Star Trek: The Search for Smaug
Star Trek: Why David has Two Dads
Star Trek: Lazarus!
Star Trek: Fantastic!

154. Red Dead Ryan - February 12, 2012

“Star Trek: Never Say Never Again” would be a remake of “The Wrath Of Khan”, this time with Megan Fox as Savvik, Dwayne Johnson as Khan, Martin Short as Chekov, Garrett Wang as Sulu, Wanda Sykes as Uhura, Morgan Freeman as Terrell, William H.Macy as McCoy, Wayne Knight as Scotty, Tom Cruise as Spock and Paul Walker as David.

It would be made by the studio, and only for the fans!

Because you demanded it!

155. Buzz Cagney - February 12, 2012

Interesting, RDR. Never Say Never Again was a remake of Thunderball. In Thunderball the bad guys hijack a nuclear bomber. That plane was a Vulcan Bomber. How spooky is that? Nero was a Vulcan Bomber.
This sequel is all starting to come together is’t it!
Its writing itself really. lol
Very interesting….

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QczyNaIu9Mo

156. Red Dead Ryan - February 12, 2012

#155.

Yeah, that clip was funny! You Brits do humour differently than in North America! Interesting but stupid! Ha!

Wasn’t there also a Vulcan motorcylce in “Thunderball”? One that Fiona Volpe rode, and later ditched in a lake?

As for “Never Say Never Again”, I used that as an example of where an actor’s ego can take him, and how fans always can’t seem to let go of their constant need to see a particular actor in a particular role even when said actor has outgrown the role, or has gotten too old, or his style of acting no longer allows for a convincing portrayal……

157. Red Dead Ryan - February 12, 2012

And funnily enough, I was listening to Tom Jones’ “Thunderball” a few minutes ago!

158. Keachick - rose pinenut - February 12, 2012

Yes, I agree. The book and movies I mentioned were well written and well made but presented horrifying ideas, ones that give me nightmares.

159. MJ - February 12, 2012

@151 “And for the belated Shatner-centered flick, “Star Trek: Never Say Never Again”! It’s where Shat-Kirk returns to Starfleet, but gets suspended from duty for being out of shape and is sent back to the gym for a rigorous workout regimen! Strictly for the fans, of course!”

RDR, great to see you are finally coming around to my thinking on Shat. Welcome back to the world or reality, my friend!

160. Red Dead Ryan - February 12, 2012

#169.

Yeah, I’m ready to move on. I think the hologram scene written by Bob would have been great, but J.J obviously disagreed. Not going to happen now, so it’s time to move on. I was making a joke about how some fans want to see Shatner crammed into the sequel with a major role. I used “Never Say Never Again” as an example of pandering to fans and actors. That film should have never been made. Sean Connery should have said “NEVER!” to “Never Say Never Again”.

Sean Connery was in his fifties at the time of NSNA, and that I thought at that point he was parodying himself as Bond.

161. Vultan - February 12, 2012

#156

British humour? That’s from “Laugh-In,” my friend. Made in the good ole flower-powered, interesting but stupid U.S.A!

:D

162. Buzz Cagney - February 12, 2012

RDR that ‘interesting/stupid’ clip was actually from a classic American show ‘Rowan and Martins Laugh-in’. Admittedly it also featured a Brit in Peter Sellers but the show was as American as your Mom’s apple pie.
I loved that show when i was a kid.

#157 are you proposing Tom Jones sings the theme song for Star Trek: Never Say Never Again there? I’d be up for that and it gives me a chance to show a bit of British classic tv….

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WMj8Ml5pTA

I agree, btw, Never Say Never Again was awful. And yet it outgrossed Roger Moore’s Octopussy. Mind you that was bad too!

163. Vultan - February 12, 2012

“You know what’s the best thing about you British? Octopussy. Why, I must have seen that movie …twice!”

—Homer Simpson

164. Red Dead Ryan - February 12, 2012

“Laugh-In” is a bit before my time I’m afraid! Today’s American (and Canadian) comedy is quite a bit different today. It’s more about expetives, and punchlines involving sexual inuendoes and toilet humor!

#162.

Actually, I’m Canadian, so my mom didn’t bake apple pie. :-D

That Tom Jones clip is great! I could see Craig Ferguson doing something like that!

And yeah, “Octopussy” was just as bad as “Never Say Never Again”! And both movies were released in the same year!

165. Buzz Cagney - February 12, 2012

#163 pmsl. Umm, Bond has American Producers, Vults. We don’t always get it right when we collaborate, do we. !
Case in point i’ve just popped Moonraker in the player! lol. What the hell. You can’t go too far wrong with 007.

166. Buzz Cagney - February 12, 2012

Try this one RDR…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFgdhZGLJrY

i can watch Morecambe and Wise all night!

167. Red Dead Ryan - February 12, 2012

#163.

Speaking of which, I remember the “Simpsons” James Bond spoof episode called “You Only Move Twice”. The family moves to an upscale town after Homer gets a job working for the madman Hank Scorpio, whose company was based inside a volcano, just like Blofeld’s lair in “You Only Live Twice”.

There were references to “Goldfinger”, “You Only Live Twice”, “A View To A Kill” (when Scorpio laughs while slaughtering the ninjas), and “Goldeneye”.

One of the better “Simpsons” episodes.

168. Vultan - February 12, 2012

007 in space! I wanna know why he didn’t go to the Moon in that one. Disappointing….

Ever see “Silver Streak”? Jaws makes an appearance in it. Well, sort of. Same actor doing pretty much the same thing.

169. Red Dead Ryan - February 12, 2012

#165.

“Moonraker” eh? I can’t get past the laser battles in space. “What the hell” indeed! Fun to watch, but totally over the top and out there!

170. Red Dead Ryan - February 12, 2012

#168.

Yeah, it’s ironic that the movie, and the type of shuttle used in it, were called “Moonraker” and they didn’t even go to the moon!

171. Red Dead Ryan - February 12, 2012

Also, during the scene where Bond enters into Drax’s mansion, he punches a code into a keypad to the tune of the signal music from the contact scene near the end of “Close Encounters Of The Third Kind”.

172. Vultan - February 12, 2012

And he didn’t even bring his rake, dammit! What’s that all about? Moonraker? Some sort of gardening club, I suppose. ;)

Either of you guys ever read any of Fleming’s Bond books? They’re pretty good, especially From Russia with Love. It gives a lot more back story to the character Robert Shaw played, Red Grant. Nearly half the book is about him!

Goldfinger is also good. Remember in the movie, the scene that introduces Oddjob’s hat-throwing skills, by decapitating a statue? Well, in the book he does it on… a cat. That’s right. And then he takes the poor dead animal into Goldfinger’s kitchen for supper. I’m not kidding.

Huh, Ian Fleming was a gifted writer but I guess cultural sensitivity wasn’t for him. Meee-yow!

173. Buzz Cagney - February 12, 2012

#172 oh yes. Man i got so excited when he did that. You have two very willing chatters in me and Vultan if you want to talk Close Encounters, Red. We share a love of that wonderful movie.

174. Vultan - February 12, 2012

#171

Yeah, I caught that. Nice reference. I watched Close Encounters just the other night. Great movie.

175. Buzz Cagney - February 12, 2012

Well guys you are talking to someone who can fairly be described as a Moonraker. I’m from Wiltshire.

http://uk.ask.com/question/what-is-the-meaning-of-moonraker

I’ve never mistaken the Moon for cheese though!

Ian Fleming is buried just a few miles from where i live.
Vults, i can’t read the books. I think the writing style is awful!

176. Vultan - February 12, 2012

Am I the only one who’s more than a little creeped out by the tall skinny alien at the end of Close Encounters? What were those guys thinking? “Yeah, let’s send out Larry first—the most alien, haunt your nightmares looking guy on the ship! Forget about the cute little aliens. They’re second stringers. C’mon Larry, let’s go!”

177. Vultan - February 12, 2012

#175

To each his own, Buzz. It’s been many years since I’ve read them, so I can’t really comment on the writing style that much. Though, I do remember it being a little too… uh, detail oriented for my tastes.

178. Buzz Cagney - February 12, 2012

177 And that weird little smile he did at the end. He looked like a Catholic priest at boys choir practice.

Think how much more unbelievable he’d have been CGI’d though!

*Bond just racing across St Peter’s square in his Hover.Gondola. I really don’t get why some people find his movie silly. lol

179. Daoud - February 12, 2012

The funny part about the end of CE3K, is the priest blessing them as they go off… is actually a real Catholic priest. That segment was filmed in an old air force hangar near Mobile, Alabama… for reasons I completely forget… but funny to see Father Dyer in it. They called the bishop in Mobile to see if they could get some authentic prayers… and the bishop sent over Dyer who was more than glad to improvise. Always a cool moment to watch that.

180. Vultan - February 12, 2012

#178

I’ve heard there are some fans who think Richard Dreyfuss’ character was transformed into an alien at the end, and that’s him smiling and doing the little hand gestures to Francois Truffaut.

Interesting… but stupid!

181. Buzz Cagney - February 12, 2012

#178 absolutely. I once had a work colleague who loved the books but detested the movies.
I also found them to be too detailed. Thats it exactly.

182. Vultan - February 12, 2012

#179

Did you know Spielberg also got the guy (can’t remember his name), the UFO investigator from Project Blue Book, for the crowd scene at the end? He’s the older gentleman in a blue suit (Ha!) with a pipe in his mouth. Kinda looks like Colonel Sanders.

183. Buzz Cagney - February 12, 2012

Can somebody please tell me what the hand gestures actually meant?
In 35 years i’m yet to find out!

Nah, i’m not buying into that theory, Vutls. It certainly is stoopid!

184. Buzz Cagney - February 12, 2012

J. Allen Hynek, Vults.

185. Vultan - February 12, 2012

#183

I’ve always assumed they were some sort of hand language translation of the tones used to communicate to the aliens. Other than that, I have no idea what they precisely mean. Maybe… “howdy.”

186. Vultan - February 12, 2012

#184

That’s the guy!
Thanks.

187. Buzz Cagney - February 12, 2012

#180 Thats funny. Did he teach the alien how to smile by any chance?

188. Vultan - February 12, 2012

Nice chatting with you, Buzz, RDR, Daoud.
I’m off for a walk.

Take care.

189. P Technobabble - February 12, 2012

182. Vultan

Don’t know if your question was answered but it was J Allen Hynek

190. P Technobabble - February 12, 2012

184 Buzz

You got to the ‘buzzer’ before me

191. Buzz Cagney - February 12, 2012

What do i win, P Techno? ;)

192. Anthony Thompson - February 12, 2012

28. Randomosity

“That alone makes this my most anticipated film (after the Avengers)”.

Are Steed and Mrs. Peel coming back? Wow!

193. Anthony Thompson - February 12, 2012

39. Ian B and 66. No Khan

Hey homeboys, the first film in this series featured a much younger cast than TOS when it started. Pine was in his early 20’s; Shatner in his early 30’s. Yeltsin was barely an adult (if that); Koenig was in his early 30’s. So take a frikkin’ chill pill and relax!

194. Battle-scarred Sciatica - February 12, 2012

Hey Vultan, Buzz et al.

have you ever read The Close Encouters of the Third Kind diary by Bob Balaban?

its a good read.

About the hand signals; It was first developed by Zoltan Kodaly – i think it was just about communication of music through hand signals just like Vultan said- a common ground betwixt humanity and alienanity…I think…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kod%C3%A1ly_Method#Hand_signs

who will ever know what the flipping the bird might have caused??

there would have been a reeeeaaally different ending, eh?

oh well back to work…

195. Mike C - February 12, 2012

154. Tom Cruise as Spock? Even a suit wouldn’t make that mistake.

Hoping for lots of Easter eggs in the new flick.

196. boborci - February 12, 2012

Quinto and Pine have been great at taking notes on their performances as they try to interpret the lines they are reading.

197. Vultan - February 12, 2012

#196

Hey Bob, ever considered making a movie about J. Allen Hynek?
Would make an interesting story.

198. Chance - February 12, 2012

You know what, I don’t care what Trek it is… as long as it’s Trek on the screen. I have been a fan since grade school (for me that’s DS9 and VOY, plus I remember reading Imzadi as a book report in 6th grade). I have loved everything Trek for as long and I can remember, I love TNG reruns, DS9, Voyager (I loved it, back off) and Enterprise. I think what killed Enterprise was the ungrateful fans, if we had excepted it as a show and not picked it apart like jackals then it may have survived. I can quote episodes, I know the trivia, and I’m a super fan… but I don’t spit on the new stuff or something I think doesn’t totally jive with the canon. Just give me Trek, let Braga handle it too (lol), I will love it no matter what. JJ, bring me Trek, I will love it.

And BTW I liked Insurection… and Nemisis…. suck it purists!

199. VulcanFilmCritic - February 12, 2012

@196 boborci. Hmmmm, “interpret the lines they are reading”?
Are they in rehearsals or are they actually shooting those lines right now, Mr. Orci?

200. MJ - February 12, 2012

@196 “Quinto and Pine have been great at taking notes on their performances as they try to interpret the lines they are reading.”

Bob, you make this sound like Citizen Kane or something? :-)

201. Hat Rick - February 12, 2012

“Star Trek: Bigger, Bolder, and Uncut” (apologies to South Park fans. And good taste.)

“Star Trek: After Four Years, FINALLY!”

“Star Trek: Come Up and See Me Sometime.”

Okay, I’m officially out of ideas.

202. P Technobabble - February 12, 2012

191. Buzz

You win a free abduction aboard the alien mothership.

203. Harry Ballz - February 12, 2012

200 MJ “Citizen Kane”

That’s it!! The next movie will be entitled Star Trek: Rosebud.

It’ll be about Kirk’s obsession in finding the sleigh he never had as a kid because history was changed!

Suh-weet!

204. VZX - February 12, 2012

I dig the cryptic comment.

205. Justin Flood - February 12, 2012

@boborci really looking forward to seeing the new trek film! I have very high hopes after trek 09 considering how fantastic it was. One thing though, is Ben Burtt doing the sound again? If so, can you guys PLEASE put back the old red alert sound. Thats pretty much the ONLY problem I had with the 09 film besides the engineering set.

206. Anthony Thompson - February 12, 2012

196. boborci

You mean they aren’t co-writing the script with you? LOL.

207. dmduncan - February 12, 2012

154. Red Dead Ryan – February 12, 2012

Tom Cruise as Spock? No way. But he’d be good as Wesley Crusher’s father, Dick Crusher.

208. Red Dead Ryan - February 12, 2012

Well, I just finished watching both “Goldeneye” and “Tomorrow Never Dies”. Great Bond flicks. Pierce Brosnan was great as 007. A shame that neither “The World Is Not Enough” and “Die Another Day” were as good.

“Tomorrow Never Dies” had an interesting premise with the mad media mogul who was like a combination of William Randolph Hearst, Ted Turner and Rupert Murdoch.

BTW, both Famke Jansen and Teri Hatcher, who played Bond girls in “Goldeneye” and “Tomorrow Never Dies” respectively, each appeared in an episode of “The Next Generation”.

209. NCM - February 12, 2012

119. VulcanFilmCritic – February 12, 2012

“@98 NCM, having lunch (or dinner together) does not mean one is “imposing” on the other. Zachary’s a big boy now and can take care of his acting roles himself. Still to have access to the best acting coach in the world regarding the portrayal of Spock is an opportunity not to be missed.”

I agree. You misconstrued my meaning. I was responding to inane speculations.

210. Red Dead Ryan - February 12, 2012

The Tom Cruise as Spock was a joke, in case some of you thought I was being serious. :-)

#207.

LOL! Not sure that Tom Cruise as Dick Crusher would sit well with Harry Ballz!

211. Red Dead Ryan - February 12, 2012

CORRECTION:

“The Tom Cruise as Spock IDEA was a joke…”

212. Harry Ballz - February 12, 2012

210. “Tom Cruise as Dick Crusher”

Oh, please……Tom Cruise doesn’t even deserve to be a red shirt, someone who gets killed off in the first 5 minutes.

That would mean us having to endure Cruise’s horrible acting efforts for 5 minutes too long!

213. Baroner - February 12, 2012

110 – Why would they lobby for Shatner to reprise the original JTK in some way??? With the magnitude of who Shatner is and the character he brought to life, not to mention the fact that he won’t be with us much longer, I can’t believe that’s a question. And, the fact that his Kirk “is dead” is really a non sequitir – not only are we in an alternate universe now, but even if we weren’t, there are many ways to work an older Kirk into a story (as the writers did for the last film, but it didn’t work out). The older fans would love, and deserve, to see Shat one last time as the Kirk with whom we grew up, especially since the last time we saw him was in the worst movie, and the worst movie scene, ever filmed (yes, I include STV and Insurrection!!!!). THIS IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

214. Red Dead Ryan - February 12, 2012

#212.

Maybe they can show his dead, half-decayed corpse lying on some desolate planet that is about to blow up?

215. Harry Ballz - February 12, 2012

#214.

Nah, even THAT would be giving the GMD too much credit!

p.s. try looking up why he’s called GMD.

216. Nano - February 12, 2012

Star Trek 2.0 – Mission Possible
Star Trek 2.0 – The Missing 4 years!
Star Trek 2.0 – TSA disaster
Star Trek 2.0 – Rise of Kirk (This might require a different rating)
Star Trek 2.0 – Bad Robot Incident

217. Keachick - rose pinenut - February 12, 2012

#196 – What? Is the script written in Esperanto or something? LOL

Sorry, but that is the first thing that came to mind when I read your post, for some reason. Anyway, carry on the good work, Bob.

218. Keachick - rose pinenut - February 12, 2012

What does GMD mean?

219. Harry Ballz - February 12, 2012

Keachick, here’s a clue……..the MD stands for Midget Dwarf.

Three guesses what the “G” stands for….

220. moauvian waoul - aka: seymour hiney - February 12, 2012

67 “Perhaps that is what I like about the McG movie Charlies Angels. The action scenes were so over-the-top and so much fun to watch, but you knew that nobody was presenting them as being anything akin to reality.

I really hope that the writing/production team for this Star Trek keep the brutality and violence to a minimum. I can’t believe that outer space is necessarily as violent as some believe or indeed wish it to be. Actually it is not exciting or awesome or whatever to be violently injured, anything but.”

Just a thought, but I would say that it is part of the problem, that violence is merely entertaining and not truly shocking. I am one of those who would like to see a more gritty movie and happen to think the last movie was very violent, with the destruction of Vulcan and the death of Spock’s mother, Olsen incenerated etc. Not showing the consequences of such events may sanitize and protect the audience from fully understanding the ramifications of bad decisions and thus, does us a disservice by cheapening the event and the loss Maybe, if we saw results and felt that loss and were more attached emotionally, we might think more before we leap, or pursued or supported questionable policies. Obviously I’m moving beyond Trek now.

221. N - February 12, 2012

Respectfully 213, I disagree. I see Shatner’s Kirk as massively overrated and cannot see why any of XII’s cast would “lobby for his return” especially considering they had one TOS actor already and have done time/universe hopping already.
The alternate universe needs to prove it can stand on its own, this has to be their movie.
Plus “old fans” by which I assume (I could be wrong) you mean TOS fans/purists, that is a small niche audience. Making a movie specifically for TOS fans would not make sense and probably not get funded. If they wouldn’t make a movie specifically for Star Trek fans in general, what hope do you have?

And just to add, Generations is my second favourite Trek movie, and only one of two I can say I love. The other, and favourite, being First Contact.

222. N - February 12, 2012

XI “very violent?” Your logic escapes me. And you see a lot of consequences from Spock’s mother’s death, Olsen was a dumb redshirt, who gets attached to 5 minute redshirts?

Personally, I found XI very timid.

223. MJ - February 12, 2012

Hey Gary Seven,

I guess you would have come away real happy if Quinto had instead said something like this:

“We are reducing the scope of this movie significantly, and we are going to be doing a much more timid movie.”

LOL

224. MJ - February 12, 2012

@220. You’ve got to be kidding me. McG is one of the worst directors of all time. Watch how This Means War flops quickly (when the word of mouth gets out) after perhaps an OK Week 1.

225. Harry Ballz - February 12, 2012

Timid doesn’t seem like the right word.

Maybe…..tentative, in exploring the limits of the new timeline.

They slapped us across the head with some things, holding themselves in check with other options.

Wise when you think about it.

226. Hat Rick - February 12, 2012

It occurs to me that we should hope for all the success in the world for Chris Pine, since that would mean that his star power for the Trek films would be all the more, um, powerful. (Okay, not very well put, but it’s late.)

So, let’s imagine that Pine becomes so amazingly popular that he makes Tom Cruise look like Gomer Pyle. That would totally rock for Trek.

Or would it?

Hmm….

Would he be priced out of Trek’s pay scale? I mean, think about it: William Shatner was a big star, yes, but not particularly so in the movies. He was more in the TV star category. (T. J. Hooker, etc.) So if Chris Pine hits it big on the silver screen — I mean, really big — could Paramount afford him for the Trek franchise?

I tend to think so. But only if Trek continues to do well. As to which I have high hopes.

What the heck. Let’s all wish the best for Pine and Quinto and the rest. It’s all good. :-)

227. moauvian waoul - aka: seymour hiney - February 12, 2012

222. The events were violent but the movie sanatized it. That was my point.

224. That was a quote from 67, not mine.

228. Jack - February 12, 2012

I don’t understand the right vs. wrong arguments for Shatner being in the movie. I get that some feel strongly about it and would like to see him as Kirk again, but, it’s not unjust, immoral or wrong that he’s not involved, it only feels that way.

229. Spock/Uhura Fan - February 12, 2012

@#226

Yes, let’s wish them all the best. As for Chris’ star power making the films more successful, well, that would depend on why people go to see the films. None of the actors (even the awesome Quinto) were the reason why I went to see the first movie. And seeing as I had never even heard of Pine before, I’m not so sure how much of a draw he alone was, which is good, imo. I think they didn’t want a ‘star’ that would ‘over-power’ the film with who they were. Even though people already likely knew or heard of Zach as Syler, his star wasn’t so big as to take away from the film and more importantly the role.

I don’t think he needs to take any notes. He does an awesome job as a very dedicated actor. Truly. They did a good job picking the cast, but I’m still warming up to the new Scotty, though…

230. Spock/Uhura Fan - February 12, 2012

@#228

Yeah, I agree. It just feels that way to some. I still wish him the best, though.

231. Buzz Cagney - February 12, 2012

#208 I’m with you, Brosnan was born to play Bond. A shame that the stories were not really worthy of him. Still, they were ok and more than watchable.
I just heard that Moonraker was one of the best earning Bond movies. Enough people must have enjoyed it back in the day. Perhaps its judged unfairly looking back.

232. Aurore - February 13, 2012

@ Mr. Orci :

T.R.E.K. : Citizen Khan Meets Xana-doom

233. Buzz Cagney - February 13, 2012

#202 oh thats already happened to me on more than one occassion. :D

234. Buzz Cagney - February 13, 2012

#197 trouble is, Vults, you just know he’d end up being a High School dropout who discovers some crazy alien artifact in his dad’s garage. He learns that aliens are about to make contact and, just in case they are a bit beligerant, talks the President into launching a pre-emptive strike on the Mother Ship just as its at its most vulnerable, doing that 180 degree flip.
This obviously pisses the aliens off who set about taking over the world using music as a weapon. Simon Cowell is created from an amalgam of parts that the aliens have left over from their grizzly experiments. He is sent down to Earth to remove all sense of good musical taste. It all gets very unpleasant then as the masses succumb to his will and, before long, with the streets totally clear on a Saturday night the greys just walk in and take over. Thats obviously just a brief synopsis. It will be far more complicated than that. ;)

hahaha love the line in Moonraker ‘whats Bond doing?’….’I think he’s attempting re-entry, sir’. LOL

235. Aurore - February 13, 2012

“And seeing as I had never even heard of Pine before, I’m not so sure how much of a draw he alone was, which is good, imo. ”
__________

Yes. I agree.

Ben Cross, Clifton Collins Jr., Winona Ryder, Eric Bana and Bruce Greenwood, were the ( “only ” ) actors I was personally familiar with, when I watched Star Trek ( 2009 ).

236. Manny Cotto - February 13, 2012

Hopefully this time they’ll give more tribute to the Star Trek Series and faithful instead of basically crapping on all things Trek.

237. Aurore - February 13, 2012

……The draw, for me, was the possibility to see Spock and Kirk, etc, again.

Since I very much liked what I saw (on DVD ), I want more, and, have high expectations for the sequel.

238. Buzz Cagney - February 13, 2012

#194 I haven’t read that. I will look out for it.

239. Spock/Uhura Fan - February 13, 2012

@#235 & #237

The actors I was familiar with were Zachary Quinto, Zoe Saldana, Wynona Rider, Leonard Nimoy ;-), and although I had heard of Harold & Kumar, I never saw it, so I’m not sure that Derek Cho counts.

Ah, maybe this sounds bad, but who did Ben Cross and Clifton Collins Jr play? It’s a real question. I’m not pulling your leg.

How did you come about seeing it on DVD first? The draw for me was seeing if they did something new with a more updated group that maybe I could like the way my mom likes the TOS group and as much as I like DS9. So far, I’m happy…

240. Aurore - February 13, 2012

@239.

Ben Cross was Sarek , and, Clifton Collins Jr. was Ayel.

I was not aware of the fact that there was a Star Trek in the works, before it was released; since I never had any interest in any of the spin-offs, Star Trek had ended with The Undiscovered Country, for me.

Hence my seeing the “prequel” , for the first time, in November 2009.

241. Hat Rick - February 13, 2012

229, interesting comments — thank you. :-)

Speaking of Trek actors: Just an aside. I am a believer in notable coincidences. As I was surfing the Web, I was thinking about movies that John Cho has been in. Literally ten seconds later, after I entered the address of a non-entertainment Website that had nothing to do with Trek or movies, I saw a banner advertising the latest Harold and Kumar movie — starring John Cho, whose image was prominently displayed at the very top of the page.

If I were a believer in precognition, I would say that I had “seen” ten seconds into the future.

If I were a believer, that is.

242. Hat Rick - February 13, 2012

^^ Also, I just realized this second that John Cho was in a series about precognition.

Cosmic!

243. Aurore - February 13, 2012

…In fact, for a long time I did not even know that there had been other Star Trek series, aside from The Next Generation.

244. Aurore - February 13, 2012

243. was meant for 239. Spock/uhura Fan.

245. Aurore - February 13, 2012

Sorry.

Spock/Uhura Fan.

:)

246. John - February 13, 2012

I’ll just leave this here.
http://i.imgur.com/Dafr1.jpg

247. Buzz Cagney - February 13, 2012

I nearly tripped over that John, i’ll move it somewhere safer for you.

http://i.imgur.com/Dafr1.jpg

248. Battle-scarred Sciatica - February 13, 2012

@238 Buzz

Not sure, but you probably already use this site for books.

An absolute must!

For your pleasure: http://www.bookdepository.co.uk/Close-Encounters-Third-Kind-Diary-Bob-Balaban/9781840234305

@247 John

Great shot! It’s almost “Fresh Hell” way before there was Fresh Hell.
Damn that Space/time continuum!

249. pierre - February 13, 2012

hello i am from france!

please, my english is a little bit carzy, so please be nice when i do my mistake.

i am pleasured that in last star trek film, they use uniform from 1960 star trek tv show.

if they use same uniform in next star trek film, i would like to see crew wear hat with ‘star trek’ written on front front of hat.

250. Battle-scarred Sciatica - February 13, 2012

My 248 post was @ 246 John and not 247.

Sorry about that. It’s 03.36 here in NZ and I should be asleep.

Ah, the joys of teething kids! *yawn*

251. rogue_alice - February 13, 2012

“Well, it’s bigger and bolder.”

Ah, I have figured out the plot now. But, I won’t share what I know.

252. Jack - February 13, 2012

243.” …In fact, for a long time I did not even know that there had been other Star Trek series, aside from The Next Generation.”

You were lucky. ;)

253. Buzz Cagney - February 13, 2012

#249 Vous voulez qu’ils portent des chapeaux qui disent Star Trek sur le front, Pierre? Ne pensez-vous qui semblent C’est un peu étrange, Pierre?

And yes, I used my Universal Translator for that. You don’t think I actually listened in French at school, do you? :)

254. Buzz Cagney - February 13, 2012

#246 thanks for that, BSS. I will look into getting the book sometime soon.

255. Bob Tompkins - February 13, 2012

As regards a new Trek series [latest poll] It really doesn’t matter much if it is ion the Prime or the New Movie-verse. The new bootiverse was already healing the timeline, so with the exception of abundant Vulcans, by the 24th Century, Picard, Data, Riker, Janeway, Sisco and the gang should be having many of the same adventures they had in the Prime Universe. Set a new series in that era or later and drop clues throughout as to which ‘verse the new series is in without really telling.
That might be fun.

256. VZX - February 13, 2012

Speculation: Maybe ZQ’s comment has something to do with the new movie’s title. The word “bold” is probably in there, somewhere.

I just hope it’s not Star Trek: Boldly Go.

Or To Boldy Go.

Boldy Went?

Star Trek: Split Infinitive

257. Buzz Cagney - February 13, 2012

To Split Infinitive and Beyond!

258. Jack - February 13, 2012

110. Hey, good question about TWOK. For me, it’s pretty much all about Shatner, the score, and the atmosphere. It’s probably Shatner’s best performance as Kirk, it’s one of my favourite versions (out of many over the years) of Spock, the Saavik stuff is fun, the battle scenes seemed fresh (this was before decades of random sparks and unlikely steam spewing from consoles, constantly) for Trek, had that sub battle feel and had real tension, and there are plenty of good lines. The death of Spock was a nice scene, but it’s really lost power, especially if you go into it now knowing perfectly well that Spock will live on. And, at the time, TWOK injected Trek with a jaunty naval spirit and verscimitude (sort of), and really made it into something new. It captured the inner conflicts that really underpinned the series, going back to Pine’s talk with the doctor in the Cage, but it also made the 23rd century feel plausible in a way Trek, to me, hadn’t before.

And, fan love could also be because it revived the franchise after TMP. I have to say, I kind of like that we’re all waiting for and anticipating Trek right now because it reminds me of back then — all there was was reruns of the original 79 episodes and TMP, so there was real excitement when something new came out. By the ’90s, the movies came out while there were two other weekly Trek series in production, not to mention endless reruns of all the previous stuff (and, we could assume then that the Trek universe wouldn’t change too much in the movies because of the other series).

I always thought the weakest parts, of TWOK, relatively, were any scenes that Kirk wasn’t in, especially the Ceti Alpha stuff. It’s still good stuff, but I always found myself fast forwarding through it. i watched it again recently for the first time in a few years, and I find most of it holds up pretty well. Khan’s henchmen look a bit silly (the hairdos, mostly — and why are thy suddenly all blonde, and young, when they were a bunch of different races, apparently, in
TOS? Was the idea that Khan’s creators were going for the whole Aryan thing?). The apartment scene is a little corny (but still classic).

it’s tough to look at in objectively now because it really was a favourite when I was a kid. Would I still love Star Wars now if I’d never scene it when I was a kid? I think it is more than just nostalgia though — I’ve been rewatching some shows I loved, like Battlestar Galactica and Buck Rogers, and they don’t hold up well at all (and, I knew that they were cheesy, even back then). But the best of TOS, and TWOK were adult stories that happened to be in space.

What’s your take on it?

259. Jack - February 13, 2012

Er, verisimilitude.

260. Xai , “Star Trek : The Pursuit of the Wasscally Wabbit” - February 13, 2012

A Title…. Please?

Will it even contain the words “Star Trek”?

I rather like “To Boldly Go” or Star Trek: Strange New Worlds.

261. Battle-scarred Sciatica - February 13, 2012

Verisimitude!?!

Now there is a word that is not used nearly enough.

I think I shall pop that into a sentence today.

262. Desstruxion - February 13, 2012

I’d like to see a shiny, gold robot with a British accent in this one. Oh, and give him a little dome topped, robot, side kick. That would be cool.

263. MONGO - February 13, 2012

Mongo not read all posts. Mongo busy.

When Mongo see Quinto mans say movie “bigger and bolder” Mongo think of BBQ sauce.

Title for New Movie:

“Star Trek: Great With Pulled Pork”

264. Harry Ballz - February 13, 2012

263 “Pulled Pork”

If someone is getting his sausage yanked, wouldn’t that lead to an “R” rating for the movie?

265. MONGO - February 13, 2012

Mongo say hi to Harry mans!

Harry mans have dirty mind. Mongo talking about pork meat you stick between buns. Good if drizzle sauce all over.

Funny Harry mans always haves mind in gutter.

266. N - February 13, 2012

@258 Thanks, Jack.

My take on TWoK? A little stretched out to be honest, but the TOS films all seem to have this sluggish feel to me. TWoK is certainly not the worst of those.
I can see how it would seem revitalising after TMP though, which was a mess, although it does have some nice subtle Borg references in it. Then again, TMP was before TNG wasn’t it so that’s sort of a moot point.
I can see how it would have more impact if you thought Spock’s death was permanent.
I guess the only for it to have the impact it would have had in its time, would be if you saw it in its time.

I could say the same for XI it was at its best seeing it for the first time in the cinema and just looses substance the more you watch it. Starting to doubt whether to bother with XII but I’ll wait until there’s a trailer before deciding.

267. Gary Seven - February 13, 2012

MJ, #223 wrote:
“Hey Gary Seven,
I guess you would have come away real happy if Quinto had instead said something like this:
“We are reducing the scope of this movie significantly, and we are going to be doing a much more timid movie.”
LOL”

I believe you are engaging in the “Straw Man” Fallacy, which is all too common on this site, and the internet in general. I am not going engage past this post, because I don’t expect to convince you. I will just say that I think that a movie that has not only action, but also in-depth characters, rich dialogue, and powerful thought-provoking concepts, is NOT more “timid” than a typical non-stop Hollywood action movie.
But for others who may also find that people argue with them in this way, at least you will know the name of the fallacy behind their argument. It’s called the “Straw Man” argument:
Reasoning:
The straw man fallacy occurs in the following pattern of argument:
Person A has position X.
Person B disregards certain key points of X and instead presents the superficially similar position Y. Thus, Y is a resulting distorted version of X and can be set up in several ways, including:
Presenting a misrepresentation of the opponent’s position.
Inventing a fictitious persona with actions or beliefs which are then criticized, implying that the person represents a group of whom the speaker is critical.
Oversimplifying an opponent’s argument, then attacking this oversimplified version.
Person B attacks position Y, concluding that X is false/incorrect/flawed.
This sort of “reasoning” is fallacious, because attacking a distorted version of a position fails to constitute an attack on the actual position.

268. Spock/Uhura Fan - February 13, 2012

@#240, 243, 244, 245. Aurore

Oh Sarek was wonderful. The actor (Mr. Cross) did a fine job. Ayel sounds Vulcan, so my guess is that’s the guy that insulted Spock’s human heritage/mom since that’s the only other featured Vulcan in the film. Correct?

I didn’t know about TNG until its last like 3 seasons. I got into DS9 years later. I also sampled some Voyager and Enterprise, but Enterprise is the show I’ve seen the least of.

@#241

Thank you as well. :-)

Good luck to Derek and the rest of them making another one. Well, I can’t see into the future, but since your mojo is working, try to sense what the new movie will be called 10 seconds before it’s announced. I think it should be something simple.

@242

Heh! :-)

269. Craiger - February 13, 2012

Just curious what anyone think the sequel could flop, even though I am anxious to find out what its about, would Paramount then put Trek to rest for a long time or for good on film and on TV?

270. Spock/Uhura Fan - February 13, 2012

@#267

Very true about the straw man thing. It’s best to just move on I’ve learned…

271. Buzz Cagney - February 13, 2012

#267 Nice.

Very nice!

Sorry, i could accept someone else playing Kirk. Just. I could accept someone else playing Spock. More or less. But there is only one Sarek. Mark Lenard is that man. Ben did his best, but no cigar i’m afraid.

272. Spock/Uhura Fan - February 13, 2012

@#269

I don’t know if it will flop or not, but if it did, and they didn’t want to do anymore movies, then my guess is that the tv series by Singer and co. might get moved up.

273. Spock/Uhura Fan - February 13, 2012

@#271

Well, I don’t know. If I ever saw Sarek in an episode, then it was so long ago that I have forgotten him, so I didn’t have a comparison. Still, I think that Mr. Cross did a fine job. We all have our opinions…

274. Craiger - February 13, 2012

#272 – Wouldn’t that show their was no interest in Trek anymore in Trek, if the sequel flopped, then wouldn’t CBS then see people were starting to loose interest in Trek overall?

275. MC1 Doug - February 13, 2012

#1:Snugglepuff, chill!

Anthony cannot post what Paramount has not made available.

Remember, it is JUST a movie.

276. Spock/Uhura Fan - February 13, 2012

Well, Craiger, I can’t really say. They might have a go at a third movie, especially if DVD sales end up being goog (that happens to movies sometimes) if they think things can be turned around, or they could decide that a half-season order of a tv show to test the waters is a less expensive risk to doing another $200 million movie.

277. Buzz Cagney - February 13, 2012

#273 yes, and my opinion is based on having actually watched both Mark and Ben and coming to the conclusion that Mark is the one and only real deal. I didn’t hate Ben but i did miss Mark. And i can’t say the same about any of the rest of the new cast, who i accepted easily.

278. Spock/Uhura Fan - February 13, 2012

And then there’s the whole, you know, one is Paramount and one is CBS but they might tie-into each other or probably do in some ways… I haven’t really bothered to see how that works out.

279. Spock/Uhura Fan - February 13, 2012

For me it was Scotty. Nothing against Simon Pegg. He couldn’t have given the role more. Like I said, we all have our opinions…

Thanks.

280. Aurore - February 13, 2012

268.

Ayel was the Romulan miner who served as second-in-command to Nero.

( Ayel sighting at 0 :47 )

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-6mnJ4YzH4

281. Spock/Uhura Fan - February 13, 2012

Oh, #279 was directed at #277.

282. Jack - February 13, 2012

266. N. I agree with you about the last one. I liked it a lot, saw it three or four times in the theater, and a few times through on DVD/iTunes but find the same thing now, that there’s not all that much to it. That said, that’s still a lot more times than I’ve watched most movies. But yeah. I see it now as more of a connection of parts and not a story that grips me all the way through (anymore), and no insult meant to JJ etc. But I find myself now, when I try to watch it, just jumping to a few cool sections (maybe Kelvin, maybe the KM, def. the first E bridge scenes and then the last 20 minutes or so). Not sure why. I’ve always loved any Enterprise bridge scenes though — I used to hit pause on grainy videotapes to try to make out all the bridge graphics/displays in the TOS movies.

Yeah, agreed about the pacing. TWOK takes an amazingly long time to get going, but I kind of like that about it. The setup really pays off. But, yeah, the Reliant stuff drags. Actually, it amazes me that Trek 09 is apparently 10 minutes longer than TWOK (just checked online, and that’s including the 3 minutes added to it after it ran in theatres) — because Trek 09 felt like a much, much shorter movie. And still I was left wanting way more.

271. Alas, Cross didn’t seem very Sareky to me either, but they were big ears to fill. Lenard even had that quiet, wise, slightly amused elegance in a terrible episode of Buck Rogers, where he played a former flame of Wilma’s whose shocking secret was that his head could detach from his body. Cross did a decent job, and was believable as Quinto’s dad, but, yeah, he was a different sort of Sarek altogether. I was trying to think of who might have gotten that Lenard vibe…

268. Sorry, you weren’t asking me… but… Ayel’s Nero’s sidekick, the Romulan guy who does all the talking when Capt. Robau is on board. He’s also the “you humans are so weak…” fellow who loses a game of I Got Your Gun to Kirk.

283. Buzz Cagney - February 13, 2012

Sorry to labour the point but your Sarek opinion is flawed. You have no frame of reference. Go and watch some Mark Lenard. Journey to Babel and The Search for Spock will do it.
I’m convinced you will see more in the character than Cross was able to show.

284. Spock/Uhura Fan - February 13, 2012

Oops, my bad, Aurore. Well, in my defense, Ayel sounding Vulcan is highly plausible seeing as Romulans and Vulcans share a common ancestry and…

:-)

Thanks.

285. Jack - February 13, 2012

8. “Yeah, we remember the actors collaboration on the TNG movies: Data has emotions for more acting range, Laforge lost his visor so he could have better closeups, Riker’s role in the enterprise got smaller so Frakes could direct, Diana Troy goes completely out of character to be ‘herself’ (and drives the ship?!), and Picard becomes some sort of Bruce Willis in space. Not even Star Trek V got this bad.

The TNG movies almost ended trek for life because the actors played the producers/directors/writers roles, and they all seem to forget that not everyone is Nimoy, someone that knows heartily what Star Trek is all about… Nimoy was the exception, not the rule, just remember Shatner’s direction. This is bad news, folks”

Hopefully this isn’t quite so ‘indulge the cast.’ Maybe they really are working on small bits of business or fine tuning dialogue to make the script work as intended. And maybe, if they really are, alas, lobbying for action etc., well, maybe the cast is a little cooler than the TNG actors — so we’ll get Spock doing avant-garde dairy videos instead of Data singing Irving Berlin.

“Why doesn’t Jean-Luc Picard mambo more?” is not a thought I ever remember having.

But, yeah, when ever I hear things like “My character will finally get in on the action!” I worry.

286. Spock/Uhura Fan - February 13, 2012

@ Jack

Understandable. Your opinion is based off of you TOS experiences. These are experiences that I do not need to have to enjoy ST09 or all of its characters. I do get that TOS is the basis for these characters, but I also get that because this is an alternate timeline, these characters are going to be somewhat different from the originals.

Based off of your experiences and preferences, Sarek did not work or work ad well for you. Same goes for Scotty with me. But, if somebody that’s never seen TOS Scotty before comes along and says that they love ST09 Scotty, well then, okay, whatever… I’m not sweating it. I’m not saying that you are; I’m just saying that’s me. Good enough?

@# 283

Alright, well Buzz, I think I’m going to side-step this one, but thank you for your reply…

287. boborci - February 13, 2012

red dead ryan

love “You Only Live Long and Prosper Twice” Hilarious

288. mojomonkey - February 13, 2012

We’re doing titles?

“Also Star Trek”

Think about it, it’ll grow on ya….

289. Harry Ballz - February 13, 2012

265. MONGO “Harry mans have dirty mind”

“Mongo talking about pork meat you stick between buns. Good if drizzle sauce all over”

I still think we’re talking about the same thing. How is it different? :>)

290. Jack - February 13, 2012

Hey. I was just responding to 271. Agreeing with his take, for myself, but your opinion is totally valid. I didn’t mean to counter you or your opinion at all — that didn’t even cross my mind. I didn’t realize that some were arguing that you were wrong. Nonsense, you like who you like.

I actually like Pegg’s Scotty. Maybe better than TOS Scotty. Certainly better than the late TOS-movie era Scotty. And I prefer the new Chekov, absolutely, and maybe the new Sulu. The jury’s still out on Spock and Uhura — for now when I think of those characters I still think of the originals (whenever I saw Uhura on screen in Trek 09 I was like, hey, look it’s Zoe Saldana). But, I can pretty easily picture Pine in any TOS Kirk situation. When I think of Captain Kirk these days, Pine probably pops to mind as often as, or even more often than, Shatner does (but, say “Admiral Kirk,” and I’ll get Shatner right away).

Lenard’s Sarek was a different character altogether from Cross’s. And the relationship was quite different. And that’s fine. To me, Cross looked a little stunned in a few scenes, even before Amanda died. But that’s just my opinion.

291. Red Dead Ryan - February 13, 2012

Buzz:

It’s interesting that in retrospect, “Moonraker” went in a pretty bold direction—-to outer space. Today’s Bond is expected to be more gritty like Jason Bourne, and the movies to be more realistic, as opposed to fantastic. So therefore, no more trips into space for our favorite spy, and no more volcano lairs for the villains. Which is kind of a shame, since Bond was meant to be a little over-the-top.

As for Mark Lenard, I agree with you. Ben Cross was fine, but no where near the original. Mark Lenard brought more gravitas and nuances which made the character of Sarek so interesting.

I also enjoyed his performance as the Romulan Commander. I thought that character was kind of a mirror for Captain Kirk. Mark Lenard played him brilliantly, giving him some of the same qualities found in Kirk, i.e, the the concern for his crew, the reluctance to go to war, and the overall personality. He was the Romulan version of Kirk.

292. Red Dead Ryan - February 13, 2012

#287.

Thanks, Bob!

293. Anthony Pascale - February 13, 2012

You Only Live Long and Prosper Twice is funny, but it brings up my longstanding view that the Bond franchise shows you dont need the franchise name in the title.

I still prefer title ideas without “Star Trek”

Or even crazier…take the Peter Gabriel approach and have JJ name all his movies just “Star Trek”

294. Red Dead Ryan - February 13, 2012

“Today Is A Good Day To Live And Let Die”

295. not_all_good_things - February 13, 2012

285. There are always arguments for and against. To me, there are times where actors make changes that aren’t necessary, and then there are changes made by writers, attempting deus ex machina on previous examples. Geordie’s visor is one good element to pick on here; lets look at the options:
Modern military organisations hold a court martial every time a significant loss occurs (such as the destruction of a ship). it is not impossible that during such an investigation it came to light that Geordie’s visor was used as a means of spying on the Enterprise and determining her ‘Shield Modulations’. Whether as an order from SFC that Geordie replace his visor with implants or Geordie chose to have them due to his own doubts and/or concerns is a moot point in this scenario, it happened.
From an acting stand-point, the contact lenses pose two benefits, firstly that they restrict the actors vision less (have you ever tried looking through a prop of his visor all day? Secondly, they do not hamper the actor’s facial expressions, you can see each and every one. It is a known fact that being able to see a persons eyes is an integral and necessary part of body language when trying to convey a message; taking off a pair of sunglasses when a person answers their door is an ancient trick of the sales industry, promoting connection and communication between the sales agent and the potential customer. Seeing a persons eyes is just as crucial in acting as it is in sales.

I could go on at even greater length, but you don’t want to read it. suffice to say, that just because an actor requests a change to a script or story, it doesn’t make it an ego trip and we should wait for the finished article before judging intent.

This isn’t to say I agree with all of the changes made to scripts by the actors involved, just that I have the decency to postpone judgement and to consider the full range of possible reasons before settling on a judgement. We cannot appreciate the consequences of script changes or deem them unnecessary voyages into an actors arrogance before we view the film.

Please, have a little patience.

296. Vultan - February 13, 2012

#293

Name ‘em all Star Trek …and leave it up to the fans to name them?
Hey, I kinda like that idea.

297. Red Dead Ryan - February 13, 2012

“Where No Man With The Golden Gun Has Gone Before”

298. Red Dead Ryan - February 13, 2012

“Quantum Mechanics Of Solace”

299. Spock/Uhura Fan - February 13, 2012

Well, thank you, Jack. That is why I responded to you. You don’t seem to mind differences of opinion or differences of experiences. That’s nice.

Getting back to Sarek and him looking stunned before Amanda died. To me, that made sense. I mean, let’s look at when we saw him before she died. I think the first time we saw him was when his son had just gotten in trouble for having an emotional outburst and fighting. Then on top of that was the way it would be seen by everyone else that Sarek would likely have to deal with in some way: That’s how those ‘human’ children are… Little Spock probably had to deal with it too as he had just (finally) given his harrassers/bullies what they wanted… Perhaps Sarek was also a bit disappointed that his son finally gave in, but probably also proud that it was for his son’s mother’s sake…

The next time was when his son basically told the Vulcan Science Academy that they could stick it where the sun don’t shine… I would not be surprised if no one had ever done that before. Then, I think the next time is when the mom dies, so, it all worked for me…

I’m happy that you enjoyed Scotty, but he wasn’t my cup of tea in the film…. I loved Zachary’s Spock. I think he was perfect, and very nicely updated. :-) :-) :-). I thinl that Zoe’s Uhura was fine for yhe first film. She left room for the character to grow. There’s a certain grace that Uhura always had. I think the perfect word might be poise. Still, I like the sass that Zoe’s Uhura has and I hope she doesn’t lose it. I would like it if she measured them out, and, over time or in this next film, lets the grace and poise factor slightly outweigh the sassy assertiveness. They set her up pretty well to have something significant to do, so I hope she gets to do it.

I, too, love the new Chekov. :-) He was very delightful, and I really like Sulu too. Loved his scenes with Kirk and his intro with Pike.

When I hear ‘Kirk,’ I still think of the tv version that Shatner played, but I am glsd that Pine gets to make the character his own.

300. Keachick - rose pinenut - February 13, 2012

#224 – Oh boy! here we go – another McG basher. This reminds me of a conversation in the movie Unstoppable between Frank (Denzel Washington) and Will (Chris Pine) – paraphrasing

Will – “Look…this shit about having the new guy prove it…it’s getting real tired, real fast…”
Frank – “Well, that’s what comes from working in a retirement home.”

Sorry, as soon as I read your comment, those were the lines I immediately thought of and it is getting real tired, man, real tired…I have read so much McG bashing over the last few months, a lot of it coming from posters who cannot put a sentence together, who can’t spell, who *beep* every second word they type, …and I supposed these comments seriously.

I am going to see the film today – 1.45pm showing at Albany Events Cinema, North Shore, Auckland. It is 12.12pm, so I had better go waddle my butt.

Let you guys know later what I thought of it – try not to give any spoilers…

*IMDb filters replace foul language like the “f” word with *beep*, just as you see it written here.

Re – violence and grittiness – the problem is that whether it is shown with the consequences which can be both horrifying and very sad or whether what violence is portrayed is somehow sanitized, I’m not sure there is any message to be told now. Audiences have been shown so much that they have become *immune* and some seem to crave to see even more – they want scenes to be even more brutal, “gritty”, “real”, “dark”. I fear that continuing to show brutality and violence in movies just feeds many people’s craving to see blood spilled – ie bloodlust.

301. Harry Ballz - February 13, 2012

Simply call every film Star Trek?

If so, it’ll come to be known as…………

Star Trek: Live Long In Guessing Which One This Is

302. Vultan - February 13, 2012

#300

McG isn’t the worst director, but he’s widely seen as being on the low end of directors these days. When seeing one of his flicks, go in with low expectations—very low—and you may be pleasantly surprised with the results. That’s what I did with his Terminator movie. Sure, it’s a bad movie, but I was at least mildly entertained by it.

Hopefully Pine and Hardy will choose more wisely as their stars rise. McG just isn’t a quality director. He’s a Michael Bay clone.

303. Baroner - February 13, 2012

221 – I see you as being way off here. Including Shatner in the movie does not take it away from being the new cast’s movie, just as including Nimoy did not do so. They will “stand on their own” just fine, for (hopefully) many movies to come. I am assuming a bit here, in that Shatner will do a limited role – I’m not arguing for more. I see some inclusion as very important. He is an icon, and he (and we) deserve one last homage. Also, Shatner is very popular to a whole new audience now. This is not only for “old guy” TOS fans, it for all ST fans.

As for Shatner’s kirk being “massively overrated,” I can’t imagine where you’re coming from. Shatner and Nimoy are the basis for the entirety of Star Trek! His “Kirk” is THE KIRK, not some minor character. If you love TNG and can take or leave TOS, then you are not a fan of the entirety of Star Trek, as I and most others are, I’d say. I’m not knocking your preference but I really can’t believe that you’d say that the original Kirk is “massively overrated.” What else is massively overrated to you? The Consitution Class Enterprise? Type II Phasers?

I’d like to ask the peanut gallery: how many people count Generations as one of their top 2 favorite ST movies?? That’s such a foreign concept to me. Kirk’s death in that movie is the single greatest disaster in ST television and movie history as far as I’m concerned, and I really don’t think I’m in the minority here. To say it ranks above STII, III, IV or VI is just nuts to me. First Contact was great. But I’d even put Nemesis ahead of Generations. Way ahead.

Finally, I’m not in any way saying that the next movie should just be for “TOS fans,” nor is some inclusion of Shatner somehow going to transform it into a “TOS fan” movie. How can you not see that from my arguments?

304. Hat Rick - February 13, 2012

“The Man With the Golden Phaser”

“Latinumball”

“Delta Vegaraker”

“Dilithium is Forever”

I got a million of ‘em!

:-)

305. Tom - February 13, 2012

#303 Baroner

I am with you on this issue. I honestly have trouble watching the closing of the great movie that is Star Trek 2009. I can’t help but think how much better an ending it would have been with the Shatner scene included. I wish they would do something and totally agree that it wouldnt hurt the new cast at all. I think Bob Orci did a tremendous job creating a role that obviously could not be large but was meaningful and applicable to the Star Trek journey that the new cast had embarked on. If you are reading Bob,, Kudos but don’t give up! Give us some hope that this could happen!!

306. VZX - February 13, 2012

Tony:
I think not having the franchise title in the movie title would work with Batman (Dark Knight), Superman (Man of Steel) and all the Bond movies, but I’m not sure about Star Trek. I just thinking of how Star Trek: Enterprise first started without “Star Trek” in the title, and they added it back in.

OK, how about a two word title, to mirror “Star Trek”…..

“Federation End”?

“Nova Burst”?

“Boldface Font”?

Things that make you go hmmmm.

307. crazydaystrom - February 13, 2012

#304 Hat rick-

A few more:

From Kronos with Love

For Your Visor Only

On the Head of Star Fleet’s Secret Service

The Alpha Quadrant is NOT Enough

Octo-Risan

The Quantum Slip-Stream Drive of Solace

The Living Lens Flares

And of course,

Moonraker

308. Craiger - February 13, 2012

Star Trek: To Bodly Go

Star Trek: Where No One Has Gone Before

309. MONGO - February 13, 2012

#289 Harry mans

Harry get jokes.

“Star Trek: You want Fries With That?”
“Star Trek: Low and Slow Makes the Meat Fall Off the Bone”
“Star Trek: Gas v. Charcoal”
“Star Trek: These Damn Fries Fell Through the Grill”
“Star Trek: Just How Do You Suppose You BBQ Fries Anyway?”
“Star Trek: Tastes Like Chicken”
“Star Trek: Mongo Hungry Now”
Star Trek: Mongo get Dinner”

310. dmduncan - February 13, 2012

I vote Star Trek in a smaller font above or below the main title.

311. dmduncan - February 13, 2012

Spoctopussy.

312. Vultan - February 13, 2012

#310

You mean something like this:

http://www.swseller.com/images/ar/rockesbbuckle.jpg

313. Hat Rick - February 13, 2012

307, LOL!

It would be so awesome if Trek had a Bond crossover. Two of my favorite franchises — combined!

You know, it’s not so farfetched, since Chris Pine plays a secret agent in “This Means War.”

Can you imagine a comedic action picture starring Pine and Daniel Craig, where Pine is trying to save the Federation while competing with Bond?

Don’t laugh — Star Trek IV, the funniest Star Trek movie, was one of the highest-grossing Trek movies ever!

Okay, I give. Do laugh. That’s the whole point.

:-)

314. Spock/Uhura Fan - February 13, 2012

@#307

“The Alpha Quadrant is NOT Enough”

Oh, that’s good stuff. :-D

315. dmduncan - February 13, 2012

312. Vultan – February 13, 2012

Close enough. Just identify it as Star Trek and let the main title take the spotlight.

316. N - February 13, 2012

303 I’m sorry, I didn’t mean to touch a nerve there.

For your blood pressure’s sake let’s agree to disagree. You can’t see where my opinion and I can’t see where yours comes from.

I love TNG, DS9, VOY and ENT by the way :)

317. Azrael - February 13, 2012

My order of preference (all other opinions not included)

1. ST: First Contact
2. ST TWOK
3. ST2009
4. ST TUC
5. ST: Insurrection
6. ST: Generations
7. ST: Nemesis
8. ST TVH
9. ST TSFS
10. ST TFF
11. ST TMP

318. Spock/Uhura Fan - February 13, 2012

@#293. I thought about that too, just naming then Star Trek and letting yhe audience track them by year… I could go with that.

319. TrekkerChick - February 13, 2012

@304

Close, but no banana..

“Latinumfinger”

320. P Technobabble - February 13, 2012

How about “James Kirk and the Pink Flamingos of Gamma Hydra XII”

321. TrekkerChick - February 13, 2012

Of course, all that I REALLY care about is getting to watch the space sharks with frikking phasers on their heads.

322. Baroner - February 13, 2012

316 – cool. 305 – right on! We’re running tandem on this issue. More threads to come! 317 – I can respect that list. Good mix of TOS and TNG. But, of course, too much TNG on there! :)

311 – Spoctopussy is the funniest damn thing on this thread.

323. N - February 13, 2012

317 okay if we’re doing this:

1) First Contact
2) Generations
3) Insurrection
4) Nemesis
5) XI
6) TVH
7) TUC
8) TWoK
9) TSFS
10) TMP
11) TFF

324. Baroner - February 13, 2012

323 – we’re still cool, but COME ON!

325. Daoud - February 13, 2012

Why restrict to Bond films? So many other movies to parody with a title:

M 5 Alive! “Nice software, Nyota…”

Gone With The Warp “I don’t know nothin’ ’bout birthin’ no Keensers!”

Citizen Khan “Pass me Ensign Ro’s Budweiser!”

To Kill a Spockingbird “Damn, Cartwright, you were in trouble at an early age, too?”

PLOMEEK “I think I made a big mistake coming here.

326. N - February 13, 2012

324 Sorry dude, it’s a subjective medium, would it help you to know TUC was the only TOS film to come out after I was born, and even then I only beat it by 3 months

327. moauvian waoul - aka: seymour hiney - February 13, 2012

300. Mmmm, okay Kea. Though I’m not sure if I fully agree, you have a point.

328. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - February 13, 2012

@317 & @323 – I feel I must represent for the pro-TMP camp.

1. I – The Motion Picture
2. XI – ST2009
3. VIII – First Contact
4, 5 [tie]. VI – The Undiscovered Country & II – The Wrath of Khan
6. VII – Generations
7. IX – Insurrection
8. IV – The Voyage Home
9. X – Nemesis
10. III – The Search for Spock
11. V – The Final Frontier

329. moauvian waoul - aka: seymour hiney - February 13, 2012

267. Gar y Seven. Bam on the strawman fallacy, though with some here it’s more of a policy than a single argument And though it’s implied, I would add “dishonest” in defining it.

330. Azrael - February 13, 2012

@326. Huh, I was born about 2 years before TMP came out, first saw “The Tholian Web” on a Black and White TV, and so on. I was about 12 when Undiscovered Country came out.

331. Pierre - February 13, 2012

hello, I am from france!

my english is a little bit crazy so please be nice when i make my mistake!

yes, we know much about cast and who will be playing all the grand star wars character, but I wonder to myself, what actor will be chose to play darth vaders?

my feeling are, as usual, I like star wars very much and I have a very large excite about the new star wars film!

my favorite character actor in star wars is mr spocks

332. Buzz Cagney - February 14, 2012

#331

Some franchise cross-over going on there, monsieur. Just a smidge. A petite pois. A teeny bit of mangetout if you will.

333. Spock/Uhura Fan - February 14, 2012

Hello Pierre. I love Mr. Spock too. We call it Star Trek, though. Star Wars is a different franchise that just gets mentioned here a lot by some.

Welcome. :-)

334. Keachick - rose pinenut - February 14, 2012

#313 – Well, FDR (CP) did say he was a cruise ship captain while his “small friend” (TH) was a travel agent…

I would think being a cruise ship captain and travel agent could be quite lucrative careers to follow in Star Trek’s 23rd century.

335. Keachick - rose pinenut - February 14, 2012

I doubt that we will ever know what changes/input an actor may have had on a scene or piece of dialogue and what had been originally written by the scriptwriter. It is possible that we could hear lines that were written three years ago unchanged while others are yet to be said or written. Does it really matter, so long as the final product is good and worthy?

The actors may have a say in what they get to say and do, but at the end of the day, it is still the director and writers who get the last word. We would never have heard Karl Urban’s lovely line “All I got left are my bones” if JJ Abrams had said, “No”.

336. Buzz Cagney - February 14, 2012

#286 you don’t need to sidestep it. All i ask is that you watch Mark before naming Ben as a great Sarek! If you still are of that opinion then thats fine. You’ll be wrong of course, but thats your prerogative.

337. Aurore - February 14, 2012

Spock/Uhura Fan.

If I May ask…….What are you doing????????

You must go to great lenghts to insult ……..I mean… to respond in google French.
Being, both reasonable and welcoming is not an option!!!!

How come your post even made it to this thread? I wonder…

So unfair…..

:))

338. Buzz Cagney - February 14, 2012

Look back and you will find Pierre is a regular. His favourite post is to say in the next movie the cast should wear hats with Star Trek on the front. He’s posted that one more than a couple of times.
I can’t begin to see how that can be confused or muddled in translation.
No, Pierre isn’t for real. I duno what the hell he is, but he isn’t for real!

I actually asked him, in French, (#253) if he thought that whole hat thing wasn’t a bit strange but he didn’t respond. So i’ve given him my chance. If you want to now thats up to you. I wouldn’t waste my time if i was you.

339. Buzz Cagney - February 14, 2012

And i happily admitted that I used an online translator but at least I made the effort to get to an answer from him. But rather than seing the fact that I tried you’d rather think i was taking the piss. Well, up yours.

340. Aurore - February 14, 2012

“Well, up yours.”
_________

Aaaaah…..That’s more like IT !!!!

…..You see Spock/Uhura Fan, that is what I meant!

THAT is how you do it !

:))

341. VZX - February 14, 2012

Je ne pige rien a ca

342. Aurore - February 14, 2012

You not missing out, let me tellz ya that , VZX.*

*Trying googling mine post .

:)

PS: Hi, VZX !

343. Aurore - February 14, 2012

………Ahem……VZX, do not be mad at me, please.

But, you should have said….

Je ne pige rien à ça.

………..Are you still going to talk to me, now ? Or, have I gone too far, this time?

:))

344. moauvian waoul - aka: seymour hiney - February 14, 2012

Aurore, you’re making people angry in two languages? I’ve got to try that.

345. VZX - February 14, 2012

Salut Aurore.

346. Aurore - February 14, 2012

“…. you’re making people angry in two languages?”
_______

Si señor !

“I’ve got to try that.”

Are you sure?

Well….your turn will probably come, Meine Liebe; wait for the next thread where someone claiming to be from France, will post about Star Wars and hats !

It happened before.

:)

347. Aurore - February 14, 2012

Salut ( again ), VZX !

:)

348. Spock/Uhura Fan - February 14, 2012

@#337

Aurore, stop it. For a second I thought you had lost your mind. Lol. :-)

349. Spock/Uhura Fan - February 14, 2012

@#340

After being here for several months, Aurore, I’m well-versed in ‘how to do it.’

First, I should have attacked the person’s preference, either with nasty jokes or made condescending references to the ST09 version. Then, I should have done my purist duty and forced that person to watch ALL of TOS before they were allowed to have an opinion about the 2009 movie, much less, the characters within it.

I could just imagine myself strapping the person into a chair and forcing their eyes open while TOS plays nonstop, saying, “SEEEE!! SEEE!!! Now do you seeeeeee!!!!”

Ah, well actually I can’t imagine doing that. :-)

350. Aurore - February 14, 2012

“…stop it. ”
________

Absolutely.
Some people (me), really should know when to stop.

:)

351. Aurore - February 14, 2012

“I could just imagine myself strapping the person into a chair and forcing their eyes open while TOS plays nonstop, saying, ‘SEEEE!! SEEE!!! Now do you seeeeeee!!!! ‘ ”
Ah, well actually I can’t imagine doing that. :-)
_________

Hey, don’t say that, the person might end up enjoying it; someone practically did that to me so that I could enjoy a show called Babylon 5(which I LOVE).

I remember those moments fondly, now. I don’t want to talk about that in details, though…

:)

Falling in love with The Original Series was easy.

352. moauvian waoul - aka: seymour hiney - February 14, 2012

Hmm, taking notes.

353. Spock/Uhura Fan - February 14, 2012

@#351

Yeah, Bab5 was nice, and I didn’t have to be forced or obligated into watching it. I still like DS9 better, though. I aways feel a bit bad about saying that because of how things reportedly happened between Paramount and JMS.

Practically doing that to you and doing that to you are two different things. There are other ways to get someone to watch a show. And keep on eye on that friend because ‘friends don’t let friends practically kidnap someone, strap them into a chair, and make them watch a show that is semi-related to a movie they like’… Just sayin’. ;-)

354. Red Dead Ryan - February 14, 2012

I’d like to see some people lose limbs in the sequel. More Red Shirts gitting killed. Some fantastic phaser battles, on ground, aboard ship, or in space. I want an accurate depiction of pain being suffered. Usually when someone gets shot in the leg, they end up walking fine, when in fact, they should be limping, grimacing, and mostly yelling in pain!

355. La Reyne d'Epee - February 14, 2012

Name it…

Star Trek: The Search for a Title.

356. Daoud - February 14, 2012

More “classic” title options:

On the Warpfront “You dinnae understand. I coulda had warp. I coulda been a transporter guy. I coulda been a captain, instead of a bum, which is what I am, let’s face it. But what in my wee bairns are you?” (Scotty to Keenser.)

The Vulcanian “T’hy’la? Jim, if you want to call me that, smile.” (Spock to Kirk.)

Andorian Crackers “One morning, I nerve pinched a sehlat in my pajamas. How he got in my pajamas, I don’t know.” (Spock to Uhura, bedroom talk.)

The Lives of a Klingon Lancer “Well, gentlemen. We have ways to make men talk.” (Kor to Kirk and Spock on Organia.)

Sons of the Desert “Well, here’s another nice mess you’ve gotten me into!” (Sybok to Kirk and Spock on Nimbus. Sybok and Spock are the sons of Sarek.)

357. dmduncan - February 14, 2012

Okay everybody, relax and let me handle this. I understand what he’s trying to say and I know how to diffuse the situation.

331. Pierre – February 13, 2012

Hello Pierre! Welcome to our home of Star Wars website. Many congratulation and thank for speak our englishes. We here in the America not sure, but many believe darth vaders be played by Benedict Cumberbatch.

We hope you stay here many times and make fun things to say with us.

358. Tom - February 14, 2012

#322 Baroner

Look forward to more threads on THE issue

359. NCM - February 14, 2012

357. dmduncan – February 14, 2012

“Okay everybody, relax and let me handle this. I understand what he’s trying to say and I know how to diffuse the situation.”

You really shouldn’t encourage dweasel behavior, but (esp. given your last round of similar engagement) this post was really LOL funny–Thank You! Your message is great, too, even if ill advised:}

360. moauvian waoul - aka: seymour hiney - February 14, 2012

dmduncan. Suave! Goddamn you’re suave!

361. NCM - February 14, 2012

dmduncan, I had to read your post again. It’s even better read out loud, and I laughed so hard I had to blow my nose and wash my face:)

362. Daoud - February 14, 2012

Just encourage Señor Pedro to enjoy this quote from another special Star Trek sequel titled,

Die KolvardYippi-ki-yay, motherspocker!” (Kirk blasting him into eternity with his phaser.)

363. dmduncan - February 14, 2012

360, 361: Thanks!

364. Jack - February 15, 2012

335 ” We would never have heard Karl Urban’s lovely line “All I got left are my bones” if JJ Abrams had said, “No”.”

Was that really Urban’s ad lib? I hadn’t heard that.

365. Keachick - rose pinenut (F) - February 15, 2012

I can’t remember now where I read/heard it. I think it may be on the second DVD in the Special Features or Casting. I haven’t watched that for a while, so I’m not sure, though I’m pretty certain that it is true.

366. Hat Rick - February 15, 2012

I loved that line from McCoy.

McCoy really is a great character. What a curmudgeon!

Sort of the prototype of that “House, M.D.” character, but far more appealing.

I’ve never really liked (or watched) “House, M.D.”

I wonder if the producers have ever thought that the Dr. House character owed a little something to a certain doctor who joined Starfleet after a painful divorce from his wife (N.B.: Not sure if the painful divorce thing is canon, as I seem to recall it’s from novels, but you know who I’m referring to. Man, I’m really going nuts with this parenthetical comment thing. But, dammit, I’m a Trek fan, not a blogger!)

367. Jai - February 15, 2012

Dr. House is directly based on the character (including some of the vices) of Sherlock Holmes as described in the novels. House’s best buddy Wilson is similarly based on Holmes’s best buddy Watson.

368. Jai - February 15, 2012

^^Novels about Holmes, of course.

Anyway, one more suggestion for a parodied ST movie title:

“Lord of the Singhs: The Return of the Khan”.

369. Hat Rick - February 15, 2012

367, Jai, thanks for that. I like Sherlock Holmes, but somehow I’ve never gotten into House. I think, from what I’ve read and seen, that House’s personal problems seem to interfere greatly with the comparison And, yes, I have indeed seen references to drug usage by the character of Holmes, but was Holmes ever committed to an asylum, as it appears House has been? (Or was he institutionalized, or penalized, or what? Not clear on that.)

I sort of liked the actor who plays House better when he was a comedian.

370. Jai - February 15, 2012

Hat Rick, re: #366:

I haven’t read any of the Sherlock Holmes novels but I understand House is based more on Holmes’s basic character and his relationship with Watson, rather than duplicating the actual storylines of the novels. Major similarities include the eccentric personality, substance abuse, interest solely in investigating highly unusual cases he regards as “interesting”, bromance with Watson/Wilson etc.

The names of the two leads are a giveaway too: Holmes -> Homes -> House, and Watson -> Wilson.

The show was much more of a straightforward drama when it first started, although it later became a “dramedy” and has made ample use of Hugh Laurie’s comedic talents. The ongoing frat-house -style shenanigans between House and Wilson have always been particularly hilarious. Hugh Laurie himself has also turned out to be a revelation in the charismatic Alpha Male aspects of House’s character, especially the more serious aspects of the role. Some would say he was wasted in his nerdy buffoon comedic roles here in Britain for all those decades.

The guy’s acting as House has been brilliant, and (based on numerous interviews, public appearances etc) Hugh Laurie seems to be a really nice guy in real life; he fully deserves his belated success and global popularity.

371. Hat Rick - February 15, 2012

Thanks for the cool information about House and Hugh Laurie, Jai.

It just goes to show that there are interesting things you can get into. I guess when I retire, I can look forward to watching “House, M.D.” for its Holmesian characteristics and Mr. Laurie’s skills.

Of course, I might not have a lot of time for that as I’m sure by then not only will there be to be reviewed the existing portfolio of Trek productions, but dozens of yet-to-be-seen Trek movies, as well. (One can dearly hope!)

372. Spock/Uhura Fan - February 15, 2012

@#367 Jai

Good to know. I watched the ‘making of’ extra for the dvd, and when they were describing the early Sherlock character, that’s who he reminded me of. Go figure. Nice to know that was intentional. Thanks.

373. Daoud - February 15, 2012

Consider Roddenberry took elements of Holmes for his original description of Number One…. and those were fused into Spock for TOS after The Cage.
.
I’m thinking the 70’s had quite a bit of Sherlock/Spock fan fiction… even to the point of Amanda Grayson descending from the Holmes family… and that “historic” family tree I’m forgetting the name of that supposedly everyone important in literature is inter-related… Hmmmm, someone help me on remembering that name. Yes, Wold-Newton. Thank you, Google.

374. Spock/Uhura Fan - February 15, 2012

Now, Spock and Holmes? I would have never made that connection. The only similarities I see is that they both look at facts and details. Interesting…

375. Spock/Uhura Fan - February 15, 2012

Ah, well, while some people are still talking about or defending other certain actors not paying their bills, I’ll just hang out here for little while…

Who loves puppies!? I LOVE puppies! And Zachary loves puppies too:

http://twitter.com/#!/ZacharyQuinto/status/149545213638098944/photo/1

Cutest picture. :-)

I hadn’t checked Zachary’s twitter since the holiday season, and it looks like he hasn’t had time to post, except for trying to help find a deserving dog a home. What a guy… :-)

376. Spock/Uhura Fan - February 15, 2012

Not sure why the link didn’t work. I’ll try again.

http://twitter.com/#!/ZacharyQuinto/status/149545213638098944/photo/1.

377. Spock/Uhura Fan - February 15, 2012

Mmmkay, well it’s on his twitter page…

378. Spock/Uhura Fan - February 15, 2012

You learn something new everyday. Who knew that tree hugging is the new black…

379. Schiefy - February 16, 2012

Leonard McCoy was played by Karl Urban. In the audio commentary for the film, J.J. Abrams stated that the “Bones” line was not actually in the script, but an on-set improvisation by Urban, a Trek fan long before being cast in the film. http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Leonard_McCoy_(alternate_reality)

380. Spock/Uhura Fan - February 16, 2012

And JJ did a fantastic job with his audio commentary. The man really deserves more credit and praise than he’s given…

381. Keachick - rose pinenut (F) - February 16, 2012

So I hop here and the first thing I note is Spock/Uhura taking a swipe at an actor because of a lawsuit he is facing right now…

This poster was objecting to *personal* stuff about actors like Chris Pine and Avery Brooks being posted here by trekmovie staff, and then proceeds to post *personal* stuff about Zachary Quinto. Wow. What can I say? Well, I could but I won’t.

382. Spock/Uhura Fan - February 17, 2012

It’s whatever anyone wants it to be because apparently THIS IS what we do here…

This isn’t to anyone in particular, but just as a note, it was nice to have a reason to fully check out Zachary’s website and projects, and from what I can tell, he actually pays his bills, so no law suits…. :-)

While I’ll never be a ‘nut’ for Zachary, I did happen to look into his movie Margin Call while people were speculating over another actor not paying his bills. There was a nice article I read about it. It’s done very well abd has an Oscar nod for the script.

There was a link to this article as well: http://entertainment.time.com/2012/02/16/who-is-the-victor-in-this-means-war-not-the-viewer/?iid=ent-article-latest

Must have been linked there because they were both in Trek…

383. Keachick - rose pinenut - February 17, 2012

So why didn’t you post the article about Margin Call instead of the article about This Means War showing some reviewers’ negative long winded comments? I have read about Margin Call as well.

Actually, you don’t know whether Zachary Quinto pays his bills. His own website does not go into bill paying etc. Everyone assumed that Chris Pine also paid his bills until this lawsuit was lodged with the Superior Court, LA and so far we are hearing only one side of the story.

S/UFan, you really are a rude, sarcastic so-n-so, and not a very bright one at that, BTW, some say that fan stands for fanatic. Fanatic, nut, same difference.

There is an actual definition for “pinenuts” (ie fans of Chris Pine) and it has to do with a group of CP fans who actively help raise funds for the charities that Chris Pine supports, if and when these charities make public appeals.

384. Spock/Uhura Admirer ;-) - February 17, 2012

Since it seems like I was supposed to have posted it, here’s the link to the article about Margin Call: http://entertainment.time.com/2011/10/28/whos-scared-of-streaming-could-margin-call-upend-the-hollywood-business-model/

It’s more about the hollywood business model and theater vs. streaming video and not as much about the film, so I didn’t post it. But, if anyone wants to read about that sort of thing (I did), well there you go…

Also, it looks like someone is lacking in their observational skills. I said I was not a ‘nut’ for Zachary. What does that have to do with being a Spock/Uhura fan??? That, I do admit to, but considering the obsessive bar that has been raised by certain ‘nuts’ here, I may need to consider a name change… Hey, it’s not like I know anyone’s body mass index… To each her own, though…

385. Keachick - rose pinenut - February 17, 2012

Both Pine and Quinto’s height can be found by simply looking in their IMDb biography. I can’t remember where I read what Chris Pine’s weight was, but once you have those two figures, working out a person’s BMI is a no-brainer. Just google BMI and follow simple instructions…there is a NZ (for me), but for everyone else, a UK or USA option to use. I used the US option for Chris as he is an American. The same could be done for Zachary if both his current weight and height were know. Zachary’s height is about the same as Chris’s – 6’1″ or 185cm.

I did that because I was genuinely concerned about Chris being told to “beef up” for the Kirk role, because some people seem to just want another Shatner lookalike playing Kirk. Not good.

Oh Lord, please read what I actually wrote. I know you didn’t call yourself a ‘nut’, but you do refer to yourself as a ‘fan’. In this context, there is not a lot of difference in meaning between ‘nut’ and ‘fan’. Sheesh, that I need to repeat myself…

386. Spock/Uhura Admirer ;-) - February 17, 2012

While I’m sure a lot of ‘nuts’ out there take the time to work things like body mass indexes and geneology trees out, ah, I think I’ll pass…

And someone needs to work a little harder at living up to that ‘perky blonde’ stereotype they wanted so much… ;-)

387. jim - February 17, 2012

I think everyone should beam forward and backward in time.

388. Keachick - rose pinenut - February 17, 2012

#386 – Sheesh, you are something else, oh never mind, you rude, stupid, ignorant so-n-so!

389. Spock/Uhura Admirer ;-) - February 17, 2012

Thank you. In addition to ‘tattling’ on me like a child (#381), post #388 simply confirms the childishness with silly name-calling.

Keep it up. Hey, sticks and stones… :-)

390. Michael heintz - February 18, 2012

So looking forward to new and interesting angles of the engineering room aka the brewery! LOL I kid, I kid!

391. dmduncan - February 18, 2012

388. Keachick – rose pinenut – February 17, 2012

Keachick, don’t get yourself worked up. If she’s not a teenager, then that’s even more of a reason to ignore her. She is definitely the queen of nanna- nanna-boo-boo / I-know-you-are-but-what-am-I?, and you shouldn’t even want to depose her for that title.

392. Spock/Uhura Admirer ;-) - February 18, 2012

Said by the king of straw man posting…

I take it as a compliment. :-)

393. dmduncan - February 18, 2012

Oh, that’s adorable. She’s trying to use logic again. Let’s see what she tries to do next!

394. Keachick - rose pinenut - February 18, 2012

No, Ms Admirer, I did not tattle on you. I simply pointed out your hypocrisy.

However I am now “tattling” about you on another thread…

395. Spock/Uhura Admirer ;-) - February 18, 2012

If anyone pays attention, then there is no hypocrisy. I never said I had a problem with posting miscellaneous/personal info in comments sections, but one can believe that if he/she wants.

I thought there would be a difference between that and what gets featured as an article or blog post. Now that I know what gets posted, I know. So, no hypocrisy.

I do find it interesting that two of the most hypocritical people here want to point fingers, though.

Have fun.

396. Spock/Uhura Admirer ;-) - February 18, 2012

I meant to say “Now that I know what gets featured, I know.”

397. Keachick - rose pinenut - February 18, 2012

#395 – What?

398. Spock/Uhura Admirer ;-) - February 18, 2012

That’s okay. It’s pretty clear, but don’t anyone worry themselves too much about it.

Let’s just move on.

399. dmduncan - February 18, 2012

395. Spock/Uhura Admirer ;-) – February 18, 2012

Hey bunchkins, I promise not to give you any more sophisticated responses, since those just seem to reduce you to blathering incoherencies that only you understand. So instead, I’ll speak to you in language that it seems to me you must be more familiar with from your peers, and much easier for you to process:

I’m made of rubber, you’re made of glue. Whatever you say bounces off of me and sticks to you.

400. Spock/Uhura Admirer ;-) - February 18, 2012

“Hey bunchkins, I promise not to give you any more sophisticated responses…”

Promise already kept since I haven’t received one.

As for the rest, I’m not getting on that not-so-merry-go-’round. It’s good to be off of it.

401. dmduncan - February 18, 2012

400. Spock/Uhura Admirer ;-) – February 18, 2012

Liar, liar, pants on fire.

402. Red Dead Ryan - February 18, 2012

STOP FEEDING THE DAMN TROLL!

403. dmduncan - February 18, 2012

She’s not a troll, Ryan. Rebecca, Pierre — those were trolls. Spock/Uhura Fan has been here long enough to establish her identity as a participant seriously representing the Spock/Uhura faction of Star Trekkiedom. She’s impudent and says really stupid things which obviously piss you off, but pissing you off by itself does not make her a troll.

404. Spock/Uhura Admirer ;-) - February 18, 2012

I don’t mind being called whatever it is someone wants to call me, especially when I know it’s not true.

Since we are using childhood sayings now, I’ll just mention the rubber/glue argument stated earlier. Seems to work.

405. Keachick - rose pinenut - February 18, 2012

#403 – Yes. It’s scary, isn’t it?

406. Keachick - rose pinenut - February 19, 2012

Actually my comment above is not quite fair as I do not know any other Spock/Uhura fans. She is just representing herself, just like the rest of us. However, Spock/Uhura Admirer is still ignorant and snarky/rude.

407. Spock/Uhura Admirer ;-) - February 19, 2012

Resorting to name-calling, ‘tattling’, straw men, flat out admitting he/she doesn’t get something, and/or changing the subject or even one’s argument mid-stream are usually done not because the person doing it is intellectually superior, better, ‘gets it’, is kind, polite, and accepting, or what have you, but for some, ah, other reason(s)…

But for those that believe otherwise, carry on then… I’ll just sit back and watch in my ignorance. Thanks.

P.S.

Thank you for realizing and acknowledging that we are all just here representing ourselves.

408. MJ - February 20, 2012

“Why can’t we all just get along?”

409. Spock/Uhura Admirer ;-) - February 20, 2012

A good quote, but one I doubt will have much if any effect here, unfortunately. :-(

410. The Gaurdian Of Forever - February 21, 2012

In this instance, re-booting the franchise was a mixed blessing, The movie was good, not great ST. It would have been perceived as a better movie had it not been ST. Taking the Trek elements out and viewing it as another SF movie increases my rating from a 4 to maybe a 7 (on a scale of 10).

Where did it work? Well, it brought Trek back into the public consciousness & it made money for CBS/Paramount. The characters of Spock and McCoy were excellent with McCoy being virtually spot on. Obviously SFX are way ahead of what was done in the 60’s TV show and the 70’s/80’s movies. And the small bone tossed to all the classic Trekfen with the appearance of Leonard Nimoy as an alternate Spock.

Where did it not work? At the very top of the list is the Kobayshi Maru. I watched that scene and cringed at how bad it was. I still cringe thinking about it. Humor has always been a part of the Trek franchise, but this was painful to watch. 2) Too much action. Ironic for an ‘Action/Adventure’ movie. But there pretty much a frenenitc pace from the get go. As a contrast, two titles cited by fans as amongst their favorites (“The Cage”, “The Wrath Of Khan”), worked because what action there was did not overwhelm the characters and dialog. 3) Plot holes-more than a piece of swiss cheese and big enough to drive a shuttlecraft trough. Kirk’s birth and Spock/Penda Urhura’s ‘relationship leap right to mind. 4) A universe without Vulcan, Ch’Rihan and Ch’Havran is just so wrong.

So you see, for all this to work, this *HAS* to be taken as an alternate universe or alternate reality or whatever technobabble term you want to use.

ST V2.1 falls somewhere between the rebooting of Battlestar Galactica, which was an abysmal, miserable, total failure and the rebooting of Doctor Who which has pretty much been a success.

ST v2,2? Quien sabe? Just like Trek V2.1 I will go into the theater with an open mind to what is being presented to me

411. Spock/Uhura Admirer ;-) - February 21, 2012

Let’s see if I’m allowed to post…

@#410

First, I would like to say thank you for stating your opinions in a non-attacking way.

When I watched the film, Spock and Uhura’s relationship was the distinction between the timelines that I liked most. I thought it was a very pleasant surprise, but that’s just me, though. I agree that Spock and cCoy were done well.

412. trekkie64 - February 29, 2012

Thoroughly enjoyed the ST09 movie. I viewed as a stand alone movie and the beginning of a new ST franchise. That said, would someone PLEASE PLEASE tell JJ Abrams that lens flare is kinda cool once or twice in a two hour movie, after that it is just distracting bordering on annoying….. Can’t wait for the new one.

TrekMovie.com is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.