Star Trek Comics Writer Talks Timeline Divergence Leading To 2013 Sequel | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Star Trek Comics Writer Talks Timeline Divergence Leading To 2013 Sequel August 7, 2012

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

With the release of the Star Trek sequel only nine months away, fans are anxiously looking for any hints about the direction of the film’s story and characters. While the J.J. Abrams wall of secrecy has remained largely impenetrable, some hints at what is planned may have been revealed in a recent interview with the writer of the Star Trek ongoing comics.

 

Comic writer talks "more Vulcan" Spock and timeline divergences – hints for sequel?

Mike Johnson, the author of IDW’s ongoing Star Trek comic book series set in the new movie universe has already stated that there are clues to the next movie being dropped into the series. The comics have been retelling episodes from the original Star Trek series in the new timeline as well as following up on story threads from the first film. In a new interview up at Newsarama where he talks about the future of the series and also says several interesting things that might hint at things we’ll see in the 2013 Star Trek movie sequel.

In the first film, we saw a far more emotional Spock than we were used to seeing. According to Johnson, that may not remain the case:

Johnson: Taking a cue from the last movie, I think Quinto’s Spock struggles more with his hybrid genealogy. Nimoy’s Spock, particularly in the beginning of the original series, is much more stereotypically “Vulcan.” The revelation of his intense, more “human" emotions came as the series progressed. But we saw Quinto’s Spock having to cope with his emotions right away given what happened to the Vulcan homeworld and his human mother.

Ironically, the loss of Vulcan has caused him to embrace his Vulcan side even more, and we’ve seen that emotional detachment play out in the third and fourth issues of the comic, inspired by the original episode “The Galileo 7.”

Could this be indicating that we will see a more unemotional Spock in the sequel? And if so, then would that have an effect on his relationship with Uhura as well as his developing friendship with Kirk?


Mr. Spock in issue #4 seems more Vulcan than in the 2009 film

The alternate timeline shown in the first film showed some dramatic differences from the "prime" universe. This has continued in the comic series, where some familiar stories from TOS have begun to depart greatly from the original source. Johnson says this is by design:

Johnson: It’s the “butterfly flaps its wings, causes a hurricane” analogy. We started off with small deviations, but as we proceed, we’re getting further and further from the original timeline. Issues #9 and #10, “The Return of the Archons,” is an example of how the new timeline diverges significantly from the original story. The last movie was the butterfly. This series builds up to the hurricane that is the next movie…the stories will depart further and further from the original series. We will use a few original series concepts as jumping off points, but the new timeline is moving in a radically different direction.

This could lead in all sorts of different directions. If the timeline keeps deviating more and more from the "prime" one, then any situations and characters from TOS could appear wildly different in this timeline, which would explain why Cumberbatch’s character may be from canon (as writer Bob Orci said in recent TrekMovie interview), but may behave in a much different way than his "prime" counterpart.


Latest issue of Star Trek comics (#10) showed most divergence in timeline yet

Khan who?

Near the end of the interview, Johnson gets asked about a certain genetic superman – and we don’t learn much:

Nrama: Any chance we’ll see Khan soon?
Johnson: Who?
Nrama: Right. Well let me rephrase… when you do get around to telling a story about Khan, will his appearance tie into the movie sequel?
Johnson: You’re breaking up.
Nrama: Well, you can’t blame me for asking, can you?
Johnson: Nope, I can’t.

Interpret that any way you like…

The rest of the interview, which goes into more detail about the series and about other hints leading up to the new film, can be found here.

 

Comments

1. Anthony Lewis - August 7, 2012

Really digging the tie and the character development.

2. Bob Tompkins - August 7, 2012

That explains why they couldn’t/wouldn’t use Spock Prime’s line of ‘It’s the timeline attempting to heal itself’ in the 2009 movie. Obviously the timeline is not attempting to heal itself at all.

3. L4YERCAKE - August 7, 2012

Sounds like Khanfirmation to me.

4. Craiger - August 7, 2012

Maybe its still Mitchell but he doesn’t get GOD like powers in the new timeline?

5. J.A.G.T. - August 7, 2012

Well, I sincerely hope they ditch the whole Spock/Uhura thing altogether. It’s not that it really bothered me but it felt like the most unneccessary element in the whole 2009 movie.

6. Anthony Thompson - August 7, 2012

4. Craiger

Have you even read ONE issue of the comics??? Mitchell was dealt with in the very first issue!

7. Startrekfangirl - August 7, 2012

And I hope they DON’T ditch the whole Spock/Uhura thing because it opened up so many possibilities for drama and character development that have not been explored in quite this way. Hooray for not trying to recreate the trinity this time around…but for developing relationships that more complex and more interesting because they are more complex.

8. CaptainDonovin - August 7, 2012

I like how the comics have sort of veered off from the original episodes. There was a scene @ the end of Archons that had me interested, sound’s like Starfleet Command isn’t too happy w/ nuKirk’s antics.

9. Krizerd - August 7, 2012

Yeah get rid of that romance for sure. They had a chance to make something good and they blew it. It’s more about Kirk and Spock’s friendship any way. And NEEDS MORE BONES.

10. Pensive's Wetness - August 7, 2012

Ok, looking at the stories being told in the comics (and the apparent nod of approval that the stories like up between the 2009 and 2013 movies), does that mean events like ‘The Doomsday Machine’ or other 2nd TOS season episodes will have already happened or not? or, perhaps in other terms, is the comic planning to do a TDDM comic before the next movie comes out? with all our collective talk about Khan, looking at the rate of comics coming out before the 2013 movie’s release, does the comic book publisher have the time to release a story on The Bounty Bay, thus possibly eliminating a Khan/Eugenics story for the movie (again, assuming that comics continue to enjoy that Cannon Stamp of approval)?

11. Montreal_Paul - August 7, 2012

6. Anthony Thompson

Have YOU read that comic that deals with Mitchell? Did you see the ending?

12. L4YERCAKE - August 7, 2012

@11. Mitchell was dead at the end of the issue, no…? What’re you trying to get at…?

13. Sebastian S. - August 7, 2012

# 11 MP~

Agreed.
The comic left it wide open for a sequel. I’d find it hard to believe a simple phaser would’ve killed him at that stage in his ‘evolution’ anyway….

And I still think Cumberbatch would make be far superior as Mitchell than as Khan Noonian Singh (who, IMO, is not as interesting a character as Mitchell). Tin-plated tyrants are a dime a dozen in pop culture (James Bond villains, for example). But a ‘good guy’ who is turned into a demi-god against his will? Infinite possibilities. Especially if he is a friend of the lead character….

14. Sebastian S. - August 7, 2012

Edit on #13

Meant to say “would be far superior as Mitchell.” Brain farting again….

15. Tom - August 7, 2012

@3 … Agreed.

16. Craiger - August 7, 2012

No I didn’t read the comic with Mitchell. Not into comics that much. Allthough the Dr. Who crossover kind of intreages me.

17. Phil - August 7, 2012

@13. Actually, that seems contrived, giving a young Kirk his very own Q….

18. Scott - August 7, 2012

To me it wouldn’t make sense for it to be MItchell because they would have to spend part of the movie explaining what happened in the comic and that they thought he was dead, then find him alive somehow and deal with him again.

19. Joel - August 7, 2012

@18

Not necessarily. In ST ’09, they glossed over a significant number of details highlighted in the Countdown comics that preceded the movie. They basically used Prime Spock’s mind meld with Kirk as a way of explaining what happened in the comics, but the comics went into far more detail.

A flashback, or some other film device could be used to explain what happened to Mitchell to casual fans and diehards could read the comic. All the episodes are only 2 issues and for the most part, they’ve been a great continuation of the new universe.

20. Legate Damar - August 7, 2012

I’d say that the destruction of Vulcan is a bit more than a butterfly.

21. Jack - August 7, 2012

The comics are interesting — and they’re getting better. The archons one points to some interesting, er, developments in starfleet…

22. Montreal_Paul - August 7, 2012

The ending to the comic version of WNMHGB was much different to the TOS version. I don’t want to give any spoilers… you guys should take a look at it. Since Bob Orci said that these comics are canon… there might be something there.

23. KG - August 7, 2012

I hate this comics/novel are canon thing they have going on right now. This is Star Trek not Star Wars damnit!

24. Picard's Fish - August 7, 2012

21 – Care to elaborate? I wont read the comics, but am interested in these “developments” you speak of..

25. Red Dead Ryan - August 7, 2012

Mike Johnson’s evasiveness on the topic of Khan is further proof that Khan is in the sequel. There’s a reason for that. J.J Abrams won’t allow anyone to even mention Khan.

Gary Mitchell is dead. If you’re going to use the logic that his superpowers could bring him back from the dead, you’d have to say the same for his Prime Universe counterpart who was buried in a plot under a giant boulder. The original Mitchell did not come back.

26. No Khan - August 7, 2012

What ever nuggets have been planted in the Comics. They sure don’t amount to much, because not a single soul has even brought forth a theory using the info in the Comic Books..

27. Picard's Fish - August 7, 2012

26: what I gather from reading comments here and the reviews of the comics is that there’s a conspiracy afoot in starfleet.

could be a clue to a plot point in the next film.. we know mr orci loves his conspiracies..

28. Guest - August 7, 2012

Why has nobody pointed out the resemblance between Benedict Cumberbatch and Crewman Green from The Man Trap?: http://img696.imageshack.us/img696/4950/crewmangreensaltvampire.png

29. Daoud - August 7, 2012

Waitaminute. We know in the prime universe, that in 2254, young Spock, lieutenant to Captain Pike… was a *smiling* with fascination Vulcan… who also was startled enough to yell “The women!”. I think Quinto’s Spock of 2258 wasn’t that far removed from the injured Spock we met in The Cage.

30. Weerd1 - August 7, 2012

Cumberbatch=Kevin Riley

Who’s going to be the brave writer who takes on how different the 24th Century becomes? The possibilities are endless…

31. No Khan - August 7, 2012

Where are all the clues in the comic books?

32. Dee -lvs moon' surface - August 7, 2012

Khan? or not Khan?…………….still ongoing……..whatever…….maybe until the end of the summer….. or not……………………………………………………………………… 2013

;-) :-)

33. Dennis_C - August 7, 2012

I suspect no Khan but Joachim. The Botany Bay is discovered but Khan has either died at some point in their 200 year journey or he dies as they attempt to revive him. With their leader gone, Joachim steps up and events take a decidedly different turn.

I was hoping for a new and original Star Trek story that in no way relied on an established villain. If the comics are any indication we’re looking at a new spin on an old story. Not necessarily a rehash but not entirely fresh or new either.

34. Jack - August 7, 2012

I’m trying to avoid spoilers. They’re not bad, the comics (especially the most recent ones) — and can be read in an ipod/iPhone app.

Okay. Sales pitch over. Here goes. Spoilers away!

Starting now…

So,

Kirk decides, on his own, to investigate legends of a missing starship (I guess his acadamy roommate stayed up at night with a flashlight under his face telling slightly lame stories) — this leads him to a society of mind-controlled zombies, except during festival etc…. this we know, right?

But in this case, according to one lovely female colonist who finds Kirk, everyone on the planet is human and descended from crew members of the U.S.S. Archon, and they’re controlled, yes, by Landru. Landru’s still an AI device, designed by (according to Kirk’s source) the evil starfleet Dr. Landru, who did mind-control experiments on people. When the archon’s crew tried to resist, Landru pulled the ship into the atmosphere, or something. And then the zombie-colonists made a nice little medieval-ish village. Crew gets chased, Landru forces the Enterprise out of teh sky with heat rays, or something… Kirk has to decide what to do before the ship’s destroyed. Does the Prime Directive apply to a starfleet colony?

Long story, slightly less long: Scotty beams out Landru, the colonists are cut off from Landru but now rudderless, Kirk calls Pike, asks for Starfleet shrinks to come in and help the Archon descendants adjust to not being zombies, and Pike tells Kirk, via comm, (slightly paraphrased) “Good job, but maybe next time, check with me before just waking up one morning and deciding to check out the legend of a missing ship, without orders to do so. Kay, bud?”

Pike logs off Skype, and then…

Mysterious disembodied voice says, more or less, that he’s been listening and that “Kirk and those pesky kids have interfered in our plans one time too many, bwahahahah”. Okay, not quite. But he does say that Kirk screwed with the decades-long Landru experiment, and that erasing the existence of the Archon from records took a lot of time and hard work, you know. Oh, yeah, and next time Kirk screws up, Pike’s losing his disabled parking pass.

…And then the next one’s about tribbles (with fantastic art).

35. Duane Boda - August 7, 2012

Spock and Uhura was at a major mistake

and didn’t belong in the 1st film or any that

precede it. A very bad ark – quite quirky!

36. Jerry Seward - August 7, 2012

May the villain be: Doctor Stavos Keniculus!

37. VZX - August 7, 2012

RDR is right. This is further proof that Cumby is playing Khan. Bummer.

38. This is going to be a long year - August 7, 2012

#34

Reacting to possible SPOILERS from the comic so beware below:

Lets say the comic sets up the new movie. Then I hope this isn’t going to be one of those stories of rogue Star Fleet officers up to no good. They have done that too often across all the series. And Kirk’s mentor being part of it is a cliche for movies in general.

I don’t mind if they reuse characters we’ve seen since Nero’s incursion didn’t change everything. But lets hope the movie is novel in the challenge it poses to the heroes. Something new and exciting is what Trek should be.

39. RAO - August 7, 2012

Anybody ever notice that the only people who cared for the Spock/Uhura thing are women, many/most of which are new fans? My guess is by design, just like how everyone hates Keenser except little kids IE exactly who it’s marketed towards.

I noticed slightly more emotionalism in NuSpock, but I just attributed it to how Quinto played him. Next spring can’t come soon enough!

40. chrisfawkes.com - August 7, 2012

Please don’t bring doctor who in.

I have no problem with the Spock/Uhura romance.

I know it’s science fiction but having Zoe Saldana on board the ship with no one interested in her would be way too far a stretch for the imagination.

41. NCM - August 7, 2012

Once again surprised to see Trekkies/Trekkers acting as if they missed the one where Spock died, followed by the one in which he lived again, as well as the one in which Kirk died, followed by the one in which he lived again. Why bother arguing that Mitchell, despite having become ‘even’ more God-like than our heroes, can’t possibly be resurrected?

42. Andy - August 7, 2012

@28

Where is the picture of the alien on the right from? Is there some production video of the new star trek that I missed?

43. caek - August 7, 2012

Because the only people that will care are the ones who read the comic.

44. nate - August 7, 2012

I like the writing of the new comics…maybe they can make that Lazurus story make more sense this time around. I’m tired of the wide open, animated style art tho…wish we could be something with more crosshatching and details in the inks. Have IDW asked Gordon Purcell or Jerome Moore to work on a few issues?

45. Tiberius Subprime - August 7, 2012

@ 6 Anthony Thompson

Just because Mitchell was was killed in the comic does not mean he will stay dead. Does anyone realise this is science fiction? That anything can happen?

If they wanted to bring Mitchell back, they would find a reasonable way to do it.

But I’m not sure it’s Mitchell. Or Khan.

I am beginning to think Cumberbatch could be Roger Corby.

Or Garth (and with his powers he could make himself look younger).

Possibly Gary Seven.

46. Tiberius Subprime - August 7, 2012

Lazarus….Hmmmm…..I kind of like that idea…..Cumberbatch could be Lazurus????? Hum….

47. CaptRobau - August 8, 2012

@39

Not at all. I’m a guy and while I’m not writing fan fiction I think the Uhura/Spock relationship was a very good addition to the story. It gives Uhura aka Zoe Saldana more of a reason to be in scenes, instead of being a background prop like Chekov. Which is a good thing, because both the actor and character have potential. It also gives more opportunities for the conflicting sides of Spock to come to the fore.

48. izmunuti - August 8, 2012

The chief value of Spock as a character is his difference from humans, his lack of emotion. It lets us see ourselves from a different perspective, and maybe learn something. For this reason, I hope it is true that Spock evolves to become less emotional in future films.

49. Picard's Fish - August 8, 2012

34: thanks Jack!

50. Aurore - August 8, 2012

“Anybody ever notice that the only people who cared for the Spock/Uhura thing are women, many/most of which are new fans?”
__________

Some women did not care for the romance.

I did.

Mr. Abrams seemed to love the Spock/Uhura “thing”, as well.

At least, that was my impression….especially while listening to the DVD commentary of the Star Trek 2009 movie….

And, you are right; he’s somewhat of a new fan of the franchise:
(If link not authorized here, google “J.J. Abrams not a fan of Star Trek”)

http://www.channel24.co.za/Movies/News/JJ-Abrams-not-a-fan-of-Star-Trek-series-20111229

But, who am I to hold that against him?

After all, he finally came to his senses; NOW he appears to be a fan.
Furthermore, on a very personal note, I love the fact that the person who brought my beloved TOS crew back , in a satisfying manner to me, is a self-avowed Star Wars fan.

His inability to get to like Star Trek in the past is probably matched
by my numerous failed attempts at really liking a saga (Star Wars) which has developed into a worldwide phenomenon.

Mr. Abrams, should you be reading this, don’t hold it against me, you know… “IDIC”…and, all that good stuff…

51. Perplex - August 8, 2012

Look at all these fascinating and fresh new Star Trek storys they are able to tell, now that they got rid of the oh so constricting canon.

52. SoonerDave - August 8, 2012

@39

While I don’t necessarily agree that those who liked the Spock/Uhura romance were women, I certainly am firmly in the camp that it was a poor storytelling choice. It’s a tortured, contrived, manufactured relationship that has cheapened Uhura’s character and reduces Spock, in those scenes, to nothing more than a more richly hormoned Kirk with pointed ears. While I’m not necessarily a “canonista,” I do believe that if you depart too greatly from any basic character’s structure, you don’t really have the same character anymore – which begs the question, why bother persisting if the choice is to undo those very things that made the character distinctive and *worth* perpetuating in the first place?

I contrast that relationship to the way Sarek’s relationship with Amanda was structured in TOS, or even Sarek’s with his later wife in TNG, thus making the Spock/Uhura business in JJTrek all the more ludicrous.

Now, before someone gets all riled up and fires “hater” bullets, I say this as someone who liked JJTrek very much, just not this specific element of it. Okay, I didn’t like budgineering, either :)

But, hey, they’re not asking me…this is JJ’s baby for this and maybe one more movie, so c’est la vie.

Sure think by now it’d be time for some kind of trailer. The absence of even fun spoilers, tantalizing leaks, or even a title, is disappointing. Really makes me think the Cone of Silence is trying to keep a Khan character under wraps to the bitter end. Alas.

53. Gary S. - August 8, 2012

No confirmation of anything in the article .
Just room for a lot of interesting speculatiion .
Should be an interesting sequel,
I have never had any doubts that it would be though .

54. Guest - August 8, 2012

@42. Andy, From Memory-Alpha: Barney Burman and his company Proteus Make-up FX Team created a “salt sucker” alien as an homage to the M-113 creature for J.J. Abrams’ Star Trek. The creature was part of a deleted scene involving Rura Penthe.

55. Basement Blogger - August 8, 2012

Maybe I got this wrong but I usually wait till they bind the issues to form a graphic novel before I buy the comics if I do. I hope the comics kick butt because it will help the cause. See Batman.

Can’t say that’s an affirmation that Khan is in the next movie. The only hint would be that if one were remaking TOS episodes, leaving Khan out stands out like a sore thumb. On the other hand, where’s the remake of the great “The Doomsday Machine?” Or did I miss that one.

56. Basement Blogger - August 8, 2012

Maybe I got this wrong but I usually wait till they bind the issues to form a graphic novel before I buy the comics if I do. I hope the comics kick butt because it will help the cause. See Batman.

Can’t say that’s an affirmation that Khan is in the next movie. The only hint would be that if one were remaking TOS episodes, leaving Khan out stands out like a sore thumb. On the other hand, where’s the remake of the great “The Doomsday Machine?” Or did I miss that one.

57. Chris Roberts - August 8, 2012

By my reckoning, most of the TOS remake scenarios are occuring a decade before they did in the Prime Universe.

58. Chris Roberts - August 8, 2012

The Doomsday Machine came from another galaxy and is that much further away.

59. Charley W - August 8, 2012

Maybe this is the timeline that eventually leads to “Yesterday’s Enterpise”.

60. RAO - August 8, 2012

47. Beyond flying in the face of the Spock character as established, I thought the Kirk-Uhura dynamic was far more interesting. And the “no, I’m assigned to the Enterprise” scene was deplorable on many levels. I dig the Nuhura character, and am glad she’s more than background character, but replacing McCoy in the Trinity? C’mon.

50. You’re kinda proving my point. While I thoroughly enjoyed JJTrek and the associated media, Trek is not Star Wars and should never be. JJ certainly “borrowed” many concepts from SW in the film, for better or worse. I think the reason I enjoyed the film while many other long time fans did not is because I had reasonable expectations going into the theatre. I did not expect a Nick Meyer-esque masterpiece for Trek fans, I expected a good sci fi action flick based (somewhat loosely at times) on Star Trek. That’s what I got, and more. My observation was not a criticism, just that- an observation that two of the more unpopular elements of the film were designed to attract a certain demographic. And it worked.

61. Red Dead Ryan - August 8, 2012

I think we’re stuck with the Spock/Uhura romance. Which is a shame. I’d prefer that Spock remain the cold, alien, detatched scientist that we know from TOS. Besides, we already have six other full-blooded, emotional humans on the bridge. Spock should remain a unique contrast to the others.

62. ME!! - August 8, 2012

The Spock/Uhura thing was a distraction at best. IT needs to be downplayed or Uhura needs to get a clue that he’s not going to be the best of mates for her.

@61 Red Dead Ryan – Agreed!!

And WHERE is Chapel? She had the hots for Spock in the series which was far more fun than this shoehorned Uhura thing.

I agree….MORE BONES!!!!!!

63. ME!! - August 8, 2012

Not that the Chapel thing was prevalent…it wasn’t . It was, unlike the Uhura relationship, more subtle and in the background. Had they done that with Uhura, I might have enjoyed it more (like when she tells him she’s assigned to the Enterprise…see? Subtle and fun). The whole thing of them slobbering on each other in the turbolift was annoyingly distracting and took away from the rest of the film and the bordering scenes. Keep it subtle, people.

64. Red Dead Ryan - August 8, 2012

Nurse Chapel was attracted to Spock, but Spock never reciprocated the feelings. Spock was unable/unwilling to give her love. That is what was so interesting, and one of the things that made Spock popular with women.

Spock, during TOS, became a symbol. He represented the desire of lots of female fans. The desire that could never be fulfilled.

He’s a reminder that in everyday life, there are things we want but can never have.

And from the male perspective, Spock represents the awkardness towards women that a lot of guys (myself definitely included) have.

The Spock/Uhura romance robs us of those things. It robs Spock of the qualities that have made him so endearing to fans for fourty-five years and counting.

65. Aurore - August 8, 2012

“You’re kinda proving my point.”
__________

I am?

I never really was a Star Wars fan.

Therefore, I am not sure I would have been able to identify all the “many concepts from SW in the film” had I not read comments pertaining to them on this site and others. Following such discussions was often interesting.

There was always someone reminding everyone how Star Wars itself was a “rip-off” of 1200 different stories or/and how Star Trek was ripped off of other “sci-fi”, most notably Forbidden Planet….

“My observation was not a criticism….”

I know.
I was merely making some observations of my own.

“….an observation that two of the more unpopular elements of the film…”

….Yes, Roberto Orci partly touched upon that once (post 87):

http://trekmovie.com/2012/01/29/orci-explains-star-trek-sequel-script-polish-reveals-bit-on-time-passed-between-films/

:)

66. JJ - August 8, 2012

I’m sure the next movie will be good, but the producers should just indicate when they’re going to give a plot summary and be done trying to leave hints at this point. Everyone’s sick of guessing.

67. Pauln6 - August 8, 2012

@63 I actually liked the Spock Uhura relationship but I agree I would have preferred it to remain more subtle. The kiss in the elevator was well done but the kiss on the transporter pad in front of Kirk during a time of crisis was way off base.

Better would have been some subtle and brief finger fondling that Kirk noticed. I guess they thought they needed to be as subtle as a brick for the less intelligent audience members and for casual female viewers who want them a bit of romance when their bfs force them to go watch sci fi. :P

68. Tyler Nicholson - August 8, 2012

Above comment is a little sexist?

I’m a female who has followed Star Trek for as long as I can remember and the “romance” side of things never fascinated me in the slightest..

69. RAO - August 8, 2012

65. I’m referring to the pandering to the female audience, not the SW knock offs. Like you said, nothing is completely original, especially in science fiction. If anything, Trek rips itself off constantly. Every other movie since TWOK has a villain with a superweapon hellbent on revenge.

70. Jack - August 8, 2012

I still don’t buy the Trek 09 = Star Wars stuff. What themes were borrowed from Star Wars? Not trying to be a dick, but I really don’t see it.

We get some pretty thrilling scenes — and they make sense withing teh story — and a few alien -looking aliens and folks complain taht it’s Star Wars, not Star Trek.

Star Trek’s always had explosions. And TNG had plenty of phaser fights. Heck, Nemesis — with its single-man Romulan fighters, shoot outs between speeding vehicles, ultimate weapon and heroes/villains physically grappling — seemed Star Warsier to me by far.

The Kirk = Luke Skywalker stuff, well — I don’t buy it. Star Wars didn’t invent the whole kid wasting his life at home thing. It’s a coming-of-age story. They tend to follow certain tropes.

I wonder if these comparisons would be getting made had JJ never said he preferred Star Wars as a kid (heck, I preferred it too, until I was about 11 or so)?

71. Montreal_Paul - August 8, 2012

Honestly, I don’t see the Star Wars theme in Star Trek either. Besides, if it wasn’t for Star Trek, there wouldn’t have even been Star Wars. George Lucas has continually mentioned that Roddenberry influenced him.

72. Startrekfangirl - August 8, 2012

I’m a woman who watched TOS when it aired originally, so I’ve been a fan quite awhile, and I’m also someone who appreciates canon….but the AU in the movie gives the writers a whole new slate, and I appreciate that, too. The two groups of fans who seem most distressed with the Spock/Uhura pairing are the die-hard fanboys who get more torqued up about what the new nacelles look like and who are still moaning about “budgineering.”

The other group most vocally distressed about Spock/Uhura are women who read and write slash fanfiction. They are pretty hostile to women characters in general–perhaps because most are young heterosexual women still sorting out their own worries about sex by self-inserting themselves in the roles of male characters.

As for why I like the relationship between Spock and Uhura, it makes them both more complex, and for me, more interesting. The scene in the hangar deck clearly indicates that their relationship has been an illicit one, a very interesting conundrum to consider, and it shifts the power balance in that scene in Uhura’s favor. The scene in the turbolift does likewise, for she is a strong woman who senses and does what no one else on the ship does–offers comfort when Spock’s grief is almost unfathomable. To sexualize that kiss is to miss its meaning, just as commenting that the transporter scene is “slobbering” misses what is going on there. Not only is Kirk getting his comeuppance, Uhura is sending Spock off to his probable death. Human compassion at such a time seems to me to be admirable.

I know that the fanboys and slasher girls will still dislike it, but perhaps everyone else who felt uncertain about the relationship will give it another chance.

73. RAO - August 8, 2012

70. Kirk Skywalker, Obi Pike Kinobi, The Death Star blowing up Vulcan ala Tattooine, Delta Voth, ect. Now, one can argue that those same concepts existed before SW or even Trek and that’s true. But to see it all in one movie, the brainchild of a SW-not-Trek fan, fuels that. The ONLY thing SW has over Trek (real Kirk Trek, not the sterile spinoffs) is a superior villain. Even Khan doesn’t compare to Vader in the first two movies.

At the end of the day, the positives far outweighed the negatives in JJTrek and that’s all that matters. Oh, and it made a ton of cash. Maybe that matters too.

74. Montreal_Paul - August 8, 2012

73. RAO

That’s stretching a bit. You can find parallels to Star Wars in almost anything. Even in Batman Begins. Orphaned Bruce Wayne/Luke… wise old Alfred/ObiWan… Wayne manor destroyed/Alderan blown up… Joker/Darth Vader… etc.

Meh… stretching on the Star Wars comparisons. If JJ was a huge “JAWS” fan or Mad Max fan, I am sure people would make comparisons to those movies.

75. RAO - August 8, 2012

72. It’s one thing to modernize a character. But you run the risk of bastardizing it (ala Scotty) when you radically depart from the character’s traits. I understand why they do crap like that or Keenser, and I accept this as the trade off for new big budget Trek with TOS names. Is that pill going to get even tougher to swallow if we have a pasty British Khan who resembles nothing of the Khan we know? I hope not. Or maybe that’ll be next year’s trade off; ignoring everything about MontalKhan so I can enjoy an excellent actor in what will be an otherwise very good film. I don’t expect Trek movies to be made for Trek fans anymore. In reality, that ship sailed in 1991. But I also don’t expect the characters I grew up with to be similar in name only, like Scotty and Chekov now are.

76. Aurore - August 8, 2012

“I’m referring to the pandering to the female audience.”
___________

You are, indeed.

But, I still don’t see how I managed to make your point; a few posts ago
(@39) you stated that the *only* people who cared for the Spock/Uhura thing were women, “many/most of which” were new fans according to you, with no data to back up your claims…which led to some of my observations in 50 ( on this site, for instance, not every woman cared for
the romance, and, a few men seemed to like it ).

Roberto Orci could probably provide me with the relevant data….if he wanted. However, he won’t….*sigh*….such is life…..

:)

77. RAO - August 8, 2012

74. I’ll give you the Bruce/Alfred allegory but the rest are stretching it beyond credability. Batman wasn’t set in space, in an age of advanced technology, where a lead’s home world was blown up by the villian’s superweapon, and the other lead was marooned on an ice planet trying to escape from a monster. Hell, the Kirk looking at the under construction Enterprise is the same exact shot as Luke looking at the moons. We aren’t talking just concepts or plot devices here, we’re talking the same ideas and scenes. Perhaps you can chalk it up to a “tribute” ala the Trek fans amongst the Court putting Ceti eels in or tribbles or certain lines or what have you that we all loved. But to pretend it’s not there is putting blinders on for blinders sake.

78. RAO - August 8, 2012

76. Generalization, of course. And Orci’s argument that “just because the polls say most people hated it doesn’t mean anything because you only make up 3% of the audience” is Bermanesque cop out bullshit. Where’s the data that shows support of Spock/Uhura, Keenser, ect? I like Orci, I respect his work, but I have nothing to gain ala inside information or exclusive interviews so I’m not going to suck up. I’m a soldier, not a diplomat. I can only tell you the truth.

79. Montreal_Paul - August 8, 2012

77. RAO

Like I said… if you look hard enough… you can find Star Wars comparisons in almost every sci-fi/fantasy/superhero movie. Star Wars/Spider-man (even though it’s not set in “space”) … To stretch is to stretch… in Batman, Spider-man and Star Trek. I chalk it up to certain “fans” that are so afraid of change that they have to find fault to justify their dislike for the new movie. And because JJ said he wasn’t a Star Trek fan and was a Star Wars fan instead… that is what they went on.

80. RAO - August 8, 2012

79. Ok, we’re not talking “stretching.” It’s literally the same thing in some cases. I’m serious, watch the Luke scene and then watch the Kirk on his motorcycle in Iowa scene. Even the music is similar. Then you’ve got Vulcan, Delta Vega, even R2 f’n D2 as an Easter egg! There’s spinning, and then there’s being Baghdad Bob (not Orci).

81. Montreal_Paul - August 8, 2012

… and you see Batman overlooking Gotham a la Star Wars…

… Praxis explodes in TUC a la Alderan…

… but George Lucas remasters Star Wars and uses the same effect as TUC.

If JJ never said he was a Star Wars fan, there would never have been people looking for comparisons.

82. RAO - August 8, 2012

81. Bullshit. Praxis wasn’t blown up by a superweapon on the villian’s massive ship as a way to get revenge on a lead character. And Batman was looking over the city as it’s protector, not as an aimless young man searching for a path.

It has nothing to do with JJ being a Star Wars fan. It’s reality staring you in the face, and I’d love to hear someone ask one of the Court whether that shot (and the other SW-esque stuff) was done intentionally as a homage or happenstance. My money is on homage. Hell, Quentin Tarantino made a career ripping off old movies. I have no major issue with JJ taking a scene or three as long as they contribute to the story.

83. Aurore - August 8, 2012

“….. And Orci’s argument that “just because the polls say most people hated it doesn’t mean anything because you only make up 3% of the audience” is Bermanesque cop out bullshit.”
_______

That is not what he said.

“Where’s the data that shows support of Spock/Uhura, Keenser, ect? I like Orci, I respect his work, but I have nothing to gain ala inside information or exclusive interviews so I’m not going to suck up. I’m a soldier, not a diplomat. I can only tell you the truth.”

…Right. Thank you for the truth.
I appreciate your honesty, soldier….

84. L4YERCAKE - August 8, 2012

You’re all missing the forest for the trees on the whole Star Wars/Trek 09 thing, the influence was that TOS was a great television show that led to more great tv shows in the similar vein, but Trek rarely translated to the big screen (Khan being the glaring exception), so in order to pull that off they went the obvious route and tried to emulate the visual scope and breadth (as well as sound) of Star Wars, and successfully, I’d say. TV Trek has more in common with Twilight Zone than space opera, and they wanted to infuse the latter in the new adventures of the classic crew.

85. Montreal_Paul - August 8, 2012

I’m just saying that you can find Star Wars comparisons in anything if you look hard enough. Personally, I think all those Star Wars comparisons regarding Trek is nitpicking fans. Nothing more. I don’t see it. Wow… Kirk is on a motorcycle looking at the Enterprise and Luke is looking at the moons from a sand dune… OMG! That is almost, nearly, close to Star Wars! Sorry, I just don’t buy into it. But you are definitely entitled to your opinion on it.

86. RAO - August 8, 2012

83. That’s how I took it. What was your take?

85. We’ll have to agree to disagree. I remember when I first saw it in the theatre. I, despite not being a Star Wars (not a hater, its just not my thing), immediately knew the Kirk scene was the Luke scene, and others in my row could be heard whispering the same impression.

87. Montreal_Paul - August 8, 2012

That never even came to my mind while watching it. When I read about it after the fact, I saw a very slight comparison.. but always found it a stretch. Yes, we will have to agree to disagree on that whole Star Wars comparison.

88. Aurore - August 8, 2012

That’s how I took it. What was your take?
______

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

Obviously , to me, “less than half didn’t like uhura/spock” did not mean
that “most people hated it” (that’s how you took it, apparently) .

But, it’s a matter of perspective, I guess. We can agree to disagree.
I liked the romance, others didn’t. No big deal.

:)

89. Sebastian S. - August 8, 2012

# 85

MP~

Partly agree; although JJ Abrams has said in print that we wanted to Star Wars-up the Star Trek franchise. I don’t think that there were any wholesale scene-steals from SW, but the vibe is a bit more SW than ST at times (and I’m totally fine with that).

As I’ve said, ST is more like classical music. SW is more like rock ‘n roll. ST09 is sort of a ‘rock opera’….

;-D

90. Sebastian S. - August 8, 2012

# 89

Edit: Meant to say ‘he wanted’ not ‘we wanted’. I wish this site had an EDIT function for us old farts….

;-)

91. Red Dead Ryan - August 8, 2012

Let’s be honest, most of the previous Trek films were slow and plodding. Even TWOK and FC, to a lesser degree, feel small compared to “Star Trek” ’09.

J.J Abrams took the fast-paced frenetic energy of all the “Star Wars” films and included it in his own “Star Trek” blockbuster. The scope of the latest Trek movie recalled, but not copied, that of the “Star Wars” movies.

I did not see one seen in the last Trek movie that reminded me of any from the “Star Wars” movies. Even the destruction of Vulcan was different. Vulcan imploded rather than exploded. But I guess Spock’s telepathic sense of the loss of his homeworld could have been inspired by Obi Wan Kenobi’s psychic perception of Alderaan’s destruction at the hands of the Death Star. But remember, in “Immunity Syndrome”, Spock sensed the loss of all Vulcan lives aboard the Intrepid from a considerable distance.

92. David - August 8, 2012

Given Landru is beamed aboard the Enterprise in the comics, I wonder if the computer will play a role in the upcoming film.

To speculate: we might have a computer who thinks it is God playing a tactical game against the god-like Gary Mitchell. Thoughts?

93. RAO - August 8, 2012

91. Great point about the Intrepid crew. Still say that the motorcycle scene was “heavily influenced” by the two moons scene. Maybe Anthony can get Orci to comment.

88. By that rationale, he is a liar. The poll in question had, IIRC, something like 5,000 votes. And the romance had like a 70% disapproval rating along with the brewery (again I’m going from memory so feel free to correct me if I’m wrong.) This site is notoriously extremely pro-JJTrek for obvious reasons. But even on the other major sites/boards I’ve seen mostly venom directed towards the romance and those that liked it generally seemed to fit a stereotype to me (IE women or NuFans who wouldn’t know a Sehlat if it bit ‘em on the ass). Perhaps it’s my perception or preconceived notions. Would you agree it was one of the more unpopular changes?

94. navamske - August 8, 2012

I’d like to know what they’re going to do in the new timeline when the probe comes looking for the whales. First, I can’t imagine that anything about Nero’s creation of the new timeline would prevent the probe from showing up. Second, apparently the only person in the Federation who could even figure out that the probe wanted to talk to a whale was Spock. And not just any Spock: a Spock who had recently undergone an intensive reeducation. He needed the reeducation because he parked his katra in McCoy and then died. He died saving the Enterprise from Khan. Khan was pissed off at Kirk because of their encounter fifteen years before that led to his being marooned on a “barren sand heap” and his wife’s death. If none of these things happen in the new timeline, who’s going to figure out that the probe wants to talk to a whale — and provide it with one to talk to? Also, they need to have an experience like the one the prime characters had in “Tomorrow Is Yesterday” so they know about the “slingshot around the sun” thing.

95. RAO - August 8, 2012

94. Two “outs” as explanation: First, Kirk2 learned these things from Spock via the mindmeld. Second, Spock is still around and logically wouldn’t go to his grave without at least telling someone “hey, there’s a huge Vienna sausage in space coming this way looking for whales. Find some or you’re screwed.” The probe is roughly 25 years away from getting to earth. V’Ger is only 12-13 and far more destructive. Here’s another question… If Spock’s ship is faster than the Narada or it’s weapons, as shown when Spock2 flew it, why didn’t Spock simply jump to warp when emerging from the black hole?

96. silver - August 8, 2012

Why all the complains…

ST 09 is star trek based on an alternate reality. It is idiotic that people expect to see TOS all over again.

As for the S/U romance I think those who hated it are a loud minority of slash fan girls… some trek fans could careless.

Many slash fan girls are still under the delusion that Kirk and Spock and secret homosexual lovers even when both Shatner and Nimoy have rejected such claim.

Last I watched TNG, TOS Spock was married and he had a son who was getting married.

When last we saw TOS Kirk in generation and there was no implication that he was homosexual.

In the recent 09 film, TOS Spock refers to NuKirk as an old friend not lover… friend.

Most fan boys could careless about the S/U romance as many of them now that a hero always get the girl. the question was who is more deserving of the girl.

kirk or spock? ….Uhura
Wolverine or cyclops?…..Jean Grey
Peter parker or Harry Osborne?…..Mary Jane
Angel or Spike…..Buffy Summers
Harry or Ron?….Hermione Granger

In all honesty most fan boys will rather see a man and a woman get it on in a sci-fi film than a man and a man.

If you watch the commentary the reason why JJ Arams and his crew paired S/U was because he wanted to avoid the cliché romance where the typical loving hero who was staright up Handsome and was a ladies man get the girl.

This was the reason why he didnt go for Kirk/Uhura

JJ Abrams wanted the intelligent geek or emo for once to get the girl.

And like I said earlier its an alternate reality,I don’t see Spiderman fans arguing about whether peter parker should be with mary jane or gwen stacy since both have been peter first loves in different marvel alternate universe .

ST 09 are not TOS characters so as far as I am concerned JJ can do with them whatever he wants as long as he makes them cool.

97. l4YERCAKE - August 8, 2012

92. The primary reason I doubt anything of that sort will happen is because I don’t think they’re going to follow any storyline that requires reading the comics retelling of the episode in order to understand it, that simply wouldn’t make sense.

For instance, there’s absolutely no way I believe Gary Mitchell will be in the sequel, I think doing that storyline in the comics was in a way the producers saying, this story will never be in the films, go ahead and cannibalize it. But let’s pretend for a moment that Mitchell is the villain: how do they fit into the film a recap of all those events from Where No Man Has Gone Before in order for the audience to understand who this person is, an audience most of which probably don’t read comics, let alone the ones being done with the new crew, however great they are. Logistically it just wouldn’t work..

Also, on the DVD extras, JJ and crew talk extensively how they watched Star Wars for spiritual inspiration for the reboot, and it wasn’t to swipe scenes like Alderaan exploding. Yes, there’s some similarities (Kirk getting called a farm boy, him gazing longingly at the Enterprise under construction, etc.) but they’re incidental, on the verge of coincidence.

ps- It’s my understanding that The Dark Knight and maybe Empire Strikes Back were the inspiration for the sequel.

98. L4YERCAKE - August 8, 2012

96. ‘Last I watched TNG, TOS Spock was married and he had a son who was getting married.’

???

What episode was that? Don’t think that’s so, friend…

99. Daoud - August 8, 2012

Maybe he’s got TNG episode “Sarek” on his mind. Sarek was married and had a son who was getting married according to the dialogue therein.
.
The only Son of Spock postulated in Trek I can recall is in the books, that being Zar, conceived of Zarabeth in Sarpeidon’s past. Are there other Sons of Spock? (Good name for an indie band, eh?)

100. silver - August 8, 2012

@98

the episode was called Unification 1 and 2

it was mention right there that Spock had a son and since vulcan are very traditioal, so I gurantee you that many vulcan children unlike human children are not born out of wedlock.

memeory beta which is an offical star trek wikia identifies TOS Spock’s wife as Saavik and his son as Zar

101. chrisfawkes.com - August 9, 2012

Anyone notice that those who have issues with the Spock/Uhura relationship are predominantly 40 year old virgins?

102. Aurore - August 9, 2012

“Would you agree it was one of the more unpopular changes?”
_________

You already stated that you believed it was an “unpopular” element @ 60.
And, I already shared my opinion on the subject….both in posts 65 and 88.

Again, we can agree to disagree.

P.S.: In the Roberto Orci’s quote I linked to, what truly piqued my interest was the following; “We just know that only 3 percent of trek fans even post…”. I wondered what he most certainly knew regarding the remaining 97 percent of trek fans who don’t even post.

I assume the powers that be do not rely exclusively on Internet polls…..

:)

103. DiscoSpock - August 9, 2012

#98 & 100 – First, there is no “official” Trek wiki; the information on StarTrek.com is as close to that as there is. Second, Memory Beta specifically lists itself as “non-canon,” which means it contains unofficial information, so calling it an official wiki shows that you don’t really know what you’re looking at or talking about.

Spock’s son Zar ONLY appears in novels, and he is never mentioned in TNG or any other official Trek. As for the “Unification” two-parter, it is Sarek’s son (presumed to be Spock, but not named in those episodes) whose wedding Picard once attended. No mention of Spock’s son. No mention of Saavik being Spock’s wife.

Again, to be clear, “Unification” talks about Sarek’s son’s wedding, doesn’t talk about Saavik, and doesn’t talk about Spock’s son, who only exists in the non-canon novels.

Same for Spock marrying Saavik–that is only in a novel, and it’s non-canon. Not official. Didn’t happen in the official Star Trek universe.

104. Jemini - August 9, 2012

39: someone could say that the ones who care about the videogame or Spock being a robotic vulcan are shallow fanboys/teenagers with acne, then.
Because, you know, apparently women only care about romance while the men only care about action. Right. /sarcasm

Surprisingly, many old TOS fans actually liked the S/U romance (I, for one, like it and welcome the change with open arms ;) )
Most of the reviews of the movie were quite positive about it or even praised the writers for their choice.
My friends all liked it including the guys because it’s something new for them and a side of Spock that we didn’t see before .
Also,
72. Startrekfangirl
“The other group most vocally distressed about Spock/Uhura are women who read and write slash fanfiction. They are pretty hostile to women characters in general–perhaps because most are young heterosexual women still sorting out their own worries about sex by self-inserting themselves in the roles of male characters. “

EXACTLY.
Those along with some fanboys are the usual S/U haters and the ones who are the most vocal against it, sometimes even to the point of obsession frankly e.g essays, links of the polls in this site posted everywhere in attempt to .. how it was their motto? ‘tell the writers how the make the sequel right and stop the madness’, repeated arguments made here over and over, hate and a general “bully” attitude toward the fans that appreciated that romance.

78: what’s your data? a stupid poll? that’s pretty lame for someone who claims to “speak the truth”
what truth?

Orci is right. You calling him a “liar” just because he stated a simple fact (that isn’t valid only for star trek but ANY fandom, actually) is hilarious.
The poll you’re talking about, in particular, was a bit of a farce. Slash fans promoted it everywhere asking people to vote against S/U.
In that poll we didn’t have the option to state that we liked them instead so it was easy for the haters to totally monopolize the results.
Furthermore, in this site it wasn’t the only poll about S/U and it doesn’t seem to me that in all of them people disliked it.
But anyway, polls say nothing.
The same person can vote more than once and you can’t even be sure that that all the people voting had actually watched the movie.

“Where’s the data that shows support of Spock/Uhura”

maybe you should start to read more sites and not just this one.
As a new couple in a very old fandom that is dominated by slash (fangirls) and fanboys since decades, Spock and Uhura surprisingly gained a consistent fanbase. To get an idea about it we can look at the amount of members that their communities have in the most popular social networks like livejournal, tumblr or fanfictions sites like fanfiction.net.
The reboot made Spock/Uhura the most popular het pair of the fandom and one of the most popular movie couples of the last five years.
They’re more popular than other canon het pairs in the trek fandom like Spock/Chapel and Uhura/Scotty where the latter is really rare

To be honest, the most vocal haters that I’ve read are the ones in this site. Coincidentally, a site where no registration is required in order to post comments.
Both at startrek[dot]com and trekbbs for example, that are fanboards, I don’t see fans hating it so much many don’t care about it/are indifferent, many liked it. Google ‘Shipper war: Spock/Uhura or Spock/Chapel? at trekbbs’

to the ones saying that the romance subplot needs to be more “subtle”
I wanted to say that If you get more subtle than S/U you have no romance sublot, at all LOL. What’s more subtle than THAT? Seriously, the romance between them took 5 minutes of screentime if not less actually and here you are whining about it and you want to take those seconds away from them. LOL now that’s fussy! (*I forgot how “useful” were all the other character scenes in the movie ;) my favorite is Kirk with the monster /sarcasm)
Just say that you don’t want to see them at all. It makes more sense and is not ridiculous as saying that their romance wasn’t “subtle” and took too much screentime.

101: I love that you didn’t specify “women” LOL

105. chrisfawkes.com - August 9, 2012

Well i was thinking mainly men with a full collection of star trek dolls and no girlfriend.

106. Jemini - August 9, 2012

eta: the writers of the novels (the ‘Starfleet Academy 2010 book series) liked S/U too. Now, I don’t know if Rick Barba and Alan Gratz were women in another life but I guess that they’re men.

107. RAO - August 9, 2012

Hmm, I say “most of the fans of the Spock/Uhura crap are women” and who vehemently defends it? I rest my case. I couldn’t tell you about the slash nonsense, it’s an abomination on all different levels. Didn’t Leila Kelomi, Zarabeth, or any of Kirk’s women put the nail in that coffin about 45 years ago? Although I will admit, that “backrub” scene on the bridge was creepy as hell.

108. SoonerDave - August 9, 2012

Gotta love the irony that a site devoted to Trek, where all things are diverse and wonderful and opinions are respected and we toss around the acronym IDIC like an umpire yells balls and strikes that folks who disdain the Spock/Uhura relationship in JJTrek are collectively likened to slash-fiction “fanboys” or are “40 year old virgins.”

Really?

I dislike the Spock/Uhura business mightily, and I’m in neither of those groups. And I, for one, have tried to establish a credible, legitimate reason for disliking it. Primarily because the way it was offered wasn’t authentic or credible for either character. Couldn’t care less which fan poll or what estimate of the fan base has chimed in…internet fan polls are absolutely useless, as are posting estimates.

Can’t a person just have an opinion without it being slashed?

109. Weerd1 - August 9, 2012

I think Spock and Uhura together in the first film is very much in line with TOS. When Uhura sings about Spock in Charlie X it is very easy to see that those lyrics refer to a past relationship of some sort. Making out on the transporter pad was a bit over the top, but likely no more over the top than Kirk trying to hook up with one of his Doctors at a Christmas party, or his Yeoman actively trying to seduce him in her mini-skirt.

There is, however, enough diverse Trek for anyone’s tastes. If the current incarnation doesn’t thrill you, be happy it’s a 45 year old show that’s alive at all, and wait for the next version. That’s what I did with Voyager…

110. Red Dead Ryan - August 9, 2012

Listen, some of us who oppose the Spock/Uhura romance have given legitimate reasons for our opposition. There is no need to pigeonhole us.

Also, Spock never got married, as far as I know.

Picard mentioned once during “Unification” that he once met Spock “at a wedding”. It could have been Spock’s wedding, but probably not, since since there would have been a mention of Spock’s wife in either the “Spock” or “Countdown” IDW comics. I figure Spock, in his latter years, would have probably mentioned a wife had he married.

So no, there is no evidence he did marry.

111. Startrekfangirl - August 9, 2012

110. Sorry, but on TNG episode “Sarek,” Picard tells Riker in the opening scene that he met Sarek years ago “at his son’s wedding.” Exact words. I just went to the episode to see. Now, he doesn’t say his “son” is Spock, but presumably he isn’t talking about Sybok.

112. Red Dead Ryan - August 9, 2012

#111.

Yeah, okay. But still, “at his son’s wedding” doesn’t necessarily mean it was Spock’s wedding. Sarek could have had another child after Spock and Sybok. Or adopted a child.

And besides, if Spock did have a wife, wouldn’t we have heard about that in “Unification” when Spock suddenly left for Romulus? Wouldn’t Picard have asked Spock’s wife about his whereabouts and what he was up to? Wouldn’t she have been on Vulcan with the dying Sarek, and his wife, Perrin?

Of course, at that point they could have been divorced, but it all becomes convoluted.

I still say Spock never married. There just isn’t anything substantial to prove that he did.

I think one little vague line in a Prime Universe TNG episode is being used as justification to defend the Spock/Uhura romance in the alternate timeline.

113. FarStrider - August 9, 2012

@112 Using anything from the Prime Universe to justify or nix something in the alternative universe is always a stretch. . Alternate Universe is ALTERNATE. Spock and Uhura is canon for this Universe for now. If they break up in the next movie that will be canon. If they get married in movie 3, that will be canon. We won’t know until we see the story play out; and even then it won’t matter how anyone uses the TOS to justify their dislike for this development. So you can get used to it or not, but it is there, and arguing about it won’t make a difference.

~FS

114. love - August 9, 2012

Either is leia, zarabeth droxine ,uhura, chapel or whoever

Vulcans are capbale of love…I may also add that Spcok Prime or TOS Spock has regretted some of his actions he did at a young age.

if you don’t believe me look at when he met NuSpock in the 09 film. He told him to put outside logic and do what feels is right.

Also if Sarek a full Vulcan can admit he openly loved Amada in ST 09 why shouldn’t Spock be able to love anyone?

The most annoying thing with slash fans is that they claim spock cant love or be in a romantic relationsip with anyone

however the slash fan write fan-fictions of kirk and spock making love all night long and saying I love you to each other in a way that is romantic and not platonic .

Frodo and Sam from lord of the rings acted more gay than TOS Kirk/Spock. However there are many lord of the rings fan that respect the fact than Sam is married to rosie and they have 2 kids.

The slash fan from lord of the rings don’t go about attacking other ship groups like many Star Trek slash fans who are so very hateful to Spock/Uhura or Spock/Chapel fans.

Some of you guys need to grow up.

115. Red Dead Ryan - August 9, 2012

#113.

I was pointing out that Spock in the Prime Universe wasn’t married. I didn’t use that to try to brush off Spock/Uhura. I was responding to those who attempted to justify Spock/Uhura by building a straw man argument that Spock Prime did indeed marry at some point. There is no evidence that he did marry.

#114.

Not all of us who are opposed to Spock/Uhura are “slash fans”. Again, stop with the pigeonholing.

116. RAO - August 9, 2012

113. That’s probably the most logical defense of the Spock/Uhura thing I’ve heard. It’s there, there’s nothing we can do about it, so we must make the decision to either accept/ignore it, or don’t watch The Vulcan Shore err NuTrek.

Now fixing the iBridge so it looks closer to the Kelvin or training ship? That’s something realistic we can push for in the future.

117. Startrekfangirl - August 9, 2012

112. “I think one little vague line in a Prime Universe TNG episode is being used as justification to defend the Spock/Uhura romance in the alternate timeline.”

I’m not sure anyone is doing this. In 76, Silver mentioned a possible wedding for Spock as reason to question the slash writers who insists Kirk and Spock are lovers, not as a reason she/he likes the S/U pairing.

Of course, many fanfiction writers veer from canon all the time, and I’d put slash writers in that category. I personally like stories that stay within canon–and fanfiction and the novels and comics can do that by writing in the back stories and filling in the gaps. For instance, some very interesting stories have been written explaining the origins of Spock and Uhura’s relationship without violating anything known already about them or contradicting anything that happens in the movie. I, for one, welcome such additions. They’re fun, and they have as much to say (and have as much entertainment value) as anything else in the canon.

118. Startrekfangirl - August 9, 2012

Silver is at 96. My bad.

119. Steve Johnson - August 9, 2012

@100

I’m pretty sure Memory Beta (Hence not being ‘Alpha’) is a non-canon source. Meaning it deals in the EU that Memory Alpha refuses. So the validity of Spock’s kind in that regard may not be applicable.

My only request of the new people (JJ, Orci, etc) handling Star Trek is that they do go back and watch the original Trek series. At least the classic highly regarded episodes, and take notes. You’ve got the audiences coming back, now try to understand deeply what the original Trek characters are beyond the pop culture impact. (EX: Having a character say “Set phasers to stun” or “Beam me up” is not deep understanding. )

Also, those who continue to deny the blatant homages from Star Wars, please, stop being defensive about it. It’s there clear as day. You can lift scenes from Trek09 and in terms of purpose, and emotional drive, they are identical to Star Wars ANH scenes. You can make the argument that “you can do that with many things” but there’s a difference. JJ is on record as being a huge Star Wars fan. That, too, is just fine. I think Trek could use some of the sleekness of Wars pace here and there. (It worked out quite well for the very frantic action scene that opened the film, for example).

The problem is that the finer details of the Trek characters could be lost amidst an excuse to do “whatever.” I think those who are very enthusiatic and defensive of the New Trek need to realize this about those detractors here. They’re more worried for the characters than anything. For instance, it is my belief that in changing Kirk’s backstory so completely there is no way that he can ever be looked at as the same man. No father, encounters and knowledge of the future, getting captaincy years too early, with no experience elsewhere. (The Farragut is destroyed in this alternate reality).

Star Trek has never relied upon “destiny” the way the first of the New Trek movies did. This is very much a Star Wars idea. (Some people might point to episodes like City on the Edge of Forever that indicate “time” has eddies and currents that converged at this point, but again, that’s handled more scientifically and as something we simply do not yet understand. Not as some kind of a spiritual “fate” in that story.)

I am understandably curious about where New Trek 2 will take this refreshened take on Trek. I just also hope the JJ crew will take some time between shooting scenes and soforth to really appreciate the original show.

I see a very sad trend amongst some of the creative people, and some of the people on here. Throwing Trek under the bus by saying “Old trek was dull.” Old Trek endured for half a century. Conventions of thousands, viewership of millions, and profit in the billions.

Those who interpret the old films as being “slow, plodding” I cannot fathom as anything but new to the franchise, because many of those “slow, plodding” films have been held in high regard, not just as Trek films, but as good movies overall for many many years before this new film came along.

They should not be so quickly dismissed because the new film is different. The flip of that coin is that the new film series itself, should not be dismissed simply for being different.

120. silver - August 9, 2012

@117 …Startrek fangirl

you have a point.

However based on canon spock/uhura fanfiction is hardly seen in TOS Fanfiction. however if you go on star trek 2009 fanfiction.net page, you will get about 1000+ S/U stories.

This to me is fair as the S/U relationship exist in the 09 film and not in the TOS film and series.

if you however want to read spock/chapel stories go on TOS fan fiction.net page and you will get at least 200+ stories on the spock/chapel romance

So I fail to see how canon is violated.

S/U are not together in TOS Universe they are together in JJ Abrams Verse.

This universe is separated from TOS universe and in all honesty everything in JJ Abrams universe has already violated canon.

As NuSpock puts it in the 09 film:

‘‘Whatever our lives might have been, if the time continuum was disrupted, our destinies have changed’’.

I only like S/U because they are not the silly gushy cheesy love story you see in edward/bella in the awful twilight series or anakin/padme in star wars

Howver this is my real reason of liking S/U and it is not based on any trek stuff it is based on reality.

NuSpock is quite snobby,nerdy and emo he is nothing like TOS Spock and NuUhura based on her being a top student and her been defended and looked after by her classmates is perhaps the ‘it girl’ of star fleet so them getting together was to me was perfect.

I like twisted romances…..Kirk/Uhura would have been to nice and neat. In fact the first time I saw the film I immediately predicted kirk/uhura will begin a romance after he hit on her in the bar.

I thought with time uhura will come around and like Kirk (afterall what’s not to like about kirk…based on a physical point of view)

However Uhura went for the awkward, unsmiling , snobby alien.
This is how real romance should be. S/U was very realistic.

In the real world most women don’t marry the straight up all handsome American guy. however fictional writers have given women the impression that the handsome jork or heartthrob is always the way to go.

geeks and nerds are never suppose to get the pretty girl. they are suppose to grow up and become mad scientist who will capture the girl and the handsome hero will come to her rescue.

Such assumption has always be a stereotype in fiction. S/U relationship is a contrast to that and that is why I loved it.

121. Montreal_Paul - August 9, 2012

119. Steve Johnson
“Also, those who continue to deny the blatant homages from Star Wars, please, stop being defensive about it. It’s there clear as day. You can lift scenes from Trek09 and in terms of purpose, and emotional drive, they are identical to Star Wars ANH scenes. You can make the argument that “you can do that with many things” but there’s a difference. JJ is on record as being a huge Star Wars fan. That, too, is just fine. I think Trek could use some of the sleekness of Wars pace here and there. (It worked out quite well for the very frantic action scene that opened the film, for example).”

It was as clear as mud, my friend. clear. as. mud. I never saw it when I saw the movie. And like I said… if JJ was a fan of, let’s say Mad Max, there would be comparisons drawn there. If you look hard enough or want to see it.. it will be there in almost anything. I am not denying anything. I just stated that I never saw it and I don’t see the “homage” at all. Sorry.

As for the opening scene… I think they got the pacing and style from Fast & Furious. ;)

122. Steve Johnson - August 9, 2012

@121

I’d disagree strongly, and speaking as someone who has spent a long time doing video editing, you can (and I have) actually cut clips from both films, and what you’ll find upon comparing them is in some instances shot-for-shot the cutting is identical to Star Wars. Length, pacing, motion. Narrative intention, indeed. It’s very clear that they used it as a basis in parts.

just because you didn’t notice it on viewing the movie does not mean it isn’t there. Also, JJ’s intention in that regard is very clear. He was borrowing from what he knew, and what he loves, and has brought it to the table. It’s inherently no different than Nick Meyer approaching the material as “Horatio Hornblower in space” fighting for uniforms with pockets, no smoking signs, and trying to push the naval theme in TWOK. It’s there, even if you don’t take direct notice of it.

123. Montreal_Paul - August 9, 2012

122. Steve Johnson

Steve. I have worked in TV and Film for over 25 years. You can do the same thing with Batman Begins. Use certain clips, edit the sound and music to match and voila!

Sorry. Don’t see it. But you are entitled to your opinion as well.

124. Montreal_Paul - August 9, 2012

122. Steve Johnson

BTW – the Horatio Hornblower in space has been tossed around even before TWOK… during TOS in fact. Along side the whole Wagon Train To The Stars. And the Naval theme was present in the original series in the 60s because Roddenberry was in the Navy.

125. navamske - August 9, 2012

Any change in the new timeline has to be the direct (e.g., George Kirk dies as his son James is born, instead of living another thirty-odd years) or indirect (e.g., James Kirk’s life is different because of the absence of his father) result of Nero’s changing the timeline. I can accept that Pike’s, then Kirk’s, Enterprise looks more advanced than the one in TOS because the shuttles leaving the Kelvin brought back to the Federation detailed scans they took of Nero’s twenty-fourth-century ship, and Starfleet reverse-engineered the technology. But what changed for Spock and/or Uhura — directly or indirectly — as a result of Nero’s incursion that would cause them to behave so differently from their “prime” counterparts?

I thought that “reverse-engineering” gag (is that canon?) was a clever way to avoid having to use the TOS Enterprise. But it pissed me off that the Kelvin, even *before* Nero’s arrival, looked more futuristic than Pike’s ship from “The Cage.” Hell, the crew members weren’t even wearing Pike-era uniforms.

126. RAO - August 9, 2012

125. I loved the Kelvin uni’s, they looked like a nice bridge between Enterprise and TOS. Let’s face it, this was a big budget movie and a CGI version of the real Enterprise wouldn’t have worked. Church took parts of the TOS Enterprise and TMP Enterprise along with original elements (some good, some bad) to create a ship worthy of the film’s scope. Aside from the nacelles’ profile, I think they nailed it. Again, you’ve got to approach the NuTrek with reasonable expectations. Looking for a Meyer film or TOS: The Movie will leave you disappointed. That’s a void filled by the top notch fan films like Phase II.

127. rose by any other name - August 9, 2012

My information is that Gene Roddenberry served in the US Air Force as a bomber pilot during WW2 and then later became a commercial airline pilot. He gained inspiration from the Horatio Hornblower – ie FICTIONAL BOOKS that he read.

I am really *loving* the lack of logic presented here – the best being:
#107 – “Hmm, I say “most of the fans of the Spock/Uhura crap are women” and who vehemently defends it? I rest my case.” presumably an answer to a post by a woman. So one woman is able to prove his point about MOST of Spock/Uhura fans being women. Holy Moly…

Neither Spock would sanction that statement as being a “logical” deduction..

Upon reading some of the posts on this thread, it seems to me that some people have spent too much time watching Star Wars and not enough time watching Star TREK (and I am not referring JJ Abrams here).

128. rose by any other name - August 9, 2012

#69 – “I’m referring to the *PANDERING to the female audience”

What? As if no film maker ever pandered to the male audience? Or does it mean that Star Trek (as in characters and stories told) was only meant to be watched, enjoyed and could only be correctly interpreted by an elite group of males, who, of course, would not have to endure the “humiliation of being pandered to”? Perhaps that’s what Gene Roddenberry initially thought, but history is proving otherwise.

Rose here found that a kea’s feathers are ruffled a bit so had to say something.

*My emphasis.

129. Jack - August 9, 2012

125 “Hell, the crew members weren’t even wearing Pike-era uniforms.”

It was 25 years before the Pike era. I do wish they’d kept that colour scheme, though.

122. “I’d disagree strongly, and speaking as someone who has spent a long time doing video editing, you can (and I have) actually cut clips from both films, and what you’ll find upon comparing them is in some instances shot-for-shot the cutting is identical to Star Wars. Length, pacing, motion. Narrative intention, indeed. It’s very clear that they used it as a basis in parts. ”

YouTube? So, which instances? Not doubting you, just curious.

The Spock/Uhura thing — were they an item before the destruction of Vulcan? If it (Spock losing his planet and his mom) pushed them into something, that might make a bit of more sense (as to why the characters are seemingly different from their TOS counterparts) . But the bit before they board the Enterprise, especially the way Saldana plays it, makes it seem like they’re pretty familiar — more familiar than instructor and student — already. Sure, it’s a movie — it’s not real, and heck, maybe in the TOS timeline a young Spock and young Uhura could have seen each other, years before TOS… nothing we saw in TOS specifically rules this out(?).

130. RAO - August 9, 2012

129. “This Side of Paradise”
Spock, after infection by the spores: “I love you. I can love you!”
Spock couldn’t or wouldn’t admit affection for Leila when they were younger, on Earth (presumably around the same time as JJTrek in the alt universe) but could upon being “freed” by the spores. How did Nero’s incursion change that when Spock as a child is lead by Sarek to believe he only married Amanda (who was played beautifully by Ryder) because “it was logical.” Later, as a young adult, he intends to undergo Kohlinar until the minister takes a shot at his mother. Spock2’s backstory to that point is exactly what the actual Spock’s backstory was, except his relationship with Sarek was much warmer. Did Spock2 suddenly toss that away upon meeting NuHura at the academy? Major divergence from the character with no, ahem, logical explanation of the time disturbance.

127. Actually just about every post vehemently defending it or taking offense to what I said has been, well, a women. Is it safe to assume you are as well? As far as pandering to women, it’s smart by the Court. Trek fandom has always been male dominated. It’s logical (there’s that word again) to expand the audience. I’m just calling it as I see it. My major problem is that it was poorly presented. I could understand Uhura taking the Chapel role of falling for Spock but being pushed away. It could’ve been a major arc over the trilogy as Spock reconciles his emotions. Instead we get something out of Twilight with no explanation that contradicts the base character. And that’s exactly what it is, playing to women’s love for the mysterious unattainable male. There were things in the movie I thought could’ve been better, mostly sets like the iBridge or Pike’s crew having names from The Cage. Even the brewery didn’t bug me because it’s possible that was a lower level of engineering we never saw much of in TOS. Then there were things I hated like the S/U, Keenser and the Corvette scene (again taken directly from the Phantom Menace). Having said all that, if one considers JJTrek in the lineage of the previous films and not a separate entity, I’d rate it my third favorite film behind TUC and Khan. One can like or even love a film while still finding faults or things they’d personally change.

131. Cervantes - August 9, 2012

A while back I came up with a scenario which allows me easily accept *whatever* character differences, design alterations, or wild plotlines the J.J.-verse movies throw up, where the ‘butterfly effects’ of Nero’s supposed ‘timeline’-altering intervention are concerned.

I’ve found it a big help in keeping the original TOS series/movies as a totally seperate entity to the 2009 reboot shennanigans, and it’s my preferred ‘personal canon’ now –

Rather than Nero causing a ‘timeline’ disruption to the ‘prime’ TOS universe…I choose to look on everything ‘Trek’-related that comes *after* the ‘Undiscovered Country’ TOS movie as merely happening in a totally ALTERNATE UNIVERSE instead…. So the ‘Next Gen’ universe is NOT the same as the ‘prime’ TOS one, and therefore neither are the events of the ‘Generations’ movie (where a non-‘prime’ universe ‘Kirk’ dies!) set in it either…and neither is the START of the 2009 movie, even before Nero’s intervention! The elderly ‘Spock’ we see in J.J.’s movie is therefore NOT from the ‘prime’ TOS universe either, but comes from the seperate ‘Next Gen’ universe that the 2009 movie begins in…

With this imaginary scenario in place, I can take anything J.J.’s ‘re-imaginings’ entail a whole lot better now! :)

132. Jack - August 9, 2012

True. Maybe not a hookup, but a connection — which Spock couldn’t pursue. So is Vulcan imploding catalyst here? Or do the writers just not give a damn and wanted them together.

Does he have a warmer relationship with his father? Don’t we just know from TOS that a rift formed after Spock turned down the vulcan science academy (which really should have had a fancier name)? In 2009 we only see Spock and Sarek when Spock’s young, at the acadamy panel…. and then as/after Vulcan’s destroyed. Could the scenes up until Spock spurns the acadamy fit into TOS continuity?

I agree that Cross is less potentially frightening than Lenard. Too bad an angrier brit, like Ralph Fiennes, but less famous and distracting, wasn’t around?

133. Jack - August 9, 2012

wait, the corvette scene was taken from the phantom menace? What, the pod-race?

And what’s so bad about Keenser? Is it because he’s short? He’s not exactly an Ewok.

134. Cervantes - August 9, 2012

But even so, I can think of plenty of moments that the 2009 movie could do without in a re-edited version sometime.

135. RAO - August 9, 2012

133. I didn’t realize it myself until I saw a YouTube video with both scenes side by side. Perhaps it’s the similarity of the actors, but they do match up. Either way, it was a very non-Trek scene that didn’t belong IMO.

Keenser is just… Ugh. You might as well have a sub title during his scenes that says “sorry everyone, we just needed an excuse for kids to buy merchandise.” I saw no need whatsoever for a walking pinecone to add even more crap to what they did to Scotty. I don’t see the Ewok comparison, except for the afformentioned “let’s put something in there to hawk to the pre-teen crowd.”

136. Jack - August 9, 2012

Fair enough. Was Keenser there for the kids? I don’t see the attraction — I don’t think Trek was a very kid-friendly movie, but what do I know. Heck, I loved TMP when I was 8, even though there was nothing in it for kids. I even collected the crazy McDonald’s toys.

If here are Star Wars homages, great. But the very different argument — JJ turned Star Trek into Star Wrs, well, i still haven’t been convinced.

Both start in space. A big ship overpowers a smaller ship. 
Both then have scenes on planets 
Both have blonde kids raised in a treeless place without a dad
Both have scenes in a bar (both bars contain at least one alien, and there are bar fights, of sorts, in both)
Both give the kid an older mentor
Both have a desert planet
Both have escape pods
Both have similar hyperspace effects
Both have a planet destroyed by a Superweapon
Both have gun fights with bolts instead of beams
Both have a charcter played by a dwarf in a costume.
Both have a final space battle between the good guy and the bad guy
Both have an award ceremony
Both have a smiley, upbeat ending

Differences: Uhura wears underwear, Princess Leia didn’t.

Things shared by Trek 09 and teh whole Star Wars series: ice planet, scary monster on ice planet, our hero saved from scary monster, tow-haired kid with a destiny, said kid likes driving fast, speeder bikes, people in robes, various councils, a ship with a shiny white bridge, san francisco = coruscant, holographic displays, shuttles, spaceships, space, actors, cgi, etc.

137. RAO - August 9, 2012

The truth is JJ ripped off Galaxy Quest. Oh wait, that was Enterprise. Nevermind.

138. rose by any other name - August 9, 2012

RAO – It is the terminology that you use, ie “PANDER to women”. Perhaps you are not aware of how derogatory the use of the word “pander” is. In fact, until I looked it up, I had no idea just how inappropriate the use of this word is. It has a worse meaning than I initially thought it did.

“pan·der (pndr)
intr.v. pan·dered, pan·der·ing, pan·ders
1. To act as a go-between or liaison in sexual intrigues; function as a procurer.
2. To cater to the lower tastes and desires of others or exploit their weaknesses: “He refused to pander to nostalgia and escapism” (New York Times).”

In this case, I take your use to be more in accord with the second meaning, but you can see how any woman might be a little miffed by being told that the Bad Robot team are “pandering” to her. Let’s hope that this was NOT JJ Abrams’ and co. intentions…BOB ORCI?!

The word infers (to me, at least) that the tastes, interests and desires of women in general are lower, less intelligent, thoughtful, insightful, challenging than those belonging to a group not so “pandered to”, ie males.

The fact that I am another woman, the second, to query your assertions do nothing to “rest your case”. You’ll need to do a lot better than just having two females question you, to prove your case…;)!

139. jimthebard - August 10, 2012

http://youtu.be/-eWopfEJq48

140. Pauln6 - August 10, 2012

All movies pander to the audience that they want to target; I don’t mind that up to a point. In aiming for more of a Star Wars vibe, they were ‘downgrading’ Star Trek to make it more of a children’s franchise. In upscaling the romance element, they were aiming for a broader audience to include non-Trek fans and especially female non-Trek fans. But let’s not get too snobby, as they did exactly the same thing in Star Trek IV, which was one of the most popular Star Trek films.

As for my view, Star Trek: Enterprise should have more of an Horatio Hornblower vibe instead of a TNG vibe. One of the reasons it was less successful IMO was that it didn’t evoke the old school excitement of TOS, although it was getting there by season 4.

As far as NuTrek goes, I lament that they pi**ed all over some very basic modern era science – trying to reach a broader audience need not involve dumbing down real science unless there is a real need for it in the story, in which case ‘proper’ made up Trek science should replace it. It was irritating that they had some very large plot holes that could have been filled with minor tweaks. If they had made the decision to regress the timeline to 2258 they should have just accepted that Chekov was too young for the first movie and used one (or both) of the women instead. I would have been far happier if Janice Rand had been involved on Delta Vega (either as Kirk’s security escort or Scotty’s disgraced assistant) instead of Keenser. The kissing on the Transporter scene was unprofessional, and ludicrous, since time was of the essence and was almost as bad as ‘2012’ where our heroes wasted time hugging each other while a woman was drowning in the next room (obviously unaware along with everyone else on the ship that one does not die instantly from drowning and usually not until the chamber has filled up completely). And finally, Kirk’s promotion was too rapid; they should have finished with his commendation and a boast that his goal was to be captain of the Enterprise. Then the sequel could have opened a few years down the line with Kirk strolling onto the bridge to greet his new crew, including the fresh young ensign Chekov.

141. Jack - August 10, 2012

Rose, the word pandering (to fans, to guys, to voters) gets used all the time in this context. You’re right, it implies plenty of cynicism. But most movies treat us like we’re all dummies — two very different/squabbling people fall improbably in love (or go on to become captain and first mate), man must learn life lesson to redeem himself and safe the world…

142. RAO - August 10, 2012

138. Pick whatever word you want, it’s still true. And you were the third or fourth by my count. The Star Warsian explosions and Kirk-on-Gaila scenes were pandering to the 18-30 males. If I used “targeting” for example which conveys the same meaning, one could become righteously indignant to that as well.

140. Bingo, on all counts. I have no idea why they put Chekov in the first movie. Some have even postulated that it’s not the same Chekov, which makes more sense considering they basically rewrote the character and he’s nothing like the “real” Chekov including his age. If anything he was another Wesley. Nickname idea for Chekov2: Wessles Crusher.

143. Jemini - August 10, 2012

113: amen.

125: “But what changed for Spock and/or Uhura — directly or indirectly — as a result of Nero’s incursion that would cause them to behave so differently from their “prime” counterparts?”

simple. In the prime universe Spock and Uhura met each other aboard the Enterprise when they were older and “married” to their job, two people who wouldn’t allow themselves to have any kind of romantic relationship with someone from the crew (also those were the 60s such relationships especially between those two were impossible).
In the alternate reality they have met each other at the Academy, four years before they both started to work aboard the ship.
It’s the different circumstances. Never wondered about how your life might have been if one event had happened or not happened or happened differently, if you had met a person at a different time or had gotten the chance to know him/her better?
Unless you believe in concepts like “destiny” ,”meant to be” and “love at first sight” I think it’s easy to understand that parallel realities might be pretty different to one another with only few things being similar.
In short, in this reality Spock and Uhura got a chance that their counterparts from the other reality hadn’t got . They got to know each other better and their personalities may fit better here.
I don’t remember if tos Uhura was a xenolinguist too but this one is and the vulcan’s language along with their story, society and culture must be one of the things that nuUhura did study at the Academy so he was her instructor and she was one of his top students and his TA (it was written in the characters dossiers at the official site).
The novels, even if not canon, can give us an insight about how their relationship might have started in the course of those years.
Most likely, they became friends at first and got closer through the years as they worked together and he was her mentor. They have similar interests and would probably find interesting things that other people may find absolutely boring or time consuming. In the novels, he’s firstly attracted to her because in her he sees qualities that he finds lacking in the other humans (e.g. she’s nerdy like him, always punctual, has the same no-nonsense approach when they work together on a project). She makes him see the humans (and consequently his human side) under a different and more positive light all the while keeping his vulcan heritage.
I think that Spock Prime never really fell in love but it doesn’t mean that he couldn’t love or wasn’t capable to experience love. nu!Spock was put in different circumstances that made it possible for him to fall in love and this is a side of him that was never explored before.

The fact that they have an ongoing relationship before the battle of vulcan( as it’s confirmed by the script and the novelization) actually makes way more sense to me and it’s more in character. Emotionally compromised or not, I don’t see Spock being so comfortable with her unless he was already intimate with her beforehand.
At the same time I don’t see Uhura comforting kissing and touching him like that had she not know that he needed that and he would welcome her actions.
Obvious existing relationship is obvious.

144. Red Dead Ryan - August 10, 2012

“Star Trek” desperately needed a jolt of “Star Wars” energy, and J.J Abrams gave it that with his own “Star Trek”. The “Star Wars” films, even the much-maligned prequels, are the gold standard for sci-fi on the big screen. A TMP or even TWOK-style Trek movie simply won’t bring in the crowds these days.

145. Startrekfangirl - August 10, 2012

143. Well said. Timing matters in relationships, as do so many other variables. That’s one reason the AU is fun…noting the differences.

A visual difference, for instance, concerning where Starfleet headquarters is located in San Francisco–in the TOS movies it appears to be across the bay where Fort Baker is now. In the reboot movie, it appears to be in SF proper at the Presidio. I don’t find that disconcerting so much as interesting to speculate about….why in one universe/timeline it would have been advantageous for Starfleet to be on one side of the bay or the other.

If anyone is interested in some credible Spock/Uhura origins stories, many good ones have been posted at Fanfiction.net. Here’s one that doesn’t violate canon, is well-written, and won some readers’ awards:

http://www.fanfiction.net/s/6290860/1/What_We_Think_We_Know

146. xai - August 10, 2012

My kingdom (minus the mortgage, closing fees and wear and tear) for a title to this epic PLEASE!

147. Aurore - August 10, 2012

T. R. E. K : The Terran Empire Strikes Back

:)

148. Startrekfangirl - August 10, 2012

147. Gold medal for Wit!

149. Jack - August 10, 2012

143. But why did they meet at different times in this universe. Why would Spock have instructed Uhura in this universe and not the other one?

150. Startrekfangirl - August 10, 2012

149. That’s what’s fun to think about! One fanfiction writer wrote a story where Spock!Prime thinks about the role of Leila Kalomi when he was an instructor at the Academy…how she was his TA. When Spock!Prime tries to track Leila down in the AU where he’s now forced to live, he discovers that Leila drowned as a young teenager and never got to the Academy…which is why Uhura became the TA of Nu!Spock and not Leila. And that has significant ramifications, since as professor and TA they spent time together and eventually developed an illicit relationship.

In other words, everything that happens COULD have happened differently. Think of a time when you ALMOST had a car wreck. If you had gone through the intersection 15 seconds earlier, it would have been YOU that died, not the driver of the car right behind you. Your whole life is a series of events that could have happened any number of ways instead of the way they did….and you could have turned out to be someone who thinks or acts differently as a result of your “different” experiences.

The same thing is true with the AU. It wipes the slate clean. The characters are different because they have lived vastly different lives from their counterparts in the other universe, which is basically what Spock concludes in his speech on the bridge when Uhura comments that their lives are an alternate reality.

They aren’t so different that they aren’t recognizable, but they ARE different people. That’s why some fans are upset…they were comfortable with the characters the way they were before. As a long time fan, I understand that, but I also think the franchise was moribund as it was and the new direction is vastly entertaining. Different, but fun.

151. rose by any other name - August 10, 2012

Has anyone been following the Fringe series, made by the same people who are now making this Star Trek film series? Obviously, there are differences but it may give some insight into what is going on within the alternate universe of Star Trek.

“As far as NuTrek goes, I lament that they pi**ed all over some very basic modern era science – trying to reach a broader audience need not involve dumbing down real science unless there is a real need for it in the story, in which case ‘proper’ made up Trek science should replace it.”

Totally incorrect. The writing was very much in line with some very basic modern era science. There was no “dumbing down” of real science – anything but. This has been discussed on multiple occasions and one does tire of mentioning the commonly held view within the scientific community of the possibility of a Kerr’s Black Hole existing and what such a hole could do and also the possibility of being able to artificially create a black hole, allowing for the remote possibility of time travel and the crossing from one universe/dimension to another. These events have not actually happened as far as we know, but the maths is there. It has been there for the last 49 years…

152. Pauln6 - August 10, 2012

I was thinking more along the lines of the supernova travelling fast enough to move between solar systems leaving no time to evacuate not one but two inhabited planets (since Remus must have been destroyed too, not that anyone seems to care) and yet travelling slowly enough for Spock, a geriatric scientist, to undertake the life-saving mission alone, and pootle around the phenomenon at sublight speed while deploying red matter.

There were a few other annoying moments too.

153. Texrose - August 10, 2012

Trek 2009, is just following the current dating/bonding behaviors of our military members with the Spock/Uhura relationship, and showing a bit of the naughty by making it obviousthat the relationship had a beginning strictly forbidden even in today’s military-that of superior officer and cadet/recruit. I hope to see the hero types have normal relationships with life partners-I’m sure that is emotionally healthier, even in the far future…

As a Trek fan since I watched TOS as a teen, and a woman who has spent much of my life with/in the military, I have to say that I like the more modern take on Spock. Why must the guys in the new Trek be like the ones in the “old” one-even the Vulcan-riding off into the sunset alone or with their buddies to get a beer, talk about guy stuff and watch sports.

I’m not a fainting flower, by the way-I’m the widow of a career military officer who lives in the far boonies works in construction, so I don’t think I ‘m taking a swooning romantic stand…

154. RAO - August 10, 2012

143. We aren’t talking meeting under different circumstances. I could’ve bought that for Kirk or McCoy. We are talking physiological changes in the character as established on screen. I’m not a canon nazi, but this is a fundamental part of the character. It took Spock decades and a mind meld with V’Ger to reconcile his emotions. This isn’t something trivial like the color of Kirk’s eyes. It’s the core of the Spock character.

151. Agreed. Incredibly improbable, but certainly in line with string/M theory as well. One of my favorite “little things” was during the Kelvin attack when the crewmen got sucked into the vacuum of space and the sound cut. Extremely well done. BTW, 153 makes five ;)

155. Jemini - August 11, 2012

149
150
the possibilities are endless.
Was Spock an instructor in that other reality too? Was Spock an instructor in those years? Was Spock and instructor of those specific classes? Did TosUhura took the same classes nuUhura took? Did she study vulcan and romulan too?

It’s an alternate reality. You may ask tons of questions here and not just regarding S/U but every character and every tiny difference with the prime universe and obviously you won’t receive an answer for them all.

154: well, that’s funny. Honestly, I don’t think that the color of Kirk eyes is such a trivial detail.
That the characters have different personalities IS possible because different life experiences can make you a different person. A personality is something that CAN be changed to some degree. We aren’t born with a definite personality in the same way we’re born with a definite eye color.
We’re born with few personality traits some may get more prominent with age, some we may lose.
But the color of our eyes… well, now that’s weird that Kirk is genetically different in two realities. He was literally conceived differently this time. Can we still consider him the same Kirk or his parents simply had son that they called Kirk? Not only he may be a different person personality-vise but basically, he’s a different person genetically.
If you can “buy” Kirk inheriting different genes in this reality that gave him totally different physical features, I think that you can buy any other difference.

As said previously, Spock prime never fell in love so you absolutely can’t know for sure how he would have acted under those circumstances, along with the other different circumstances in this reality. Who knows maybe Spock Prime would have himself realized some things sooner had life given to him the same experiences that this reality gave to nuSpock. We can’t know.
The fact that it took him so look to accept his human side it doesn’t mean that the same will happen to nuSpock or will happen in the same exact way. It’s impossible. One thing is sure, one way or another it doesn’t matter how or when even Spock Prime accepted that he had feelings and understood that trying to be more vulcan than vulcans wasn’t the best choice (though, honestly even Spock Prime always seemed a very emotional character to me) I bet that Spock Prime had regretted losing so much time and accepting some things only when he was old. That’s why he told nu!Spock to put logic aside sometimes.

156. John Trumbull - August 11, 2012

But the color of our eyes… well, now that’s weird that Kirk is genetically different in two realities. He was literally conceived differently this time. Can we still consider him the same Kirk or his parents simply had son that they called Kirk? Not only he may be a different person personality-vise but basically, he’s a different person genetically.
If you can “buy” Kirk inheriting different genes in this reality that gave him totally different physical features, I think that you can buy any other difference.

The Kirk of the new timeline has the same physical appearance of the Kirk of the Prime Timeline. Otherwise, Spock wouldn’t have recognized him on Delta Vega. The fact that Chris Pine has a different eye color than William Shatner falls under “suspension of disbelief”.

157. bardicjim - August 11, 2012

The timeline was changed at the point of Kirks birth, not at the point of him being conceived. It is merely a case of the actors having different eye colours. Let’s try not to get too picky about the differences between these two fictional realities. I have been reading this discussion with a vague passing interest, not because of the subject matter, but because I get to see the passion of all the fans on here.

To be honest though, based on what I have read, I have to say that some of the people on here need to calm down and learn to accept that Star Wars is Star Wars and Star Trek is Star Trek and that both are/were mirrors on the time that they were created and that, being fiction, are always going to have elements that are similar to each other as they are both Space based.

Also being fiction they are always going to have elements where you might have to suspend disbelief and let those annoying little anomalies pass over your head. Yeah it’s great to debate and chat, but when it gets to the point where you are discussing genetic differences between timelines to explain the canon discrepancy between the two Kirks eye colours you become a parody of yourself.

Therefore, it is quite clear to me that the lack of new information about the second JJTrek (Or should I say BOTrek) is leading to a cascade failure of brains around here and we need something juicy upon which the good people of this site may feast.

I don’t say much on this site and the above text goes some ways to explaining why i keep schtum as I am quite opinionated but ….I have been an avid reader of articles and comments for a good few years now and the last few comments above just made me do it. Nothing personal lads, but get a grip.

158. RAO - August 11, 2012

That’s twice now I posted a reply which did not show up. Site glitch?

159. Texrose - August 12, 2012

155-I’m just not much of a “canon” type when it comes to sci-fi-I wasn’t a “Star Wars” fan, either, but we did see the movies.

Since the possibility of an alternate universe and the resulting “what if”‘ that comes with it has always been a favorite subject in sci-fi and fantasy, it is no wonder we are fascinated with it. As child, I saw episodes of “The Twilight Zone” that explored the subject , and was glued to the TV.

Among other things, an alternate reality offers a place for the righting of wrongs, and the pursuit of revenge-subjects dear to many in the audience that make for a great story sure to keep the interest and fire the imagination. TOS and Next Gen both traveled in the time and dimensional soup in several episodes.

The James Kirk portrayed in the new film is more the Kirk I liked in TOS-the kick-ass-and-take-names leader who was fair minded, but far from perfect-like many generals of the past. The battle scenes were good in the movie, too. In NextGen, Picard tiptoed around things much of the time-totally different.

I’m pretty sure I’m not the only person who enjoys seeing a film or program that explores the psychological motivations of the characters as much as scenes that showcase action and technology, hence, the “new” Spock, Uhura, Kirk and the rest bring the possibility for new facets of those characters.

160. Aurore - August 12, 2012

Aaaaah…. The Twilight Zone…Love that show.

So does Mr. Abrams, from what I heard.
If I am not mistaken, ” Walking Distance” seems to be his favourite episode….

:)

161. Trek Lady - August 12, 2012

So those who did not fall in love with the whole S/U thing are either “40 year old virgins” or “young heterosexual women still sorting out their own worries about sex by self-inserting themselves in the roles of male characters. ”

Good grief people. Way to marginalize anyone who does not happen to agree with your point of view. There are MANY fans who have posted their opinions about WHY they disliked the S/U romance who had very legitimate reasons which have nothing to do with their sexual insecurities – so stop acting like dicks and accept that other folks are going to have opinions that differ from yours. That should not make them less a target for insults and bullying!

162. Red Dead Ryan - August 12, 2012

#161.

Agreed!

163. Texrose - August 12, 2012

161-Thank you, and I agree-people shouldn’t be trashed because they don’t agree with someone else’s opinion of how fictional characters should behave in a book or a film. It is, after all-fiction.

And when works of fiction mirror the current behaviors of the segment of society they are portraying, change is bound to happen, alternate universe or no. The military is not as uptight regarding relationships and marriage between active duty members as it was in the mid/late 60’s, hence the characters’ romantic involvements in Star Trek will likely change as well to remain relevant.

As for exploring love, in service and civilian life, “Battlestar Galactica” did that, too-rather darkly, in the case of Gaius Baltar and Six.

164. SoldierGirl - August 12, 2012

#163:

Not trying to argue with you or anything, but I’m a current member of the reserves and when I enlisted I had to sign a contract that stated I will uphold the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice) which had a pretty clear-cut section specifically dealing with fraternization, with a sub-section which addressed the issue of relationships betwee chief petty officers and junior enlisted, which Spock and Uhura were in the last Trek movie.

Don’t believe me, here’s a link: http://www.ig.navy.mil/ethics/fraternization.doc

I agree with you when it comes to fiction that pretty much anything goes, because well, its fiction, but your statement that the real life military turns a blind eye to fraternization in modern times is not entirely accurate.

165. Texrose - August 12, 2012

First, thank you for your service. No, not blind eyes-I apparently wasn’t clear on that-the UCMJ will likely always be a fact of life, because there have to be rules for conduct.

My husband served with someone who began an affair of that nature in the Army, was found out, and it wasn’t pretty at all. The two involved didn’t make it public, but ears for scandal are everywhere…

The movie implies that Spock and Uhura did get away with inappropriate fraternization, somehow-I took that from the scene where everyone is getting ready to ship out. Spock is nervous about giving the appearance of favoritism to Uhura in her ship assignment-he is looking around, guilty as hell and practically whispering, while she is loudly demanding to be re-assigned to the Enterprise. He gives in without much of a fight.

When TOS came out, my dad was in the AF. The push to recruit women had not begun, and the draft was still a fact of life. So TOS pretty much mirrored the totally male-dominated military of the time-there was even an old joke that if a soldier was supposed to have a wife, the Army would have issued one to him. NextGen was more like the military after the late 80’s.

If two service members married, the female member was expected to leave the service if she became pregnant, and was not really offered much encouragement to remain in the service (this was the Vietnam Era). There wasn’t all that much effort to assign married members together, either-but happily, all that began to change a few years later when the draft was ended and women were actively recruited.

166. Startrekfangirl - August 14, 2012

161. For the record, I didn’t say that people who dislike S/U were “young heterosexual women still sorting out their own worries about sex by self-inserting themselves in the roles of male characters.” I was talking about many Star Trek fanfiction writers who write slash.

167. Slashwriter - August 16, 2012

#166:

Still a hasty generalization as I, myself, am thirty-five, happily married (just celebrated my twelve year anniversary in fact), and the mother of a five-year-old who is quite comfortable with her sexual identity, thank you kindly, and I write slash. For Star Trek, in fact. I enjoy it. My husband even knows I write slash for Star Trek and is utterly okay with it, supports the fact that I’ve found a hobby I enjoy. In addition I’m a member of an online community of Star Trek slash writers, our membership reaching over a thousand, where the average age is around forty, so yeah, might want to check your facts there, Commodore Decker, before dishing out the unjust and largely unfounded stereotyping as a means of demeaning others whose literary tastes happen to differ from yours.

Whether you intended this or not, you’ve displayed a distressing amount of privliedge here. Distressing amount. To the point that it resulted in hate-filled rhetoric.

168. CoffeeProf - August 17, 2012

For those of you who are so against the Spock/Uhura thing, here’s something I’d like to share. Last weekend I went to Space City Con and met Nichelle Nichols. I asked her about it and she said that she thought it was absolutely great. She said it brought a dimension to the character that she never saw before considering that it’s always Kirk that got the girl. If she’s cool with it, then I am…it was her character first so I think she has a more than valid opinon on the matter.

169. Slashwriter - August 17, 2012

#168:

While I think it’s utterly heartwarming to hear that Nichelle is pleased with the direction that the character she played with such dignity and grace for so many years has gone in this new incarnation, her opinion on Spock/Uhura doesn’t preclude Star Trek fans having a differing opinion on the matter.I love Nichelle, as a child of the eighties who was pretty much raised on TOS reruns and whose parents took her to see ST 1-6 when they were released to the theaters (the first three at a drive-in movie theater, if that doesn’t age the hell out of me, lol), I looked up to her while growing up, but she doesn’t control how I think, nor does she dictate my tastes. I’ll cite another example, just to get my point across… just because Michael Jordan is featured on a box of Wheaties, doesn’t mean I’m going to all of the sudden develope a taste for Wheaties, a cereal I’m not particularly fond of on a good day.

Do you, CoffeeProf (love your name btw, I’m a bit of a coffee junky myself) go through life expecting everyone you meet to like the same ice cream flavor you favor, or to share your taste in music, or to even take coffee in the same way you take it? I’m assuming the answer to that is no (at least, I certainly hope it is), so I ask you, why then do you feel that every Star Trek fan must like the Spock/Uhura pairing and then use a fallacy of logic, appeal to celebrity, to condone this worrying degree of egocentrism?

Tastes differ, and just because we all like Star Trek does not mean that, by extension, we have to like all aspects of it. If that were the case ST5 would have done just as well in the box office as ST2 (there is a good reason it didn’t).

170. Spock/Uhura Admirer ;-) - August 19, 2012

@#167/169 Slashwriter

”Still a hasty generalization…”

Not really, because it wasn’t a generalization. Maybe that’s what it felt like to you, but that’s not what I read. That poster didn’t say that ALL slash fiction writers hated Spock/Uhura et cetera. What I read was that s/he saw a trend wherein out of the people that do seem to hate and despise the relationship, they seem to fall into 2 categories, one of which was slash writers. If that’s what this person sees, then that’s what they see. That’s not to say that in all reality it’s true because it goes to what Mr. Orci was saying about 3% of fans posting. It could be that out of the slash writers this person saw posting, those just happen to be the hateful 1%, give or take, that happen to have other tendencies and characteristic s in common that this person referenced. Still, to call it a generalization of ALL slash writers is inaccurate.

”… but she doesn’t control how I think, nor does she dictate my tastes…”

Now who’s the one taking liberties? Did that person say that anyone else should think the same way that Ms. Nichols thinks? Did s/he specifically say that you should think that way? For that person, asking Ms. Nichols about what she thought of the pairing in ST09 put the issue to rest for them. No one is telling you how to think, so this coming from you is just ridiculous:

”so I ask you, why then do you feel that every Star Trek fan must like the Spock/Uhura pairing and then use a fallacy of logic, appeal to celebrity, to condone this worrying degree of egocentrism?”

First of all, this did not happen. The person said that they had something to “share.” That’s it. Sharing an experience does not equate to telling someone what they have to think. Furthermore, going on to say that Ms. Nichols has “more than a valid opinion on the matter” is not the same as saying that your opinion is completely invalid if it differs from hers. Not to be rude, though think what you like, I would less concerned with a “worrying degree of egocentrism” and more concerned with my reading comprehension if I were you. Sorry if this offends, but I don’t feel like sugarcoating at the moment.

And just to be clear, I have nothing against slash writers. I believe that fan fiction has room for all likes, tastes, OTPs, and such for all fandoms. ;-)

171. Spock/Uhura Admirer ;-) - August 19, 2012

correction: “I would less,” should be “I would be less…”

172. Jemini - August 19, 2012

edit: “167. out of context.” my bad, I was actually replying to 168. Slashwriter

173. Spock/Uhura Admirer ;-) - August 19, 2012

^@Jemini #172

I don’t know what you said, but it looks like maybe your other post got deleted. (??)

174. Slashwriter - August 19, 2012

#170:

I do take offense, actually, but then that’s entirely what you meant to happen, isn’t it?

Definition of a hasty generalization:

Making a hasty conclusion without considering all of the variables. In statistics, it may involve basing broad conclusions regarding the statistics of a survey from a small sample group that fails to sufficiently represent an entire population.

What the poster said: “The other group most vocally distressed about Spock/Uhura are women who read and write slash fanfiction. They are pretty hostile to women characters in general–perhaps because most are young heterosexual women still sorting out their own worries about sex by self-inserting themselves in the roles of male characters.”

My reading comprehension needs work?! Oh contraire, it is yours that does. Because the above fits the definition of hasty generalization in an almost text book sense. I”m not the only poster who thought so as others, in these comments here on this post, have also called the poster out on her rather rude stereotyping.

Know what I think?

…I think you’re upset that I called some of your fellow shippers out for their less than brotherly/sisterly behavior towards anyone who doesn’t ship what they ship. In fact, my previous ambivalence towards the Spock/Uhura pairing in canon (because really, I didn’t care, I will do what I want in fandom regardless of what is in canon) is quickly becoming full fledged irritation based on the behavior of their shippers here on this board.

“Furthermore, going on to say that Ms. Nichols has “more than a valid opinion on the matter” is not the same as saying that your opinion is completely invalid if it differs from hers”…

No, just less ‘valid’. And, strangely, implying my opinion, and the opinion of anyone who doesn’t fall at the feet of this pairing and worship it, is ‘less valid’ is still insulting, just as the poster intended it to be. Therefore, it was an act of deliberate rudeness. Or an attempt to strong-handle into compliance, I can’t figure out which the poster was going for more.

You’re really condoning this behavior, and being willfully blind to the unpardonable implications clearly evident in both posts? Really?! Wow. That’s disturbing.

175. rose by any other name - August 19, 2012

Nothing in that scene in the hangar suggests that there could be a romantic/sexual relationship going on. Have you not heard of the expression “teachers pet”? This kind of marginalization can happen in primary school where a child is singled out and bullied etc because other children think that child is being given special consideration by the teacher. This may, or may not be true. It was only later in the turbo lift that we saw that, at the present time, Spock and Uhura shared a certain level of intimacy.

No – Starfleet is the not the present day military nor a present day corporation and/or other. The rules that apply today need not necessarily apply 200 years from now. I think it is assumed that most adults have a better, more mature handle on relationships of various kinds than many have today and it is more accepted that fraternization can and will occur. Some relationships may be beneficial to the individuals involved as well as to Starfleet as a whole, given the very different circumstances many Starfleet personnel would be working in, compared with people today.

#96 – “As for the S/U romance I think those who hated it are a loud minority of slash fan girls”
#101 – “Anyone notice that those who have issues with the Spock/Uhura relationship are predominantly 40 year old virgins?”

Here are the two statements that are being debated, made by two different people. I was trying to work out how this debate/discussion got started. I agree that both statements as quoted above would seem to be rather hasty generalizations.

176. Spock/Uhura Admirer ;-) - August 19, 2012

@Slashwriter

”I do take offense, actually, but then that’s entirely what you meant to happen, isn’t it?”

Taking offense or not taking offense is your prerogative entirely, but to try to tell me or assume what I “meant to happen” is where the buck stops because that you cannot do. I don’t mean for anyone to be offended, but what offends me is when you put words in other people’s mouths and your own perceived intentions in their hearts and minds.

If you just responded to what those posters actually said then I wouldn’t have had a problem with your defense. Instead, you dream up words that were never said and commands that were never made. That is a sad shame, and you do yourself no favors with that.

”Definition of a hasty generalization:
Making a hasty conclusion without considering all of the variables. In statistics, it may involve basing broad conclusions regarding the statistics of a survey from a small sample group that fails to sufficiently represent an entire population.”

Which is essentially what I said in my post when I referenced that that poster could just be talking about the 1%, give or take, that they came across.

It’s like if there are 100 shoes, and 90 are blue, 5 are red, and 5 are yellow. If that poster just happens to come across 5 pairs of shoes (and this is their experience with shoes) and those shoes just happen to all be red, then that person may think that shoes are just red because they haven’t seen any blue (and frankly, you’re not acting too “blue” yourself right now). It’s a stereotype (in the true sense of the word), that’s for sure, but it is also their experience, which is also just as sure. I don’t think you can fault a person for that, but you could kindly try to open their eyes without prejudging them in the same way that they perhaps prejudged you. I don’t think that’s what you did.

What you could have faulted that person for was not clearly stating (at first) that this was only their experience, which that person actually ended up clarifying after you made your initial post to them:

#166 – ”161. For the record, I didn’t say that people who dislike S/U were “young heterosexual women still sorting out their own worries about sex by self-inserting themselves in the roles of male characters.” I was talking about many Star Trek fanfiction writers who write slash.”

And obviously, these would only be the writers that this poster knows about. Still, this wasn’t good enough for you because you just seemed to have your pitchfork ready, which actually likens you more to the very stereotype you were trying to combat. Ironic.

”What the poster said: “The other group most vocally distressed about Spock/Uhura are women who read and write slash fanfiction. They are pretty hostile to women characters in general–perhaps because most are young heterosexual women still sorting out their own worries about sex by self-inserting themselves in the roles of male characters.”

Yes, and then that poster came back and said that they were talking about “many,” not most or all. And who knows what “many” is to him/her? That is why I referenced Mr. Orci’s 3% quote because it can cut both ways in this instance. If you need any additional clarification, please see above.

”My reading comprehension needs work?! Oh contraire, it is yours that does. Because the above fits the definition of hasty generalization in an almost text book sense. I”m not the only poster who thought so as others, in these comments here on this post, have also called the poster out on her rather rude stereotyping.”

No contraire! It does need work. But what I love here is that you use the fact that other posters have or may have shared your same view as a justification or proof of something. Now, um, what did you call that when you were talking to CoffeProf? Hmm, let me see… Oh, there it is, it was a ”fallacy of logic” then. Oh, how ye has such a short memory, or perhaps it’s a double standard?

”Know what I think?”

No, but I’m sure you’re about to tell me.

”…I think you’re upset that I called some of your fellow shippers out for their less than brotherly/sisterly behavior towards anyone who doesn’t ship what they ship. In fact, my previous ambivalence towards the Spock/Uhura pairing in canon (because really, I didn’t care, I will do what I want in fandom regardless of what is in canon) is quickly becoming full fledged irritation based on the behavior of their shippers here on this board.”

And your thinking is wrong then. I’m not upset about you “calling anyone out.” What I didn’t and still don’t like is when anyone creates a strawman to attack. Had you just responded to what people actually said instead of making up statements and commands, then all would have been fine to me, regardless of who you ship.

”“Furthermore, going on to say that Ms. Nichols has “more than a valid opinion on the matter” is not the same as saying that your opinion is completely invalid if it differs from hers”…

No, just less ‘valid’. And, strangely, implying my opinion, and the opinion of anyone who doesn’t fall at the feet of this pairing and worship it, is ‘less valid’ is still insulting, just as the poster intended it to be. Therefore, it was an act of deliberate rudeness. Or an attempt to strong-handle into compliance, I can’t figure out which the poster was going for more.

And what if that poster wasn’t going for either at all? There’s nothing concrete in that post that would make me think that’s the case. And who said your opinion was “less valid,” then? That’s your perception. I didn’t think that poster was saying that your opinion was less valid, but if that’s how you took it, then I cannot argue with that. I do take issue with you saying that that person was being deliberately rude and/or attempting to “strong-handle” you into “compliance.” If you think what that poster posted was “strong-handling” here, then trust me, you haven’t spent enough time on these boards. That poster was very mild.

And there was nothing forceful about that post, imo. Unfortunately, most of the forceful posts here come from people that favor the Spock/Kirk/McCoy triad, and they sometimes relentlessly tag-team anyone that doesn’t feel the same way they do. I have even been told, forcefully, to leave this website by another poster that favors that triad just because I didn’t agree with him. That (among other things) hasn’t happened to you here, and I doubt that it will, so you’re doing okay, at least for now.

And worship? Worship is a strong word, imo, and I do not liken Spock and/or Uhura to any God or Gods, and I do not put their fictional love story on any kind of pedestal to be “worshipped” in that way. I like them individually and together. That is how I will continue to like them. That will not change.

Who knows, maybe you are a nice person and we can get along eventually. That has yet to be seen. All I know right now is that I am friends with slash shippers/writers, and right now, they don’t make me think of you, and you don’t make me think of them. It’s unfortunate, but perhaps that can change.

”You’re really condoning this behavior, and being willfully blind to the unpardonable implications clearly evident in both posts? Really?! Wow. That’s disturbing.”

I’ve already answered you on what I think of both posts, and I am not being “willfully blind” to anything, not even you. I do not condone anyone’s bad behavior if it was bad, but I also don’t condone yours as of now. That’s all. Like I said, perhaps things can change…

177. Spock/Uhura Admirer ;-) - August 19, 2012

#175

”I was trying to work out how this debate/discussion got started…”

Well, actually, you need to go back farther in the thread.

”#96 – “As for the S/U romance I think those who hated it are a loud minority of slash fan girls””

Was a response to the many perceived complaints about the love story, and it starts out saying that. I don’t know if this statement is true or not, but this statement was a response to statements that started this “discussion,” I think, and not the “discussion” started itself.

And:

”#101 – “Anyone notice that those who have issues with the Spock/Uhura relationship are predominantly 40 year old virgins?””

Seemed to be a direct response to this poster and post:

#39” Anybody ever notice that the only people who cared for the Spock/Uhura thing are women, many/most of which are new fans?”

To be honest, I think these “discussions” start as soon as an article comes along on this website and even half-references Spock/Uhura.

178. Spock/Uhura Admirer ;-) - August 19, 2012

correction: “started itself,” should be “starter itself.”

179. Slashwriter - August 19, 2012

#176

“Who knows, maybe you are a nice person and we can get along eventually. That has yet to be seen. All I know right now is that I am friends with slash shippers/writers, and right now, they don’t make me think of you, and you don’t make me think of them. It’s unfortunate, but perhaps that can change.”

No, I hold no hope we will, and here’s why… you’re too biased, though claim to be otherwise, thus entirely blind to your own biasm. And you never even tried to explain things in a friendly way, instead jumping on me in a hostile manner from the get-go, then putting it back on me as being unreasonable for ‘misreading’ things but felt it was entirely okay for you to go into depth into what YOU perceive was the posters’ intentions. And the interesting thing? You’ve attacked me with nails drawn, for a conversation that wasn’t even directed at you, in both posts I made I was addressing the posters directly, not you, and then you lecture *me* on hostile intentions.

You inserted yourself in this argument. You may not picture me in a good light, well trust me, the feeling goes both ways. Right now I find myself hoping I never run into you in real life at a convention or wherever, because you’re not the type of person I want to know.

Perhaps you’ve been attacked by those who dislike the Spock/Uhura pairing in the past, perhaps not. It’s clear you feel persecuted against, which has made you overly defensive and on the attack. And, btw, attacked is exactly how I felt when following this thread and read the comments I responded to. We can go back and forth on perceptions all day, and lord knows I’m willing, bring it, but let me put this is a way to penetrate your shipper bias, in a way that will, hopefully, get you to at least try to understand why someone of my demographic might be offended by this:

““The other group most vocally distressed about Spock/Uhura are women who read and write slash fanfiction. They are pretty hostile to women characters in general–perhaps because most are young heterosexual women still sorting out their own worries about sex by self-inserting themselves in the roles of male characters.”

And this:

“…it was her character first so I think she has a more than valid opinon on the matter.”

(Not putting words in anyone’s mouth, those are direct quotes.)

We’re strangers, you and I, we run into each other at Starbucks and meet for first time and it is discovered through polite conversation that we’re both Star Trek fans, maybe you see my Enterprise coffee mug, I don’t know. Anyway, once we get going on the topic of Star Trek I mention to you that I write slash fanfiction for it, do you then tell me, to my face?

“In my experience slash writers are pretty hostile to women characters in general–perhaps because most are young heterosexual women still sorting out their own worries about sex by self-inserting themselves in the roles of male characters. And by the way, I saw a Nichelle Nichols at a convention and she approves of Spock/Uhura and I think her opinion on the matter is more valid.”

No, you don’t, because it would be RUDE. Just because the internet gives us a degree of anonymity does NOT mean its a free-for-all to say and do things we wouldn’t do if we were all face-to-face. I responded to two posts that I felt were a) misrepresenting slash writers and b) implying that a celebrities opinion was more valid because the celebrity opinion happened to coincide with their shipperness. It doesn’t matter that the first poster was only seeing a limited sample from a demographic, simply making derogatory statements the way she did, no matter the portion of the demographic she’d been exposed to, is uncalled for behavior. I don’t go up to those of different religious backgrounds than myself (which would be everybody as I’m agnostic), or those of different ethnicity than myself and start spouting off the worst of the stereotypes centered around them. I don’t even put any stock in said stereotypes because I know better than to lump an entire group of people together with derogatory intentions. Why then do you feel its okay here? Furthermore, I have every right to correct misconceptions once they’re stated, every right to call BS as I see it. And will continue to do so.

If that puts you and I at each others throats, as I suspect it will because you’ve labeled yourself the SU defender and nothing any member of your ship does or says should ever be called to task in your eyes, even it its blatantly wrong, so be it. You’ll find me particularly stubborn.

180. Spock/Uhura Admirer ;-) - August 19, 2012

” No, I hold no hope we will, and here’s why… you’re too biased, though claim to be otherwise, thus entirely blind to your own biasm. And you never even tried to explain things in a friendly way, instead jumping on me in a hostile manner from the get-go, then putting it back on me as being unreasonable for ‘misreading’ things but felt it was entirely okay for you to go into depth into what YOU perceive was the posters’ intentions. And the interesting thing? You’ve attacked me with nails drawn, for a conversation that wasn’t even directed at you, in both posts I made I was addressing the posters directly, not you, and then you lecture *me* on hostile intentions.

You inserted yourself in this argument. You may not picture me in a good light, well trust me, the feeling goes both ways. Right now I find myself hoping I never run into you in real life at a convention or wherever, because you’re not the type of person I want to know.”

Well, the choice was yours and you’ve made it. I never claimed to not be “biased” in favor of Spock/Uhura. In fact, any shipper, including yourself, is just that when they choose to ship a particular pairing/triad. That chip on your shoulder is a rather large one, and I don’t know what put it there. I never told you what those posters’ intentions were because I have no way of knowing. I did tell you that I didn’t see the same things you saw when I read their posts, and that’s not the same thing. I didn’t lecture you on hostile intentions at all, but you seem to want a fight, and I’m going to give it to you.

I’m not so sure that I inserted myself into an argument (seeing as I haven’t said anything to those other posters) as much as I just mentioned that it would be good if you actually responded to what people post and not make things up. Seems reasonable enough to me, but whatever… And you don’t have to worry about conventions. I never gone and don’t plan on going.

No, oddly enough, I do not feel persecuted. I think I take care of myself on these boards fairly well, as do others. Liking a fictional pairing is not really important enough for me to feel “persecuted” over. You were the one who went into detail about being “strong-handled,” and I simply let you know that if you think that was the case here then you are mistaken.

Um, okay, so you are correct about what I would not say to your face at a coffee shop, but you are correct for the wrong reasons. I would not say that to your face because I would not say that period because that is not my observation/opinion. It’s someone else’s. Why you would choose to take someone else’s words and insert them in my mouth is very interesting to me.

“I don’t even put any stock in said stereotypes because I know better than to lump an entire group of people together with derogatory intentions.”

And yet you didn’t know better than to color me with someone else’s words. That’s okay. I see that you are exacerbated, and I understand, whether you believe me or not, why. The two posters you mentioned did not lump an entire group together with their posts. Please remember the difference between “many” (which was the operative word used) and ‘all’. Right now, it looks like you are partly creating your own afflictions. Example: You seem to think that one person describing another person as having “a more than valid opinion” means that someone is telling YOU specifically that you have less than a valid opinion. Why is that? If you really believe that you have “more than a valid opinion” too, then what does it matter that someone else, like Ms. Nichols, has more than a valid opinion herself? She’s earned that.

Look, I don’t know what pairings you like, but I wish you the best in celebrating them and writing for them. You’ve obviously been hurt, and I can understand that sometimes slash shippers feel defensive in their own right. I’m not the “SU defender,” although that does have a ring to it I suppose, but I have and probably will defend anyone’s right to like them here. Conversely, if I saw people unfairly attacking you because of the pairing you like, then I would defend your right to like them and talk about them here too. And that’s not hypothetical. I have done that in the past here with other posters and their character preferences/opinions. Nothing’s wrong with liking what you like.

And I’m done for now.

181. rose by any other name - August 19, 2012

The comments going “under the knife” so to speak, were made by several different people and they all seemed to be generalizations, some of them perhaps a little harsh. However, the post referring to 40 year old virgins was one I took to be a little tongue-in-cheek actually.

The reality is – either you, as an individual reading this thread/post, liked the S/U relationship as it appears to be so far or you don’t. People like or dislike things for all kinds of reasons. Some of those reasons given will make sense to a lot of people; other reasons may not. At the end of the day, it is neither here nor there.

As a well-known pointy-eared individual said – “There are always possibilities”. So true, especially with regard to whatever Spock and Uhura have going on between them, which may not be much at all or a lot more than anyone had bargained on. Either they will remain together, joined at the hip (shall we say) or they won’t, in accordance with what the writers/producers wish to tell in the story. Some will be upset either way. Others, like me, will just think “Oh well, c’est la vie”.

182. Spock/Uhura Admirer ;-) - August 19, 2012

I don’t know. Some of those same people saying “C’est la vie” might not be saying that if they don’t get what they want with “their captain.” I guess we’ll all know and perhaps see when the movie comes out.

183. Slashwriter - August 19, 2012

#180:

I did not put words in your mouth. I was being hypothetical. “You” was representative of anyone who willfully makes generalizations, like the ones made here, and think it okay. My exercise, or ‘test’ if you will, I feel is a good one. If “you” (any given poster) have something to say in a reference to a group of people for which “you” are not a part of and have very little knowledge of, especially something not particularly kind, think to “yourself”, would “I” say this to a person in real life if “I” were to meet them waiting in line for a slurpy at 7-Eleven. No? Then don’t post it.

I also think your deliberately misunderstanding me on the issue of ‘all’ or ‘most’. It doesn’t matter if the OP representation is one person out of a hundred, or 99 out of 100. Neither one, or 99 or 100 is representative of the slash population of Star Trek. Which, if you add the Kirk/Spocks, the Kirk/Bones, the Sulu/Chekovs or any combination thereof, and take their population numbers from their respective archives or their livejournal communities, it would reach WELL into the thousands,

The definition of “most” from dictionary.com itself:
…the greatest number or the majority of a class specified

She used ‘most’. She also used “slash writers”. Therefore I’m a bit perplexed you are even arguing with me on this issue. Can you not see at all how even using the term ‘most’ is offensive and why I would consider it a generalization? I have been writing slash for over a decade. I did it back before livejournal or AO3 was a twinkle in anyone’s eyes, back when we relied on things like geocities, or lycos, and had to close down half a dozen pop-up ads just to get to a story. Out of the thousands of slashers I’ve met in my tenure, some of them in real life, people I consider close friends, I have met very, very few (as in maybe one ) who are either misogynistic or sexual confused. So let me be completely frank, leave no room for misunderstanding…

Her comments were offensive. They were also untrue. She shouldn’t have made them.

And being told someone’s opinion is more valid *is* implying that ‘therefore anyone who opposes said opinion is less valid’. We live in a society that creates heroes out of actors and musicians, the ‘appeal to celebrity’ fallacy is a common one. It is unfortunate. As you pointed out yourself, worship is a loaded word, and not one that should be used as mindlessly as it is. A celebrity is no more an authority on something that comes down to personal preference as anyone else, and therefore does not have a ‘more’ valid opinion, they just have an opinion. I would say the same for Shatner, or Nimoy or Takai (whom I adore and somehow gets a hold of all the best macros).

As for the chip on my shoulder, I certainly didn’t come here with one. I came for spoilers. Then I read these inaccurate and untrue comments towards slashers, and then, when I call them out on it, I get jumped by you. Yes, I admit it, you’ve helped make me infinitely more wary than I was before. It started with casting aspersions on my reading comprehension and escalated from there. If I’m defensive, its largely been escalated because of your interaction with me up to this point.

I would love nothing more than to interact on these boards with fellow fans and squee over the awesomeness of trek. But I will defend my demographic when misrepresented and defend myself when attacked. To expect otherwise of me is ‘ridiculous’.

#181:

I agree with you. Even though I wrote primarily slash, S/U doesn’t really bother me. I mean, I didn’t think they had any chemistry together in the movie, but I recognize that that’s my opinion, that others think their chemistry is great, and I’m okay with that. I can easily separate canon from fandom and recognize that we each take from trek what is most important to us. For me the Reboot movie was awesome enough that even the little things that I was like ‘okay, what was that?’ didn’t overshadow the movies general greatness.

I guess what I’m trying to say is I don’t really care if S/U are together or not in the next movie. I will see the new movie regardless, then go home and write what I want.

It does bother me when my section of fandom is misrepresented and painted in a negative light, though. I find it exceedingly hard to stay silent when I witness such things.

184. rose by any other name - August 20, 2012

Once again, Spock/Uhura Admirer, you are being rude. “some of those people” you refer to is clearly me, Keachick or rose by any other name as I choose to be called at the moment.

I was making a general comment to everybody reading, ie from those who love the S/U relationship to those who vehemently hate it and everyone in between, such as myself. I made no reference to the Kirk character. You did that and used it as a side-swipe. I really should expect no better.

As with the S/U relationship, I have no idea what the writers have written for the Kirk character in terms of him having any romantic relationships etc. Yes, I have my own wishes, hopes, fantasies but given what has been told in the Online comics so far, I am not expecting that this nuKirk will get much in the way of romance. That appears to be Spock’s destiny so far in this new universe. Whatever…c’est la vie…:(

Warning to Slashwriter – Spock/Uhura Admirer is liable to twist what you write. She has done it to me on various occasions…just saying.

185. rose by any other name - August 20, 2012

PS I deliberately chose not to mention Kirk, yes, if you like, “my captain”, in my post at #181 in order to avoid any entanglement, but you, S/U Admirer, just can’t help yourself, can you. Wow!

I too would not like to meet you anywhere. I would be constantly having to watch my back…:((

186. shinzon's lover - August 20, 2012

Hey, I just met you.
And this is crazy,
But here’s my starship.
Khan me. Maybe?

187. Slashwriter - August 20, 2012

#184:

LOL! Trust me I got the memo on that. In fact, I have Spock/Uhura Admirer’s user name filed firmly in the mental cabinet of Does Not Play Well With Others… unless, of course, these others consist of fellow S/U shippers, then she’s willing to fight tooth and nail to defend THEIR inability to play well with others.

188. Spock/Uhura Admirer ;-) - August 20, 2012

Well, I responded to post #183, but it’s been deleted and there’s nothing wrong with it, so apparently, if you’re a slash shipper that attacks other people for things they didn’t say, your “inability to play well with others” gets protected here. So, have fun playing with people that can’t pick a username and stick with it while they use their different identities to try to preach to other people about how they should be, especially when that’s not how they really are. See you around.

189. DON - August 20, 2012

WHAT OF THE HISTORY OF CPTN. ARCHER

190. DON - August 20, 2012

DID THE DESTRUCTION OF VULCAN REMOVE Saavik, Tuvok, T’Lar, T’Lar, FROM FUTURE TIME LINES?

191. CoffeeProf - August 22, 2012

#169

I’m not trying to force my opinion on anyone. I’m just pointing out the opinion of the person who originally played the character. One thing I don’t like is people putting words in my mouth or assuming things when I haven’t said them. But I’m not going to assume and give you the benefit of the doubt.

192. Trek Lady - August 23, 2012

#188 “…if you’re a slash shipper that attacks other people for things they didn’t say, your “inability to play well with others” gets protected here.”

Not so.

…since I replied to Startrekfangirl’s #166 post prior to Slashfwriter’s comment and was deleted as well. I too felt my comment was acceptable, but obviously someone else (with editing privileges) did not. If your statement held any truth, then I would not have been deleted, since I was certainly calling her (which is not the same as “attacking” her) on the things she posted (which pretty much means she DID say them).

If someone posts, “Short people are ugly” then I am going to make assumptions about what kind of person they are. If one does not want people to make assumptions about “how you really are” then one should not post things that are hurtful or hateful.

Simple really.

193. rose by any other name - August 24, 2012

#193 Trek Lady – I am a little confused. Were you actually referring to my post #189 or S/U Admirer’s post #188?

I am uncertain as to which comments I have posted here that could be considered hurtful or hateful…

194. Trek Lady - August 24, 2012

193. Sorry if I was unclear. I was referring to S/U admirer’s post about being deleated. And the “hurtful” comment was not in reference to anything you said, rather, it referenced some of the original comments that set off this whole discussion.

195. mlw98 - August 30, 2012

Cumberbatch = Garth of Izar

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