A Milestone Month: September Marked Four Notable Star Trek Anniversaries | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

A Milestone Month: September Marked Four Notable Star Trek Anniversaries October 8, 2012

by Joseph Dickerson , Filed under: Editorial,History , trackback

This past September marked four important anniversaries in Star Trek history: two most fans are well aware of, one that many may have forgotten, and a fourth the anniversary of an event many fans still regret happened. All are worth noting here.


25 Years of TNG
The first anniversary worth reviewing is the one that received the most media attention: the 25th Anniversary of Star Trek: The Next Generation. Some great articles from Wired, TIME and more were written in celebration of this silver anniversary, and on two separate occasions the full cast of the series took to convention stages to mark the occasion.

The Next Gen anniversary was also celebrated earlier in the year with the release of the amazing remastered Star Trek: TNG Season One blu-ray set. The set was the result of a herculean effort by the folks at CBS-Paramount Home Video to scan all the original elements that were used in the production of the series and the production team essentially had to “re-edit” the series in HD.

Bonus: Cover photo: Check out these 25th anniversary posters from the Official Star Trek Store!

Here’s to the finest crew in Starfleet

46 Years of Trek
The second anniversary of note was the 46th Anniversary of the original Star Trek series, which was celebrated by Google with an interactive doodle on their home page as well as a canny reference on the popular series Mad Men and even a shout out from Oreo.

Lots of shout outs to 46 years of TOS

Did you forget? 11 years since Enterprise
The third anniversary wasn’t noticed, but is still worth celebrating. On September 26th, 2001 Enterprise (later retitled Star Trek: Enterprise) made its debut on the UPN television network. Lasting four seasons, Star Trek: Enterprise made a significant contribution to Star Trek lore and still has many fans to this day. Happy (belated) 11th birthday!

Enterprise began it’s short and sweet 4-year run 11 years ago

A Sad Anniversary: Star Trek: The Experience Closure
The final September anniversary worth noting is an unfortunate one… it’s now been over four years since the closure of Star Trek: The Experience, the much-lauded interactive tourist attraction that was housed at the Las Vegas Hilton.

While there has been Star Trek tourist attractions since (the Star Trek Exhibition is currently in Orlando in a semi-permanent installation, and the Mad Science Star Trek Live education show may return in some form) nothing since has matched the sheer scope and glory of the Experience. Speaking as a fan of the attraction and friend of several people who worked there, we still miss it.

We still miss you, Star Trek: The Experience

More Joseph!

Like these posts by Joe? Then check out (and support!) the Kickstarter for his new book, UX101: A Primer on User Experience Design

Joseph Dickerson is a writer, User Experience Architect (and Star Trek fan) focused on designing effective and innovative on-line and mobile applications. For more from Joseph visit josephdickerson.com or follow him on twitter: @josephdickerson.



1. Stiftl - October 8, 2012

the google doodle.was fantastic!

2. flo - October 8, 2012

no comments yet – be the first?

3. SirMartman - October 8, 2012

Hmmm,, Im starting to feel old,,


4. Remington Steele - October 8, 2012

In before someone starts crying about a lack of movie update :P

5. Kayla Iacovino - October 8, 2012

Haha, too true, Remington.

It’s TrekMovie’s should we post a new story flow chart:


Is there news? —> Yes —> Is it about the new movie? —> Yes/NO –> ???
No –> Something interesting to write about? —> Yes –> ???

6. Chris J - October 8, 2012

11 years since Enterprise!?


7. Ciaran - October 8, 2012

I feel so incredibly old now that it has been pointed out that Enterprise debuted 11 years ago. I remember the day it aired here in the UK in January 2002 and I was so excited! Now, as I said, I just feel old. Lol.

8. Sebastian S. - October 8, 2012

I still miss the Star Trek: Experience very much.
Went there three times. My wife and I absolutely loved it each time. It was the closest this old fan has ever come to ‘living Star Trek’ in real life. The food at Quark’s was delicious. The costumed staff were fun and really got their characters. The design of the whole thing was simply jaw dropping.
It was a lot of fun.

9. Smike - October 8, 2012

Enterprise I miss the most…basically because it was prematurely cancelled while it was getting good… In retrospect, it is still my series no. 3, right after TOS and TNG… I’m not a big DS9 fan (it’s a good show but NOT good Trek IMO) and VOY just didn’t live up to its opportunities.

I really hope they will finally release ENT on BluRay some day. It WAS shot in HD, so it shouldn’t be too difficult to bring it out…

10. P Technobabble - October 8, 2012

There have been countless things written and said about the significance and influence of Star Trek and I don’t really have anything to add to all of that. But the fact that it is still around after 46 years is pretty amazing, especially in today’s attention-deficit world.

11. Lostrod - October 8, 2012

Here’s an interesting article about the movie:



12. Chris Roberts - October 8, 2012

@9. Smike – October 8, 2012
“I really hope they will finally release ENT on BluRay some day. It WAS shot in HD, so it shouldn’t be too difficult to bring it out…”


(although unconfirmed at this stage)

13. VulcanFilmCritic - October 8, 2012

@Lostrod Yes, It DOES make sense! That’s why BC (as Gary Mitchell) was capable of beating the crap out of Spock. Alice Eve as Liz Dehner, hmmmmm…fascinating.
But why go right back to the same storyline of godhood for Kirk’s best friend?
Isn’t the point of an alternate timeline so that we can explore completely different scenarios? Why couldn’t Mitchell just be a good guy (even if he was something of a wiseguy)? It all depends on that one event that occurred in “Where No Man Has Gone Before.” And I would think that with such disruptions as the destruction of Vulcan, that we would be unlikely to end up in the exactly same singular situation that produced godhood for some members of the Enterprise.
Also, isn’t it a little cheesy recycling story ideas, as well as characters, from the old show? Isn’t it a little pat? Doesn’t that reek of fan-fiction?

14. T'Cal - October 8, 2012

I miss The Experience as well! We renewed our vows with our kids and a friend witnessing in June of ’08 on the Bridge of the Enterprise and then ate at Quark’s. We’d been there a dozen times over the years but that was the best. And then it closed. Terrible.

I liked the idea of The Experience moving to Disney World (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbOGbkHlyVw) but I though it was cool to when The Tour was at NASA too. Just do something cool with the concept that is permanent. The Tour is a good idea; The Tour going on while The Experience is a fixed part of Disney World or Universal Studios is a great idea.

15. Chris Roberts - October 8, 2012

15/16. Whoops! I appear to be caught in a repeating loop of time.




16. Chris Roberts - October 8, 2012

That’s interesting. Now, all of a sudden, they’re back again.

Sorry for the duplicate. 17 had moved up to 15. It wasn’t there a minute ago, hence the reason why I reposted.

17. Sebastian S. - October 8, 2012

# 14


The Tour was a decent consolation prize. My wife and I saw it in Long Beach back in 2008, and it was nice but nowhere near as fun as STE.

And yes; I would’ve loved to have seen both STE and the Tour co-exist somehow. That would’ve been awesome….


18. Christopher Roberts - October 8, 2012

Happy 11th Anniversary Star Trek Enterprise!

Videos celebrating the series…

http://youtu.be/TXVw8RNx8tM (without Faith of the Heart)
http://youtu.be/iZ9nvkv14-U (teaser)

19. rm10019 - October 8, 2012

I think Anthony owes us an apology and explanation for this article and the cancellation of Enterprise ;) Look, without US, and the cancellation of Enterprise, there would be no new Trek Movie 09 or otherwise!!!!

Lol, sorry, couldn’t resist.

20. Chris Roberts - October 8, 2012

@19. Bob Orci likes conspiracies. There’s one for him, right there!

Although he probably knows all the gory details.

JJ Abrams in the library, with the leadpipe. Leslie Moonves providing him with an alibi. :-}

21. Phil - October 8, 2012

Lovely. Kirk vs. God, Part II……sounds like a renter.

22. Tiberius Subprime - October 8, 2012

here we go again:


(Mitchell is one of my three possibilities (the other being Garth or Roger Corby))

23. Tiberius Subprime - October 8, 2012

They can do the whole Heart of darkness thing with this, too.

24. Pensive's Wetness - October 8, 2012

Gary Mitchel… hmmm…..! well im patient and ill be happy with the product (i have faith that the end product will be just as good :D )… in the meantime, more wrist exercizes while watching YP…

25. Daoud - October 8, 2012

Lostrod & Tiberius Subprime. That article is just someone’s blog. Someone who can’t spell Khan correctly, or Montalban.
Gary Mitchell is a strange choice, because Bob used Gary in the comics and retold the story of WNMHGB. The weird throw-in was that Dr. Dehner backed out since Dr. McCoy was on board (rather than Mark Piper, M.D. in the prime universe). Alice Eve reminds me more of a young Bibi Besch, than of Sally Kellerman, but who knows. Bob loves a remix. I just hope Dr. Dehner is McCoy’s ex-wife — or the reason he ended up with an ex-wife. The “clue” of Urban spouting off Cumby’s a good Gary… is no real surprise: Urban is a KNOWN joker. His “I shall call it: Caesar salad” intentional blooper from Xena is case in point.
Surfin’ McCoy only adds to that reputation.
I still think Garth opens up the most story opportunity, particularly going with the Heart of Darkness theme that the title seems to be indicating. Garth is doing something in the Laurentian System that he shouldn’t. Laurentia can be some sort of Vietnam-style conflict with the Klingons. Neural, anyone? Mugato? Dehner the psychologist is sent along?
Save Khan for the threequel. End Star Trek Into Darkness with the Botany Bay floating shot.

26. Legate Damar - October 8, 2012

Enterprise was easily the best of the three Trek series that had a birthday last month. Too bad it was cancelled before its time.

27. Buzz Cagney - October 8, 2012

#11 I’ve been, cautiously, saying its going to be Mitchell for months now.
I hope so for 2 reasons. 1, because I think it could make for a great story. And 2, and perhaps more importantly, I want to say “told you so” :))

28. Dr Beckett - October 8, 2012

Nice to see so many warm comments about Enterprise. I really miss that show. Seasons 3 and 4 are actually the most played DVD sets from all the TV series I own….

29. Phil - October 8, 2012

Enterprise wasn’t a bad show, it just never found it’s legs. It seemed to want to capture the swagger of TOS, while embracing the political correctness of TNG. Unfortunately, it ended up spinning it’s wheels for a good portion of it’s run…

30. boxker - October 8, 2012

Man, I remember being a kid and the hoopla was all about the TOS celebrating it’s 25th anniversary.

31. Red Dead Ryan - October 8, 2012

Guys, its going to be Khan. The same sources that confirmed the title are the same ones who determined the villain is Khan. And TrekMovie still hasn’t backed away from that claim.

Also, they already did Gary Mitchell in the comics. He ended up getting killed. Why would they bring him back again to (most likely) kill him off again?

Didn’t the supreme court say that no villain featured in the comics would be in the movie?

Yeah, I don’t think its Gary Mitchell.

32. Montreal_Paul - October 8, 2012

31. Red Dead Ryan
” The same sources that confirmed the title are the same ones who determined the villain is Khan.”

Really? The SAME source. I missed that in the article that it was the same source. You sure?

“Also, they already did Gary Mitchell in the comics. He ended up getting killed. Why would they bring him back again to (most likely) kill him off again?”

The ending in the comic was different. It left it open. And I believe it might have posted on Trekmovie: “It’s definitely a character that will make fans of TOS excited. Think along the likes of Harry Mudd, or Trelane, or Gary Mitchell, or the Talosians or the Horta. Actually, it’s one of those that I named.”

“Didn’t the supreme court say that no villain featured in the comics would be in the movie?”

They also said that the villain will be a reboot of an original series character. They also said that the comics hold clues to the movie. To date, no mention of Khan or eugenics have been mentioned in the comics.

So I disagree with you Ryan. It points to Mitchell. BUT, if you are right and it isn’t Mitchell – it still won’t be Khan. You can take that to the bank.

33. AJ - October 8, 2012

That blog is pure speculation via process of elimination. Why would a God-like Gary Mitchell have a mere fist-fight with Spock instead of just turning him into a toad or something?

It looks like some bizarre take on Khan to me.

34. Red Dead Ryan - October 8, 2012


“They also said that the villain will be a reboot of an original series character.”

Yup! And Khan fits that bill perfectly!

“They also said that the comics hold clues to the movie.”

Yeah, that could be anything, not necessarily related to the villain. It’s more likely that other elements, like Cupcake, and the Spock/Uhura pairing, will return for the sequel. That’s probably more like what they were talking about.

With their devotion to total secrecy, I doubt that the Supreme Court would offer any clues as to who the villain in the sequel is in the comics.

“To date, no mention of Khan or eugenics have been mentioned in the comics.”


35. Montreal_Paul - October 8, 2012

33. AJ
“Why would a God-like Gary Mitchell have a mere fist-fight with Spock instead of just turning him into a toad or something?”

Why did Mitchell has a fist fight with Kirk and not turn him into a toad or something in the TOS episode?

36. Montreal_Paul - October 8, 2012

34. Red Dead Ryan

Highly doubt the clues are to show Cupcake will be back. But all signs point to Mitchell. The way the ending of the comic is laid out with Michell floating in space and not crushed and buried on a planet. As well as Dehner being mentioned in the comic.

37. AJ - October 8, 2012



He created those Kefarian apples, though.

I’m being sarcastic. If his god-like powers just give him mega-strength, it’s kinda ‘meh.’

38. Red Dead Ryan - October 8, 2012

I don’t see the point of killing Mitchell off in the comics and then immediately bringing him back for the sequel.

39. Antinoos - October 8, 2012

The villain will be Charles Evans.

40. Tiberius Subprime - October 8, 2012

If I were a betting man, I would lay good odds that Cumberbatch is Mitchell.
I would also lay odds on him being Garth.

Either way, I think I’d win.
Can’t wait to see if I do.

41. Chris Roberts - October 8, 2012

If true… the movie universe’s version of WNMHGB will probably be a 10 minute pre-title sequence, like the attack on U.S.S. Kelvin was in the first. The Enterprise going into the great barrier and a reprise of what happened in the comic, would make it decent opening scene.

That introduces Gary Mitchell and a nod to the audience, who were expecting TOS episodes to be rehashed and remade. Before wrong footing everybody…

42. Tiberius Subprime - October 8, 2012

Sounds very possible.
And a good way to open the new film.

43. Captain Rickover - October 8, 2012

Sorry to interrupt,

but what have all these rumors to do with all that anniversaries from the article?

25 years since TNG! I feel indeed aged. Hope for a quicker release of Season 3 on bluray. December for Season 2 seems very long for me…

11 years since ENT, I’m feeling even older now.

44. cd - October 8, 2012

So if the villain is Gary Mitchell, and in ST: TOS, Kirk fought him on Delta Vega, not a moon of Vulcan, is Spock going to fight Gary Mitchell on Delta Vega, now a moon of Vulcan?

“Vulcan has no moon. Vulcan needs no moon.”

45. rm10019 - October 8, 2012

Gary Mitchell is floating in space in a photon tube in this JJ Universe, after Kirk shoots him. Ongoing comic #1 and #2. Dr. Dehner is notably absent from the issue.

46. Aashlee - October 8, 2012

Hey, look at this! I might have to buy a plane ticket to London!


47. Aashlee - October 8, 2012

Here’s some more news about the “Star Trek” theme park in Jordan, though this isn’t necessarily a Trek ride. Interesting, though… I guess I’m buying more plane tickets!


48. hcmv007 - October 8, 2012

Cumberbatch is Charlie X

49. Rose (as in Keachick) - October 8, 2012

It seems that September is a big month in the Star Trek world. Also, JJ Abrams officially signed onto being director for Star Trek Into Darkness in September 2011!

Frankly, I just don’t get all the speculation and debate/argument over a couple of outtakes of Quinto/Spock apparently being beaten up by the Cumberbatch character. Sorry, but it is terminally stupid, since we don’t know anything about the story or context.

Since everybody has been in speculation, many insisting that this person must be Gary Mitchell or some augment like Khan…
Here is my explanation – Spock has been afflicted with a disease – either naturally occurring or engineered – see rest of movie to find out.;). This disease has compromised his physical and mental strength and agility, so making him less capable of fighting off an aggressor…I’m sure that Bob Orci and co. will ensure that Spock is restored to his normal human/vulcan hybrid health!

50. Phil - October 8, 2012

Oh, come on, guys. Shatner had no problem whipping out a novel resurrecting old Kirk after the bridge fell on him. Resurrecting GM after his comic book passing should be no big deal. After all, Trek III and IV dealt with getting Spock back from the dead, so the precedent has been established. Take this with a grain of salt, of course, but a couple of on-line sources had Shatner telling Abrams that his involvement in Trek 2009 needed to include him being resurrected. If true, JJ was wise to abandon the effort to get Shatner in the last movie.

51. Phil - October 8, 2012

@49. Either that, or he dies.

52. Craiger - October 8, 2012

Too bad these anniversary’s were a last month and Trekmovie missed it.

53. Basement Blogger - October 8, 2012

@ 31, 32

Yikes. We’re back to arguing about whether it’s Khan. Yeah, RDR, I agree with you. I think it’s Khan. The two biggest pieces of proof? The search for a Hispanic actor ala Ricardo Montalban. And remember that Anthony has not retracted his story that it’s Khan. There’s still Anthony’s sources. I have not see “Aint It Cool News” retract its story. This is a guess, but I think Alice Eve is Carol Marcus. We already know she’s canon from this site. Plus, she watched all TOS episodes and seemed focused on Kirk. Possible research on a romance? Plus she looks like Bib Besch.

Is it Gary Mitchell? Well as RDR points out, he dies in the comic. Though, there is some evidence Cumberbatch could be. I concede that. See his pointed sideburns. Starfleet? But the big piece of evidence that it’s not, is this comment from STID writer Bob Orci. He confirms that Mitchell is not in the movie.

Bob Orci says Gary Mitchell is not in STID.

54. Montreal_Paul - October 8, 2012

53. Basement Blogger

You forget one thing, Carol Marcus was never mentioned in the original series. We did not know about Carol Marcus until TWOK. You do know that they would be making a rebooted TWOK as a sequel, they would have to reboot Space Seed if they were doing a Khan story.

The anger and passion Khan feels in TWOK was because of being marooned on a planet and that he feels Kirk is responsible for the death of his wife. Yes, I know, he tried to kill Kirk in Space Seed – but he was not like he was in TWOK, looking for vengeance for the death of his wife and being left for dead. There is no “wrath” in Space Seed. Think about it.

Yes, Mitchell apparently died in the comics – but did he really die? in the TOS episode, he was crushed and buried. In the comics, he was shot out into space in a torpedo coffin a la Spock. If he is God-like now, who says he is definitely dead? It was left open in my opinion. Dehner is also canon in TOS.

As for Del Toro, who says he wasn’t being cast as Mitchell? Because he is Latino? Well, you guys believe that a white British actor can play Khan so why not a Latino actor playing a white American?

As for Orci’s comments, who says he’s not trying to mislead us to keep the secret alive? He also was quote as saying. “It’s definitely a character that will make fans of TOS excited. Think along the likes of Harry Mudd, or Trelane, or Gary Mitchell, or the Talosians or the Horta. Actually, it’s one of those that I named.”

55. dub - October 8, 2012

I’m so glad I had the opportunity to visit Vegas while Star Trek: The Experience was there! I loved Quark’s Bar! I still have one bottle of Romulan Ale (blue dyed beer) on the shelf in my office!

56. Craiger - October 8, 2012

Did Bob say the reboot comics are canon?

57. Montreal_Paul - October 8, 2012

56. Craiger

Yes sir.

58. Craiger - October 8, 2012

What if they combined Space Seed and TWOK for the sequel but maybe not have Spock die since he is still young.

59. Montreal_Paul - October 8, 2012

58. Craiger

Combine it how? How would you get that wrath and desire for vengeance without the time passing of him being marooned on the planet and his wife being killed, etc?

60. Shannon Nutt - October 8, 2012

I don’t know if Bob said the comics were canon, but he did say they would lead up to the sequel, and since they’ve already covered Gary Mitchell in the comics, he can’t be the character Cumberbatch is playing. I STILL think it might be Kirk’s brother Sam, since the comics have gone out of their way to keep him alive when they did the Operation: Annihilate issues. Plus, JJ has a thing for family issues in his work – so that kind of story would appeal to him. We’ll see.

61. Nony - October 8, 2012

The Mad Men reference didn’t have anything to do with the 46th anniversary of Star Trek…and it happened five months ago, not in September. But it was cool anyway.

Wish I could’ve seen The Experience!

62. Hat Rick - October 8, 2012

This is a great piece. Thank you for running it, TrekMovie.

I still remember the start of Enterprise as though it were yesterday. Hard to believe it’s been eleven years.

But in a sense, it seems as though it’s been longer than that. Enterprise wasn’t given its due, and by now, it’s faded into nothingness in the minds of the general public. And that’s a damnable shame.

Maybe it was the title song, after all. Maybe if they’d gotten the guys who did Magnum, P.I. and The Rockford Files to do an upbeat, up-tempo intro it would have been different. Who knows?

It’s water under the bridge, now.

But I still remember. “It’s been a long road…”

63. sean - October 8, 2012


No offense to Bibi Besch, but no, Alive Eve does NOT look like her. :)

64. sk8r_gurl - October 8, 2012

On a side note, just wanna say it’s great to see some regular content at TrekMovie again, even if it’s not STID related. Keep it comin’ folks!

65. Captain Otter - October 8, 2012

It won’t be Mitchell. Also, I think the Horta will factor in the story. The bad guys will be a combo of Federation and corporate types mining resources for secret projects and killing the native species. The comic on the Archons sets up that the drama to come involves secret Starfleet doings, Kirk being Kirk, and Pike caught in between. Just my best guess after reading the comics and paying attention to Mr Orci.

66. Mawazitus - October 8, 2012

Benicio del Toro certainly would have been a unique casting choice for Gary Mitchell. It wouldn’t really fit age wise (he’s 45 years old IRL), seems like Mitchell and Kirk were supposed to be about the same age. I’m not sure how that would have changed with the timeline differences, I’m certainly no temporal science expert… and I’m not sure if something like that would really stop Abrams and Company from casting him anyhow.

Abrams (or someone else in the upper echelons) was quoted or paraphrased as saying that Cumberbatch’s audition in some ways ‘forced’ them into going a different direction with the character than initially intended.

That could lend credence to del Toro as Mitchell, but it’s still all very vague and abstract. It would be pretty amusing if they were both being cast as an intensely re-imagined Harry Mudd.

67. Sebastian S. - October 8, 2012

Seems like every time I check in on this site, we’re STILL discussing whether Cumberbatch is playing Khan or Gary Mitchell (I’m starting to think that BOTH are red herrings at this point….)

Nice to see some things never change. ;-)

68. Basement Blogger - October 8, 2012

@ 54


Here’s the problem with the Gary Mitchell shot out into space and coming back theory. They would have to spend a lot of time explaining how he got there. In essence it would be like filming Where No Man Has Gone Before and then telling a new story about Mitchell coming back. I doubt they would put that movie out. It would probably be at least four hours long.

As for Del Toro playing Mitchell, you totally forget they were looking not at just him but a number of Hispanic actors. Unless Zorro is in the movie, why look for Hispanic actors to play Gary Mitchell? Hold on. Maybe they’re trying to increase the Hispanic audience by turning Gary Mitchell into a Hispanic. But wait a minute maybe the new movie does feature Zorro since Bob Orci wrote the last Zorro movie. It’s the Wrath of Bob for the criticism for The Legend of Zorro.

That’s it. The Supreme Court wanted to bring Zorro into the Trek universe with the search of those Hispanic actors. Then not satisfied, they saw Sherlock and decided to bring in Moriarty. He was in TNG’s Ship in a Bottle and that makes him canon for Trek. :-) So within a month, the guys rewrote the script to cater to Cumberbatch. :-)

Hispanic actors sought for villain role.


69. Aaron (Naysayers gonna nay...) - October 8, 2012

Its Carol Marcus and Kirk and her fall in love and little Kirk is soon to come. I also think its either Kodos or Mitchell. Honestly both could be interesting stories but Kodos offers more I believe. And I think it will definitely feature the love story between kirk and Carol Marcus. Awe movie ends with baby David in the oven so to speak setting up interesting ploy ideas for the third movie. What would Kirk do to save his unborn child???

70. Aaron (Naysayers gonna nay...) - October 8, 2012

P.S. I grew up in Vegas and oft lament the loss of The Experience. Sighs….

71. Aaron (Naysayers gonna nay...) - October 8, 2012

Ewww what if it was Gary Kirks BFF and there was a love triangle with Carol Marcus and the baby was really Gary’s??? Gary dies and Kirk is told junior is his… Now that would be a twist. It would be interesting story telling and would piss off a portion of fandom. Sounds like an Abrams move to me… I love it.

72. ray - October 8, 2012

when are aliens / star trek comics do a crossover? idw and dark horse should get together about it.

73. The Gurardian - October 8, 2012

If its khan than perhaps someone can explain, why the Cumberbatch star trek into the darkness, photo that Chris doohan has posted on his facebook page has a supernaturalish otherworldly blueish tint to Cumberbatches eyes. To me that image is more suggestive of someone possesed by a Godly type entity.
Chris any insite?

74. The Gurardian - October 8, 2012

looking again at the image i guess it would be an supernaturalish otherworldly Blueish Greenish tint to his eyes.

My money is on Cumberbatch being Gary Mitchell.

75. LizardGirl - October 9, 2012

Maybe it was going to be Khan, but then changed the character to Mitchell?

76. Bradley - October 9, 2012

I’m not sure how to send in news tips, and not sure if I should comment here, but it seems odd that you guys have not posted about the confirmation of Enterprise on Blu-ray.

77. J - October 9, 2012

Yes, that was a special month. And yet during this special month Trekmovie managed to hit rock bottom by posting that animated ST “trailer”.

78. P Technobabble - October 9, 2012

54. Montreal_Paul
“…Think along the likes of Harry Mudd, or Trelane, or Gary Mitchell, or the Talosians or the Horta. Actually, it’s one of those that I named.”

I’d forgotten about this quote from Bob O. After seeing it again, I’m gonna throw my money at Trelane, except that he won’t be the mischevious adolescent he was in TOS. I think he’ll be more Khan-like, a real mean SOB. We may definitively find out that he’s of the Q continuum, giving that little nod to TNG-era shows.
Meanwhile, all this speculating is definitely affecting my acid reflux…

79. P Technobabble - October 9, 2012

Today John Lennon would have been 72.

80. Chris M - October 9, 2012

September certainly was a fantasic month for Star Trek! Been loving all the celebrations for the 25th Anniversary of TNG and got a chuckle out of the Google celebtration of Star Trek’s 46th Anniversary. Can’t believe it’s been 11 years since Star Trek Enterprise began, judging by the poll over at StarTrek.com it’s finally getting some of the credit it deserves.

Sad that’s it’s been four years since Star Trek The Experience closed down, I was fortunate enough to travel to Las Vegas in December 2004 and me and my mate dropped by Star Trek The Experience each day we were there and we were absolutely amazed at how awesome it was!! Travelling to the USA again this weekend, including Vegas, and am saddened that I won’t be able to drop by. I am just so glad I got to experience it before it closed!

81. MC1 Doug - October 9, 2012

While I think the author (see link below) was a bit harsh (who also needs the service of a good editor and/or spell check), I agree with some of the points he raises. Personally, I think Gene Roddenberry would have been horrified with the movie.


82. T'Cal - October 9, 2012

I loved ST:The Experience but as interest in Trek waned, I realized that ST:TE was better off as part of some other bigger theme park. To capture the fanbase as well as the general public, it would have to have a mass appeal yet have the details that Trekkers would appreciate. IMHO it would have to have themes from TOS-movie era, TNG/DS9/VOY TV era, and JJA’s-movie era. That could mean interactive rides, restaurants, shops, theatres, etc. Disney’s Tomorrowland is an easy leap but Universal has the vision to do this as well if the Harry Potter section is any indicator – very cool!

83. Daoud - October 9, 2012

@81 MC1: Thanks for highlighting that article.
It really was a bad movie, after all. The article really encapsulates all the serious criticism in a nutshell. He doesn’t address the thought that *some* of the blunders could be retconned… but not all of them. Star Trek Is Dead. Long Live Star Trek?
Plus, as great as it is to have Bob around now and then…. he’s never seriously taken on in a scholarly fashion a coherent response to each of those 15 points.

84. Vultan - October 9, 2012


Yesterday was Columbus Day in the US, and I was thinking it would be nice to replace it with a more modern, more inspirational explorer (Columbus was a brutal, borderline psychopath to say the least).

So… how about Armstrong Day…?

85. Montreal_Paul - October 9, 2012

68. Basement Blogger

The thing is, the other actors were just reported to have been thought about. Neither was tested for the part and Paramount had no comment on the casting. JJ & Paramount have denied the part is that of Khan. The whole Khan things started with the fans when they heard that Del Toro was being touted for a role. I think that Bob & JJ and the gang went with this to throw people off. BUT Bob forgot about that quote he made,

“…Think along the likes of Harry Mudd, or Trelane, or Gary Mitchell, or the Talosians or the Horta. Actually, it’s one of those that I named.”

They tried to throw things off by that “close, unnamed source.” Deception and smoke & mirrors. Well, we’ll see in May.

86. AJ - October 9, 2012




87. Phil - October 9, 2012

@82. Star Trek and Disney were made for each other, but it was not meant to be….

88. Rose (as in Keachick) - October 9, 2012

#83 – I read that link pointing out all the so-called blunders in the first Star Trek movie and most of them are nonsense. That being said, why should Bob Orci take them seriously and waste his time attempting to answer them?

89. Vultan - October 9, 2012


I agree. The author was a bit overly harsh. He makes some good points about the movie’s flaws (and there are plenty to find), but the franchise hasn’t been “ruined.” If the TOS crew could survive “Spock’s Brain” and “Final Frontier,” they can survive anything.

90. sean - October 9, 2012


Rodenberry was horrified by most of the movies. He also said he hoped after he was gone someone would take Star Trek and remake it. I’d say it’s a wash, really.

91. Phil - October 9, 2012

@88. Actually, most of them are fairly well thought out, as most of them have been debated here as well, some at length. They tend to drop into two catagories, creative (brewery as engineering, new look Enterprise) and plot flaws (cadet to cap’t, etc..). It didn’t ruin the movie, or the franchise because the pacing and overall level of storytelling tended to compensate for the flaws – obviously they were successful, because the movie was well received and made money. I would not expect Bob to answer them, I would expect him to take a harder look at future efforts and tighten them up so none of the obvious problems are not repeated.

92. Canadianknight - October 9, 2012

Fond memories of ST:TE. We went there for our honeymoon in ’97, and made several more visits over the years. Time wasn’t kind to ST:TE (the upper level of the Promenade disappearing, the “Admiral’s Collection” ceasing to carry higher-end collectibles, the aging original Klingon Encounter, etc), but we loved it every time we went.

We just got back from our first trip to Vegas in four years. We missed going there (and having a Warp Core Breach, or a James Tea Kirk) to hang out at Quarks. Didn’t even go near the Hilton…

93. jamesingeneva - October 9, 2012

How longs it been since we’ve seen Anthony? Feels like its been forever :( Does that count as an anniversary lol…

I soooooo miss ST:TE. We went the weekend it was closing and it was so packed we didn’t get to enjoy Quarks and most of the shops were already closed and tearing everything down. That said, I took my 7yo son and he had such an incredibly fun time with the Beam-out/Bridge on the Klingon Experience and was a bit terrified by the Borg 4D, he thought he was really getting assimulated. Now that he’s 11 he wishes we could return and do it all over again. I agree it would fit well in a major theme park but then you gotta figure would it boost sales enough to pay for it. Have there been any updates on the guy that supposedly bought all the stuff from the experience and was going to open up at the mall or something?

94. Richard - October 9, 2012

Going on a tangent:

Prometheus came out on dvd and blu ray today so I went down and grabbed it. If you’re going to be picking it up, and you care about making of documentaries, pick up the 4 disc blu ray version. It has the bonus disc with the 3 hour and 40 minute making of documentary + 1 hour of ‘enhancement pods’. Its made by the same guy who did the 3 hour docs for the Alien Quadrilogy/Anthology and is in the same style and quantity. Its also in 16×9 full 1080p. The bonus disc does not come in the 2 disc blu ray set.

I have extremely mixed feelings about the movie itself. Too many dodgy character motivations and actions. I’m not even sure I like the movie yet. But the documentary on this thing was outstanding and thorough. I had no idea how much was shot practically. I had assumed certain things were cgi only to find out in the doc that it was shot practical on set and in camera. I haven’t had time to dig into the enhancement pods yet or the deleted scenes or the movie itself and the commentaries. But with this much material, at this high of quality, this is a must have blu ray set.

Just be advised that only the 4 disc 3D blu ray set has the documentary. It contains a 2D blu ray version of the film as well as the 3D and a dvd copy. The doc is on a blu ray disc so if you buy this make sure you have a blu ray drive to play it on. The doc does not come on dvd, which is unfortunate for folks who haven’t plunged into the blu ray world.

I’m not sure why Fox would bother with the 2 disc blu ray/dvd set when its missing the most important special feature??

95. Richard - October 9, 2012

My favorite part of the doc: A side by side comparison of the PG13 and R rated versions of a part of the surgery scene. Its interesting to see what the MPAA considers to be “too much” blood and gore.

96. Shilliam Watner (Click for Trek Ships Poster) - October 9, 2012

81. MC1 Doug – and 83. Daoud – Some of the mistakes pointed out in the article are indeed things that bothered me, but not enough to ruin the movie for me, and certainly not enough to proclaim Star Trek dead.

Let’s get real here. Every Star Trek movie has had many errors and inconsistencies. Even the vaunted TWOK. To pick only on Abrams’ film and then declare it to be a franchise killer because of those errors displays a definite prejudice toward the new keepers of Star Trek and a decided lack of objectivity. If you were to be fair, you would have to also hate the other Star Trek movies, because many of them, if not all, have just as many problems.

Just admit your prejudice. You’re giving Shatner, Nimoy, the rest of the cast and crew of the movies a free pass. They aren’t being held to the same scrutiny as Abrams and his cast and crew.

That’s cool. Everybody has their favorites. But it is my opinion that Abrams’ Star Trek was not in any way inferior to the other Trek Movies, and was, in fact, better than most of them. If I had to choose between watching Generations, Insurrection, Nemesis, Final Frontier, Undiscovered Country, Voyage Home and ST09, I’d most often choose ST09. I find it no less perfect than any of those films, and superior to more than half of them.

I’m not saying you should like ST09, but I AM saying it seems only fair to apply the same criteria when judging the films. Looking at Old Trek with rose-colored glass, and the new one in stark light is hardly a fair way to judge them. And articles slanted against the new film, when the old ones are guilty of the same crimes, are hardly more than fan propaganda.

97. Jonboc - October 9, 2012

#81 “Personally, I think Gene Roddenberry would have been horrified with the movie.”

Well, I loved JJ’s movie but I was horrified with TNG..so I guess we’re even. lol

98. Sid - October 9, 2012

I really wish I’d given Enterprise more of a chance when it was on the air. Turns out some of my favorite Trek ever came with that damn theme song…

99. Aurore - October 10, 2012

“BUT Bob forgot about that quote he made,

‘…Think along the likes of Harry Mudd, or Trelane, or Gary Mitchell, or the Talosians or the Horta. Actually, it’s one of those that I named.’

They tried to throw things off by that ‘close, unnamed source.’ Deception and smoke & mirrors.”


If he had forgotten about it, the Internet would not have.
Or, am I mistaken in believing so?

Is there a direct link to this so-called Roberto Orci’s quote?
(Where, when was it made?).

I’d be interested to know.

100. P Technobabble - October 10, 2012

90. sean

Yeh, there always seemed to be something Roddenberry didn’t like about the Trek movies. But, apparently, he was difficult to work with anyway, which is why Paramount put him in the back seat. I’m pretty sure there would have been something about 09 that he would’ve complained about, but we’ll never know that one.
At the same time, I think it’s a great part of Roddenberry’s legacy that he wanted people to come along and bring us new Star Treks. What else would keep it going into the futurs?
Not everything is going to fit into Roddenberry’s version of Trek, and, years from now, Trek won’t fit into JJ’s version, and so on. If I recall, it was Roddenberry’s own attitude toward letting Star Trek be available — meaning fans could “play around” with Star Trek without Paramount shutting them down — that helped insure its future. So, it appears Roddenberry, himself, opened Pandora’s Box, making space for other people to make Star Trek.
However, the fact that he would criticize Star Trek made by others showed that he couldn’t really let go. I think he always belived that as creator of the show he could do it better than anyone else.
As for Trek09, I can see people debating well into old age about the plot, the sets, whether it’s good or bad, etc. Can’t wait to see what sort of debates will come over the next film. I just hope it doesn’t lead to riiots or JJ & Co are gonna have a lot of explaining to do…

101. Aurore - October 10, 2012

Correction. 99.

(Where, when was it made?) = ( Where, when was it made by Roberto Orci,for the first time?)

102. Classy M - October 10, 2012

Aurore, this seems to be the first place to cite that quote, if quote it is: http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/nailbiter111/news/?a=51528

103. Aurore - October 10, 2012

Classy M – October 10, 2012

Thank you, Classy M.

Apparently, according to the article you linked to, it all started with an e-mail someone received from…someone.

104. crazydaystrom - October 10, 2012

Trelane would be interesting. And even though I’m not a big Q fan, a Cumberbatch Trelane as a renegade Q could actually be fascinating.

One day my friends all will be made clear. My birthday is this Sunday and that’s one day, JJ.

105. Classy M - October 10, 2012

You’re welcome, Aurore. I tried to go back to the original site but I wasn’t able to locate the article. Still, I think the link I posted gives some idea of the story’s provenance and, by extension, its validity.

106. Montreal_Paul - October 10, 2012

101. Aurore

It was also posted on trekmovie as well. But Bob Orci later did a backtrack and claimed it wasn’t him that leaked the info. Highly suspicious.

107. Aurore - October 10, 2012

“I tried to go back to the original site but I wasn’t able to locate the article. ”

I did manage to go back to the original article.

Thanks to you….. and the link before the comments section of the site you linked to, as a matter of fact.

108. Aurore - October 10, 2012

“It was also posted on trekmovie as well. But Bob Orci later did a backtrack and claimed it wasn’t him that leaked the info. Highly suspicious.”

What I personally remember is a couple of fans claiming the list was from him.

(To my knowledge, this here site only posted an article that referred to an “informant close to the production” as far as the “list of characters” was concerned.)

109. Gary S. - October 10, 2012

Just because it was posted on this site doesnt mean that Bob said it .

110. jamesingeneva - October 10, 2012

Aint that the truth, how many times have we had imposter posters lol

111. Trek lives - October 10, 2012

Boys, it wasn’t a poster that said that. It was in an article that trekmovie posted.

112. Aurore - October 10, 2012

“…..it was in an article that trekmovie posted.”

The site posted an article that explicitly stated that Roberto Orci had given the list?

113. boborci - October 10, 2012

Happy Anniversaries!!!

114. Khan-sablanca - October 10, 2012

Hi Bob Orci,

Thanks for popping by with the happy wishes. I’m really looking forward to the movie.

And in case it’s not clear to everyone, obviously Bob Orci Khan-not comment on the identity of the villain. Nor Khan I comment on the Genesis of these bad puns.


115. Aurore - October 10, 2012

….Oh, yeah, right.

“Happy Anniversaries!!!”

116. Themanle1 - October 10, 2012

Just thought, that if and when the 3rd new star trek movie comes out, it will probably be star treks 50th anniversary!!!

117. boborci - October 10, 2012

108. That list never came form me.

118. Craiger - October 10, 2012

Could Cumberbatch just be an undercover Klingon agent in Starfleet? He would look human using the Augment treatment that Phlox used in Enterprise? He could then assume the name Gary Mitchell. They could have a flashback scene showing how he infultrated Starfleet and became Kirk’s best friend during the Academy. So far the only the thing that was confirmed is the Klingons being in the movie. What if they are they are the main villains in the sequel? Klingons are one of the bad guys in Trek known to the general public. Plus the Klingons were in ST 2009 but those scenes were deleted but they were still mentioned.

119. Craiger - October 10, 2012

They could make the sequel along the lines of 24 or Homeland.

120. sean - October 10, 2012


It’s a beautifully shot movie with big ideas that made some major missteps RE: characterization. But I kind of love movies that go for broke and fail big.

In terms of the Bluray, are there a lot of cut scenes? The film felt like it suffered from some seriously patchwork editing.

121. Richard - October 10, 2012

#120: There’s about 37 minutes of deleted scenes apparently. I haven’t had time to dig into them yet. I bough Game of Thrones season 1 on blu the same day so there’s some competition for my attention atm, :)

122. sean - October 10, 2012


37 minutes sounds about right. There were a lot of jumps in there, where it felt like we’d completely missed crucial plot points.

123. Bob Mack - October 10, 2012

Today me miss Mongo more than ever. Me wish Mongo here.

And on the “Gary Mitchell’s in the comics so he can’t be in the movie” business – why not? “They” say there are clues in the comics and yet “they” say Mitchell cannot be in the movie because he was in the comics. Something doesn’t add up there. So maybe he died in the comics and maybe it makes the story complicated if they try to retell it with the comics viewed as canon, but would “they” let Mitchell’s presence in the comics actually derail a $200 plus million dollar movie?

I’m not saying it’s Mitchell, I just don’t think that the comics make it impossible.

124. Canadianknight - October 10, 2012

#96 – Well said.

Infinite diversity folks. :)

I’m old school… grew up with TOS. Loved it with every fibre of my young being. I still adore it, and watch the episodes on a regular basis… while my wife alternately shudders and laughs while I say the lines a split-second before the characters. :)

Personally, I loved ST09. Can’t wait for the next one.

125. DeShonn Steinblatt - October 10, 2012

There is bound to be something similar to the Experience in those Paramount theme parks.

126. Aurore - October 10, 2012

117. boborci – October 10, 2012
“108. That list never came form me”



127. Basement Blogger - October 10, 2012

@ 85, 114, 126

Aurore, Bob Orci, Montreal Paul,

The quote used by Montreal Paul….

“…Think along the likes of Harry Mudd, or Trelane, or Gary Mitchell, or the Talosians or the Horta. Actually, it’s one of those that I named.”

This quote is being used by Montreal Paul and others on the Internet as proof that Cumberbatch is Gary Mitchell. Folks, it’s two years old!!!!! Link. And I think Bob has denied he made the comment on this thread. (117) I’m guessing it’s the Real Bob Orci. By the way Bob, how are you doing?

This website still stands by its report that the villain is Khan. “For now TrekMovie cannot confirm Urban’s comment (BC is Mitchell) and we still stand by our earlier reporting.” (Reporting that it’s Khan.) Parentheticals added. Link below.

Anthony Pasquale is a very careful man. He would not report it, unless he had sources to go along with the proof. But could Cumberbatch be Khan? Sure. Heck, as I joked above he could be Moriarity (Sherlock Holmes) since he was in TNG. But I believe the proof and Anthony’s sources point to Khan.

1. Source of the MP’s quote; it’s in the story from 2010

2 . Trekmovie stands by its reporting that it is Khan

128. Aurore - October 11, 2012

Am I allowed to refer to this?

“184. Basement Blogger – May 11, 2012
Okay, I can change. There was a story that seems to single that TrekMovie is backing away from the April 30, 2012 story.

‘So maybe TrekMovie and the other sites are all wrong and Khan is not in the film (and I admit this is entirely possible). I have also noted that reports of Khan are still officially rumors from Paramount’s point of view.’

You are now correct, Motreal Paul. TrekMovie has backed down.


129. Aurore - October 11, 2012

I’m sorry, I forgot to provide the link for Bernie’s post (184)



130. Aurore - October 11, 2012


In the second link you provided us with, I missed it when I first read it but, there is also this:

“Officially everything regarding the plot or new characters for the sequel are rumors from Paramount’s perspective. So yes it is possible Cumberbatch is playing Khan, or Mitchell or even some other character.”


131. Basement Blogger - October 11, 2012

@ 130


Geez, you like calling me by my real name. I feel like Batman when Chief Gordon called him Bruce. :-) And wow, you looked at the debate between MP and myself.

During the debate. I thought Anthony had backed down, that comes from the May story. But as you noted, there was a story on July 9 regarding the rumors of Gary Mitchell as the villain. And Anthony has clarified that he “stands by” the earlier reporting that Khan is the villain. The distinction is that Paramount conslders anything regarding characters is rumor. That’s not TrekMovie’s position which was clearly stated in the July story.

What TrekMovie is saying is that Paramount considers our discussions to be rumor whether it’s Khan or Gary Mitchell. I will say that the line you point out seems to indicate that TrekMovie is not one percent certain. I can agree to that. I’m not certain it’s Khan. I’m not certain it’s Mitchell. What I am certain of, is that Benedict Cumberbatch is in the movie.

132. Aurore - October 11, 2012

“And wow, you looked at the debate between MP and myself.”

Not quite.
I only remembered a discussion between several posters, actually.

“What TrekMovie is saying is that Paramount considers our discussions to be rumor whether it’s Khan or Gary Mitchell.”

What I am saying is that what Paramount considers a rumour is a rumour to me, as well.

It is due to what I think of “unnamed sources”, in general. Bernie.

133. Montreal_Paul - October 11, 2012

131. Basement Blogger
“What TrekMovie is saying is that Paramount considers our discussions to be rumor whether it’s Khan or Gary Mitchell. I will say that the line you point out seems to indicate that TrekMovie is not one percent certain. I can agree to that. I’m not certain it’s Khan. I’m not certain it’s Mitchell. What I am certain of, is that Benedict Cumberbatch is in the movie.”


134. Montreal_Paul - October 11, 2012

127. Basement Blogger
“This quote is being used by Montreal Paul and others on the Internet as proof that Cumberbatch is Gary Mitchell. Folks, it’s two years old!!!!!”

If I may add….. Two minutes old or two years old … why should how old it is have any bearing on it’s validity? What makes this any less true than Anthony’s “supposed inside source”? BOTH are unconfirmed rumors from “inside sources.” Could be Khan. Could be Mitchell. Could be someone else all together.

135. Aurore - October 11, 2012

…..And, by the way :

“Geez, you like calling me by my real name.”

Yeah…I do.

But, at least I did not call you Bernard F. Wong…..



136. Phil - October 11, 2012

@134. Well, there was no story or script two years ago. That could be a factor.

137. gordon - October 11, 2012

@ 7

enterprise 1st aired in the uk on september 26th 2001

138. Aurore - October 11, 2012

Correction. 132.

“Not quite.
I only remembered a discussion between several posters, actually.”

Should have read :

Not quite.
I only remembered a discussion between several posters, actually.

The thread I referred to in 128 was not just about two people debating.
Other posters participated in the discussion, and, in my opinion, made many good points, as well.


139. BulletInTheFace - October 11, 2012

#22: Roger Corby?? LOL. That’s a unique choice.

I’m not mocking you–I simply am 100% certain it’s not Corby. It’s been said several times that the villain is iconic. Roger Corby is most definitely NOT iconic.

And neither is Garth, for that matter.

140. Chris Roberts - October 11, 2012

@137. That’ll be the US premiere date.

Sky One had Enterprise beginning in January 2002, I think. Channel 4 on terrestrial freeview TV by September that year.

We’re always months behind the States.

141. Chris Roberts - October 11, 2012

correction @140 “enterprise 1st aired in the uk…”

142. BulletInTheFace - October 11, 2012

#69: Kodos has the same problem Corby and Garth do–he’s not iconic. The villain will reportedly be iconic.

143. Chris Roberts - October 11, 2012

Thought so. http://www.trektv.co.uk/

Enterprise premiered in the UK, 8:00 PM Monday, 7th January 2002 on Sky One.

144. Basement Blogger - October 11, 2012

@ 134

Montreal Paul

The reason the 2010 anonymous quote you used is stale is this. In my post at 53, I use Bob Orci’s statement that Gary Mitchell is not in the movie. Your quote was SUPERSEDED by Bob Orci’s denial which was made in June of 2012. Link. I trust writer of the movie’s comment more than an anonymous statement. I think any person would.

1. According to Bob Orci, Gary Mitchell is not in the movie. Statement made in 2012.

2. The 2010 quote that Gary Mitchell is in the movie is from an unnamed informant.

145. Montreal_Paul - October 11, 2012

144. Basement Blogger

I am just trying to point out that there are equal arguments for Mitchell as there is for Khan.

If I use your argument about believing Bob more than an anonymous source, I could also say that JJ denied that the villain was Khan – yet there was an anonymous source saying that it was Khan. And everyone is quick to believe it is Khan because Trekmovie “won’t take back the story.” What makes THAT source more trustworthy than JJ?

Fact is, it could be Khan… or it could be Mitchell… or it could be someone else all together.

146. jamesingeneva - October 11, 2012

Trek Movie news, kinda lmao… http://www.startrek.com/article/gallery-to-release-star-trek-into-darkness-novel

147. Basement Blogger - October 11, 2012

@ 145

Montreal Paul,

Here we go again. You asked me a question. What was wrong with the 2010 quote? I answered the question. Whether you liked my answer or not is not the issue. I just showed you what was wrong with the 2010 quote. Feel free to disagree. I just answered your question.

I do want to note that you used the 2010 quote and attributed it to Bob Orci. You did not link it so we had to research it. See your post 54. We looked at it and it said it was an anonymous source; NOT Bob Orci. Bob said here it wasn’t him. @117. I strongly suggest you cite the source when you use a quote to make an argument.

148. Montreal_Paul - October 11, 2012

147. Basement Blogger

What in heavens are you talking about. I was just showing how your argument can also be used to debunk the Khan theory.

You said that the quote was an inside source and Bob denied what the anonymous source said.

Same thing – Anthony’s source said it was Khan and JJ denied it.

I’m not going to agree or disagree. And no, you didn’t answer my question so I am asking you again… which anonymous source is more trustworthy?

I am not doing a dissertation, if you want a link, you can look for them yourself like you did before. I don’t need links, just looking for the answer to the question I asked.

149. Montreal_Paul - October 11, 2012

But since you need a link, here ya go!


150. Montreal_Paul - October 11, 2012

Or from this website:


So, who should be believed in this case? JJ Abrams or Anthony’s source?

151. Basement Blogger - October 11, 2012


Montreal Paul,

Sorry to make this additional post but i have to comment on what I said above about posting the sources for your quotes. You said this in 145,

“If I use your argument about believing Bob more than an anonymous source, I could also say that JJ denied that the villain was Khan – yet there was an anonymous source saying that it was Khan. And everyone is quick to believe it is Khan because Trekmovie “won’t take back the story.” What makes THAT source more trustworthy than JJ?”

You again did not cite the source for J.J.’s quote. So again I had to research it. Here’s the exact quote. There was a report that Del Toro was playing Khan. Hiflix asked Abrams and he responded, “Not true.” Link.

That quote could have a few meanings. One. It’s not Khan as the villain. Two, Khan and Del Toro are not in the movie. Or it could mean it’s not true that Del Toro is not playing Khan but that Khan is in movie.

But again it is incumbent on you to use the actual words, context and to cite the quote. Looking at your argument, you make it seem like Abrams denied that Khan is in the movie. Abrams was terse and did not explain his answer. Putting your interpretation on a quote robs the fan of the any context. Please be more accurate.

1. Abrams denies Del Toro is Khan.

152. Montreal_Paul - October 11, 2012

151. Basement Blogger

Right. So like I asked, which anonymous source is more trustworthy? The one that says it is Khan or the one that says it is Mitchell?

Anthony’s source says that it is Khan. JJ said not true.

Another source says it is Mitchell. Orci says no.

Which are you more likely to believe and why?

153. Sebastian S. - October 11, 2012

# 152 MP~

I think they’re all just screwing with the fans….

154. Montreal_Paul - October 11, 2012

153. Sebastian S.

You know, I completely agree with you. I bet that neither Khan nor Mitchell will be in the movie.

155. Basement Blogger - October 11, 2012

@ 150, 152

Montreal Paul,

You don’t use the exact quote or the context. See my post 151. The exact quote from Abrams is “Not true.” Again it’s important to use the exact quote and the context. Abrams was asked about Del Toro as Khan.

Again it means a few things. One. Del Toro is not Khan and it’s not Khan. Two. It’s not Khan. Three. Del Toro was asked but they couldn’t reach an agreement. Four. Del Toro was not asked. Five. The villain is Khan and Del Toro is not him.

I’ve already acknowledged that there is some proof it could be Gary Mitchell. But my opinion is that it is Khan based on the evidence and Anthony’s sources. l

156. Montreal_Paul - October 11, 2012

155. Basement Blogger

Okay, so you tend to believe an anonymous source as opposed to the Director & Producer. Fair enough. That’s all I wanted to know – I wasn’t trying to debate you, just opening your mind to differing views and just wanted to ask you a question – you finally answered it. Thank you

And I guess they should have changed the headline since it would be misleading. Right?
“JJ Abrams denies Khan rumour for Star Trek sequel”


157. Montreal_Paul - October 11, 2012

155. Basement Blogger

And it was pretty definite as to what JJ was answering. He was asked if Del Toro was playing Khan. JJ said Not True. Del Toro was being cast as the villain – the part that Cumberbatch is now playing.

Here is the exact quote:
“it was suggested that Benicio Del Toro was being lined up to play Khan in the Star Trek sequel. Not true, says JJ Abrams.”

158. Craiger - October 11, 2012

How about Cumberbatch being, Kang, Kor or Koloth?

159. Shilliam Watner (Click for Trek Ships Poster) - October 11, 2012

If the villain turns out to not be Khan, some people here are going to owe us an elaborate production of eating crow.

160. jamesingeneva - October 11, 2012

if any of you guys are in Austin area, bridge rebuild team needs some volunteers – check out their facebook wall @ https://www.facebook.com/EnterpriseRestoration?ref=stream

161. Basement Blogger - October 11, 2012

Oops, I forgot about this story. Happy Anniversary Star Trek! And that means all the Star Treks. And yes, Christopher Roberts, that includes “Enterprise.” (@ 18) It was a show that deserved better treatment by Paramount and should have been watched by more of us Trekkers. Plus thank you Rick Berman for your work on TNG and Enterprise. Oh, oh. I did it. Get ready for the Berman haters to blame him for everything from Sub Rosa to global warming. :-)

162. Milton - October 12, 2012

The exact quote, the REAL exact quote from


is the following:

“Specifically, over at Hitfix, JJ Abrams has responded to the rumour that Del Toro is playing Khan, by saying, simply, “Not true”. That’s all he said, but then, that’s all he needs to say.”

For a statement to be true, all parts of it need to be true. Paramount did not have a deal with Del Toro to play Khan in the new Trek movie, so JJ Abrams was correct in saying that it was, “Not true.”

This in no way means that JJ Abrams was leaking that the villain is not Khan. All it says is at the time of the question, there was no agreement that Del Toro would play Khan.

If anyone is finding this confusing, then picture the opposite. If JJ Abrams had said, “Yes, it’s true, Del Toro is playing Khan,” then Abrams would have been lying, because they didn’t have an agreement with Del Toro.

And yes, they should have used a more accurate headline.

163. Steve Johnson - October 12, 2012

@Basement Blogger.

Enterprise got FOUR SEASONS. It was one of the most expensive shows on TV at the time. It got a fair shake, alright? The same cannot be said of shows like Space: Above and Beyond, Firefly, Ironically Braga’s show immediately following Enterprise “Threshold” fits that bill far more (and was a much better piece of story telling than Enterprise).

Enterprise had the fan base it deserved, because the creative team working on Enterprise made it clear in interviews and behind close doors meetings just how they felt about Star Trek fans.

However, the cast of Enterprise was a fantastic group of actors, and they deserved a better show. The effects guys who slaved over Enterprise deserved to have their talent and hard work be part of a better show, and indeed some of the directors deserved to be part of a better show. The writing of Enterprise killed Enterprise, nothing else.

Happy Anniversaries, Star Trek.

164. Captain Hackett - October 12, 2012


They will release a new novel based on the same movie.

165. Dave in RI - October 12, 2012

158. Craiger – October 11, 2012
How about Cumberbatch being, Kang, Kor or Koloth?

Or maybe Cumberbatch does a “Harold Hecuba” and plays all three parts!

166. Dave in RI - October 12, 2012

100 points to anyone who gets that reference : -)

167. crazydaystrom - October 12, 2012

NY Comicon begins today. Wonder if there’s any chance of any major Trek announcements? I believe it was said we might be seeing a teaser trailer at Comicon TWO Comicons ago. Who said that? I’m not sayin’. But his initials are boborci! ;-)

168. Basement Blogger - October 12, 2012

@ 163

Steve Johnson says,

“Enterprise had the fan base it deserved, because the creative team working on Enterprise made it clear in interviews and behind close doors meetings just how they felt about Star Trek fans.”

Please cite your source or link for the allegation that the creative team dissed the fans. I don’t recall hearing that charge.

I do not agree with your assessment of Enterprise. The show was smart, inspiring and emotional. Topics covered included the war on terror (Xindi war); time travel and prejudice.

Enterprise also suffered from the lack of availability. UPN (Enterprise’s network) was carried here in Cincinnati by low powered channel 25. Time Warner initially did not carry the channel. There were problems nationwide also. Link.

1. Channel 25 not carried by Warner

2. Lack of availability of UPN

169. Basement Blogger - October 12, 2012

Sorry. The link to the article that says UPN had availability issues didn’t copy. Here it is.


170. AJ - October 12, 2012

I lived in Ithaca, NY for part of the time ENT was in first-run, and UPN was completely absent from the market.

171. Red Dead Ryan - October 12, 2012


Good point!

172. Montreal_Paul - October 12, 2012

162. Milton

All how you look at it Milton. Do you have the EXACT quote or do I? Unless we have the exact quote, it could be either or.

Was the question asked to JJ before or after it didn’t work out with Del Toro? Fact is, we don’t know. But we will find out in May!

If you take a look at all the fact that people have laid out over the past few months – there is an equal argument for Mitchell as there is for Khan.

Just saying.

173. Milton - October 12, 2012


There’s no mystery about the exact quote. Your post @156 included the following link:


All I did was follow the link, read the article, and then copy/paste the exact quote.

The exact quote does not have JJ Abrams denying that Khan is in the sequel. All the quote proves is that at the time the question was asked, there was no agreement that Del Toro would play Khan.

The villain may or may not be Khan, though it looks to me that the evidence leans heavily in that direction, but that’s just my reading of the tea leaves.

Whether the villain turns out to be Gary Mitchell (who would be great), or Kor, or the mirror-universe Kirk, or even an overly aggressive tribble, I’ll still be happy to buy my ticket to the first showing, munch on a jumbo bag of popcorn and hope to applaud at the end. Here’s to May 2013!


174. Montreal_Paul - October 12, 2012

173. Milton

Well Milton, I took a direct quote from there too… both are worded differently. “it was suggested that Benicio Del Toro was being lined up to play Khan in the Star Trek sequel. Not true, says JJ Abrams.”

Reading that, it reads as though JJ was denying the fact that Del Toro had been lined up to play Khan. There are only two definitive answers to that. Yes or no. Even if the deal had fallen through (which it did), Del Toro was still lined up to play the villain.

Of course, JJ saying “not true” could mean that Del Toro was never even lined up for a role (Khan or otherwise) in Trek.

But I am with you in that no matter who the characters are, I will still be there in May with my girlfriend and daughter to watch another fun Trek movie.

175. jamesingeneva - October 12, 2012

LMAO, 4 days later and the argument continues! I keep coming back just for this lol…

176. Milton - October 12, 2012

Montreal_Paul, your eyes are more keen than mine.  Both quotes are indeed there.  The quote I used was from the body of the article, whereas your slightly different quote is near the top of the page.  Sloppy on their part, mine too.

I then tried to find the original article that the denofgeek.com article referenced, and found it here:


The hatfix.com article also does not have the original quote.  They say they got it from here:


…which unfortunately gives a 404 Not Found error.

The hatfix.com article was from December 2011, so I searched the lationoreview.com archives from December 2011 and earlier, and the article is not there.  Instead, all they have is an article which says they think it’s Khan and then quote JJ Abrams from a startrek.com article:


So I officially give up on this search.  It would take me until May 2013 to find it, if it even exists.

But the good news is we’re at least providing jamesingeneva with some entertainment.


177. Richard - October 12, 2012

I think Duncan Jones’ film “Moon” is the greatest science fiction film of the past 25 years. I believe the 2009 Trek film is the second greatest.

If you haven’t seen “Moon” and you like sci fi you should seek it out. It goes for about $9 on blu ray.

178. Richard - October 12, 2012

Huge news, Enterprise is coming to blu ray next year:


So stoked!

179. Spockchick - October 13, 2012

Shame the Star Trek experience closed. Anyone coming to Scotland can come see the tiny ‘James Doohan Experience’ in the Museum at Linlithgow. Linlithgow Burgh Halls (the old town hall) have been restored. In this picture here,

you can see the lovely 17th century fireplaces that have been restored with new blue and white Delft tiles. In each fireplace, one tile depicts the NCC-1701, the Enterprise, in homage to Scotty’s Linlithgow origins.

180. Hat Rick - October 13, 2012

I feel that this thread has a number of threads that could be appended to separate stories in themselves. It’s a shame that there aren’t more opportunities to do so, as the number of news stories here has declined to near-record lows on a per-day basis over the course of the last four weeks.

So, I’d like to know: Is this a function of Anthony’s not participating as much anymore, or a real lack of interest in or news about Trek? Or some combination thereof?

Your opinions welcomed.

181. LizardGirl - October 13, 2012

@ 180 Hat Rick (this is a long one!)

I personally and strongly believe that this site has quite a bit of potential. Mainly because of the loyal supporters here. There are quite a bit of people who come here despite the decrease in news, which tells you that even in lean times they are willing to come back again and again. So Trekmovie has to be doing something right already. Think of how much traffic this site would get if there were a few enhancements.

The articles are wonderful, funny and many times thought provoking or last least, provoker of heated discussion. While there is a Chat tab for off topic discussions, I don’t believe it’s something that most posters use (only a few, which is still nice!). Also, I believe we’re not necessarily talking about off topic things. Mostly Star Trek/Science Fiction topics, but maybe unrelated to the article.

It would be wonderful if we had in addition, what TrekToday has–a BBS discussion board, where the fans can be a little more interactive in what topics they want to talk about (which would be great in slow times), without changing the subject of the discussion tied into the featured article. It may just be a question of time, energy, and availability of Trekmovie staff. I don’t know about that kind of stuff so I won’t make assumptions on how easy it is to set up.

I’ve seen a lot of grumbling about Anthony’s lack of involvement lately. I don’t really know what he could do, though. I don’t berate him for his absence. But you definitely “notice”. As of late, I go to Trekweb to read articles and come here for the discussions. I have noted the great fan interaction with the site TrekToday. Each site has their pluses. It would be nice to bring all of those elements together here. Mainly because there’s such a large pool of supporters of this site (me included) already.

It does need some sort of pick-me-up. I don’t think that posting 3 or 4 articles every two-three weeks will work in that sense. It’ll have to be a little more drastic to get people really excited about Trekmovie again. If people are stil excited to come here it may or may not be for the news, but for the interactions.The feelings of cynicism, betrayal or flat out rage will dissipate with honest to good changes or adjustments.

I haven’t been here as long as others* but I can tell that this is a great Trek community because of how different (expressive) everyone is. It’s a funny, cooky, lively bunch of people. It would be sad to see those numbers dwindle (highly doubt this, but it’s a possibility).

*I believe I accidently came across this site around September-November of 2011. I posted my first comment on an article about Bill Shatner’s possibility of being in the new franchise. I used this very same screen name (don’t know if I used caps though). Afterwards, I kind of forgot about it. Found it again December 011, or January of this year and have been posting ever since!

182. Craiger - October 13, 2012

#180 – This isn’t “The Source For Everything New In Trek” anymore. I think someone said Anthony is hiking through Europe right now or was. That proves he is not interested in running this site full-time anymore, and that’s fine he should just come right out and say so and remove the sites tagline. Whenever he comes back Anthony never tells us what’s up with all the breaks and lack of interest in Trekmovie.

183. AJ - October 13, 2012

181: Lizardgirl

I think I ran across this site in 2007, and when I met the community here, I became hooked, and via CHAT, made some permanent friends (one whom I met in real life at a con). We had a beloved member, British Naval Dude (Del Trame), die of heart failure in 2010, and receive proper honors on this site to the point where we heard from Anthony recently that he will be referenced in ‘Star Trek Into Darkness’ thanks to this site, Bob Orci’s presence here, his good heart and receptiveness (and our group’s persistence).

After that, I just don’t need another site. If it’s Chase Masterson’s birthday, I really don’t care. I care about Star Trek itself, and its future. I care about its proper marketing as a franchise and its distribution throughout the world. I’m a fan since 1972.

This site has a good swath of intelligent people of many ages who can engage in informed debate about various topics from fan reputation to film marketing and production or just pure lore, and we get the drop-in voices of Mr. Orci, Chris Doohan and others from time to time. We get snarky on a regular basis, but, hey, welcome to the Internet.

I DO wish the site would get back under Anthony’s control. Apart from his “tough but fair” demeanor, he’s got an “in” which other sites wish they had, and he rarely simply amalgamates and regurgitates news already posted elsewhere on the web. He reports real news, and other sites usually regurgitate Trekmovie’s news items.

Let’s hope that when the levy breaks and the Paramount machine gets rolling on STID, that Trekmovie will be back in the vanguard.

184. Hat Rick - October 13, 2012

Excellent responses and much to think about. Many thanks.

185. MJ - October 13, 2012

Lets just face it the creators of this new Trek think all the fans are nothing more than walking talking piggy banks that they enjoy making fun of and mocking in interviews.
They care nothing of what we think.
You can Bank on that.

186. Montreal_Paul - October 13, 2012

185. MJ

Like every other movie producer and film company. Nothing new there.

187. Lostrod (seriously!) - October 13, 2012

The worst thing about this site no longer being under Anthony’s control (it seems) is that I frankly don’t know who to believe anymore.

Apparently people are free to sign in as anybody so there is no way of knowing it the poster is who we think it is.

In the past, those fake posters would be “perma banned”. Now, they seem to have free reign.


188. Bardicjim - October 13, 2012

Latest news. Prequel comics announced. Countdown to darkness. Coverr shown at comicon.

189. MJ - October 13, 2012

Prequel comics are nothing but cheap a$$ ca$h grab. But what else should we expect from the “SupREAM Court” now right.

So my guess is the comics will NOT show the villian

190. bardicjim - October 13, 2012

For once I hope that the swearing does not get the message deleted. Needed to be said that did.

191. Craiger - October 13, 2012

I wonder if Paramount maybe cracking down on fan sites again? Maybe they want Trek fans just going to the offical Trek news site StarTrek.com? Gustavo said over at Trekweb after the sequel he plans on leaving Trekweb, allthough he said he has grown tired of reporting news, so I don’t know if we will have that site anymore for Treknews. I guess we will just have Trektoday, Treknews and StarTrek.com.

192. LizardGirl - October 13, 2012

@183 AJ

I remember how you told me about Del Trame. Again, I wish I’d known the guy. If anyone doesn’t know who AJ’s talking about, go to the Chat tab. Then read post 1377 & 1378. Make sure to note the dedication underneath the word CHAT at the top.

It’s history like that, that makes this site special, I think. It’s an almost tangible, I don’t know…you can feel it’s a little more personal here–cozy even. I like the other sites, but I’m missing that connection that I get here.

Anthony, wherever you are, I hope you and your loved ones are okay. We miss you and hope you come back soon.

For better or for worse, I too am hooked!

193. LizardGirl - October 13, 2012

@ AJ

Also, you bring up a good point about Anthony. Unlike some sites, Anthony talks directly to those involved with Star Trek franchises as well as runs his own site. He gets direct information from the source of new Trek. In that way the site can be seen as “the source for everything new in Trek”. Not necessarily based on how often we get information, but on the fact that when we do get it, it’s good solid information. Good point. I hope he gains control of the site again as well. Kayla has been doing a swell job, though!

194. Craiger - October 13, 2012

I wonder if Anthony got a new job that requires alot of hours and he can’t devote alot of time to this site anymore and the time he does have off he wouldn’t want to spend it here?

195. Rose (as in Keachick) - October 13, 2012

I must admit I am a bit hooked as well to Trekmovie. I check in every day just to see what else might be new, whether there have any new comments etc.

I came in June 2010 and Del Trame died in September 2010, so I only got to read a few of his posts… He could be EXTREMELY funny. I was like what the? and was laughing until I was crying. There is some good humour to be had here but none like the British Naval Dude (Del Trame). I am pleased to hear that he will be given honourable mention in the new Star Trek movie.

Certainly, things have been quiet. It is Sunday here, but Saturday still where you are (13 October), but there is no Saturday Science report yet – still time I guess. Anyway, I am not too concerned – if there is no real news, then there is no news – period. I think that this lull may well be the proverbial “calm before the storm” scenario. When the Bad Robot guys have worked out what the trailer will contain and when to release it, then it is going to be “All Go” and we won’t know ourselves.

Keep the faith.

196. Craiger - October 13, 2012

Rose funny how now people are just addicted to just the chat here at Trekmovie and to see if Anthony ever comes back from vacation and then goes on vacation again. LOL. Otherwise with the lack of news I don’t think this site would get too many hits? Maybe Anthony thinks he can still make money off this just by the number of people who click on it just to chat and see if its back from the grave?

197. Thorny - October 13, 2012

Anthony must be “out of communications range”, I can’t believe he would otherwise have let the “Star Trek: The Next Generation – 365″ book publication go unmentioned, especially since he and this site are specifically cited in the chapter about the episode “Parallels”.

It is a superb book, by the way.

198. Hat Rick - October 13, 2012

Thorny, if this site ever goes, I’ll certainly miss your insights on the American space program, among other things.

By the way, there’s no sign that TrekMovie will actually fold; I don’t want to start any rumors. I’m just saying that if it does, and we all go our separate ways, there’ll be people whose comments I will really miss.

Although, if you really think about it, the more persistent fans will post elsewhere, under other names, and perhaps even their own.

Now, I thought I saw Wayne Hall post on this site, and I believe I recognize that name from the old AOL days when he and his brother Randy were regulars on the Star Trek boards there. Or moderators, even.

Whatever’s happened to those AOL boards, by the way? About ten years ago, they started disintegrating into a web-based interface and the place just wasn’t the same.

If there are any posters from the days of AOL’s preeminence as one of the leading sites for Star Trek discussions, you might want to make yourselves known. I posted very regularly there under a number of screen names and would welcome the knowledge that some of us are still alive and kicking, fan-wise.

Best regards,

Hat Rick

199. AJ - October 14, 2012

Here’s what we CHATers had to endure at the masterful hands of of ‘British Naval Dude’


It only touches the surface.

We were truly grateful that Anthony helped us to get the message out to Bob, and hopefully, to the final cut.

200. Hat Rick - October 14, 2012

Trek people are quite fun and — in the vast majority of cases — well-rounded and happy. You can just see that in the tribute to which you linked.

I hope there will never be a day when Trek fails to attract the kinds of people we’ve come to know and love here at TrekMovie.com.

(Why do I feel like I’m writing an elegy for this site? Message to self: TrekMovie is still around!)

201. shinzon's lover - October 14, 2012

New Star Trek comic! Star Trek: Countdown to Darkness! Prequel to new Star Trek Movie!

202. Craiger - October 14, 2012

#200 – That’s because Anthony is not telling us what is going on with this site. Is he still interested in it or not? He never says so when or if he comes back from break after break.

203. Hat Rick - October 14, 2012

202, Craiger, perhaps we should coin a description for the owner of this site: The Mysterious Anthony!

Well, mystery has its charm, but sometimes it’s also frustrating.

Sponsors will have expectations that their ads will appear a certain minimum number of times, so the fact that this site still exists could owe something to that. There have been instances when other sites — TrekWeb, for example — have seem very deserted, and yet TrekWeb lives. It seems to have been revived over the course of the last several years, although now I’ve read recent news that it may go for good.

Trek fandom is big enough for multiple sites.

If Anthony doesn’t have the time to do TrekMovie anymore, he can always sell it to someone who does.

Imagine entering “TrekMovie.com” in your browser and coming up with a 404 error. That would be a depressing day.

204. Craiger - October 14, 2012

Hat RIck – The problem with selling it is that Anthony has all the contacts within Paramount and they know him. I’m not sure they would want to deal with a new owner. That’s another thing I like about this site especially in its heyday that people involved in Trek, would chat here and you could chat with them. Now they hardley do anymore. I don’t understand why Anthony doesn’t feel the need to give us a status update on the site is it closing or what?

205. Lostrod - October 14, 2012


Thanks for the link. I checked it out and the cover definitely looks like a Gary Mitchell story …. The eyes!


206. Well Of Souls - October 14, 2012

This is live as I type Jumping at 127,000 feet


207. Well Of Souls - October 14, 2012

Looks like he is jumping @ 128,000 feet That is roughly 24.5 miles

208. Well Of Souls - October 14, 2012

Felix Baumgartner had a safe landing in which he landed on his feet in New Mexico breaking 3 world records at the same time: Highest balloon flight, highest jump, and fastest freefall. Still unsure if he achieved the spped of sound but it was close in the +700 mph range. He was just short of the record breaking duration of freefall of 1960 by several seconds though. What an awesome feat.

209. Charla - October 14, 2012

One of the poster’s comments in one of the links to Baumgartner’s jump was someone asking everyone “does this remind anyone of the jump scene in Star Trek 09?” I wondered that myself! Really amazing!

He’s Harry’s brother dontcha know, But his name is Hugh G. ….. :D

210. AJ - October 14, 2012


Craiger: I don’t think Paramount gives a darn about Anthony’s site because we fans are all going to see the new film at least twice in the cinema, and in perpetuity on our Blu-Ray players.iTunes, etc. while we read the novelization and the comic prequels and hum the soundtrack. Paramount’s lawyers probably monitor all the sites for breaches is all.

Don’t forget, there is NO Trek news. Retro-reviews, birthdays, opinion pieces, and even articles like this one are not newsworthy (coming one month late). Anthony may very well know when the first news will break, and is just waiting until that time when there will be something to write about.

The last big announcements were “Klingon Style,” TNG Blu-Ray progress and Conan. All covered here.

211. Craiger - October 14, 2012

AJ, then the tagline should be taken down if Anthony only wants to just report on the movie because then this sites main name would make better sense. However why keep a site up just to report on the new Trek movies? Movie blogs can handle that news. Is regular Trek news drying up if so I wonder why?

212. Phil - October 14, 2012

Felix Baumgartner. Stud.

213. OfBajor - October 14, 2012

This is ‘still’ far and away the best Trek community on the web. I have been coming here three or four times a day since late 2008. Granted, I don’t post that much but I read absolutely everything.

You regular posters feel so familiar to me that it would be a travesty if the site closed and you all went your seperate ways. Trekmovie is an obsession…long may it continue

214. LizardGirl - October 14, 2012

@209 Charla

That’s exactly how I explained it to my mom. I was like ” You know in Star Trek when they jumped from the ship? Yeah, someone did that a few days ago.”

I was thinking Star Trek jump scene when I saw it too. Just as cool.

215. Basement Blogger - October 14, 2012

If you go to Chat, at times, you’ll get some Star Trek news. But for right now, how about some Star Trek news?

1. This site routinely posts Trekker Stephen Colbert and Jon Stewart pieces that feature Trek. So, Thursday, Colbert did a piece on an Obama conspiracy. He was involved in transporter experiments! And Colbert enlists an expert on transporters. William Shatner. Look at Shatner’s models. And listen to those sound effects. Funny stuff. Here’s the video.


2. If you watch the excellent Argo, you find out that the plot is about CIA agent Ben Affleck using a fake science fiction movie to get diplomats out of Iran. He dupes everybody that the diplomats are part of the movie crew. The Star Trek connections. Quick mention in a list of science fiction movies. Two action figures, Spock and Kirk. But are outnumbered by Star Wars toys. Damn you Affleck. :-) But the biggest thing is the character of John Chambers. You see he was a real life make up artist and was the CIA contact. His Trek credentials? . He made Spock’s ears. See someone in the Star Trek World making a difference in the real world. You’re right Captain Picard in Generations. Oh, the lessons you can learn from Star Trek.

3. TrekWeb is reporting that a diorama from Diamond Select will feature Kirk fighting Khan from the episode Space Seed. It comes out in March 2013. Hmmm, doesn’t Star Trek come out two months later. More evidence of Khan in the new movie? :-) It is cool looking.


216. Montreal_Paul - October 14, 2012

215. Basement Blogger
“More evidence of Khan in the new movie?”

I think you’re stretching a bit there. Besides, I think CBS licenses those products and not Paramount.

217. Basement Blogger - October 14, 2012

@ 216

Um. I was having a little fun there. Tongue in cheek. Note the emoticon. Regardless, if Diamond Select knew Khan was in the new movie, it would make sense to have a Khan product whether it was from the movie or the TV series. Still, I was having a little fun here. Sheesh. Do you have to shoot down every idea that Khan might be in the new movie?

218. Montreal_Paul - October 14, 2012

217. Basement Blogger

Yup ;)

219. Richard - October 14, 2012

You guys are gonna be so disappointed when the villain turns out to be Quark, Rom and Nog lost once again in time :)

220. Corkscrew - October 15, 2012

The Wikipedia page for this site is accurate.

221. Romulus - October 15, 2012

btw there was a guy called Felix who broke some skydiving record yesterday.

222. Occasional poster - October 15, 2012

Hmmm – looks like a Starfleet Officer on the cover of the “Countdown To Darkness” comic leading into the new movie.


223. It's Paramount - October 15, 2012


Gustavo at Trekweb states it is Gary Mitchell and by looking at the other comic Mitchell was in prior, it appears to be the same looking guy.

224. Ralph Pinheiro - October 15, 2012

Allyn Gibson said he saw the cover in person. It’s Kirk, in his opinion.
This Starfleet Officer in the cover has an evil eye.

225. Montreal_Paul - October 15, 2012

224. Ralph Pinheiro

They are remaking “The Enemy Within” … Cumberbatch is playing Kirk’s evil side!

226. AJ - October 15, 2012


Craiger: You make the case constantly that Anthony should ‘take down his tagline’ because he’s been remiss in his coverage of minutiae which we Trekkers constantly seek out, but which doesn’t actually exist.

Do you think the “Countdown to Darkness” comic’s blurry cover shot from NYC Comic-Con warrants an article? “The source for everything new in Trek” is actually JJ Abrams and his team. And until that machine starts rolling, Trek news is just a giant goose-egg.

227. Basement Blogger - October 15, 2012

@ 222

Thanks for the Star Trek news. Can’t tell who’s on the cover. That is a Starfleet officer on the cover. Doesn’t look like Chris Pine. Gary Mitchell? Link for pictures of Gary Mitchell from previous comic.


The NY Comic Con photo looks like Shatner. The hairstyle doesn’t seem to match Mitchell. It’s brushed back and off the forehead ala Shatner or Pine. Hard to guess, but my guess is that is Kirk.

228. Craiger - October 15, 2012

AJ, Trektoday thought it was.


229. Craiger - October 15, 2012

So did Trekweb:


230. Ralph Pinheiro - October 15, 2012

If he is Gary Mitchell, how would they explain star trek ongoing #1 to people doesn´t know the history?

231. LizardGirl - October 15, 2012

@213 OfBajor

232. Rose (as in Keachick) - October 15, 2012

The head has the shape of William Shatner’s, not Chris Pine. The face appears to be that of an older person. Also, what we have seen of Benedict Cumberbatch is that his hair is jet black – certainly not Kirk’s colouring.

233. Lostrod - October 15, 2012

And what is that object in front of the mysterious star fleet officer?

Kind of looks like the doomsday machine …


234. Ralph Pinheiro - October 15, 2012

I see something appearing in front of white light. It looks like a spaceship. In my opinion, it is not Enterprise. And the star fleet officer seems to be holding this object. I tried to expand without losing resolution.

235. Ralph Pinheiro - October 15, 2012

yes, Lostrod. I tried to expand and it looks like an object in space, a ship or doomsday machine.

236. Sk8r_gurl - October 15, 2012

Garth of Izar!

237. Basement Blogger - October 15, 2012

What the? My deleted post has reappeared. Sorry for the repeated content. Damn Tholians. I’m phasing in and out.

238. Rose (as in Keachick) - October 15, 2012

The first two or three images we get associated with Star Trek Into Darkness is of blinding brightness… Could the story be about everybody being sent blind by such brightness and so all they can see is a kind of darkness? I guess only a once sighted person now gone blind would be able to explain the experience – maybe. Therefore, we know more about what this supposed villain looks like than anybody on the Enterprise…hmmm

What say you, Bob Orci? BTW, a “Yup” answer won’t cut it (I’m onto you)…:)

Words like “blind”, “sight”, “brightness”, “darkness”, “light”, “dark” can have a myriad of meanings…then there are words like “INsight”…

239. Montreal_Paul - October 15, 2012

232. Rose (as in Keachick)

Take a look at this video. Cumberbatch’s hair doesn’t look black like Quinto’s. It looks more brown. Kind of like the cover to the Countdown to Darkness cover.


240. Rose (as in Keachick) - October 15, 2012

His hair looks pretty dark to me. It is not the fair hair that we have seen Chris Pine wearing for at least the first six months of this year and the hair is darker than Cumberbatch’s natural auburn shade.

241. Craiger - October 15, 2012

I’m about ready to ditch this site with these constant breaks.

242. Dee - lvs moon' surface - October 15, 2012

something like Gary Mitchell… maybe… ;-) :-)

here: http://i.imgur.com/ObooV.jpg

243. Dee - lvs moon' surface - October 15, 2012

Chris Pine has signed with CAA!


244. Jeff Herman - October 15, 2012

LORD Garth!

245. Sk8r_gurl - October 15, 2012

Oh yeah, my bad, Lord Garth indeed! Thanks 244. :)

Also, though, while I’m not quite as ready to bail on TM as 241., I do think it’d be nice if someone in charge of the site would give us an update as to its status. If there’s no STID news, then there’s no news and I’m perfectly fine with that, but I miss TM’s other regular content (science saturday, sci-fi industry news, other Trek related posts and interviews) and always enjoy the chance to read through community posts on all the various news items.

I don’t think we’re entitled to anything out of Anthony or anyone else in charge, but it would be considerate to those who have supported TM for many years now to keep us in the loop as to what we can expect out of the site. My two cents, anyway….

246. The Last Vulcan - October 15, 2012

Seriously tending towards Gary with this comic cover… however note that it’s a prequel so who knows how that will play into the movie. And yes, the deafening sound you hear is this site dropping the ball. :(

247. It's Paramount - October 15, 2012

Is it possible both Gary Mitchell AND the Doomsday Machine could appear in the movie? Its possible Peter Wellers character could be the CEO of a company who builds the Doomsday Machine and it gets loose.

248. Bart - October 15, 2012

Trekcore is the place to go! They have updates almost every day, including great coverage of TNG remastered with screenshots, interviews, reviews, … They also have message boards so we can catch up thete as well :)

249. The Last Vulcan - October 15, 2012

@247 Since we’re operating in a vacuum of information, I’m willing to suspend disbelief and do a mix and match of TOS eps. Right now it’s anyone’s guess what they’re going to do.

250. Tiberius Subprime - October 16, 2012

Could it be possible Gary Mitchell (Cumberbatch) and Garth (Peter Weller) are in this film?

When you think about the age, Peter Weller could make an effective and believable Garth. And Weller did say he had his own ship….

Just a thought.

(Could the planet / volcano image be the Horta homeworld??)

251. Jim - October 16, 2012

Did anyone else recognize the face being half bright and half dark? And the dark side is like fading into the stars! Hhhmmm??

252. Complete Score to Star Trek Generations - October 16, 2012

HERE’S SOME NEWS — Dennis McCarthy’s complete score to Star Trek: Generations available THIS MONTH!!! Too bad no one is updating this site on a regular basis to inform its visitors…


253. Complete Score to Star Trek Generations - October 16, 2012

#248 — Trek Core is one of the finest Trek sites as well.

254. Craiger - October 16, 2012

CBS extends Moonves’ contract until 2017.


255. T'Cal - October 16, 2012

Wow. It’s been so long since we had any NEWS that it’s almost time for the next anniversary…

256. Uberbot - October 16, 2012

#250 — That’s LORD Garth!!!!

257. Chris Roberts - October 16, 2012

254. Craiger – “CBS extends Moonves’ contract until 2017.”

That’s the 50th Anniversary screwed then.

258. The Last Vulcan - October 16, 2012

IMHO: Moonves is a wretched lowlife as well as an avowed and proven Trek-hater. He only changed his tune once he saw the box office receipts from JJTrek. He should have had his contract ripped to shreds and sent to clean the latrines instead of enjoying another 5 years of megabucks while piling on nothing but junk medical and cop shows on CBS.

259. jamesingeneva - October 16, 2012

someone’s still here plucking keeping an eye on us wannabee children, i posted something earlier and it was deleted lol… oh well. It’s been a week so we’re overdue for some random post any day now lol

260. Craiger - October 16, 2012

I got it Kirk splits in half due to a transporter accident and Cumberbatch is Kirk’s evil side. LOL.

261. Montreal_Paul - October 16, 2012

260. Craiger

I beat you to the punch in post 225! ;)

262. Craiger - October 16, 2012

Oh, sorry, :)

263. It's Paramount - October 16, 2012

I enlarged the comic cover and you can definitely see the Enterprise on the left side of the cover headed towards (or coming from) what appears to be a smaller object in the distance shaped just like the doomsday machine. Go check it out and enlarge it. There is no doubt!!

264. Jonboc - October 16, 2012

#241 “I’m about ready to ditch this site with these constant breaks.”

…promises, promises. :)

265. Keadoofus - October 16, 2012

Anyone know what’s going on with Anthony? Is he well?

266. Craigq - October 16, 2012

Last I read someone saw on his Facebook page he was backpacking somewhere in Europe. I think he has found a new hobby other than running this site.

267. Craiger - October 16, 2012

I should have posted as Craiger on post #266.

268. Craiger - October 16, 2012

Could Cumberbatch being Commodor Decker? Maybe that Volcano scene isn’t a Volcano at but the inside of the Doomsday Machine and Spock and Uhrua are trying to stop Decker from sacrificing himself to destroy it?

269. KennyB - October 16, 2012

@265…….I asked a few weeks ago and I didn’t see any reply……notice HE doesn’t post anything. Hope all is well. This was THE place for info in 2009……..guess it’s time to find a new source. Hate that.

270. KennyB - October 16, 2012

I was SURE the site would be updated with this story today about TrekTech in real life………….Looks like a VISOR will soon be real.


Wish I could post of front page.

271. Commander K - October 16, 2012

Sad to say this site is dying. Trekweb is where it’s at for news and views!

272. Hat Rick - October 16, 2012

We mustn’t forget the valiant efforts of Kayla and other non-Anthony contributors, however. But especially Kayla, for her consistently excellent science reporting, etc.

273. jamesingeneva - October 16, 2012

Didn’t realize AP had a FB page, I’m surprised nobody is blowing that thing up lol… Backpacking in Europe would be… fun!

274. Craiger - October 16, 2012

Commander K – Not sure what’s going to happen to TrekWeb after the sequel premiers Gustavo has said he is going to leave Trekweb because he has gotten bored with reporting Trek and Scifi news.

275. Craiger - October 16, 2012

I read that post again and it said according to Anthony’s Facebook timeline he was in North Germany I guess just vacationing their maybe not backpacking.

276. Bucky - October 16, 2012

Gee, I hope the beloved Trekmovie webmaster didn’t end up in some time of “Hostel” style situation while enjoying seeing the world.

277. Charla - October 16, 2012

I think Kayla and a couple of the others are really trying in between their real life occupation (and life in general) to also keep this afloat. It really is hard to commit time to something of this magnitude. Having several willing people to keep things going when others can’t is a must. Thanks for those of you trying to keep things going while AP is away.

278. The Last Vulcan - October 16, 2012

There are flight attendants who don’t travel as much as Anthony! :)

279. Montreal_Paul - October 16, 2012

My guess is that Anthony knows exactly when there will be news about the sequel coming out, either from Bob or his “inside source”, and has decided to take advantage of the slow/no news period. The last thing Anthony posted was about the movie’s title. I bet he’ll be back just before some big news is released. Until then, if any surprises, such as the 3 frames that were released, come out – he has Kayla to post an article about it.

I know that doesn’t account for the lack of regular Trek news. But perhaps he listened to all the people griping about not caring about certain things.

Anyway, I could be way off base. We’ll have to wait and see.

280. The Last Vulcan - October 16, 2012

Anthony’s staggering access to Trek movie scoops is nothing short of amazing and simply can’t be touched by any other site I’ve ever seen. That’s what keeps me hanging on here even through the morass of general disregard. I’m sure that when the big news hits about Cumby, plot, etc. it will most likely be here. If I had one wish it wouldn’t even be that Anthony hung out more here but that there was a 100% assurance that the boborci of the day is the real one and not a pathetic fake like that mess a couple of weeks ago.

281. Corkscrewed - October 16, 2012

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TrekMovie.com talks about this site in the past tence, like it no longer exists.

282. Shilliam Watner (Click for Trek Ships Poster) - October 16, 2012


283. Strangelove - October 17, 2012

is this a hoax or official????

284. Thomas - October 17, 2012

283. Strangelove

TrekWeb.com is certainly saying it’s real, and that the official website will be launching soon.

285. Tim - October 17, 2012

Well trekweb seems to be the new number one source for news. Sadly, as I ‘ve followed treknews since 2006.

286. Thomas - October 17, 2012

The Facebook page also has a post saying it will feature an exclusive trailer when the page reaches 500,000 likes. So, everyone get over there and like it.

287. Aurore - October 17, 2012

“is this a hoax or official????”


It does not look official to me.

At all.

288. Aurore - October 17, 2012

“…..it will feature an exclusive trailer when the page reaches 500,000 likes.”

What is this “Paramount”?


289. Tim - October 17, 2012

…on the other Hand, it really looks like a fake with no recent visual material.

I don’t think it is real.

Paramount, you can do way better.

290. Tim - October 17, 2012

…on the other Hand, it really looks like a fake with no recent visual material.

I don’t think it is real.

Paramount, you can do way better.

291. jamesingeneva - October 17, 2012

Hey BobOrci, can you confirm or deny for us? I think its fake. Anytime you have to call something the Official page it sounds ingenuine to me.

292. jamesingeneva - October 17, 2012

Yeah, this is so a fake, check out the whois on the rules page : http://www.whois.com/whois/xp3.biz

293. Mark from Germany - October 17, 2012

I found this on the facebook page of “Star Trek into darkness”
Maybe we will see a traíler soon… Look at this

“An exclusive trailer from Star Trek Into Darkness will be posted when we reach 500,000 likes! Share this to your friends! The fate of our page rests in your hands. Live long and prosper”


294. Aurore - October 17, 2012

“is this a hoax or official????”

I checked again.

….There’s (still) only one site reporting on what would, I think, be an event…… if it were true…

295. Uberbot - October 17, 2012

Kayla rocks and no site like this should be run by one person. Look at Aintitcoolnews and other sites. Typically, there’s a staff of contributors that keep things going.

It shouldn’t all be on Anthony. It’s too much for any one person to maintain and keep up to date the way it should be.

296. thebiggfrlogg - October 17, 2012

September was great! It is nearly November. As usual you can nearly hear the tribes purring softly at Trekmovie (even after pins drop).

297. thebiggfrlogg - October 17, 2012

Er, tribbles, damn spellcheck.

298. Aurore - October 17, 2012


To my knowledge, another site at least has an article on the “facebook page” thing….now.

I ,personally, still have no intention to “like” anything, though….
I have a hard time believing the whole thing is official.

(Link if authorized, here:)

299. Aurore - October 17, 2012

“I have a hard time believing the whole thing is official.”



300. The Last Vulcan - October 17, 2012

Hey, it’s a great way to build up Likes so you can get megabacklinks. 99.9% sure it’s a scam by some SEO weasel. I hope that Paramount sues them back to the Stone Age.

As for Anthony, I wouldn’t care if it was Sybok running this site as long as SOMEBODY was actually involved on a day to day basis, even for no other reason than to moderate these comments and keep the fakeboborcis from running rampant.

301. Spiked Canon - October 17, 2012

Go to the Facebook page Star Trek Into Darkness and Like it. When they get 500,000 likes they will show the trailer

302. BiggestTOSfanever - October 17, 2012

look at this article regarding when the star trek trailer will be released!


303. Thor - October 17, 2012

Everybody is reporting the Facebook page – FirstShowing, ScreenCrush, CInemaBlend, BleedingCool. A lot of sites besides TrekWeb.

304. Braziliantrekkiefan - October 17, 2012

Whatfoca?? hellooo Paramount!!!

Premiere in Brazil, July 26 /2013?? Are you kidding??? Oi Mr. Bob Orci??


305. jamesingeneva - October 17, 2012

LOL I can’t believe how people pick up all these things like they’re official without checking… Check Paramount official press releases page and there is no press release… http://www.paramount.com/news/press-releases

306. Commander K - October 17, 2012

I was at the last Star Trek premiere in London and apart from getting a high five from Abrams, it was pretty much like going to the movie at a regular cinema…unless you can get an afterparty ticket…however, there are ways to getting into these things…as long as you’re willing to pay..

307. JohnRambo - October 17, 2012

here is no press release!!!!!!

308. JohnRambo - October 17, 2012

“The winner and five friends also receive $60,000 in cash”

haha….how stupid are people?

309. Lostrod - October 17, 2012

Yep, it’s a scam. See link below:



310. SoonerDave - October 17, 2012

Wow. That press release doesn’t even begin to read as an authentic Paramount item. Completely bogus. Can’t believe it would pass anyone’s sniff test.

311. Robman007 - October 17, 2012

Gotta wonder if this sites lack of activity is a legal deal brought on by Paramount and Bad Robot’s desire for this film to be just as much a secret as who really shot President Kennedy (it was Spock, by the way)

312. SoonerDave - October 17, 2012

@311 “It was Spock, by the way…”

Please tell me that’s not a thinly veiled reference to one of the scripts rejected for a TOS movie (which it was, BTW…).

313. Billy Mays - October 17, 2012

Hi, Billy Mays here with another fantastic product. If you’re like other Americans, you love to eat Chipotle but you hate all those terrible bloodstains in your underwear.

314. Just Sayin' - October 17, 2012

313…hilarious, but TMI. My suggestion, stop eating Chipotle and invest in a lot of gauze.

315. Just Sayin' - October 17, 2012

Picard…Picard is an old poot.

316. Robman007 - October 17, 2012

Yeah, it was….that was the movie that was suggested for every film after TMP.

317. Hat Rick - October 17, 2012

We should also thank ourselves, the fans, for contributing news to this site by way of comments on (usually) the last story posted, where there are periods of droughts between new postings.

On a tangential note, I noticed recently that comments are closed on some of the postings from a month or so ago (or weeks ago), which is unusual. This may be to lighten the load on the fill-in moderators as it is may be a drag to have to go check dozens of threads to see if they have new comments.

I agree that there should be a fleet of moderators, not just one, responsible for a large fan site, to spread the burden.

And yes, I said “fleet.” Because this is about Star Trek and Star Trek loves fleets of ships — and so why not of moderators?

Ever wonder who decides how collections of things should be named? Like a “herd” of buffalo or a “murder” of crows? How does the last one even make sense? But I digress….

318. BulletInTheFace - October 17, 2012

Come on, folks, that FB trailer page was a pretty obvious hoax.

319. Phil - October 17, 2012

@317. I think those comments were closed because there were a few sock puppets running amok there. Probably easier to just shut it down them wade through thousands of posts….

320. MJ - October 17, 2012

Really think its time to put the site down, Anthony obviously doesn’t even respect his readers enough to give an update as to why no stories are being posted.

321. MJ - October 17, 2012

R.I.P. Trekmovie.com 7/15/2006 till 10/2012

322. BulletInTheFace - October 17, 2012

#295: While I get what you’re saying, Ain’t It Cool News is probably not the best example to use, given how ineptly designed, poorly written, non-edited and un-managed that site is. AICN lacks any competent writers, Harry Knowles is practically illiterate, and Herc clearly has no freakin’ clue what AICN’s readers watch, given the complete crap he discusses. Reality shows? Really? So yeah, you raise an excellent point–but AICN is pretty much the worst, least journalistic site out there. When TrekMovie was still being updated, it was a thousand times better than that irrelevant craphole of a page.

323. Phil - October 17, 2012

There are at least four ‘Star Trek Into Darkness’ Facebook pages, and a number of groups. Seems JJ has a few weeds growing in his cone of silence garden. Not to sure how much longer they can keep pretending the movie doesn’t exist, no the notion of building word of mouth….

324. Craiger - October 17, 2012

MJ, What’s the point in keeping it if now all he wants to do is just report on the sequel, if he even still wants to do that and doesn’t want to report on other Trek news? Movie blogs can report on the sequel news. I

325. jamesingeneva - October 17, 2012

LMAO @313! That’s funny as hell man!

326. Basement Blogger - October 17, 2012

We can get Trek news from TrekWeb, and Trek Today. Let’s hope AP is okay. Meanwhile there’s an interview with Ronald Moore over at Trekiss Today. He misses Trek. The feeling is mutual. I Got to admit, I did not watch Battlestar. Why? Because I couldn’t get over the hot blonde Cylon in the pilot. Ridiculous. Some of the acting in that pilot was kind of lame.


327. The Last Vulcan - October 17, 2012

Hey, JJ how about using THIS for plumbengineering instead of that lousy brewery!


Now THIS looks like New Trek!!!

328. Bucky - October 17, 2012

Yeah, I didn’t watch BSG when it first came out cuz people were complaining online about the pilot episode. And I never watched it when it aired. And this summer I watched the whole frakkin’ thing in a month and thought it was great. Even the pilot miniseries is really sweet too but the first official episode of S1 is when it kicks into high gear.

329. Corkscrew - October 17, 2012

Anthony tweeted that the FB site was fake and his tweet was retweeted by William Shatner.

330. Hat Rick - October 17, 2012

329, then it’s official: Anthony Lives! :-)

Imagine how relieved and/or sheepish we’ll feel when AP comes back with a vengeance in 47 days with 47 new news stories all about the new Trek movie….

Here’s hopin’.

331. Hat Rick - October 17, 2012

Phil, 319, thanks for that information.

Bucky, 328, I think RDM’s best work was on DS9, not TNG or those few eps he did on VGR. Even though I like all of his work, generally. Including nuBSG. So I totally understand why he would miss Trek.

Someone needs to hire him to do Trek again on TV.

332. Craiger - October 17, 2012

This is another type of article that Trekmovie used to post but no longer. I got this off of TVTattle.


333. Craiger - October 17, 2012

TVTattle linked to the TVGuide article.

334. Vultan - October 17, 2012


The blonde couldn’t fit into the toaster suit.
Not as fashionable either.

335. Maltz - October 17, 2012

Um. Okay. I know it probably has been discussed in the previous 333 messages. But what the hell is up with this site?! Is Star Trek really this uneventful? Wow. I think this is the longest Anthony has gone without an update. Dare I say it…ST is waning???

336. Hat Rick - October 17, 2012

But could she fit into a binder? Full of blondes, that is.


337. Basement Blogger - October 17, 2012

@ 334, 336

Vultan, Hat Rick,

Funny stuff. Tricia Helfer who played the Cylon wouldn’t look good in that Cylon suit. Binder full of blondes. I like that. Going to start my collection with Scarlett Johansson, Blake Lively, and January Jones.

338. Hat Rick - October 17, 2012

Thanks, Basement Blogger. Speaking for myself, I’ve found that the recent debates are comedy gold, and usually despite the debaters’ best intentions. At the very least, their transcripts should find a decent home in the fiction section of your local library.

339. Devon - October 17, 2012

Rest In Peace TrekMovie.com!

340. Craiger - October 17, 2012

The lack of news on this site and on the sequel makes me feel the sequel and this site is in trouble.

341. Basement Blogger - October 17, 2012

Guys, we can still come here and share Trek news. And there are three sites we can look at. So let’s stop griping and have some fun. But I will say this. We should have a report from London about Destination London. I bet our Federation representative Kayla will be there. She’s at studying at the University of Cambridge. Anyway here are some Trek sites for news.


Trek Today

TrekCore.com Check out the interview with Nana Visitor.

342. rm10019 - October 17, 2012

So stop posting.

343. Basement Blogger - October 17, 2012

Hey with today’s bogus Facebook Page about the new Star Trek movie, got me thinking about another hoax. Remember the fake teaser trailer? i ask all these people that do hoaxes, why don’t you work on projects that will help your careers? I mean you are obviously very talented.

Anyway here’s the Trekmovie story with the fake trailer. At one moment, it had me fooled. The faux trailer is well made.


344. The Last Vulcan - October 17, 2012

@337: Tricia Helfer would look the best under my sheets. :)

@340: This site is suffering from terminal neglect by its ownership. Don’t connect anything to do with this site with the movie itself as it’s like saying that because your cousin got indigestion from a Big Mac, McDonalds is in trouble.

@341: I’m checking all those sites on a regular basis, but I’m still mainly here due to this site’s remarkable (and fairly inexplicable) IN with boborci and the few scoops that JJ is letting out.

345. Montreal_Paul - October 17, 2012

340. Craiger
“The lack of news on this site and on the sequel makes me feel the sequel and this site is in trouble.”

Don’t you think you are being a little dramatic? The movie is coming out in May… still 7 months away.

346. Rose (as in Keachick) - October 17, 2012

I just read this on the STID IMDb message board. How truthful it is, who know? (I just hope it is not “my captain”) –

“I was in a play with a guy who was an extra in STID. Knowing I’m a huge Trekkie, he let me in on a little secret, but he wouldn’t expand on it because he, like all actors and extras and crew, are sworn to secrecy. What he told me is he spent three days being an extra in a final scene of the film…the setting is a major funeral. That’s all he would tell me, other than I will just have to wait for the film to come out. :S”

347. Aeolus 14 Umbra - October 17, 2012

This site is pretty dead, alrighty. Thank goodness for Trek Today.

348. Devon - October 18, 2012

Anthony was posting on Twitter today. Updates coming?

349. bardicjim - October 18, 2012

Commodore Deckers funeral. It is not a volcano it is the inside of the doomsday machine. Spock is fighting BC cos he wants to sacrifice himself and PW is playing the man who foolishly tries to harness the Doomsday Machine. The fact that Decker has been passed over so thoroughly makes me think BC is playing him.

350. T'Cal - October 18, 2012


351. SoonerDave - October 18, 2012


I’ve got it. We’re in the midst of a trilogy.

Cumberbatch is playing Gary Mitchell, who sees the alternate timeline and gives Kirk his “god” powers, and encourages to fulfill his “true” destiny on “his” side of something akin to the “Force.” Kirk makes the decision, under gut-wrenching circumstances (perhaps to save the Enterprise?) to accept Mitchell’s offer, but to the crew his decision to “go to the dark side” causes him to “die,” and the “funeral” is Kirk’s. The last part of the trilogy is how JJ and crew will double-talk him back to life, and probably weave in a Shatner scene in the process.


352. Phil - October 18, 2012

@346. Someone is having fun with the Khan rumor. Remember, Spock dies in that movie. With the release of a three frame preview, maybe Spock gets roasted on the newly forming Genesis world this time….

353. Montreal_Paul - October 18, 2012

353. Phil

Spock died in Space Seed?!?! The Genesis planet is in Space Seed?!?! How did I miss that?

Phil, if they were doing a Khan story it would have to be be a first encounter with Khan, not a TWOK story. Think about it.

354. Hat Rick - October 18, 2012

Rumors, rumors.

Maybe if they gave us another three-frame preview, we could interpolate the rest of the movie.

Or, if they gave us a three-frame preview every day, eventually we’d get the entire movie. Wouldn’t that be something?


355. SoonerDave - October 18, 2012

Maybe Spock has some left over Red Matter he’s gonna plant inside the volcano and create an alternate timeline for Shatner’s hair.

356. The Last Vulcan - October 18, 2012

@352, gotta say, that does make some sense. Gary giving Kirk his powers fits with the comic book cover as well as the (icky) title… and if you add Decker and the Machine this could be the actual story. I’d put that among the top two or three plot theories so far.

357. SoonerDave - October 18, 2012

@355 Let’s see, 3 frames a day, assuming 30fps shooting, and further assuming a two-hour movie… 7,200 seconds x 30 fps = 216,000 frames/3 day = 72,000 days, which is just a smidge over 197 years. Perfect.

358. The Last Vulcan - October 18, 2012

OK, been doin’ some thinkin’…

We KNOW JJ loves to blow up planets…
That THING on the cover of the comic sure does look like DM to me
Weller sez he has his own ship, and he’d be an amazing Decker
Eve is sure sporting a great Dehner imitation hairstyle
It’s pretty well a foregone conclusion that there are Klingons involved, so if the God-like Kirk has to abandon his humanity in order to save the DM from eating Qo’noS and saving the “enemy” that would also be a typical JJ ploy.

I’ve read a LOT of potential plots but this one fits the few crumbs that are out there better than any other…

359. Hat Rick - October 18, 2012

To paraphrase Kirk, SoonerDave, 358, that would indeed be just about right. We’d be in the 23d Century, after all.

Of course, the secret sauce behind 3D might be that it’s filmed using ultrafast film — the kind used in “freeze time” films. Which might be, say, a hundred times the frame rate.

It would help things for Trek fans to have the lifespans of the Metrons.

Or perhaps evolve into beings of pure energy.

Film at 11 — thousand.

360. Phil - October 18, 2012

Y’all been sipping the kool aid…Kirk with God-like powers?? Kirk, at the end of Trek 2009 isn’t much more then an overgrown juvenile, so why is it necessary for him to suddenly become god-like? All this will do is just give us ‘Bruce Almighty in Space’, which really would be nothing more then a really bad comedy, without the morality play? Didn’t we get enough of that crap with Q popping in on the TNG crew and giving selected crew members god like powers for a bit?

361. Montreal_Paul - October 18, 2012

361. Phil

Q only gave Riker the power in one episode. And I don’t think you would get “Bruce Almighty in Space” – did you feel that WNMHGB was a Bruce Almighty in Space?

So, let’s hear your theory? Oh yeah – TWOK remake… only 20 years earlier. Right?

362. The Last Vulcan - October 18, 2012

@362 even though I have had the misfortune to see the X-rated photographs of you and Mme. Marois in flagrante delicto using a fleur de lys to do unmentionable things, I do agree with you. :) Personally I’d forgive JJ for the title if this was the essence of the plot.

Vive le Qo’noS Libre!

363. Banned - October 18, 2012

Deleted by Admin

364. Basement Blogger - October 18, 2012

Okay, more Star Trek news. This site likes to post Colbert or Stewart videos when they channel Star Trek. And it seems to me that Colbert is the more of the hardcore Trekker. Yesterday, he used clips from Amok Time to describe Tuesday’s presidential debate. Video below. The clips come at the end. And then he uses a Trek character to picture Obama. You can guess which one.


365. Rose (as in Keachick) - October 18, 2012

Good grief! What couldn’t the major funeral be for either Admiral Pike or prime Spock? What the bleedin’ hell would Khan boring bloody Khan or Gary before boring Mitchell have to do with either?

People have a tendency of dying, including well-respected ones and/or very old ones. Both Admiral Pike and prime Spock would easily fit these descriptions.

366. Phil - October 18, 2012

@362. Excuse me – it’s a crappy plot device regardless of how many times it occurs.

I have no theory, just a desire to see a well crafted story that isn’t a mashup of rehashed characters and plots from previous TV episodes. All the twisting of logic to make Mitchell/Khan/whatever possible here is just fantasy, people filling in blanks because of a lack of information coming from Paramount. It’s really no big deal, as long as no one takes dissenting opinions personally…..

367. casual poster - October 18, 2012

@ 361 Phil

Only happened once in TNG with Riker and it happened in TOS with Mitchell. Did you find those episodes to be funny and reminiscent of Bruce Almighty? Yeah, you are right, couldn’t tell the difference at all. ;)

368. SoonerDave - October 18, 2012

Good grief, people, we’ve got to have at least some fun making up ideas for the movie since JJ’s got the Cone of Silence around it….otherwise its going to be eight more months of nothing….Who cares if the predictions are right or wrong…it’s all in fun. It really is just a movie, guys…

369. Hat Rick - October 18, 2012

369, SoonerDave, “just a movie”?

Just a movie?!

I think not. It’s a philosophy, a way of life, a religion!

How dare you!


Seriously, guys and gals. It’s just a movie. And it’s just a franchise.

But what a franchise it is! :-)

370. Phil - October 18, 2012

Generally, I’m not to hot on the idea of taking any TV show script and expanding it into a movie. TWOK worked because they were able to build a plausible story around the passage of time. We don’t seem to have that luxury in the new universe because we have been told the next movie picks up shortly after the last one left off. I would hope the creative team would have been a bit more origonal. It really doesn’t matter at this point, the film is shot, and it will be what its going to be.

And if the Bruce Almight comparison hits a bit closer to home, the Kirk we were shown in the last movie was a bit impulsive, not prone to the best judgement, a cheater, and a skirt chaser. Typical young adult, who just happens to command a starship now. Now, give him god like powers, what could go wrong? Old Kirk had a few years to rise through the ranks to mature a bit, New Kirk hasns’t, so if the movie is about Mitchel, or about Mitchel sharing his god like powers this could end up looking like Bruce Almighty in Space real quick, given some of the cartoon like humor that surfaced in the last movie.

371. Rose (as in Keachick) - October 18, 2012

The problem is that people only seem to be able to make up ideas that include either Khan or Gary Mitchell and are forever debating whether these people are in the movie. Many are convinced that one or other of these guys are in the next movie. Even when I post a rumour about a major funeral occurring at the *end of the movie, or so the poster thinks, (it is quite possible that what this poster wrote on the other site may well be true), immediately people allude to it having to do with either Khan or Gary Mitchell.

Out of the hundreds (thousands, even?) of humanoid beings that are supposed to inhabit the Star Trek universes, who can good or bad, friendly or otherwise, it seems unbelievably small-minded for people to latch onto only two humans as being the cause of everything that goes wrong. I just don’t get it.

This is not to say that the writers have not made Khan, Gary Mitchell or any other well-known TOS adversary as this movie’s, STID, main protagonist, I just think it lacks imagination to constantly go on about Cumberbatch playing only these handful of people. The only *positive* aspect of all this is that people have extended the possibility to beyond it being Khan and only Khan.

* Given that often scenes are filmed out of sequence, this funeral scene may occur anywhere in the movie, possibly even at the beginning.

My own notion is that the one who dies may be prime Spock himself and this time, there is no resurrection. This old Spock goes out as he did in Wrath of Khan, ie sacrificing his own life so that others (perhaps this alt. Enterprise and its crew) might be saved. This time, however, it is not Dr McCoy he tells “Remember” but the new, young (Quinto) Spock, and it is this Spock who receives his katra. How the young Spock will be able to cope with all this accumulated knowledge and wisdom and what he does with it, if anything, is anybody’s guess.

372. Simon - October 18, 2012

I didn’t have time to read the entire thread but nobody posted the news of the upcoming release of the full score to STAR TREK: GENERATIONS on CD at the end of the month from GNP/Crescendo?

373. Rose (as in Keachick) - October 18, 2012

Further, this may be prime Spock’s *destiny* – ie die saving the captain and the Enterprise from destruction. However, the same *destiny* need not apply to alt. (Quinto) Spock.

374. Former Trekologist - October 18, 2012

@372 – Very interesting speculation about funerals. We’ve seen leaked photos of the crew in dress uniform, presumably for this event. We need to remember, though, who we’ve seen in said uniforms. I seem to remember just about everybody, Kirk and Spock included. If it is a funeral, I’m not expecting it to be one of the main characters just yet.

375. Phil - October 18, 2012

Well, the discussion tends to drift toward ‘who’s the villian’ probably because every time Trek hits the big screen there is a protagonist who needs to be overcome. I’d like to think that, being the new universe it would be a great time to throw off the shackles of canon and tell some new stories, but that does not seem to be the direction the creative team is going. At least for me, it would be great to walk out of the theater witn no mention of Khan, Mitchell, or any other old character, knowing this crew is off on their own series of adventures…..yeah, I’m not holding my breath.

376. Red Dead Ryan - October 18, 2012


I actually agree with you, Phil. But we have to remember that J.J Abrams isn’t making these films solely for hardcore fans like us. He’s aiming them towards the mainstream audience. Those are the folks who enjoy seeing the good guys prevail over the bad guys, with intense action, and mind-blowing special/visual effects. Paramount wants Trek to be able to hold its own against other big-budget blockbuster franchises such as “Batman”, “Lord Of The Rings”, “Star Wars”, “Fast and The Furious”, etc.

The more thoughtful, slower-paced, explore-new-worlds Trek is geared more towards the television medium. Where there is more time to explore the universe in greater detail, something you can’t really do in a two hour movie.

Having said that, Abrams made a hell of a Trek movie last time around, and I look forward to the sequel.

377. Aaron - October 18, 2012

@ 376 Phil that is exactly what STIV did. Who was the villain in STIV, I ask you.

378. Montreal_Paul - October 18, 2012

376. Phil

People are just going by what is known. Both Alice Eve and Cumberbatch are playing canon characters. Anthony’s inside source says it is Khan. Another inside source suggested that it may be Mitchell. We also know that Klingons are in the movie and we know that Leonard Nimoy is not in the movie.

As much as I don’t want Khan or Mitchell, signs point to that one of them will be. Hopefully it is just a lot of misdirection and we will actually get a new and original story.

379. Red Dead Ryan - October 18, 2012


A new Trek movie done in the manner of “The Voyage Home” wouldn’t appeal to the mainstream today as much as it did when it came out.

Today’s audiences want more fast-paced action out of their sci-fi movies.

380. Rose (as in Keachick) - October 18, 2012

#375 – In my speculation, it is not Spock, played by Zachary Quinto who dies, but prime Spock, played by Leonard Nimoy. Just before prime Spock (presumably played by Leonard Nimoy) dies, he transfers his katra (ref. movies Wrath of Khan and Search for Spock) to the younger Spock. This younger Spock lives on and would have as much reason as anybody to be at the funeral of prime Spock, even though he knows that it is only the body of old Spock that he and others are farewelling. And why not? It is a body that has served him very well for a great many years!

However, once the katra is transferred, it is not prime Spock who is in charge anymore, it is the young (Quinto) Spock. Although the scenarios do seem very similar, we do NOT have a totally untenable, indeed immoral, situation occurring like that shown in the Fringe series, where William Bell (played coincidentally by Leonard Nimoy) is able to take over the body of Olivia Dunham and before too long, Olivia’s own “katra”/soul, consciousness starts to disappear and her body becomes dependent for life on that of William Bell’s soul/consciousness (or whatever you want to call it). That simply does NOT happen in Spocks’ cases.

I guess that could mean that we get to see an appearance from Leonard Nimoy again…it may be that the younger Spock may resist because he does not want to see the older Spock die, however he is made to realize that older Spock’s death is for the greater good and that not all is lost.

I have determined that William Bell (Fringe) is an amoral a&&hole.

381. Montreal_Paul - October 18, 2012

381. Rose (as in Keachick)

Sounds plausible, but Nimoy isn’t in this movie. He has outright said he wasn’t in the movie and I believe him more than I believe anyone else associated with the movie.

382. Vultan - October 18, 2012


I hear you, Phil. But we shouldn’t be too surprised with what we’re getting. I mean, look around. We’re in (hopefully near the end of) an age of schlock right now. Crap is prevalent.

But what’s worse is the fact the-powers-that-be have managed to convince many to simply expect less. See “diminished expectations.”


Hopefully someday a devious mastermind will switch the 3D glasses with the shades from “They Live” and alert audiences to the bamboozle.

383. Uberbot - October 18, 2012

#373 — I posted the news about the Generations score up above…

384. Montreal_Paul - October 18, 2012

383. Vultan

You have to realize that it isn’t the studios that want to do this, they have to do this. The younger generation has such a short attention span that everything has to be “videogame” action and “videogame” toned. A good story isn’t enough for today’s generation. Paramount had to do something with Trek. To be a viable franchise these days, it had to change. After Enterprise went off the air and Nemesis failed to produce, they had to follow today’s market. Us older Trek fans from way back are getting older, in order to bring a new generation of fans on board, story lines had to get simpler and action had to be faster. You won’t see a TWOK or TVH anymore. The younger fans would be bored with it. Even a movie like Hunt For Red October wouldn’t fly the way it did back in the day. I would pay to see another Trek movie the way they made them back in the 80s … but if Paramount wants to make money and have the franchise live longer than 50 years, they had to go this route. Take a look at movies like Bond and Batman… very different from the same franchise produced even 15 years ago. Know what I mean?

385. Craiger - October 18, 2012

Paul – They are doing a Hunt For Red October type TV series with Last Resort.

386. Craiger - October 18, 2012

What if Cumberbatch is Khan and Weller is Mitchell? Weller said he had a ship. What if Khan takes Mitchell’s ship strands Mitchell and his crew on the Botany Bay and Kirk and crew find them their?

387. Craiger - October 18, 2012

Allthough Weller might be too old for Mitchell but since canon is out the window now.

388. Montreal_Paul - October 18, 2012

386. Craiger

TV allows you to do something slower paced and take a longer time telling a story. I think Ryan mentioned it above. i completely agree. But Hunt For Red October wouldn’t work in the theaters today the way it worked when it opened. Take a look at movies like Mission Impossible & Bourne … the first ones, compared to the latest and you can see that even they quickened the movie pacing and action.

Last Resort will work better in TV than in the theatres – otherwise you get Battleship.

389. Montreal_Paul - October 18, 2012


Oh – and we are led to believe what Bob Orci said, Weller is not playing a canon character.

390. Rose (as in Keachick) - October 18, 2012

#383 – Yes, I read that.

The idea only came to me, just today, after I read about the possibility of there being a major funeral shown in STID. Of course, it really depends on who has died. For all we know, it could be Admiral Pike’s funeral and prime Spock is still alive at this stage.

My better half was surprised at my idea and noted that it was quite ironic and weirdly elegant at the same time. Perhaps the writer(s) might like to use this idea for the third movie. This all depends on what they have happening to the Spocks in the STID movie.

391. Vultan - October 18, 2012


If you’re talking about the pacing of modern films, then there’s nothing wrong with adapting it to modern sensibilities. Go as fast as you want. It’s the lack of originality and thought-provoking ideas that I’m talking about when I talk about “schlock.”

You mentioned how Batman has changed. Okay.

Well, Chris Nolan has done well for himself lately. But why is that? His movies are fast-paced. They have plenty of explosions and fight scenes and people running for their lives, just like all the other summer blockbusters out there. So why do conversations about his films sound a bit different than those of… say… Michael Bay? You hear it all time, see it in the reviews. All this talk of real-world parallels? Social commentary? People looking for symbolism in popular genre entertainment? Huh? What is this, the ’60s? Stories trying to be ABOUT something? And apparently people—and rumor has it some of them may be young—want to see this stuff. Bizarre. The data must be wrong!

Or could it be audiences aren’t quuuiiite as dumb and shallow as studios want us to believe?

392. Montreal_Paul - October 18, 2012

392. Vultan

Take a look at what demographic movies are aimed at now. Males 18-35. What do these males buy? Videogames. Lots of them. And they want their movies like they like their videogames. Dark and fast paced with little story. And take a look at the top grossing movies of the last 10 years. See a trend? Avengers was a fun movie. Social commentary? Nah. Fast paced action? Yup. Great story? Debatable. Thinking man’s movie? Nope. Mindless fun thrill ride? You bet.

The 3 best Trek movies, 2-4-6, would never do well in today’s market. They had action, they had a good story and they had a social comment. If they were made today – you would lose the social commentary.

And yes, I do believe audiences are that dumb and shallow sorry to say.

393. Vultan - October 18, 2012


“you would lose the social commentary.”

Are you sure about that? I’m not a fan of Avatar, but it did seem to have a good deal of commentary going on there (however subtle as a chainsaw as it was). And District 9. And Inception. And Source Code. All sci-fi flicks that had a bit of something more than just “mindless fun thrill rides,” and hey, look, they made money. And I’m guessing a few of those dollars came from 18-35-year-olds with bloodshot, Nintendo eyes.

Wait a minute… I’m 29 years old. I’m in that demographic!

394. Vultan - October 18, 2012

Anyway, my point is that Trek doesn’t necessarily have to go the Transformers route to impress the “mainstream” and turn a profit.

395. Montreal_Paul - October 18, 2012

Like I said, take a look at the top 10 box office grosses for the past 10 years. It’s not for EVERY movie, but for the majority, it’s true.

1- Avatar
2- The Avengers
3- Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 2
4- Transformers: Dark of the Moon
5- The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King
6- The Dark Knight Rises
7- Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest
8- Toy Story 3
9- Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides
10- Alice in Wonderland

This is for world wide grosses and here is my source:

Inception was at #32
Source Code wasn’t in the top 100 and neither was District 9. Ironically, neither were any of the Trek films. Keep in mind that I am only looking at the last 10 years… although the only difference is that Titanic & Star Wars ep.1.

I’m not saying that films aren’t being made with social commentary in them – I am saying that movie companies see where the movie is and what the majority of the demographic wants. 18-35 Males are the ones buying the Bluray packs, they are also buying the movie tie-in video games and movie tie-in collector toys, etc.

396. Vultan - October 18, 2012


No, I see your point, Paul. I know the studios want to please their stockholders. And I don’t have anything against that. It’s just frustrating when you know they can have all the thrills and make a lot of money AND put in a little something that tickles the neurons. I don’t think those things always have to be incompatible in order to reach a wide audience. I know they don’t.

Going back to Phil’s comment, Trek doesn’t have to be The Avengers or Titanic or Tranformers or a Pirates movie to be successful. TOS wasn’t a comic book or a ’80s cartoon. It was a ’60s primetime TV show, different from anything else on the air. But why was it different?

Maybe the next movie will be amazing. Maybe it will check all those boxes. We know next to nothing for sure right now. I hope for best—because that’s what Star Trek is.

397. Vultan - October 18, 2012

Correction: “I hope for THE best…”
Darn typos.

398. Montreal_Paul - October 18, 2012

397. Vultan

I hear you. I would hope that we can still get movies like Inception and Avatar that also have a social commentary as well. Trek 4 & 6 had them right in your face… and those were two of the best Trek movies. TWOK was amazing – it was not just a gret Trek movie but it was a great Sci-Fi movie as a stand alone too. It also dealt with growing older and a sense of family. If they were to remake it, it would never be made the same way.
I have to say that Trek works best on TV… it gives you the time to develope a really great story and have your characters grow too. In my opinion, the next Trek series should be a continuous story that progresses throughout the season… much like Enterprise was doing in it’s last season… more like a continuing story such as Falling Skies. And definitely not on the big 4.

I used to go see movies at least once a week… but in the past 5 years, I think I have seen a movie once every two months. I think movies have lost their art. I’m 45 and an Avenger’s type movie every once in a while is fine… but I want more than I did when I was younger. Next movie I plan on seeing is Bond and probably Cloud Atlas.

399. sean - October 18, 2012


I have no idea what turned you off in the pilot, but Tricia Helfer (the blonde) was fantastic throughout that series. She had to play countless versions of her character, and really pulled it off. Regardless of how people feel about BSG’s end, the show featured tremendous performances from everyone in the cast.

400. Shilliam Watner (Click for Trek Ships Poster) - October 18, 2012

I’m looking forward to the next film. I thought the first was a very good start. I’m expecting a lot more from the second one. But a Star Trek movie every three or four years isn’t what I want. Especially with a new cast. Star Trek really needs to be a series, and that is an established fact ;-)

There’s a reason most of the Trek series were better in their third or fourth seasons. They had matured and found their feet. This new bunch, as good as they are, will never gain that maturity. At best they’ll have one more movie – six total hours of Star Trek. How good was TNG or DS9 in six episodes?

I’d like to see them put this cast on TV and let them grow. But of course that will never happen. No matter what, I’d like to see Trek return to TV.

401. Vultan - October 18, 2012


Yeah, I agree. Trek does work best on TV. Eventually it will happen again, I think.

I used to go to movies about every other month on average. This year I’ve only been… two, maybe three times. But I’m planning on seeing Skyfall, too. And Lincoln, Hitchcock, and The Hobbit also look good. So I guess I’m more a fall/winter kind of moviegoer.

I’m kind of ashamed to admit I still haven’t seen The Avengers yet. Pathetic, I know. But I’m planning on doing it soon. Promise!

I like Marvel movies. No really, I do!

402. Montreal_Paul - October 18, 2012

402. Vultan

I know Trek on TV will happen again. My best guess… I would say maybe a year or two after the 3rd movie. Not sure what they will do, but I am guessing they won’t have TV and movies at the same time. They learned the last time that over saturation doesn’t work. But if they are to succeed – the smart thing would be to put it on cable or into syndication like TNG did.

I’m not worried in the slightest about the sequel, JJ and the gang put out a great movie in 2009. I know they will do another great job. It will be a blockbuster and people will be in those theatre seats. People get so worked up because there is no trailer or news 7 months before the movie is out. I think it’s just impatience on their parts. I am looking forward to a trailer but I know there will be one early January. I am fine with seeing something 5 months before the movie. Nothing to worry about really.

People get all pissy because they don’t like the new ship or engineering or this or that. Well, I remember people bitching about TWOK before it came out. Nick Meyer didn’t know Trek, she changed the uniforms to be more militaristic – people were upset, Khan says he remembers Chekov who wasn’t even in Space Seed…. killing off Spock… etc, etc. But now it is looked at as the best Trek movie to date by most. People worry too much. :)

403. Newman - October 19, 2012

Is this websit defunct?

404. bardicjim - October 19, 2012

@378 the villain of STIV was modern day man.

405. jamesingeneva - October 19, 2012

@404, evidentally it’s what we make of it these days :)

406. Seatbelt Blue - October 19, 2012


Did you seriously say that the Burton-Schumacher batman movies were *more cerebral* than the Nolan pictures, which you imply *lack* narrative depth?

407. The Last Vulcan - October 19, 2012

I’m stickin’ to my guns based on the tiny amount of leaks so far. IF there is a funeral, it will be the God-like Mitchellian Kirk who dies keeping the Doomsday Machine from wiping out what is most likely Qo’noS. It’s got all the right echoes back to the pre JJ movies. Of course, like Spock, Kirk will be back in Movie 3.

408. BulletInTheFace - October 19, 2012

You guys are misusing the term “canon” when you say Weller is not playing a canon character. Obviously he’s canon if he’s in the film–every character in the film is canon. The term you’re looking for is “established” or “existing.” That’s not the same as “canon.”

409. Phil - October 19, 2012

@405. That, and the whale probe that was laying waste to Federation defenses…..

410. Montreal_Paul - October 19, 2012

407. Seatbelt Blue

Wow, you really didn’t read that post, did you? Never mentioned anywhere that Burton’s Batman was more cerebral and Nolan’s lacking narrative depth. Let me post again so you can actually read it this time. ;)

“Take a look at movies like Bond and Batman… very different from the same franchise produced even 15 years ago.”

Batman, Bond, Trek… even other Super Hero movies have a much darker tone to them then they had 10-20 years ago. And they are all much more video game like.

411. Montreal_Paul - October 19, 2012

409. BulletInTheFace

No, people are getting it right. It was stated by Bob Orci that Weller’s character is new to canon.

412. bardicjim - October 19, 2012

@410, the whale probe would not have been a problem if not for modern man though. Hardly makes it an enemy. Plus it wasn’t laying waste, it was just making stuff stop working as it went about its mission.

413. bardicjim - October 19, 2012

Maybe WEllers character exists in Star Trek, but in a book which is not canon?

414. T'Cal - October 19, 2012

BC plays Picard’s great-great-great-grandfather!

415. Commodore Redshirt - October 19, 2012

Someone please wake me up when this site comes back to life…

416. boborci - October 19, 2012

what up, ya’ll?

417. PromoBoy - October 19, 2012

Pathetic– no change to this sight for almost two weeks?!
Anthony– what gives?

418. Seatbelt Blue - October 19, 2012


Hey you! Read my comic!

I’m joking. I mean, please do read it.


419. Seatbelt Blue - October 19, 2012


420. Montreal_Paul - October 19, 2012

417. boborci

Hey Bob, how’s post going?

421. boborci - October 19, 2012

montreal Paul

Wish you could be here. It’s both fun and scary watching the movie come together.

422. AJ - October 19, 2012

Film franchises have to be marketed like cigarettes. Cigarette companies have an eternally targeted consumer called YAS (Young Adult Smokers), which is a ‘new’ consumer who is addicted to nicotine, but is still capable of trying different brands.

As these consumers grow older, they tend to stick with one brand, and their chances of quitting increase, does their chance of dying. Why market to them, except to give them free swag when they smoke more?

Thus, the advertising for a cigarette brand, let’s say “Camel,” reinvents itself every few years. The macho hippie hiking through the woods becomes the “Joe Camel” cartoon figure, which is obviously, and nefariously aimed at ensnaring VERY young smokers.

“Star Trek” so needed the JJ Abrams treatment just like we can’t sit around watching Adam West in the new Batman films. But my own kids (10 and 12) look at “Trek” like it’s a relic. It needs to exist in kids’ lives like Pokemon and Star Wars, McDonalds and Play-Doh. But, first it has to be relevant, and second, must be constant: cartoons, action figures, GOOD video games, pajamas and bed clothes, etc. Otherwise, the ‘fan base’ grows old and quits, or dies.

That’s why these long silences come off as disturbingly unprofessional. I can go right now to Walmart and buy Star Wars toys, or an Iron Man action figure, but if I want a Star Trek figure, I need to wrench it off some old hoarder on eBay for $75. I can buy the 48 CD limited edition soundtrack with notes by Jeff Bond for $200 or a $2000 fully lit replica of the Enterprise-A, but no Spock floaties for the pool, and no one buys CDs anymore anyway. Trek fans are getting old, and it will affect our favorite franchise negatively if it is not aimed in some way at kids in the near future.

423. boborci - October 19, 2012

423. Best argument yet. A truly good case.

There are many reasons for how we are where we are, but there is no arguing with some of your observations — thanks. No joke .

424. Aashlee - October 19, 2012

Hi, boborci!

I bet you can’t wait to start seeing some finished film footage. After all that work, your efforts are coming to fruition. How exciting!

I have a question: During the first movie’s filming, you were prohibited from re-writes because of the writers’ strike. During the second, there was no writers’ strike. Did you have many re-writes at all? And, if so, what kind of thing would necessitate a re-write? Just curious about the creative process…

I, for one, don’t mind waiting for the movie to come out before I see anything. My love of Trek is not dependent on merchandising or reminding myself every five seconds about the film’s existence. I know it’s coming — that’s enough, and I’m excited.

Best of luck…

425. boborci - October 19, 2012

AJ. All I would quibble with in your argument is the word “unprofessional.” You are right that we may be leaving money on the table. I suppose leaving money on the table may be considered unprofessional. But it is secondary to the quality of the movie. That may be a mistake. Again, your argument is tight.

426. Montreal_Paul - October 19, 2012

422. boborci

Wish I could be there too! I love being in post. Of course the times I was in post were usually for projects only seen here in Canada.. and only on TV. Would love to just sit in and watch you guys going at Trek! Fun and Scary is a good way of describing seeing a project close to your heart come together!

Is it coming together the way you saw it when you wrote it?
Is it true that Noel Clarke’s scene will be cut out of the movie?

427. boborci - October 19, 2012

ashlee —

We were absolutely able to rewrite and did so gladly. First, we had notes on our own work. Secondly, the actors really knew their characters this time around, so they were amazing in giving notes and suggestions for how to better the script. They were our true collaborators in the final rewrites.

428. Aashlee - October 19, 2012

Boborci, was there anything in the first movie that you wish you could have rewritten? Anything that gnaws at you (LOL) every time you watch the movie?

429. Montreal_Paul - October 19, 2012


I loved that scene you wrote for Shatner. I really wish that would have been filmed. It would have been the perfect addition to the two Spock’s scene.

430. AJ - October 19, 2012



“Unprofessional” is my way of saying “When is the damned trailer coming out!?” I just feel that we’re nearing saturation time. We should now be seeing iconic images of the the Hulk breaking his fall with a building while he holds Iron Man as it applies to ‘Star Trek Into Darkness.’ The spots should be running constantly during “Spongebob” AND “The Daily Show.”

431. NuFan - October 19, 2012

I’m sure a new series would be aimed at the young. Which is good news for me.

432. P Technobabble - October 19, 2012

I agree that the Shatner scene would have been a very cool way to end the movie and “bring back” Kirk. I’m sure there were a lot of reasons why that didn’t happen. However, I think it’s awesome that we got a chance to read and visualize that scene, almost as if it were a special feature along-side the cut Klingon scene.
The new cast has already shown that they take these roles very seriously. I think any ideas they might have contributed had to be worthwhile or they wouldn’t be considered “collaborators.”
I think the entire team has shown a lot of integrity by taking their time writing and making this film, as opposed to settling for something just to appease the fans. And I, for one, am glad

433. P Technobabble - October 19, 2012

oops, jumped too soon.
I, for one, am glad we don’t know anything about the plot yet.

434. boborci - October 19, 2012


I wish coulda shot the Shatner/Kirk scene we wrote. that is the main thing.

435. CAPT KRUNCH - October 19, 2012

boborci….awesome…. the first movie had the really cool..Under Constuction site showing the Enterprise “under construction”…Is there anything like that happening for the new movie….It gave us somthing to look at….and that’s all we really need…haha….
Good luck…I really appreciate your work…keep it up!

436. Danpaine - October 19, 2012

435. boborci – October 19, 2012

Good to know you feel that way, Bob. Loved the film as it was, but that would have been the icing on the cake. Great scene, a real shame that didn’t happen.

437. Basement Blogger - October 19, 2012

Hey Bob Orci,

I’ve got no UFO news. But above I posted this video piece by Stephen Colbert about a guy who claims he and Obama participated in government teleportation experiments. The piece features William Shatner as a teleportation expert. I’ll post it again below. By the way Colbert is clearly a major Trekker. He keeps channeling the franchise. And from previous interviews, J.J. Abrams looks like he has a great time on Colbert’s show.

Secret government teleportation piece by Colbert features Shatner


438. Rose (as in Keachick) - October 19, 2012

@ Bob Orci – I assume that prime Spock is still alive in STID and may still have that holographic image of Kirk’s greeting. It may not be too late to do that scene, perhaps prime Spock shows it to (Quinto) Spock and the young (Pine) Kirk on his/their birthday(s).

I like my idea of how prime Spock dies and so does my better half…I know, such hubris/conceit on my part. What can I say? What do you think? Is such a scene doable?

Rose…”My own notion is that the one who dies may be prime Spock himself and this time, there is no resurrection. This old Spock goes out as he did in Wrath of Khan, ie sacrificing his own life so that others (perhaps this alt. Enterprise and its crew) might be saved. This time, however, it is not Dr McCoy he tells “Remember” but the new, young (Quinto) Spock, and it is this Spock who receives his katra. How the young Spock will be able to cope with all this accumulated knowledge and wisdom and what he does with it, if anything, is anybody’s guess.”

Refer posts #373, #375 and #382 on this thread.

439. boborci - October 19, 2012

capt. crunch

good question. truth is, the first movie had different marketing requirements. Different timing. So you may actually be surprised by difference in approaches. You’ll see something soon. Look forward to your thoughts.

440. boborci - October 19, 2012

Basement blogger

I have actually heard second hand stories of Teleportation nodes existing at various places around the globe.

441. boborci - October 19, 2012


Interesting for sure. As valid a Trek theory as anyone could come up with. Dig it.

442. Craiger - October 19, 2012

Bob, is that volcano scene not actually a volcano but the Doomsday Device and Cumberbatch is actually Commodore Decker?

443. boborci - October 19, 2012


Who told you!?????:)

But seriously, folks. I need advice. I can’t comment on here without getting a google alert about my commenting on here. What am I to do? This is meant to be an intimate fan site! So many signs in my life, these days, are telling me that I should drop out of all social media.

Thoughts? Be brutal.

444. Jack - October 19, 2012

423.” Trek fans are getting old, and it will affect our favorite franchise negatively if it is not aimed in some way at kids in the near future.”

I disagree that gearing merchandise toward kids is the answer — a lot of these properties (Transformers, the heroes in the Avengers) were toys first. Or they were seen as kid’s properties first. Star Trek’s never been a huge toy/ swag property — and I think that’s actually a good thing. Prometheus, Looper, Inception, Serenity, Avatar — all very popular — but not a lot of toys / merchandise.

Heck, even the higher-end Star Wars stuff is geared to adult fans.

Actually, I disagree that aiming it toward kids is the answer. Sure some fans are getting older, but there will always be adults/teens/folks of all ages interested in Trek.. But I don’t think changing the content is the answer. It’s been thriving for 46 years… I’d argue that the bulk of fans discovered it at some point in their childhoods, or even more recently — whether it was 30 years ago or just this year — and more people will keep doing the same as time goes on.

445. boborci - October 19, 2012


Hear, hear!!!!

446. Craiger - October 19, 2012

Bob this is the movie I think you should reboot. Someone posted the full movie on Youtube if you haven’t seen it.


447. Aashlee - October 19, 2012

Social media keeps you in touch with Trek fans more directly, and I know that Trek fans value having contact with someone “on the inside.” However, I can see the legal and professional ramifications if you cross a line somewhere. If you must protect your legal and professional interests, you might do what many others do: go incognito, use a different identity. This way you can communicate with people directly without some of the messiness.

Gee, you could be one of the fen again! You know, “Joe Trekker.”

Tough decision. Good luck with that.

448. boborci - October 19, 2012


I remember that movie! Have actually read a bit about it. Not a bad idea:)

449. Well Of Souls - October 19, 2012

Not really looking for a response, but it is times like these where Bob Orci, for instance, drops in out of the blue just to answer a few questions or just makes a casual comment. That in itself really sets this site apart from other Trek sites in my opinion. As a plus, and this is a big plus, the fans on this site really do take their Trek seriously and along the way, for the most part, make for very interesting reading as well as a few good laughs through their comments and random inputs on the subject matter. Even going off subject matter when the site slows down due to lack of new subjects there always seems something of interest brought foreward by the posters as well as a good laugh from some of the comments pertaining to lack of new articles.

Back in 1966 I had the opportunity to see TOS in color as my dad was a TV repairman and to this day remember how in awe I was due to the fact much programming was still in black & white. And it wasn’t just that it was in color, it was a cool show to boot. Flash-foreward to CAPT KRUNCH’s “Under Construction” comment on the Star Trek reboot. That trailer was so awesome and I really had the feeling lightening had struck twice. It was brilliant and I would definitely welcome a trailer similar to Star Trek 2009.

Also as far as reboots go, I’ld like to say as a long time fan of Hawaii 5-0, your take is very refreshing and I enjoy it immensely. Keep up the great work Bob. You have made for great television entertainment which becomes more of a rarity these days with all the reality show crap that litters our airwaves.

450. boborci - October 19, 2012


Thanks for weighing in so articulately!

Food for thought.

451. NuFan - October 19, 2012


It depends how much abuse you’re willing to put up with.

452. boborci - October 19, 2012

Well Of Souls,

You rock. Great post, and thanks for uber generous kind words. I love the description of your dad repairing Tv’s. My uncle, who got me into Trek, was also a a TV repairman, and I have a similar fondness for memories of watching him work. Thanks.

453. Craiger - October 19, 2012

Bob, thanks,Its one of my favorite movies. You could set it on a modern carrier like the Ronald Reagan CVN-76 and have F-35C’s instead of F-14’s. Maybe even have them prevent Pearl Harbor and see ramifications of that act? You could have Charles During character Sam Chapman, saying naming this ship after an actor what’s going on here?

454. Thorny - October 19, 2012

Things I’d like to see…

– The movie poster up in theaters in time for the Thanksgiving movie crowds (and please, a better poster than the smeared ink printer’s accident that was the first movie’s poster… maybe a little color this time).

– The first teaser with a Christmastime movie release

– Major teaser spot during the Super Bowl

– Full movie trailer with a big spring release like “Good Day to Die Hard”

455. Montreal_Paul - October 19, 2012

444. boborci

Well, it would help to understand what these signs are. What is telling you to get out of social media?

I think social media is great as a marketing too and also to get closer to your fans. I think what you have been doing is great… you stay within your legal limits of what you have been telling us. You interact with your fans which makes you more grounded and one of us. I don’t see JJ ever doing this at all, no offense to him. I say keep doing it until you tire of it. Only you can tell when it gets too much.

I am gearing up to pitch a show up here and social media is going to play a huge part in it. Facebook, Twitter & a website with a message board & chat all play into the pitch. When used wisely, it is a great tool.

Them’s my two Canadian cents. :)

456. boborci - October 19, 2012


thanks! more valuable than two cents!

457. Well Of Souls - October 19, 2012

Thanks for the personal response Bob, and you’re very welcome for the generous words as they are very deserving for all of the effort you and your team have put into bringing these great ideas to life. For the record though, even though my dad & I had a lot in common, both being musicians, into electronics and drinking frosty mugs of beer to name a few, I could not for the life of me me get my dad to like Star Trek. I did however get him to appreciate Pink Floyd a bit due to the fact he liked the saxophone work in some of the tunes. But at least I can be thankful he did provide me with the tv to watch TOS in all its glory back in the day.

458. Montreal_Paul - October 19, 2012

457. boborci

My pleasure Bob. What’s the exchange rate now? I guess 2.45 cents then. ;)

Can’t wait to see the movie in May… Trek is in great hands now and I know it won’t disappoint. Keep up the great work! By the way, thanks for Transformers… you made my family name cool!

459. jamesingeneva - October 19, 2012

Bob, just when we’re getting down you always find a way to come in and pick us back up. Thank you! I’d love to know your thoughts on why they haven’t brought classics like the gremlins back yet. God I miss them!

460. Sam Tamoglia - October 19, 2012

I second AJ’s question about when the 1st trailer’s coming out, it’s evident people are getting ansty, what with the Facebook hoax.

461. KennyB - October 19, 2012

Dang I always JUST miss the boborci orgy! Great to see you still checking on us Bob! Just wish you could drop us meth addicts a tid bit or two! Looking forward to some solid news SOON! Keep up ALL the great work!

462. Thor - October 19, 2012


463. AJ - October 19, 2012

Trek has two potential TV directions, given the current state of entertainment,, for what it’s worth:

1. “Game of Thrones” HBO no-holds-barred T&A and ultra-violence with awesome plots and character arcs. Thing is, I’ve met so many kids, through my own, that have seen it (all 20 episodes) and worry what will happen to Bran and Rickon, and generally hope little Arya won’t get brutally raped and killed. Nice way to put one’s kids to bed on a Sunday night .

2. “Star Trek” as an animated high-quality show. One that is “too intelligent” for kids, but is just too cool for them not to watch it with mom and dad. 25th century, or whatever, with some real character arcs and good voice actors.

464. Well Of Souls - October 19, 2012

Bob, as Captain Kirk would say: “Bob, you go ahead and continue to quote Starfleet regulations” LOL. As Montreal Paul said, as long as you stay within your boundries there should be absolutely no reason for you to consider dropping out of the social media at least until the day you become bored with it. You are a very grounded individual and a well respected voice to this community. As jamesingeneva stated, you have a timely way of appearing out of nowhere and picking us up when things seem a little slow.

Montreal Paul, I am curious about your upcoming project. I’ll keep an eye out for further updates.

465. boborci - October 19, 2012


not too late!

466. KennyB - October 19, 2012


467. Nony - October 19, 2012

Wow, these comments keep going and going and going! Hi, Bob!

How are we all doing this fine day? Anybody planning any interesting Trek-related Halloween costumes?

468. Well Of Souls - October 19, 2012

Bob? Quick question. Has your team considered a trailer similar to the “Under Construction” one you did in 2009. By answering yes or no, you do realize you are not giving anything away, right?

469. Nony - October 19, 2012

@ 463 Thor

I hope they notice and fix that “DARRKNESS” typo before the comic goes to print…unless it’s a secret clue or something.

470. jojomorty - October 19, 2012

Mr. Orci:

I may be part of the problem with your numerous google alerts — most of the recent alerts were due to me.

Recently, when you have made comments, I have passed them along as tips to other Trek sites. Such was not maliciously done, but as a way to keep interest afloat concerning the upcoming movie. I did not know that you considered this site’s comments as private and intimate; I thought you were making your comments for the entire Trek community. Many, many folks, such as me, read these comments and posts everyday, without joining in the conversation; therefore, I thought they were meant for the larger Trek community.

I apologize for any discomfort I have caused you. I have been a Trek fan from day one, and greatly enjoy your comments. My excitement made me want to share the Trek info you passed along with others.

Would you like for me to stop passing along your comments? That might lower the scrutiny of your posts and keep your comments.

Once again, I apologize for forwarding your comments.

John Morton

471. Well Of Souls - October 19, 2012

That’s a very good question Nony. Actually I’m going as a tranporter & will be beaming in every bar the limo takes us. LOL

472. bobborci - October 19, 2012

john morton

no need to apologize. one can have no expectation of privacy on a chat board. not truly complaining. and being quoted about trek is the least of my risks. thanks for nice response, though.

473. P Technobabble - October 19, 2012

444. boborci

Take a cue from Spock. He once said his “other” name couldn’t be pronounced. Why not take on a name that can’t be spelled?

474. Jack - October 19, 2012

John, I think they’d be picked up anyway. Maybe not as quickly. Those guys go to the sites and look. Heck, Anthony used to announce “exclusive!” when ever Bob posted something about the sequel. I always found that a little dishonest.

It is odd that we as fans are feeling like we have to do something to spread the news about this film.

And yeah Bob, I think the discussion is good, for us anyway. And I think most of us have figured out that you’re not talking to us as an official spokesperson for Into Datkness. I don’t think the comments are particularly newsworthy or revealing — but these are the times we live in: random tweets make international news. And these sites have to keep posting stuff — and there really isn’t much to post…

And we also panic here if we haven’t heard about STID in a week or two — which doesn’t make a lot of sense,, it’s out in seven months. What weekly news can there posdibly be?

But if there’s a sense that this is bad publicity — the fans are, er, revolting — well, maybe staying away is smart. Don’t know.

It would be nice to have chats here, about whatever, and not have them make world news.

475. jojomorty - October 19, 2012

Mr. Orci:

I will immediately cease passing along your comments. However, I will still check in, on a daily basis, in hopes of reading your posts. I will just keep my excitement to myself.

You say an apology is not needed, but I feel I must — once again, please forgive me. I feel horrible that I have played a part in making you question your involvement in social media. Please give some thought to continuing. Your comments are a treat for us Trek fans, for they allow us to vicariously experience being a part of the new Trek movie Your posts keep the Trek community content as we anticipate the film’s release.

I regret my actions. I overstepped your boundary and sincerely apologize.


476. jamesingeneva - October 19, 2012

go save the old E’s bridge, kickstarter is live! http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/newstarship/star-trek-enterprise-bridge-restoration

477. Andy - October 19, 2012

Hey bob. Quick question. I’m currently a student of visual effects that is hoping to some day work at ILM. I was wondering, do you ever make it up to the studio in San Francisco? I know a lot of the dailies are webcast now, but I assume there is an occasional local visit.

Also, I’m officially the most hyped/anxious for a film ever, period, for STID.

478. star trackie - October 19, 2012

Hmmm…in years past, I don’t recall Bob always addressing each post by the poster’s name, he usually just references the post #. Not saying he isn’t entitled to change his approach, but he’s been pretty consistent with exchanges in the past. With no one minding the store, I’m not so sure all is as it appears.

479. Shilliam Watner (Click for Trek Ships Poster) - October 19, 2012

479. star trackie – That occurred to me, too. I don’t think it’s the real Bob Orci. I’ve never seen him address so many people individually before.

480. No Khan - October 19, 2012

New ST comic book covers. http://trekweb.com/articles/2012/10/19/First-Look-at-the-Cover-of-Star-Trek-Countdown-To-Darkness-POSSIBLE-SPOILERS.shtml

481. jamesingeneva - October 19, 2012

LOL 479/480 I thought the same thing until Bob ignored my posts as usual and figured he’s the real deal!

482. Craiger - October 19, 2012

Even Trekweb is saying this site appears to be dead. Hey Bob did you put a muzzle on Anthony? LOL. :)


483. Ralph Pinheiro - October 19, 2012

Mr. Bob Orci,

Do I need to know about Star Trek Countdown To Darkness before watching the movie?
Is Michael Giacchino still working on the soundtrack?

484. The Last Vulcan - October 19, 2012

@480, I’m a continued skeptic as to the reality of ANY boborci around here. And yes, Trekweb’s analysis of this site is not too far off. If we could be 100% sure that it’s the REAL boborci, (not yet another in a long string of fakes) then IMHO that would be more than enough life and we wouldn’t even care to get articles…


485. Jack - October 19, 2012

459. Paul. “You made my family name cool”

Wait, your name is Paul Witwicky? ;)

486. boborci - October 19, 2012

Referring to posters by name is my new thing!

487. boborci - October 19, 2012


No. You dont need to read countdown to get the movie. But Countdiwn is great fun.

488. Ahmed - October 19, 2012

#487. Bob,

When is the comic coming out ?

On a different topic, who are your favorite science fiction writers, if any ?

489. Dee - lvs moon' surface - October 19, 2012

WOW … Kirk/Pine… definitely Into Darkness!


490. Dee - lvs moon' surface - October 19, 2012

Mr. Bob Orci… I like your “mood” in the social media!

;-) :-)

491. Rose (as in Keachick) - October 19, 2012

@ Bob Orci – If you started using another name, then we would not know that it was you. People using pseudonyms can write some very mean stuff sometimes. If you have been subject to this, please try to ignore it. These people are cowards.

Just be who you are – Bob Orci, just as I am Rose (as in Rosemary) who also likes to be known as keachick (for reasons I have often mentioned here in the past).

492. Rose (as in Keachick) - October 19, 2012

Thank you, Bob, for your kind comments about my idea for Star Trek.

BTW – Is there a funeral in STID? Yes/No.

493. MJ - October 19, 2012

I still say the silence speaks volumes, my prediction is Star Trek Into Darkness will be one of 2013 biggest failures at the box office.

494. MJ - October 19, 2012

And it pains me to say that. I hope to be proven wrong.

495. Shilliam Watner (Click for Trek Ships Poster) - October 19, 2012

493. MJ – Gotta disagree with you. I’m betting it makes more than the first. I hope to be proven right.

And that is definitely a fake Bob Orci commenting here. He’s sticking around way too long for the real Bob O. I think.

496. Jack - October 19, 2012

Every time Bob Orci posts, people start claiming it’s not Bob Orci. It usually is. When it’s not, Bob usially announces that there’s an imposter pretty quickly.

– J

497. Aaron (Naysayers gonna nay...) - October 19, 2012

Bob… Do you feel the cast has a good chemistry? I mean TOS and TNG had years together in the slogs of TV production grinding out show after show. That sort of experience creates a bond like no other. The new cast was all just sorta thrown together in the shoes of other mens and womens roles. It has to be different.

498. boborci - October 20, 2012

497. aaron,

yeah, this cast has good chemistry because they all truly respect each other as actors.

499. Aaron (Naysayers gonna nay...) - October 20, 2012

Thanks for answering Bob… I won’t ask anymore because at this point I would just be asking in hopes of gaining tidbits about the movie. Anyways… back to tweaking on my script for the indy film I am doing. If you want to shoot any advice for me out that would be cool. If not that’s fine too. The best advice I have gotten so far is… “Just make your films… Let the rest fall as it may but make your films if that is your passion.”

500. HarryMudd.com - October 20, 2012

Hi boborci,

Just keep posting as you.  You obviously need to keep what you say somewhat circumspect, but it’s nice that you include just enough of a tease to keep us interested.  This is a difficult task, but I believe you are handling it expertly, and we appreciate your hanging around with us and occasionally revealing a gold nugget or two.

Me, I post under whatever name I find appropriate for the moment.  I always take care to be polite and never act as a sock puppet where one could have multiple identities all in agreement and thereby attempt to make it appear there are more voices all saying the same thing.

And that’s the danger you would face, were you to post under pseudonyms.  You’d want to defend your decisions as a writer, perhaps even spill a few more beans than you’ve felt able to previously, but in the end, it would all just be sock puppetry.  I’d much prefer you instead spend the time working on projects you love, and just be yourself when you drop by to liven up the party.


501. Jack - October 20, 2012

493.” I still say the silence speaks volumes, my prediction is Star Trek Into Darkness will be one of 2013 biggest failures at the box office.”

I don’t understand the reasoning here, MJ. Are you saying they’re quiet, 7 months before release and while in the midst of post-production, because they think they have a lousy product? Or are we back to the belief that if people don’t know things now, they won’r on’t go see it in May?

So you’re aTrek fan, and you’re predicting it will fail spectacurlarly (okay, you hooe you’re wrong) — I really don’t understand, man,

Why will it fail? Because it’ll be lousy? Because fans will be pissed off for having been kept in thedark and not go see it? Because the general public won’twanttosee it because they didn’t know much about it far enough in advance? I jut don’t get what’s informing the prediction…

Life is full of uncertainy, man ;).

Yeah, I’m complaining about complaining again. I suck.

502. Aurore - October 20, 2012

“…..But seriously, folks. I need advice. I can’t comment on here without getting a google alert about my commenting on here. What am I to do? This is meant to be an intimate fan site! So many signs in my life, these days, are telling me that I should drop out of all social media.

Thoughts? Be brutal.”


Whether I agree with you or not, I enjoy reading your comments.

As a matter of fact, most of your off-topic comments, the incredibly serious ones, if you will, are to a large extent responsible for my high expectations regarding the sequel.

From what I’ve read so far, I believe you would participate in these fora even if you were not involved in the making of the next Star Trek. I know you would.

But, to me, interacting on such venues should never feel like an obligation. Therefore, and, as has been pointed out earlier, should you ever really tire of doing so….just ….”withdraw”.

So much is worth our time and attention in this world…especially off-line.

P.S.: I look forward to the movie, evidently. I also look forward to the audio commentary. I had a great time listening to the last one. ‘Learned a lot!

503. captainkirk - October 20, 2012

A thought occurred to me about the new prequel comic that’s been announced to be about McCoy’s origin in the first issue. Some fans have speculated that Alice Eve is playing Dr. Dehner who is McCoy’s ex-wife. Could this story show that?
If so, then I know a lot of people are going to use this as evidence that Gary Mitchell is the villain even though it is possible for just one character to be reused in a new story without all the others appearing as well.
Although a prequel comic could be used to reintroduce GM without having lots of exposition in the movie but I highly doubt that will happen. What people need to remember is that the writewrs came up with the story for the movie before the comics were started. So they wouldn’t write a story where Mitchell was already dead and then alive again.

504. Tom - October 20, 2012

Totally don’t get not doing something with Shatner in Trek Into Darkness. Given all the remorse shown by all that it did not happen in Star Trek 2009, surprising that the scene or an offshoot of it did not turn up in the next film

505. captainkirk - October 20, 2012

Correction to my previous post. The McCoy origin story is part of the regular ongoing series, not Countdown to Darkness.

506. Enterprisingguy - October 20, 2012

Tom, the “bring back Kirk one more time” ship has sailed!

He’s no longer Kirk. He’s moved on and so should we. He’s having fun mugging it up as the Priceline guy.

Seeing him in the movie would take the mainstream audience out of the film just like seeing Mr. Whipple as a yeoman for the captain! :)

507. STD - October 20, 2012

504 – agreed. its a shame the Shatner scene didnt end ST09 film but itd be great if it (or something like it) was in STD

cmon get Shatner into darkness!

508. STD - October 20, 2012

506 – dude thats like saying Arnie cant be in a terminator movie again as he was the politics guy

Shatner in STD would work fine

509. drumvan - October 20, 2012


with regards to your comment about withdrawing from social media (assuming this site as well). most of us who go to movies or see concerts have no real two-way connection with the artist. they perform, we watch and either enjoy or not. we get back in our cars poorer in cash but hopefully richer in spirit and continue with our lives.

what you provide to this site is a real connection to the product we are viewing. it makes the eventual movie seem more personal. more intimate. more special. we feel like we’ve been able to get a small peak “inside”. sure, some people want to get more “inside” than you can allow us to get. it’s unfortunate that those people are usually the most vocal and insensitive. seems to be the way with everything now days.

i for one would be disappointed if you decided to leave the site or become a “stealth” poster. even tho the site has become somewhat of a rudderless ship lately, your occasional posts (when we know it’s really you) lend it credibility. it makes it fun again. gives the site and anticipation of the new movie a kick in the pants.

as you know, you can’t please everyone. as someone wise once said, “do not try”. if posting on this board brings you some joy and sense of connection to your audience then please continue. if it has become more of a burden then you have to do what’s best for you. this board (and ones like it) are such a small part of your audience that you aren’t risking any real financial damage to the end product. those of us that are reasonably sane will completely understand your decision. the others, there’s no hope for them anyway :)

it would be nice if you said goodbye and closed the door on the way out tho. just so we can start talking behind your back ;)

and what’s up with “daRRkness” on the comic? did somebody do that on “talk like a pirate day”? darrrrrrrkness!

510. Hat Rick - October 20, 2012

1. Bob Orci, please stay, as your comments are quite welcomed and respected here.

2. Kayla, can we count on you for another delicious Science Saturday delicacy? Your already stellar reputation as science maven can only grow if you do! Thanks in advance.

511. Craiger - October 20, 2012

Does Anthony think anyone will actually still be here if and when he comes back? Site traffic has gone down. With Anthony gone this long if he comes back and doesn’t say why he has been gone this long.


512. rm10019 - October 20, 2012

At least he is sure YOU will still be here for some reason…

513. Craiger - October 20, 2012

Trekweb is my new Trek news now. I used to go their before Trekmovie. Trekmovie would nornally post articles like these. This is what I mean by “The Source For Everything New In Trek.”


514. Craiger - October 20, 2012

#512 – I think Anthony now seem to take his followers of this web site for granted. He may find that’s not the case anymore they way he his followers of this web site. If he starts posting article again he may find no one responding to them.

515. Craiger - October 20, 2012

Sorry, I meant he may find that’s not the case if his followers of his web site wont respond to his articles anymore.

516. Hat Rick - October 20, 2012

Craiger, if this were my site, I would try to be a bit more open about my intentions, but on the other hand, it’s not my site.

I would have a very difficult time running a site like this, with all its moving parts. I would estimate that I would have to have at least 10 ten times as much time devoted to such a site over the course of the last six years than I have had in actuality.

For those who may recall, I posted some personal images of the Trek 2009 production from CSUN when it was filming, and was more active in the beginning than I am now. But even so, that time requirement is not comparable to what Anthony has presumably allotted to this site.

Nothing is forever. In a way, I am now prepared for the wind-down of this site because there isn’t a show of interest by the owner, and because there are alternative sources that may be able to pick up the slack. And, now that Bob Orci has hinted that he might withdraw from posting, I’m not sure what the point is of checking out this site on an intra-daily basis. I’ve gone days without checking this site, and that’s unusual.

Life goes on, really. I’m tired of expecting an explanation from Anthony, and I don’t think anything we say will make much of a difference as to whether he will address his absence or not.

That’s life. I suppose there’ll always be something else after all, and memories, besides.

517. Craiger - October 20, 2012

Hat-Rick – If Anthony doesn’t want to run this site anymore because he has other things to do I can understand that. However he shouldn’t just leave us his loyal viewers of his site hanging like this. Why couldn’t he post and article something like “Due to other commitments in my life I can no longer run Trekmovie to its full potentional like in the past so I will be shutting down this site soon. Thank you for your loyal viewership over the past years, its been great fun.” If he did something like that I am sure we would quit complaining and go elsewhere for news.

Or if Anthony plans on a big expansion of this site he could do post an article like “Big plans coming soon for Trekmovie. The reason I have not been posting news at Trekmovie is because I have been working on something so secret that I can’t talk about it but Trekmovie has big plans, so stay tuned.”

518. Hat Rick - October 20, 2012

517, I don’t know. Those are good questions. But, as I said, I’m not sure I’d be able to run this site any differently, since it requires such a time commitment.

On the other hand, I agree with you that if it were me, I’d probably post a note or two telling people about my plans. What would be the harm?

People have come to rely on this site for news and society (i.e., social interaction). The lack of interest by the owner — as evidence by lack of postings — makes it difficult to justify investing any emotional energy in checking this site because, even if things pick up, how are we to tell that we won’t have a drought like this again soon? Based on the record, the probability is much higher in the last few months that there will be precisely such a drought. And then some of us will feel a bit annoyed, or even duped. And that’s not a good thing.

All it would take is a note declaring one’s intentions to avoid that.

But then again, as I say, it’s not my site.

519. Radioactive Spock - October 20, 2012

@ BobOrci.

Would be sad to see you leave. I think it’s the coolest thing that you actually interact with us.

520. Ahmed - October 20, 2012

We are halfway through October & not a single news release about the movie, it start to get me nervous about the sequel, why it is taking them so long to start the actual marketing.

521. boborci - October 20, 2012

there’s talk of pushing back the movie

stand bye…

522. Ahmed - October 20, 2012


Is this for real ?

523. HarryMudd.com - October 20, 2012

…continued from @500.

Hey boborci,

In a complete turnaround from what I wrote above, It now occurs to me that maybe you would enjoying posting comments on occasion via a Clark Kent type pseudonym, and if you would enjoy that, you should go ahead. As Spock Prime said, “Do what feels right.”

But the “boborci” @521 is almost certainly a fake. There’s no way he would post a bombshell rumor like that.


524. Enterprisingguy - October 20, 2012

508. STD – October 20, 2012

“506 – dude thats like saying Arnie cant be in a terminator movie again as he was the politics guy

Shatner in STD would work fine”


“Dude”, would you want or expect to see Arnie PLAYING the terminator again? Of course not! Even if Shatner were only playing Kirk in a flashback he no longer looks the part and neither does Arnie. Arnie might be content to play another part (such as the creator that the look of the T-800 was based on) but Shatner wouldn’t settle for anything less than Kirk.

And while Arnie may have been away from acting for awhile he wasn’t undermining his image as an action star by recreating his image into that of a clownish pitchman on TV. I just don’t see Shatner as Kirk anymore. Time to accept that all things end eventually.

525. Craiger - October 20, 2012

If this site was monitored more Anthony would be able to tell if its a fake Bob Orci and block him.

526. Ahmed - October 20, 2012

#525. Craiger

True, there should be a way to prevent imposters from taking over Bob’s identity here.

Anthony did a wonderful job when he created this site & gave us the chance to interact with Bob & others in JJ team. But now, unfortunately, Trekmovie.com is almost dead.

527. No Khan - October 20, 2012

I now go back over to trekweb.com more & more. That place seems to be the only other update site.

528. boborci - October 20, 2012

521 a fake


529. STD - October 20, 2012

@boborci (if its really you)

what do you think the abbreviation for Star Trek Into Darkness should be? you know like ST: TMP, STII: TWOK etc etc

STID or STI2D or STD. i kind of prefer STD. got a nice ring to it

for the last movie I think most people seem to have latched onto ‘ST09′ (even though that kinda means Insurrection – not the movie youd want yours mistaken for im sure!!)

530. Richard - October 20, 2012

He spelt “bye” wrong. It should have been “stand by” not “stand bye”. Definately a troll.

531. LizardGirl - October 20, 2012

To the real boborci

Yeah you’re cool, stick around please!

532. STD - October 20, 2012

@524 – dude i never said Arnie should play the terminator again. he too old for that now (unless he all CGI like in last one) but yeah he could be involved somewhat in another role. itd be pretty hard to make a terminator movie without Arnolds involvment in someway.

regarding shatner – obviously itd have been amazing to have had him in ST09 in that awesome end scene but maybe theyve put him in STD in like a flashback (or flashfoward) or something i dunno .

533. AJ - October 20, 2012

Trekweb says Trekmovie “appears to be dead.”

534. Rose (as in Keachick) - October 20, 2012

AJ – Even though Trekweb may have more articles (most of which are of little interest to me and seem rather pedestrian), I actually feel that Trekmovie is more alive than some of these other sites and it is because of us, the posters. There are heaps of sites everywhere, most of them reporting what everyone else is reporting, sometimes word for word, but are they alive in any true sense? The answer is NO!

This site is alive because mostly good people come to interact and share what little information/rumours they may pick up about the upcoming Star Trek movie. It also helps that one of the movie’s writers drops in to say “Hi”. Bob Orci (ie the REAL Bob Orci) – please stick around here at least. Thank you!

535. STD - October 20, 2012

533 – if this site could talk itd say ‘I WANNA LIVE!’

536. Charla - October 20, 2012

533, AJ – Sad day but I think that many of the posters here who were out for blood, just ‘cut their nose off to spite their face’. It is unfortunate they took along with them the other posters who were here to get news (and who didn’t want to have a riot everytime the news wasn’t something we didn’t want to hear.)

It may very well be dead. Guess we’ll find out eventually. :( I hope their wrong.

537. P Technobabble - October 20, 2012

To satisfy my need for a Capt Kirk fix I’ve been watching my TOS blue-rays from beginning to end. And I’ve got my girlfriend watching. She had never watched TOS, except for a few snippets over the years, so she wasn’t a fan. I took her to Trek 09 and she loved it. So now when I ask her “What do you wanna watch?” she actually says “You can put Star Trek in if you want.”
Of course, this is her way of saying “I want to watch Star Trek.”
I think her favorite, so far, is “This Side Of Paradise” — big surprise, huh?
She kinda goofs on Shatner cos she’s really more familiar with his most recent work. And she likes Spock, but she really likes Zachary Quinto more cos “He’s a cutey.”

The thing here is that before Trek 09 she would roll her eyes whenever I mentioned Star Trek and say “It must be a guy thing.” Since the movie I’ve gotten her more interested — little by little — and she’s come to enjoy it.
So, thanks Bob and Co. You’ve made it so much easier for me to get tv Star Trek time.

538. Stephan - October 20, 2012


One general question: You know that a lot of Trek fans are very impatient and are eagerly waiting for some material of the new film and of course the film itself. A part of me is impatient as well but the other part is glad that I don’t have any information about the movie so that I get surprised when I see it.

But what about your feelings? Are you impatient as well? Are you curious if the film will be well received? I mean you must be sick of talking about old aspects like qm and galaxy threatening supernovas. If I were you I think it would be very hard for me to talk with the fans on trekmovie so often and always keeping the big secrets. Do you long for the movie to come out so that you can talk openly about it? Or do you like to torture the fans a little by not telling anything? ;) So what are your feelings for the moment?


539. Bucky - October 20, 2012

To be fair, the site is called “Trekmovie” (headline aside) and there is nothing going on in the world of Star Trek movies right now that can be reported on because there’s nothing out there.

540. Craiger - October 20, 2012

Bucky – Its Trekmovie and “The Source For Everything New In Trek” and that means other Trek news not just movie news. If this site just wants to report on the new Trek movies and it isn’t even doing that anymore, it should just be called Trekmovie and drop its tagline.

541. Craiger - October 20, 2012

Rose, AJ maybe then we should just create a new forum for just Trekmovie members to chat if they want to. Call it something like the place for former Trekmovie members to chat. Then we would see how fast site traffic would drop on Trekmovie. LOL.

542. SherlockFangirl - October 20, 2012



543. Charla - October 20, 2012

#423 AJ and #424 boborci….

SHEWWW!!!! (That Bob seen this) YES YES and yes. This!!! AJ’s statements hit the nail on the head, are true, and pertinent to the success of Trek!!! You can’t find anything Trek unless it’s from some greedy creep from Ebay who over- prices everything 10 fold and on top of that doesn’t give a squat about Trek.

And please tell me that it is/was the real deal, true blue, none other than the REAL honest to goodness, ‘boborci’ ! Because maybe, just maybe you could illuminate the person/group in charge of marketing and tell them they are going about it all very wrong.

The marketers need to get the Enterprise and crew out of space dock already …. geesh. I mean how do they keep their job, really?

544. Rose (as in Keachick) - October 20, 2012

My post has disappeared. It noted concern about what might be happening to Kirk in the next movie and suggested that he should receive one of Admiral Archer’s beagles (not a new suggestion – I have been hoping for such a scene from the start). I wish I knew what gives here sometimes…

545. STD - October 20, 2012

536 maybe AP is taking as much break as possible its going to be thursters on full for news starting soon and hes trying to get as much fresh air, sunshine, holiday, steak, etc as he can before he has to hunker down to reportin STD news every single mothorfockin day!

546. P Technobabble - October 20, 2012

Good thing my beagle wasn’t Archer’s dog. He’s a neurotic mess and would’ve peed all over the ship.

547. Craiger - October 20, 2012

Rose why would Admiral Archer give Kirk one of his Beagels when he hired Scotty and Scotty lost his dog in that transporter accident. Unless Archer would forgive Scotty since he helped Kirk save Earth.

548. Aurore - October 20, 2012

“Trekweb says Trekmovie ‘appears to be dead.'”


Is this official or a hoax?

….Trop drôle….

549. Craiger - October 20, 2012

Aurore here’s the Trekweb article. I think its just Gustavo’s opinion on Trekmovie not an official confirmation. I think now Anthony should come back and say something because speculation is starting to run wide about the status of Trekmovie.


550. LizardGirl - October 20, 2012

As long as people keep posting here, the site will do well, I think. Trekweb is a pretty good site for interviews and general updates (seriously, they are!). But there aren’t many posters there as there are here. And in agreement with Hat Rick at 518, we’re mainly here (especially right now) for the socializing. Not enough of that on Trekweb, yet, to influence a complete boycott of Trekmovie. Plus, Bob’s here.

551. Montreal_Paul - October 20, 2012

493. MJ
“I still say the silence speaks volumes, my prediction is Star Trek Into Darkness will be one of 2013 biggest failures at the box office.”

Completely disagree with you. You worry way too much MJ. Are you getting flashes of Christmas past? ;)

552. Aurore - October 20, 2012

“Aurore here’s the Trekweb article. ”


Like I said; “Trop drôle”!!!

(Thanks for the link, nonetheless.)

Anyway…More than 500 comments on the thread of a “moribund” site…….Not bad.

“I think its just Gustavo’s opinion on Trekmovie not an official confirmation.”

Fine. Fine.
I suspected as much.


553. Rose (as in Keachick) - October 20, 2012

I was not aware that Scotty and Kirk were one and the same people…:) I also wrote “one of his beagles” and I am assuming that Archer has more than one of the dogs. It is my assumption that Archer likes to breed pedigree beagles or perhaps I have that wrong. Therefore, Kirk would not be getting the same beagle that Scotty lost in the transporter and then miraculously turned up again later fit and well on the Enterprise bridge (I think that Bob Orci told me that sometime back…)

Anyway, my story goes that Scotty’s experiment with the transporter caused the beagle bitch to be suspended, along with her unborn puppies, where the puppies’ development got put on hold. Once she made her way out of the transporter holding pattern into real time/space, the embryonic puppies began normal growth. Of course, this beagle is not exactly happy with Scotty (*snarls and growls at him but nothing more) and this is passed onto the puppies. Kirk is given one of these puppies, who also really has no time for Scotty and his darned experiments, so whenever Scotty is within cooey, Kirk’s dog does what mum does. Kirk consoles the little animal with soft words like “Yes, I know that Scotty was a bad man, mean to you and your mum. But you’re Ok now…” to which Scotty in frustration replies, “I’m never going to hear the end of this, am I?” Kirk replies (with good Pine verbal/eye gestures – he narrows his eyes) – NOPE!

*If only all other grudges could be as benign as that of the beagles’.

554. Rose (as in Keachick) - October 20, 2012

This site could easily become well known as the site of the appearing, disappearing, appearing… posts. The post is now here again.

I am not totally crazy. My better half says that I am just crazy enough to be interesting…:)

555. Rose (as in Keachick) - October 20, 2012

@ Bob Orci – Is there any chance of a trailer or teaser for STID coming with the release of Skyfall in the US? There are many who are convinced that this is what will happen or at least desperately hope this is the case.

Skyfall does not come to NZ cinemas until 22 November 2012.

Perhaps, this is why you feel like you need to withdraw from “social media”. As time gets on, you know even those like me won’t be able to help ourselves when it comes to asking questions about the Star Trek movie…:) I mean, is there anything you can tell us that we don’t know already. Maybe you could talk to JJ and others about giving us a little something. I know the whole world will know within a matter of hours, but really, what of it?

556. Mac - October 20, 2012

No Science Saturday?

557. boborci - October 20, 2012


Interesting question.

With the first Trek we did, it was excrciating to wait. I wanted to talk about it so bad it hurt. But this time i dont feel that need as much. I am now more interested in hearing what you think of it. For whatever reason, this time i am much more Zen and Patient about it.

558. boborci - October 20, 2012


559. jamesingeneva - October 20, 2012

now kayla’s dropped off the face of the planet lmao… we can’t win. only thing keeping this alive is real boborci and fake boborci posting and the ongoing argument of what the movie will be about lol

560. Craiger - October 20, 2012

If Kalya’s gone now somethings got to be up with this site and its looking more and more like Trekmovie is shutting down I just wish they would give us some announcement if that is indeed happening so we can go elsewhere and so can the real Bob Orci. I guess we would go to Trekweb or Trektoday? However Trekweb has had trouble in signing up for new accounts their. Trektoday does have forums also.

561. Vultan - October 20, 2012


Hey, Bob, any chance you guys could release the logo/title for the film soon? I know it’s nothing earth-shattering really, but I’m interested to see how Star Trek and Into Darkness are placed, the fonts, the hierarchy of the words, etc.

Just curious, as someone who works in the graphic arts/design field.

562. Ryan Spooner - October 20, 2012

Nearly 2 weeks and not a single news article…. is NOTHING happening in the worlds of Star Trek, Science and Sci-Fi?

563. Stephan - October 20, 2012


I am looking forward to the movie and I will tell you what I think about it. ;)


564. This is going to be a long year - October 20, 2012

trekmovie.com dead?

He’s really not dead… as long as we remember him.

Besides as long as chat is active the regular visitors and boborci are keeping things going.

Hey boborci,

How about starting an Ask Bob time over here on chat?

Also, do you have any insight into why trekmovie.com has gone silent?

565. Charla - October 20, 2012

#557 You don’t sound like Bob O.

Sorry I don’t buy it. He doesn’t capitalize Patience and along with the other little idiosyncrasies. Nope.

566. Craiger - October 20, 2012

Maybe Anthony should just turn Trekmovie into just a StarTrek/Scifi Chat Forum and we can post our own Trek/Scifi news.

567. AJ - October 20, 2012

Kayla is in Cambridge, UK, and traveling the world getting a PhD, and still finds time to amalgamate info and toss out an article from time to time. As they say, “If you want something to get done, give it to a busy person.”

The site used to have some fun personalities amongst its contributors, all of whom still are in the masthead: Grouchy Grandpa Anthony, Kayla, John Tenuto on swag and culture, Charles Trotter from Memory Alpha, and Rosario who did exhaustive reports on genre TV & film releases. It had Bob Orci, Chris Doohan, Rick Sternbach and Diane Duane leaving comments, and I used to chat in LIVE CHAT with a Dutch artist from the “Ships of the Line” calendar a few times per week. Trekmovie.com had a Q&A with ST09 cast and crew from the “Bridge” when they wrapped the last day. We had an April Fool’s Enterprise sketch before the film’s release and “Nacelles Monthly” from a German graphic artist when the first photo of the Big E was released.

These days, we have topics like how important September was (and always is) in terms of “Trek” anniversaries coming out in October and events like 20,000 people attending a London con with all the captains right now just completely passed over. We’ll get an article in December about it.

Also, I am ‘happy as Larry’ to know all the friends I have made here, and I stick mostly to CHAT because we don’t slash each others’ throats or sock-puppet. The ranks there are thinning now as well.

It is “shit or get off the pot” time for this website.

568. Craiger - October 20, 2012

Well said AJ! I agree with everything in your post.

569. Vultan - October 20, 2012

Holy red nacelles, Captain Kirk, check out this TOS poster!


570. Craiger - October 20, 2012

Vulcan that would have been a new article on Trekmovie but now, not. That is what we mean by “The Source For Everything New In Trek.”

571. Craiger - October 20, 2012

Sorry I meant Vultan.

572. AJ - October 20, 2012


That about covers all of ’em, I think.

573. Ahmed - October 20, 2012

Does anyone here on the site, know Anthony personally ?
He might be sick or dealing with some personal issues that are preventing him from updating the site.

Perhaps, it is might be a good idea for Anthony, to have someone else taking care of the site whenever he is off for any reasons.

And, really, it is not helping that there is literally nothing new about the sequel whatsoever.

574. Stephan - October 20, 2012


I just saw you on German tv. I am watching a documentary about the influences of Arthur C. Clarke and his 2001: A Space Odyssey. You were talking about the movie as THE science fiction movie. :)

575. Ahmed - October 20, 2012

#574. Stephan,

IMO, 2001: A Space Odyssey & Blade Runner are the perfect example of a great science fiction movie. Followed maybe by Alien, The Matrix, Inception.

It kinda sad, that we don’t see many new good science fiction movies these days.

576. Vultan - October 20, 2012


We still get a few “good” sci-fi flicks now and then. I haven’t seen it yet, but I hear Looper is pretty good. And then there was District 9, Source Code, and Moon to name a few more from recent years. Rise of the Planet of the Apes was also pretty good, I thought.

But the great ones like 2001 and Blade Runner are few and far between. Guess that helps to make them great.

577. Ahmed - October 20, 2012

#576. Vultan,

“But the great ones like 2001 and Blade Runner are few and far between. Guess that helps to make them great.”

Yeah, agreed.

I seen most of the recent examples that you mentioned, they were good ones.

There was another one, a low budget movie called “The Man from Earth”, it was such a beautiful & fascinating movie.


Perhaps there are other little gems like that movie hidden among the pile of crappy low budget movies.

578. porthoses bitch - October 20, 2012

The trailer “Rise of the guardians” is included on the New madagascar dvd..chris pine voices Jack Frost he has a sound bite of “toss me in a sack and throw me thru an intergalactic portal ” very kirk like lol..

Yeah I like Madagascar…..Ben Stiller for renegade starship captain in Galaxy quest II………….

579. Gary S - October 20, 2012

Actually Anthony seems to have quite a few people heliping out around here already
As for Scifi films ,
They are not gonna stop .
Too much money in it .

580. Vultan - October 20, 2012


Interesting. Thanks for the link. I’ll have to try and find that one.

On the subject of great sci-fi, I just finished watching a short documentary on Ray Bradbury from 1963. Gives some great insights into his creative process.


581. Ahmed - October 20, 2012

The thing is with science fiction movies, that Hollywood is not adapting the good stuff from the science fiction literature.

Books by Asimov (Foundation), Arthur C. Clarke (Rama), Iain M. Banks (The Culture), to name a few, are not making their way to the big screen or even the TV networks.

582. Vultan - October 20, 2012


Agreed. Though Rama could—COULD—get made… someday.
From its wiki page:

In an interview with Neil deGrasse Tyson in February 2012, [Morgan] Freeman indicated an interest in playing the role of Commander Norton for the film, stating that “my fantasy of commanding a starship is commanding Endeavour”. Tyson then asked, “So is this a pitch to be … that person if they ever make that movie?” to which Freeman reaffirmed, “We ARE going to make that movie.” In response to a plea to “make that come out sooner rather than later”, Freeman reiterated that difficulty in authoring a quality script is the primary barrier for the film, stating “… the only task you have that’s really really hard in making movies, harder than getting money, is getting a script … a good script”.

583. Ahmed - October 20, 2012

#582. Vultan,

I heard that rumor about a planned “Rendezvous with Rama” movie way back in early 2000. Back then, it was mentioned that both David Fincher & Morgan Freeman were interested in making it. But, so far, nothing came out of it.

Same thing happened with Asimov’s book “The Caves of Steel” which was rumored to be under way & then, nothing.

584. Vultan - October 20, 2012


Yep. The wiki article mentioned that. But since the Tyson interview was from earlier this year, that gives some hope it might still happen. Doubtful though. I guess they don’t call it “development hell” for nothing.

It really is perplexing how many sci-fi and fantasy novels haven’t been adapted to movies and television. Of course, some defy adaptation simply due to the complexity of their stories, but not ALL of them are that way. And stories can be altered for the screen anyway. Have been many times to great success.

585. Phil - October 20, 2012

A little more Trek news….from the UK…


586. Montreal_Paul - October 20, 2012

485. Jack


587. Hat Rick - October 21, 2012

Kayla’s Science Saturday and the weekly roundup of scifi properties (lengthy, and delightfully so!) were a few highlights of this site, but lately they haven’t appeared.


588. RNase-free Jeff - October 21, 2012

Hey Guys,

Although I haven’t posted here very often, I have been an avid reader of this site since 06 when it was know as the Trek XI Report. This is a website that I’ve checked daily and enjoyed all of the articles that these great people have produced. Outside of just a news-breaking site for the details of ST09, these folks have put together fantastic reviews, product information, interviews with cast and crew, and other wonderful flourishes like the holiday articles (nothing better then watching Kirk’s Constitution preamble oratory on July 4th, for this American). Furthermore, it really has been a great place to read the thoughts of all of you commenters.

So it is really sad if this indeed the end of Trekmovie, because it’s been a great joy to digest and be a part of. The writers and contributors should be saluted for putting together everything they have given us over the last 6 years. So if this is it, thanks for a great run. But I’m hoping this is just the 7th inning stretch, and that there’s more to come. For now, I’ll just stick with saying thanks for everything, but I won’t put the black armband on yet.

Second star to the right, and straight on till morning. Engage!

RNase-free Jeff

589. Aurore - October 21, 2012

“…Second star to the right, and straight on till morning….”

‘Love this quote….


590. Craiger - October 21, 2012

Ahmed they said on his Facebook page he is vactioning in Europe. That is the reason I think Anthony should post something like Trekmovie wont be regulary updated anymore because he has found other things to do with his life to be worried about this site anymore. However if that’s the case I think Anthony should just shut Trekmovie down, why allways keep us hanging with news? You can check movie news blogs for Trek sequel information.

591. Hat Rick - October 21, 2012

In retrospect, perhaps four years between new movies is really too long. All the most ardent Trek fans are seemingly discouraged by the lack of official news about the next one. Discouragement has a way of building toward irritation and then outright anger that the matter has been handled the way it has. Four years of waiting isn’t easy, and there’s the added possibility that the next movie won’t be worth it. Why the silence?

I am not sure why it’s taking so long to develop teaser trailers for the next movie. Perhaps they are waiting for American Thanksgiving to release a trailer for it. I know that other movies seem to have trailers that have been released a long time prior to the opening date.

So, never mind who’s minding the store at Trekmovie. My question increasingly is, who’s minding the store with the movie itself?

592. Hat Rick - October 21, 2012

^^ All but for the most ardent Trek fans, I meant to write. But perhaps the original sentence is indeed more accurate.

593. Classy M - October 21, 2012

‘…and the darkest hour is just before the dawn,’ sang Mamma Cass.

That second star is the morning star and once it comes we’ll forget about our current state in(to) darkness.

Have faith, guys.

594. The Last Vulcan - October 21, 2012

Come on, people! If you’ve been around this site for more than a couple of months you’ll know that this is just part of the way it goes around here.

1) Anthony takes a hike for a few weeks
2) The speculation runs wild that Anthony is gone forever
3) Everybody screams that the site is dead, it’s all over, it’s finished
4) A new scoop arrives and everyone plunges back in to dissect every word
5) The whole process starts all over again

Is this any way to run The Source For Everything New In Trek? Hell no, but that still won’t change things on this site. Anthony’s dedication to this site is determined by the winds that blow, and none of the hand-wringing and public exhortations to mass exodus to other sites is going to make any difference. The bottom line is that this is the site that gets the lion’s share of the REAL insider scoops and the one that at least some of the time has the REAL boborci on it. Every other site can just suck lemons as they can provide minute by minute breaking news on every time that some secondary or tertiary TOS senior citizen actor has a BM, but when it comes to getting the VERY RARE news that JJ lets slip out, this place is the site to go to.

I don’t like it much either as the nonchalant attitude to running this site at all the other times is damn infuriating and frustrating to the max, as is the inability to ever determine WHICH boborci you’re reading AND why the F*** posts appear, disappear, get cloned, etc…. but there you have it. Like it or lump it, that’s the way it is.

595. Dee - lvs moon' surface - October 21, 2012

# 594…

YEP!!!…. ;-) :-)

596. Montreal_Paul - October 21, 2012

591. Hat Rick

I guess you can call me an ardent fan. I’m 45 and have been watching since I could remember. I loved every series and movie. I collect memorabilia. I have hundreds of Trek books. Have most of the original crew’s autographs from meeting them. I have interviewed a few of them for a TV station I worked for. And I am not discouraged. I am not worried that the movie will flop. I am not worried that Trek is dying. I would rather they take their time and deliver a really good movie. I don’t want it rushed like 5 was.

The movie is on schedule. They are in post production right now. The movie is still 7 months away. It has already been stated by Bob Orci that we will see a trailer in the Christmas season of movies. And it will STILL only be 5 months away.

Relax. Good things come to those who wait. The only people that are discouraged and worried are people that are incredibly impatient.

597. Aurore - October 21, 2012

This site has been declared “dead” so many times, before…

….I’m of the opinion that some “big news” is coming.

Good news that is.

(I loved RNase-free Jeff’s post. Classy M’s too.)

598. Basement Blogger - October 21, 2012

Guys, Anthony replied to an email I sent him on October 17. I emailed him a link to the Colbert video featuring Shatner. So, I think he’s okay. I don’t know why this site is kind of asleep. Trekweb has photos of the five captains at the Destination London Trek convention. At least TrekMovie could link this site to show the photos of the five captains. The London convention is news.


599. AJ - October 21, 2012


The thing is, a small ‘tweet’ from at least one of the site runners would at least indicate that the site is still running. We were told by Anthony in CHAT in early September that he was about to reset the thread to zero, and on October 21st, we’re at 2000 posts and climbing. He can be in Germany or Nepal, and still manage the site from a PC or a smartphone. When other sites report that the “legendary fansite appears to be dead,” it’s a wake-up call to either do some damage control or tell everyone the bar is closed.

We do have Joseph Dickerson’s article here from two weeks ago, but it is a rundown of milestones from 6 weeks ago, and he has not found a reason to be present on the board for commentary.

I’ve looked over at movies.com where Anthony is a regular contributor, and he hasn’t written anything since the summer, so he is definitely disengaged. It’s right to hope he is OK, but the ‘feast or famine’ approach this site is engaged in now is becoming annoying, especially compared to what it used to be.

600. Aurore - October 21, 2012

Thank you for the link, Bernie!

601. Aurore - October 21, 2012

“1) Anthony takes a hike for a few weeks
2) The speculation runs wild that Anthony is gone forever
3) Everybody screams that the site is dead, it’s all over, it’s finished
4) A new scoop arrives and everyone plunges back in to dissect every word
5) The whole process starts all over again”



602. Aurore - October 21, 2012

When other sites report that the “legendary fansite appears to be dead…’”

Personally, if they are the same sites reporting on fake Facebook pages without checking their sources, I’m not too worried…

603. Craiger - October 21, 2012

Anthony takes more than a few weeks off at a time. This time its a month last time it was a few weeks. Trekmovie used to have a few articles a day. Then it looked like sop was take a few weeks post one or two articles, then take a few weeks post one or two articles. Now everyones dissappered again. Can’t you see why alot of fans of this site are getting mad?

604. Craiger - October 21, 2012

I can understand taking some time off but this is getting ridiculous.

605. Rose (as in Keachick) - October 21, 2012

Craiger – Please stop repeating yourself. It’s tiresome!

@ Bob Orci – which question does your word “excruciating” post #558 refer to? Perhaps you find it excruciating to be more Zen like and Patient?…:) Just clarifying… Also, has the first trailer actually been made yet? Are you waiting for the right moment to release it?

606. Craiger - October 21, 2012

Also why is the other staff taking time off? A professionally run site would have backup staff reporting when others would want to take time off. Just look at sites like Engadget, I’ll bet their staff takes time off all the time but you wouldn’t be able to tell since they have new articles posted all the time. I guess what I am trying to say is Trekmovie isn’t being professionally run anymore they are treating it now like its just a hobby.

607. Craiger - October 21, 2012

Rose – I am not repeating myself I am just responding to other posters.

608. Aurore - October 21, 2012

“….. Can’t you see why alot of fans of this site are getting mad?”

Naturally, fellow fans are entitled to their feelings.
I won’t lecture them for getting mad. It’s their right.

….And, hopefully, I won’t get lectured for …not getting mad, either….


609. Aatrek - October 21, 2012

Look, you want news on the next movie, stay here. News on random interview snippets? TrekWeb. (Almost) daily updates on the TNG/ENT Blu-ray project, interviews with Trek stars and Remastering production staff, and other goodies? TrekCore.

If there aren’t updates here, it’s probably because there’s nothing to update. I don’t think TrekMovie is the source for ‘everything new in Trek’ anymore, obviously. But it’s still good for Movie stuff.

610. Aatrek - October 21, 2012

(cont.) Personally, I think TrekCore is leading the pack these days, with contacts inside CBS and CBS Digital.

611. casual poster - October 21, 2012

@603 Craiger

Craiger, if it really ticks you off THAT much, why are you still coming back here only to gripe about it? You had mentioned awhile back that you were thinking about leaving this site. Not that I have anything against you, because I don’t… but if you really are annoyed here with the lack of news and annoyed with Anthony taking time off, why don’t you head to another site that does have updates and news regularly? No offense, but you have been repeating yourself. I would love to have new articles here too, but honestly, I do go to other sites as well and come back here because when Anthony does come back, the site will go back to posting regular news again. There actually isn’t anything much happening right now anyway.

612. Craiger - October 21, 2012

Rose and #611 – I refer you to AJ’s post – 567 as to why other sites for Trek news didn’t compare to this site back in its heyday now its a former shell of that, that is why alot of us are complaining.

613. Richard - October 21, 2012

How dare anthony take a vacation from running a free website that none of us pay to use. The nerve of that man…

614. casual poster - October 21, 2012

@612. Craiger

Seriously, who cares. If you really don’t like the lack of news or Anthony going on vacation – then stop coming here. It only upsets you when you do. Constantly complaining about it isn’t going to “bring it back to it’s heyday” … This is Anthony’s site and he can do as he wishes. We don’t pay for membership here, people are free to come and go as they wish. You aren’t paying for a service you are no longer receiving. You have a choice, you can stay here and gripe and feel slighted by the lack of articles and news or you can go to another site and get regular news. But seriously, Anthony doesn’t have to answer to anyone except himself. There isn’t any movie news now anyway.

615. RNAse-free Jeff - October 21, 2012


Wait wait wait, Harvey Dent was quoting Mama Cass?!?!?!? Mind officially blown!

616. Azrael - October 21, 2012

Trekkies break world record in London, check it.


617. AJ - October 21, 2012



At this point, Paramount and its team are covering their ears saying “La-La-La!” because 17,000 potential ambassadors for the “Trek” brand will now fan out from this con all over Europe, a huge growth market, with absolutely no information about the new film. You fire people for that.

Whatever strategy they have locked up is now officially worse than what they could have achieved. Maybe we will once again look for Romulans in Paris in some viral $5 game they think up instead of sending 17,000 ultra-psyched Trekkers back home across Europe with an awesome message about the new film’s trailer and start accumulating word-of-mouth. This is the stuff marketeers learn in college.

618. AJ - October 21, 2012

I think there are several factors involved with the new film:

1. We’ve been hammered with the message that the film’s overall quality supersedes release date commitments. Paramount never said that about “Transformers 2.”

2. “GI Joe: Retaliation” was pulled by Paramount for re-writes and re-shoots AFTER the TV campaign was launched at the last Superbowl.

3. ‘World War Z’ was pulled for re-writes and re-shoots

4. ‘TMNT’ was pulled and it’s pre-production staff sacked earlier this year

5. Trek under JJ has been rife with delays. Maybe the absolute lockdown on ‘STID’ info is linked to the sunk costs of advertising GI: Joe on the Superbowl, and then postponing it for a year because the ‘retaliation’ was for the death of a main character the test audiences thought shouldn’t die.

I’d love to be a fly on the wall at Paramount today. Probably make a good sit-com.

619. Hat Rick - October 21, 2012

Yeah, I guess I’m kind of wondering, along with you, AJ (617), why so little buzz about the next movie.

If it’s truly a tentpole property, then we maybe should have had a tease as early as this past summer.

A few scenes, fade to black, and then “May 2013″ would have sufficed.

I’m trying to compare this to what they’ve done with Skyfall, the new Bond flix. I think they advertised that with a trailer last year, did they not? I cannot honestly recall seeing a trailer for it, however. All I know is that Skyfall was all the buzz for the last several months.

As far as whether I’m impatient, maybe not yet, but every day that passes without any official news, I’m sorely tempted to be.

It seems that there are a lot of negatives regarding the Trek franchise since a few years ago — no more Star Trek The Experience, Nimoy is bowing out of convention appearances, still no Trek TV show, Trek-related actors passing on, and so forth. I personally cannot help thinking that the sheen from the last Star Trek movie has completely worn off and there’s nothing yet to replace it. That’s beginning to irritate me, because it seems to me that no one in power really seems to take note of that and/or care.


620. Craiger - October 21, 2012

AJ, Why spend $159 million on the sequel if it stinks?

621. rm10019 - October 21, 2012

A) You are easily irritated

B) Star Trek as a property is doing exactly what Paramount and CBS want it to do. Making money with every Feature and DVD release while avoiding being diluted and over exposed. There will be promotion for the film in a pattern fitting its release date and accordance with the distributor and producers wishes.

622. Craiger - October 21, 2012

RM – We just got a teaser trailer for Iron Man 3.

623. Classy M - October 21, 2012

615. Sorry to blow your mind, but hey, everything goes better with 60s music.

Thanks, Aurore.

There’s a possibility I’m putting two and two together and coming up with 1701, but Benedict Cumberbatch is to attend the London premiere of Skyfall on Tuesday. Also, according to twitter Newsweek is currently planning a profile of The Batch. Could this be the start of Into Darkness publicity? Even a trailer?

624. Hat Rick - October 21, 2012

621, I’m not one of those who’s been bashing Paramount. For years, I’ve been very positive about how Paramount has been treating this movie.

I hardly think that an expression of concern that this property isn’t being treated well justifies the description you’ve given me.

No one is stopping you from expressing your opinion of how Paramount has proceeded, but if you can justify, factually rather than otherwise, the lack of attention paid to the new movie, then provide the facts that do. Right now, few people seem to know about the next Trek movie, and fewer people in charge seem to care.

“In accordance with the distributor and producers wishes” implies that you know that these people are actually monitoring what’s going on. What supports this allegation and/or conclusion? The record shows that little by way of publicity has occurred and nothing seems to be forthcoming.

Avoiding overexposure doesn’t mean avoiding publicity (Abrams’ recent appearance and faux preview notwithstanding). I’m sure you’d understand the difference.

625. Aurore - October 21, 2012

“….Could this be the start of Into Darkness publicity? Even a trailer?”

Mmmmmm….who knows?


626. D-Rock - October 21, 2012

If there is a funeral at the end of STID, I think Pike dies. Makes somewhat sense, they are not going to kill off one of the main crew (please don’t bring up TWOK) so quickly into a reboot, and older quotes from Bruce Greenwood, while saying he was satisfied with his character’s story, didn’t exactly sound stoked about it.

I hope there is another story soon, don’t know how much more cringe-inducing fanfic of scenes I can read.

627. Hat Rick - October 21, 2012

I saw from one of Craiger’s message above that Iron Man 3 has released a teaser of sorts (thanks for that info). In the absence of info about Star Trek, it might behoove us to discuss how much and how interesting this snippet is.

See also: http://www.bleedingcool.com/2012/10/21/an-closer-look-at-the-iron-man-3-trailer-teaser/


So what we can conclude from this trailer is that it involves (1) the destruction or threatened destruction of Tony Stark’s personal empire and physical base (the Malibu home); (2) a damsel in distress; (3) the insidious villain named “Mandarin” and his right-hand man, the radioactive “Chen Lu”; (4) some kind of peril to civilians; (5) a hospital scene; and probably (6) Iron Man (or substitute) in his “patriot” suit going to China.

Now, does this lessen my interest in Iron Man 3? Not one bit.

628. RNAse-free Jeff - October 21, 2012

@619 Hat Rick

I think the first trailer for Skyfall was released at the beginning of the olympics, if memory serves me right. I don’t remember seeing anything earlier than that.

But on a second note regarding Bond, it was fantastic that the first full trailer for ST09 was released with Quantum of Solace, and I thought it was the best move Paramount could do for releasing the trailer.

I’ve had high hopes that they will do the same with Skyfall, but again, with no news on that front and Skyfall hitting theaters in 2 weeks, they’re either really REALLY trying to surprise us, or I guess we’ll have to wait until one of the Holiday season film releases for the first trailer (which wouldn’t be as great, because I can’t think of a big film coming out during that period). I hope they don’t waste the opportunity, considering it is T-minus 7 months to opening day

629. RNAse-free Jeff - October 21, 2012

Scratch that, the first Skyfall trailer came out with MIB III on Memorial Day. So, that’s six months ahead of release date that a trailer was released. And we haven’t passed that threshold yet for STID.

630. Montreal_Paul - October 21, 2012

You know, Bob Orci said a trailer will be released during the Christmas season movies. That gives you a spread of mid December to Mid January.

That being said… Hobbit is opening on December 14th. I will place my bet that a Trek trailer will be attached to that. Or, it can be attached to Hansel & Gretel in January. Both of them make sense to me.

631. Montreal_Paul - October 21, 2012

629. RNAse-free Jeff


632. Darkthunder - October 21, 2012

RIP TrekMovie.com.

No updates on the site for 2 weeks, and a major convention ongoing in London. I think it’s safe to assume, this site is dead (which is a huge shame). On the other hand, TrekMovie was started as a blog detailing news about the (then) upcoming Trek movie. I think a more general Trek news site would’ve been preferrable.

633. TrekMadeMeFat - October 21, 2012

As Montreal Paul has pointed out, Bob Orci has already told us when the marketing of this movie will begin. Pretending you couldn’t quite hear Bob isn’t going to change anything.

Also, it’s entirely possible that Craiger is autistic. Autistics are highly repetitive without being aware of it.

634. Ahmed - October 21, 2012


Frankly, the marketing for the sequel sucks. No viral videos, no poster, no official Facebook/website, no movie synopsis, NONE.

635. Hat Rick - October 21, 2012

628, RNAse-free Jeff, thank you for that important and insightful information.

I do remain somewhat concerned. The movie should be good, but I’m not entirely happy about the marketing. If the movie is mind-boggling great, as it should be, then they should stoke interest in it very, very soon.

And, to be honest, I do not want to wait until Christmas for the first trailer / teaser.

I suppose I’m also going to question at this point whether all the secrecy associated with JJ’s movies really help them. And were all of them this sub rosa I remember the viral marketing associated with his movie, Cloverfield. That helped build up interest. Even Cloverfield wasn’t as secretive, it seems.

What’s the point of excessive secrecy?

636. Hat Rick - October 21, 2012

^^In 635, I mistakenly omitted the question mark after the words, “sub rosa.”

637. Montreal_Paul - October 21, 2012

Ahmed & Hat Rick

You guys know that the movie is only due to be released in mid May and that we are still 7 months away from May. Someone else mentioned this but I will again, The studios are looking to promote their Christmas movies first before they start to promote their next summer releases.

We know that the trailer will be released during the Christmas releases – most likely The Hobbit. And I know that we will start getting news in November.

Bond only started promoting 6 months before it’s release. Trel will most likely do the same.

I really, really don’t get why people are freaking out 7 months in advance!

638. Montreal_Paul - October 21, 2012

* Trek will most likely do the same.

639. Shilliam Watner (Click for Trek Ships Poster) - October 21, 2012

637. Montreal_Paul – Yeah, I’m not getting the freak out reactions either, especially the people predicting imminent failure of the film because of the lack of any publicity more than half a year from opening day. I guess some people have an abusive relationship with Star Trek, and if they don’t get things their way they lash out.

640. Ahmed - October 21, 2012

#639. Shilliam Watner
I didn’t say that the movie will fail, I don’t want it to fail. I want it to score big to keep Trek alive on the big screen & on TV as well.

My frustration is basically at the marketing timeline, the lack of any kind of information so far.

641. Shilliam Watner (Click for Trek Ships Poster) - October 21, 2012

640. Ahmed – I wasn’t referring to you. It was a post from somebody a few days ago. I haven’t read your posts.

642. SoonerDave - October 21, 2012

There’s no reason at all a simple teaser trailer couldn’t have been released this summer, one that revealed nothing about the movie, but just reminded folks it was on the way. Didn’t even get that. I’ve been hearing about Skyfall forever now, in contrast.

Frustrating thing is that I remember this being consistent with how Paramount promoted TOS movies, so I guess I shouldn’t be surprised.

As for this site, its dead, but the conversation here is interesting. I appreciate boborci’s posts, but there’s really no reason for Paramount to talk out of both sides of its mouth by referring to Trek publicly as tentpole, then keep the next incarnation so buried in secrecy that hardly anyone knows about it. Its just sad and frustrating.

C’est la vie.

643. helen - October 21, 2012

I’m a fan of Cumberbatch’s so coming in cold to Star Trek but given how big this franchise is I;d expect something by now. A teaser well before the Xmas trailer. Its been so long since the last film they really need to get people talking positively about the franchise. The excessive secrecy only suggests that they dont have that much confidence in the product. If Cumberbatch is tied to a stinker I’m going to be fuming.

Peter Jackson has done a great job with the Hobbit pr.

644. P Technobabble - October 21, 2012

I don’t get it. We have a new Star Trek movie coming. What is more important — getting the movie, or getting a trailer? Or any other kind of teasers?
Don’t you want to see the movie, in full?
Do you really need to see bits and pieces to stimulate you? Does anyone that frequents this site NOT know the movie is coming? Who needs to know about the movie that doesn’t already know?
The secrecy is teasing enough and it’s supposed to let us be surprised about something when the movie comes out, eh?
My goodness….

645. RNAse-free Jeff - October 21, 2012

Technically, the marketing hasn’t been totally nil, we did get our first look at the film less than 3 weeks ago (thanks to the 3-frame clip JJ showed on Conan). :P

646. Ahmed - October 21, 2012

#644. P Technobabble
“The secrecy is teasing enough and it’s supposed to let us be surprised about something when the movie comes out, eh?”

The problem with too much secrecy, that it might indicate a problem with the movie.

647. Craiger - October 21, 2012

Exactly Ahmed. Plus people might forget they even filmed a sequel. I don’t want to know everything about the sequel. I think just seeing a trailer and knowing who the bad guy is would be enough for me. Then we could start speculating how the story will go based on who the bad guy is. That would also help promote the movie.

648. Montreal_Paul - October 21, 2012

646. Ahmed

What?!?! Are you daft? How does it indicate a problem? We had secrecy for the first one and it turned out great! Boy are you a pessimist.

649. Montreal_Paul - October 21, 2012

647. Craiger

You do know that the movie only open is May, right? So, you basically want to know who the bad guys is as soon as possible… and then what? See more and more and more shot from the movie… 3 trailers before Christmas…. the plot summery and a novelization before the movie comes out so you go in and know what’s going to happen. What ever happened to being patient and anticipation? I loved going into Trek 09 not knowing what was going to happen. I wish they wouldn’t have let us know that Nimoy was in it… would have been great to go in there not knowing and being surprised.

650. SoonerDave - October 21, 2012

@644 Because it would be nice to see Paramount follow up their *words* with *actions* in relationship to *promoting the movie*.

Promoting the movie that you have publicly stated is part of your “core” franchise is part-and-parcel of backing words with actions. When you don’t do that, right or wrong, it subjects you to speculation (completely justified, IMHO) that includes a lack of faith in the franchise in general, or the next incarnation in particular. Sorry if that offends, but its my opinion. For a major tentpole release, it deserves the same treatment the other highly anticipated releases seem to be receiving.

I realize there’s ostensibly some great rationale for the double-secret (non) marketing going on right now, and also realize there’s nothing I can do about it, so the best I can do is express just a bit of frustration here. And, in honesty, its more disappointment that TPTB at Paramount are pushing this Trek just like they pushed all the TOS movies 30 years ago, which was rather minimally.

Last time, we had trailers, the “under construction” site, and even now, I still hold out hope for something like an AR game similar to that which preceded the prior movie, but at this point I think the prospects for anything that novel are laughable.

I sincerely hope I’m wrong, and all these good things are still in the offing. Somehow, I doubt it.

651. SoonerDave - October 21, 2012

@644 Because it would be nice to see Paramount follow up their *words* with *actions* in relationship to *promoting the movie*.

Promoting the movie that you have publicly stated is part of your “core” franchise is part-and-parcel of backing words with actions. When you don’t do that, right or wrong, it subjects you to speculation (completely justified, IMHO) that includes a lack of faith in the franchise in general, or the next incarnation in particular. Sorry if that offends, but its my opinion. For a major tentpole release, it deserves the same treatment the other highly anticipated releases seem to be receiving.

I realize there’s ostensibly some great rationale for the double-secret (non) marketing going on right now, and also realize there’s nothing I can do about it, so the best I can do is express just a bit of frustration here. And, in honesty, its more disappointment that TPTB at Paramount are pushing this Trek just like they pushed all the TOS movies 30 years ago, which was rather minimally.

Last time, we had trailers, the “under construction” site, and even now, I still hold out hope for something like an AR game similar to that which preceded the prior movie, but at this point I think the prospects for anything that novel are laughable.

I sincerely hope I’m wrong, and all these good things are still in the offing. Somehow, I doubt it.

652. SoonerDave - October 21, 2012

Sorry for the accidental double-post. The only thing less likely than a PR campaign for the movie is for this site to go to real forum software :)

653. Montreal_Paul - October 21, 2012

You guys worry WAAAAAAY too much. You are starting to get paranoid. The movie is 7 months away. Bob Orci already told you when to expect a trailer.

654. Craiger - October 21, 2012

Not to sound like I am repeating myself again but Paul we knew who the bad guys were in the new Spiderman and Batman movies did that spoil those movies for anyone? Not me. I actually haven’t seen them yet. Waiting for them to come out on BluRay and VOD. We also know that the bad guy is in Man of Steel. Also we just got a teaser trailer for Iron Man 3 and that premiers the same month as the sequel.

655. SoonerDave - October 21, 2012

@653 You’re confusing worried with disappointment. *Every* Trek movie has had *some* kind of pre-release pub, official or otherwise. Until now.

That’s disappointing. Not worrisome.

656. Ahmed - October 21, 2012

#653. Montreal_Paul

Not really, I don’t think it is too much to ask for a little bit of new information. However; you are correct about the trailer. The 2009 movie trailer, came out in November 2008 as Anthony reported it that day


Still, I admit that don’t like the tight secrecy around the movie.

657. Shilliam Watner (Click for Trek Ships Poster) - October 21, 2012

655. SoonerDave – I wasn’t aware that every Trek movie til now had been publicized more than six months before its release. Is there a web site or some source you can direct me to for this information?

658. Montreal_Paul - October 21, 2012

654. Craiger

I hate when people compare Star Trek to comic book movies. That’s apples and oranges. You know who ALL the villains are and the stories because of the years and years of comics. As soon as the said Bane… you knew who he was, what his story was and that be broke Batman’s back. You say Lizard and you know the story already from the Spider-man comics.

Trek has a different history. We didn’t have occurring villains like the comic books did. Other than general villians like The Klingons, The Romulans, the Borg.

You should be comparing Trek to Bond instead. Do you know who the villain is in Bond… other than it being Javier Bardem? No.

Comic book movies should NEVER be compared to Trek…. completely different beast Craiger.

659. Craiger - October 21, 2012

Paul – Same thing could be said of TOS and its villains. Didn’t Orci say the bad guy was canon?

660. Montreal_Paul - October 21, 2012

655. SoonerDave
“*Every* Trek movie has had *some* kind of pre-release pub, official or otherwise. Until now.”

Really? Other than Trek 09, what was the prerelease pubs for the other Trek movies? I don’t remember any. Where did you get this info?

661. Rose (as in Keachick) - October 21, 2012

Wow. Some real joy killers here. They’ll release the trailer when they are good and ready and not a moment before!

Interesting comment made by a poster above that Benedict Cumberbatch will be attending the UK Skyfall premier on 23 October with overall cinema release date on 26 October and wondering if perhaps a Star Trek teaser/trailer may come with Skyfall’s release. Bear in mind that Chris Pine is also in the UK right now, filming the Jack Ryan movie. I wonder if Chris Pine will also be attending (with Cumberbatch) the Skyfall premier in London. I guess it is a matter of wait and see…

Skyfall does not get released in the US until 9 November. Well, 9 November is 6 months and 8 days from STID release in 17 May 2013. (What’s a mere 8 days?) Fingers crossed!

662. Montreal_Paul - October 21, 2012

659. Craiger

Not following you. WHAT can be said about Trek? Like I said, Comic book movies and Trek are like apples and oranges my friend. You can’t compare the two. You can compare it to Bond or MI… but not comic books. Sorry.

663. Phil - October 21, 2012

Yeah, I’m board. My son founf this….and yeah, animated Trek works for him.


664. Hat Rick - October 21, 2012

To some extent, my messages today have been somewhat stream-of-consciousness, so if they’re not rigorously constructed, I apologize for that. But in lieu of Science Saturday or Sci-Fi Friday (is it Friday? It’s been so long!), it’s interesting to see all these mentions of various films that I find highly probable I’m going to see. Skyfall, for one.

Now, Skyfall had a $150 million budget, according to one source. According to the same source, the immediate predecessor in the series had a budget of $200 million. (Wikipedia.) Wikipedia also says that ST 2013 has a budget of $185 million. So, by the numbers, ST 2013 is a big-budget movie. So I suppose soon we will be seeing manifestations of that in the form of promotions, advertisements, etc. So I’m waiting.

On a scale of 1 to 10, 1 being not at all concerned and 10 being raving mad infuriated, I would say that I’m at 1.8, but it’s rising to 2.0, regarding the lack of news about this new film. Official news, that is.

I’d say that as recently as a week ago, I was at 1, but honestly, I cannot say that anymore. Can’t say for sure why; maybe the lack of news on this site has something to do with it. But there it is, and I’m being honest with you about that.

Very little about this film makes sense to me right now. The volcano business is just bizarre. Spock and volcano aren’t two concepts you really conflate.

So — in the manner of newscasters — let me do a short list of “what we know” from stuff we’ve read here and elsewhere:

1. Villain will be canonical. (Is this right?)
2. Cumbie will play a villain. But there may be more than one villain, right?
3. The movie may or may not be standalone as a plot but it will have a character-development effect on the team, and will bring them together as a more cohesive unit.
4. All the classic characters from the TOS crew are in the movie, from Kirk to Spock to Bones to Uhura to Scotty to Sulu to Chekov. None of them, presumably, die, since their actors are contracted to do a third movie. (Unless there’s a resurrection involved.)
5. The villain is probably not Khan, since no one actually looks sufficiently like Khan who’s known to be in this movie. Although, of course, B. Del Toro would have been Khan-like, but backed out apparently for financial reasons. Cumbie plays someone who has superhuman characteristics, however (based on the leaked photos with him, Spock, and Uhura with a phaser in her hand, near what seemed like a crash-landed containerized area.
6. On the other hand, the villain could be Khan, since we really don’t know.
7. The comics will “foreshadow” the film’s plot. The cover of one of the relevant comics shows a Starfleet office who may or may not be Gary Mitchell, and there’s some kind of vessel silhouetted on it. Some say the officer could be a young Kirk, others disagree; it could be a young Shatner-as-Kirk, from the looks of it.
8. PIke is in it, and the actor who played him had a positive comment about his character, but this comment, to some, was not as effusively complimentary as to suggest that Pike has a large or particularly glorious role in this movie. Some fans say that Pike could die in this movie, although I’m not sure how that follows.
9. Some say that this could be a movie centered around the Doomsday machine.
10. I’m sure there’s other stuff I’ve totally missed, so this is a catchall category: “Other things.”

665. Hat Rick - October 21, 2012

One other thing — according to Memory Alpha’s Apocrypha section on Gary Mitchell, there are two IDW comics that expressly portray the ultimate fate of said officer in the Alternate Reality, so — even considering that the comics are noncanonical — it would seem unlikely that the villain of the next movie is Mitchell, given that it would be anti-climactic if so.

666. SoonerDave - October 21, 2012

660 657

Only the memories of my personal experience watching all the Trek movies from their original release back in 79. Starlog magazine was a consistently great source for early production information, including casting stories, plot rumors, production photos, and interviews. Another mag of that era was titled something along the lines of CineFX and it typically had info about effects production, model making, and related info like matte production.

The other great thing of that era was how Paramount used “Entertainment Tonight” as a pub vehicle, and they never hesitated to promote Trek…it was one of the first media sources to report in detail about the decision to even make a TMP sequel given the reluctance of the studio.And that the sequel would be based on Khan.

I remember David Gerrold was given a great mid production screening of “Search for Spock,” no or little music, no visuals, with rough splices, and he wrote a conceptual review of the film in that form, and did so without divulging one bit of spoiler information. It was great stuff, with a production mindset obviously greatly departed.from the contemporary version.,

So, do I have names and dates? No, but I do have the fond memories of the great expectations fostered by the willingness of the studio trelease,officially or otherwise, tangible tidbits about a highly expected movie without spoiling anything about it, and not diluting the actual movie experience one iiota.

I contrast that with now, where the hope fur nothing more than a trailer puts you at risk for flaming as if you were wanting the whole movie posted on You Tube..alas….

667. Montreal_Paul - October 21, 2012

665. Hat Rick

I guess you didn’t actually see the comic. There was only one IDW ongoing comic about Mitchell. Yes, he died at the end. But he did not die by being crushed and buried like he was in the TOS episode. In my opinion, the way that the comic ended – it left it open for him to return. He is a God now after all, right? And if he wasn’t crushed & buried, then what’s to say that he can’t come back?

668. Montreal_Paul - October 21, 2012

665. Hat Rick

Okay, I understand… his story wasn’t told in two different comics… his story spanned two comic issues.

But still, like I said… his “ending” was different than the TOS episode. i suggest picking it up and giving it a read!

669. Shilliam Watner (Click for Trek Ships Poster) - October 21, 2012

666. SoonerDave – I am old enough to remember those same magazines. And now I better understand where you are coming from. I read many articles in both publications. I’m not so sure any of the articles were more than six months in advance. I think it just seemed longer because we were kids, and time goes too slowly for a kid when you’re waiting for a beloved movie. But I might be wrong.

Anyway, I get where you’re coming from. It’s cool.

670. Ahmed - October 21, 2012

Speaking of publications like Starlog, I really miss the 90s when I used to get my information about upcoming science fiction movies & TV series from magazines such as SFX, Dreamwatch, Starburst.

Now, we have more news sources online but somehow, it is not the same as holding a magazine and going through the pages.

671. Montreal_Paul - October 21, 2012

666. SoonerDave

Not sure if Starlog is still in print these days, but I do remember them and have many in my collection. I also read Star Trek Magazine and they have article about the new movie, they have interviews with the cast, they also have interviews with the filmmakers too. So, in essence, if you look for the stuff – it’s there. It just depends where you look.

And those Entertainment Tonight pieces, they came out a few months before the movie opened. In the past, it was very rare to get anything before a few months before a movie’s release. The most I remember it being… and I did check with old newspaper and magazine clippings I have (yes, I am that big of a fan… you should see my home office.)… and those articles were a few months before the movie was released.

672. Gary S. - October 21, 2012

Nope .
Starlog is gone .
I have some of the older issues .
I dont have the heart to part with them.

673. Belkin - October 21, 2012

There’s actually been a number of news items re. the next movie – just not on this site. Try treknews, trektoday or trekweb, which all have way, way more info about the movie, and trek news in general, than this site has had for months.

674. WillH85 - October 22, 2012

Thanks for the heads up. It’s sad how they just let this site go with out saying a word about it. I know sometimes stuff comes up, but if you’re running a website it’s generally professional to at least say something.

675. bardicjim - October 22, 2012


Universal translator? Well….. It’s a start!

676. Pussy licker - October 22, 2012

I eat pussy

677. Richard - October 22, 2012

[Qoute]676. Pussy licker – October 22, 2012
I eat pussy [/Quote]

@676: My guess is the last time you even saw pussy was when you came out of your momma at birth :)

678. Hat Rick - October 22, 2012

Finally, there is a new article on this site after a few weeks. On Treknology, no less! One of my fave subjects.

Am I allowed to do a happy dance on this site? :-)

679. Charla - October 22, 2012

please someone come back and edit these pages… before it gets any worse… please.

680. Thor - October 22, 2012


681. MJ - October 22, 2012

Keachick please stop acting like you are more on the know, than the rest of us. I am getting really tired of reading your posts which come off as being self important, and give off a vibe of “I am Better than you are”
It really doesnt suit you, neither does your border line cyber stalking of Chris Pine, both here as well as on IMDB and the other sites your frequent.

682. MJ - October 22, 2012

Wow in days of old that poster in 677 would have been banned in minutes. Seriously is anyone awake at the wheel right now?

683. MJ - October 22, 2012

Wow in days of old that poster in 677 would have been banned and the offensive post deleted in minutes. Seriously is anyone awake at the wheel right now?

684. Azrael - October 22, 2012

@666. According to Paramount and Bob Orci the IDW comics are, in fact, canon materials of the JJ Abrams Star Trek timeline. Just FYI, in case you missed the article about it here a few months back.

685. jamesingeneva - October 22, 2012

lmao @ PL, now the party has really started…. must be like 8 or 9yo

686. Rose (as in Keachick) - October 22, 2012

MJ – (if that is you) – Who the f*ck are you? Border line cyber stalking Chris Pine? sheesh. You know nothing – you self-important a*ss!

687. Rose (as in Keachick) - October 22, 2012

Whoever you are (MJ?) – It is not exactly a well kept secret that Chris Pine is in England at the moment filming the Jack Ryan movie. Would you also consider the Cumberbatch fan who posted here on this site on one of these threads a day or so back also to be a Benedict Cumberbatch cyber stalker because *she knew/believed that Cumberbatch would be at the Skyfall premier in London on 23 October?

Hell, all I said was, to paraphrase, wouldn’t it be good if Chris Pine could be at the premier with Cumberbatch, especially if the UK and Europe are the ones to see the first STID trailer preceding the Bond Skyfall movie, opening in cinemas all over UK and western Europe on 26 October?

You know, this is neither real cyber stalker nor indeed complicated rocket science!

688. Phil - October 22, 2012

Beginning to look like it will be the Iron Man III trailer on Skyfall.

689. Montreal_Paul - October 22, 2012

689. Phil

I would bet that TREK will have a trailer for The Hobbit in December or Hansel & Gretel in January.

690. AJ - October 23, 2012

Iron Man III trailer on Trekmovie:


691. Phil - October 23, 2012

The Iron Man trailer has been out about 24 hours now, and it’s generating some chatter. With a built in audience from The Avengers, IM3 getting a three month jump on marketing may mean trouble for Trek in the theaters. Both franchises are aiming for the same audience, afterall….

692. Montreal_Paul - October 23, 2012

692. Phil

Trek will be fine. It has gone up to bigger movies in the past and always did well. Not sure why some people get “worried”… I don’t get it. The last Trek movie took in the best take so far for a Trek movie… and people are STILL worried? *shakes head and walks away*

693. Phil - October 23, 2012

@698. It’s a different environment then 2009. Prior to the release of Trek 09 Fast & Furious was a holdover that had decent box office, but that was about it for April. So Trek was there to take advantage of being a early summer release, and it didn’t hurt the movie was well received and heavily promoted. Wolverine, Angels & Deamons, and Terminator Salvation were expected to be serious competition, and didn’t quite live up to that expectation. Now, next summer, unless IM3 is a complete disaster, it’s going to do huge box office, if for no other reason it will hold the audience from The Avengers. A week after Trek 13, The Hangover III hits theaters, then in June we get Man of Steel and Monsters University. Much stiffer competition next year, and considering most of these films will do much better in foreign box office then Trek 13 will, it just makes the ‘shhh, it’s a secret’ school of marketing that much more baffleing. Yeah, the movie will do alright, but if it performs at or below Trek 09’s numbers, there will be a lot of second guessing going on.

694. Montreal_Paul - October 23, 2012

694. Phil

I have seen Trek open with bigger movies since the 80s … I am still not concerned at all, It will bring in bigger money than Trek 09 did. You worry too much. I, for one, won’t be seeing IM3 … the second one wasn’t that great and I don’t think the third will be either.

You can go by what happened in 09 too… as you said, “Wolverine, Angels & Deamons, and Terminator Salvation were expected to be serious competition, and didn’t quite live up to that expectation.” I have the same feeling about the movies opening up with Trek next year too. And Trek never did well in foreign markets anyway. No one has been able to figure why since the 80s.

695. Phil - October 23, 2012

@695. For the movies opening up around Trek, Man of Steel is probably the only question mark, and if Chris Nolan hits paydirt with that franchise it could perform well. The Hangover III might have fatigue, even if it underperforms will still make money. Pixar is a lock, IM3 will be solid, because of The Avengers coattails. I’m not concrned about Trek making money, but it may be a bit of a stretch for it to do better then the last one. On the other hand, JJ and his strange lack of marketing may be taking the strength of the brand name a bit for granted, whish doesn’t make a lot of sense considering the five years between movies.

696. AJ - October 23, 2012

Paramount has said both (paraphrasing) “We realize that Star Trek is never going to draw big numbers overseas,” and “We’re going to try to catch the wave that foreign box office is contributing to overall earnings” because of massive new cinema infrastructure in Europe, Russia, Asia and Latin America. It’s the non N. American business which goes bonkers over “Madagascar,” and “Ice Age” “DK Rises” did 60% of its 1.1 billion gross overseas. Terminator Salvation hauled in $371m w/75% coming from overseas, while ST09 took in $386m w/75% coming from N. America.

In order to hit those numbers with “Trek,” you have to launch the brand from scratch for billions who never saw it on TV. Just how does absolute silence improve the brand’s visibility in China, Poland or Brazil?

Do you think the Russians ‘get’ the new silence when ST09 was the first time anyone there had ever seen Star Trek characters on a screen? No. Because they’ve forgotten about it, or never bothered to show interest anyway.

I think at $185m, JJ is delivering the new film over-budget:


and needs to find a way to crimp costs. We’ll get the marketing campaign, but over a shorter period, and there may be a lack of faith that the new film can deliver huge ‘Batman’ numbers anyway. Also, after the GI:Joe superbowl ad for a film that was then pulled from the summer schedule, no one at Paramount would dare piss money away again.

697. Red Dead Ryan - October 23, 2012

AJ, you hit the nail on the head as usual. Paramount needs to better market Trek overseas, or else risk having its property become a second-tier blockbuster franchise that can’t compete with Batman, Spider-Man, Lord Of The Rings, etc.

The overseas market, especially the non-English speaking countries, are becoming a bigger piece of the pie.

If Paramount continues to bury its head in the sand, they’ll be leaving tens (hundreds?) of millions of dollars on the table, and possibly ignoring a potential source of new fans in untapped markets.

I would argue this is the reason Trek is not really a global brand, at least not like “Star Wars” is. Far more people worldwide have at least seen one “Star Wars” movie, as opposed to either an episode, or a movie, of “Star Trek”, which ironically, has FAR more live action content than George Lucas’ juggernaut.

698. Mallory is M - October 24, 2012

I dont understand why people are all upset about spoilers I mean really how does knowing that M dies durring SKYFALL, after being accidentally shot in the stoumach by one of Sylva’s henchmen, and she bleeds to death ruin the movie.
So what if at the End you know ahead of time that Eve is in fact Moneypenny at the end of the movie and Mallory is now the new M.

Does knowing ahead of time that the final scene takes place in the new M’s office and it looks pretty much like M’s office in Dr. No really change your enjoyment of the movie going into it.

Cause reading about the main details of the movie, isnt watching it.

699. Bucky - October 24, 2012

Wow. ^ 699 is a real tool. I hope that made you feel all warm and special and fuzzy doing that. It must be some sort of … thing about you.

Well, I’m glad you enjoyed that.

And I’m gone from Trekmovie till, like November from now on.

700. crazydaystrom - October 25, 2012

Thanks Mallory is M. I would’ve rather found that out while watching the film. To whatever degree, you’ve spoiled a film I’m very excited to see. NOT COOL!!!

701. crazydaystrom - October 25, 2012

Sorry about the double post here but I just saw #677. WOW things have gotten pretty surly around here. And I am by no means a prude. Believe me, by no means a prude. I can (and do) get as down and dirty as (almost) anybody, but I always attempt to be apropos of the venue…
Call me crazy…sheesh!

702. Red Dead Ryan - October 25, 2012


You’re full of crap.

703. Thor - October 25, 2012


704. boborci - October 26, 2012


I have a joke for you.

That dog is a lying piece of shit, he never worked for the CIA.

705. boborci - October 26, 2012


Lady’s driving down an old country road when she sees a sign in front of a farm that says “TALKING DOG — 50 DOLLARS.”

Intrigued, the woman pulls over and knocks on the door.

An old farmer answers, says nothing. The lady say, “Uh… I saw your sign. Talking dog? Really?”

The Farmer says, “Yup. He’s out back if you wanna meet him… I’ll be right here…”

So the woman goes out back and finds a dog in a dog house. As she walks up to the dog, THE DOG says, “Hiya, Miss.”

The woman can’t believe it. She says, “You can really talk?”

The dog says, “yeah. How’s your day going?”

The woman can’t believe it. She asks the dog how the hell it is possible that he can talk.

The dog explains, “well, I was raised as a puppy by the CIA so that I could speak english because they wanted to be able to use me in undercover operations where unsuspecting bad guys would let there guard down thinking there is no danger in talking shop around a dog. Then, I would report back to HQ and we could use the intel I gave to foil crimes against the state.”

Incredible, thinks the woman. She goes right back to the front door to talk to the farmer. She says, “That dog is incredible, how could you be selling him for only 50 dollars. And the farmer says:

Anyway — get the point?

706. crazydaystrom - October 28, 2012

Uh, no boborci I don’t get the point. I only know as they say-

No matter where you go…

…there you are.

707. Aurore - October 28, 2012



What you did there….

That’s criminal is all I’m going to say.


708. Aurore - October 28, 2012

…..And, I don’t want to know who started what first….
…That is STILL criminal, Junior…um…Mr. Orci….Sir…

Get my point?


709. Aurore - October 28, 2012

All joking aside, I personally don’t really have a dog in this “fight”.

After May 17 2013, everything I’ll read regarding Star Trek into etc… will probably feel like that CIA dog joke to me, anyway…

….Good thing I’m like St Thomas.

710. Rose (as in Keachick) - October 28, 2012

#709 – I get the point of Bob Orci’s story. It is a bit sad that you still don’t get it.

711. NCM - October 28, 2012

I’ll take a stab at it: The farmer’s answer is, “The dog’s a lying piece of shit…” a fact that, to the farmer, means the dog’s intel. ain’t worth the crap he lays down in the yard; so who gives a shit if he can talk.

I think that’s a pretty clever put down to ole’ Mallory.

712. Rose (as in Keachick) - October 28, 2012

#712 – You could be right with your answer…:)

I have not looked at the story in that way. I interpreted it to mean that when relating part of a story, you do not or should not give away the “punchline”, in this case, why the dog is only worth $50.

Poster Mallory at #699 told us pertinent information, spoilers, if you like about the Skyfall movie. The movie has only just been released in the UK and parts of Europe. It does not come to North America until 9 November and not to Australasia until 22 November, and yet this poster has given away what many might consider major spoilers for a Bond movie.

Of course, Mallory may be talking horseshit, but he may not be. Anyway, some people keen to see Skyfall don’t need nor necessarily WANT to know this stuff ahead of time.

The same applies to Star Trek Into Darkness!

This is not like reading a book. An individual may pick up a book and immediately turn to the last chapter to read what the ending is. That is their individual choice and preference. However, the moment he tells someone else who has not yet read the book what the ending is, that becomes another matter. This is what is happening to movies, ie people don’t have the nouce, the courtesy to simply be quiet, “keep mum”, about important plot points they have seen in a movie before others have had a chance to see the movie for themselves. Some of the worst people are the critics and reviewers themselves, people you would think should know better.

I suggest that, once STID is released on 16/17 May in most countries, that an embargo is placed on this site where no discussion is allowed about the movie for say two weeks until as many people as possible have had the opportunity to see the movie for themselves. However, maybe people, who have seen the movie, would be able to give it a rating out of 10 but no more than that. Later, they may wish to explain why they gave it the rating they did or even change the rating.

I realize my suggestion might be much more easily said than done, but you never know…

On another site, I mentioned some time back that it is likely that I, living in NZ, may get to see STID before anyone else, since it opens here on 16 May, not 17th. NZ is also between 19 and 21 hours ahead of California, USA, I’m not sure how far ahead of New York, and 12 hours ahead of the UK. I assume you can see where I am going with this…
The regular posters on that site have asked me to promise not to reveal any spoilers, villains, plot points about STID (other than anything already revealed in trailers and/or other official promotional material). I have done so.

Anyway, this is my take on things…

713. Rose (as in Keachick) - October 28, 2012

crazydaystrom – I apologize. I see that you do not like the reveal about Skyfall anymore than I do.

714. Aurore - October 29, 2012

711. Rose (as in Keachick) – October 28, 2012
#709 – I get the point of Bob Orci’s story. It is a bit sad that you still don’t get it.


If you were addressing me.
Notice how I started my post@ 708.


To make his point, Mr. Orci started by the end of the joke.

Spoiling it somewhat. I got it.

I was joking, and… hope he got my point….


715. Aurore - October 29, 2012

“I have not looked at the story in that way. I interpreted it to mean that when relating part of a story, you do not or should not give away the “punchline”, in this case, why the dog is only worth $50.”



And, my take on the joke is that, the farmer, disappointed that the dog had lied about working for the CIA was ready to sell it for practically nothing.

A talking dog was not an amazing thing,to him.
He would have been more impressed by a former CIA agent.

716. Aurore - October 29, 2012

@Roberto Orci

Funny joke, by the way.

‘Got another one?

If you do…Don’t “pull a Mallory” this time….That’s “criminal” ya know…


717. Aurore - October 29, 2012

“I was joking, and… hope he got my point….”


What point?

718. BoothManager(as in projection-booth) - October 29, 2012

In other news, I suspect that we might be seeing a trailer this Friday when Flight opens.
Just call it a well placed gut feeling.

719. Aurore - October 29, 2012

“In other news, I suspect that we might be seeing a trailer this Friday when Flight opens.
Just call it a well placed gut feeling.”


….’Not feeling it myself….

But, if you’re right, I wont be complaining.

720. Aurore - October 29, 2012

wont =won’t

721. Aurore - October 29, 2012

Hey wait a minute.

In fact, being a lying piece of sh*t, the dog might have, indeed, worked for the CIA ( no offense to any…ahem…”agent”).


722. Aurore - October 29, 2012


@ 712 was right.

The joke is even funnier…..when you really get it!
The farmer (and I ) did not get that that talking dog WAS (formerly) CIA!

That’s my story and I’m sticking to it, now.

723. Phil - October 29, 2012

Well, May 17th is wedding anniversary so we won’t be seeing it on opening day. That said, it matters not to me what details are or are not posted, I’ll probably still go see it., at some point after…

724. Aurore - October 29, 2012

Correction. 723.

@ 712 was right. = @ 712 was partly right.


725. Rose (as in Keachick) - October 29, 2012

Aurore – my mistake. Sorry. I meant to write post #707 – crazydaystrom.

Yes, I see. Sometimes we may refer to a person as a ‘dog’. I just took it to mean the animal canine, better known as a dog…LOL

Good one, Bob!

726. Aurore - October 29, 2012

“I just took it to mean the animal canine, better known as a dog…LOL”

Rosemary, if I understood you correctly, that is, indeed, what Mr. Orci meant; “the animal canine”, a ( real ) dog.

So, you were right.

727. boborci - October 29, 2012

713 — Rose

YOu win. Correct interpretation. Giving punchline away changes perception of joke or THE STORY as you move through it.

You cannot see a movie (or a story) the same way if you know where it’s going before you experience it.

728. Rose (as in Keachick) - October 29, 2012

Oh, OK, Bob Orci. That’s good.

I know I am probably going to piss some people off here (so what’s new – I seem to do it even when I don’t mean to…) but we know absolutely nothing about STID. Rumours are just that – rumours!

What has been going here has to do with people’s own perceptions, expectations and even obsessions and quite likely, have nothing to do with what the movie is about or who the guest actors are playing. Cumberbatch, Weller, Eve etc could be anyone. All we have been told is that Noel Clarke plays a married man with a child and Nazneen Contractor plays his wife and mother of the child. Anjini Taneja Azhar plays the little girl. There was debate (ref. Noel Clarke) as to whether these scenes make it to the final cut.

I do not have access to the latest comic, which may tell some of the background story to this movie, but I am assuming that I do not need to read the latest comic in order to understand this film.

What we do have is sight of the new Countdown comic’s cover with Kirk’s face shining bright on one side and in darkness on the other side. All this is open to interpretation which, at this point, almost solely depends on the individual’s perception of what he sees and what he imagines might be going on etc.

Yet there has been so many, many repetitive postings and general silliness and even nasty bitching at times about no-information, no-knowledge, no-anything. Oh Lord, the absurdity of it all. Trust me, we’re all going to look like such DORKS and frankly, I doubt that just some people will get to eat crow. It is more likely that the only food on the menu will be crow because of how many people will need to eat it, ie EVERYONE!

Bob, Alex, JJ…you are such *bad* people… *wicked*!…:))
(Just make sure I get my whimsical beagle scene!)

729. Aurore - October 29, 2012

“(Just make sure I get my whimsical beagle scene!)”

You might just get it.

That recent dOg joke was a clue. Surely.


“There was debate (ref. Noel Clarke) as to whether these scenes make it to the final cut.”

I wonder whether the debate was not a consequence to a joke he made in an interview ( listening to him, I thought he was merely joking):


730. crazydaystrom - October 29, 2012

@714. Rose (as in Keachick) –

Apology accepted though none was necessary.
I tell ya, I usually get these types of jokes but this one was lost on me. I’ve never claimed to be the brightest bulb in the marquee. Nice to have it all spelled out, as it were.

731. Rose (as in Keachick) - October 29, 2012

What? Are Porthos’s descendants secret agents? Hmmm?…:) I wonder if the CIA will still be around in Starfleet and the United Federation of Planets. Now there’s a worrying thought…

For some reason, I suspect that Bob Orci might have the inside gossip on this one. What say you, Bob? Don’t tell me that you are “keeping mum” on this as well…:)

Gosh, you must feel soooo weighed down!

732. Aurore - October 29, 2012


“A talking dog was not an amazing thing,to him.
He would have been more impressed by a former CIA agent.”

Should have read( even if I know better, now ):

A talking dog was not an amazing thing,to him.
He would have been more impressed with a talking dog formerly employed by the CIA .

733. NCM - October 29, 2012

Aurore, you remind me so much of my sister-in-law, it’s uncanny. And I used to truly believed she was an absolute one of a kind. All compliments, btw.

734. Rose (as in Keachick) - October 29, 2012

I just have to mention this. I am watching our TV news which is showing the massive storm, Sandy, hitting the east coast of America. Three million people are without power and they think those numbers may rise. The news is also saying that 60 million Americans are affected by this storm.

Anyway, all my best wishes to people in the US and hope that anyone who may come to this site are safe and well, especially if they live in the storm affected areas.

I just can’t believe what the wind did to that crane in New York. Holy moly!

735. Aurore - October 30, 2012

“Anyway, all my best wishes to people in the US and hope that anyone who may come to this site are safe and well, especially if they live in the storm affected areas.”

I join my voice to yours.

736. Aurore - October 30, 2012

“….All compliments, btw.”

All *sincere* compliments must go to Aurore(@716).
I believe she had the correct interpretation regarding the joke.

Aurore(@723 ,and, elsewhere…) just loves the idea of a “lying piece of sh*t” working for the CIA….


737. Aurore - October 30, 2012


“And, my take on the joke is that, the farmer, disappointed that the dog had lied about working for the CIA was ready to sell it for practically nothing.”


The farmer always knew the dog had never worked for the CIA.

He did not think much of liars.

Simple as that.


….All (sincere) compliments to ME…

738. NCM - October 30, 2012

LOL. My impressions aren’t based on this thread alone. A year ago I kept meaning to ask my crazy (love her to death:) sis-law if she was waiting for me to ask her if she was posting here. Though I believe you post from across the pond?

How much more mileage can you get out of that dog and farmer show?:)

739. Aurore - October 30, 2012



Woof woof ???

740. NCM - October 30, 2012

Aurore–can’t blame you for trying:)

I finally read the earlier strings on this thread and see I missed some good discussions, but what a downer, at a time when we should be enthusiastically looking forward to payoffs just round the corner, that it’s all talk of TM death and boborci’s retirement from fan interaction.

Bob, if you’re still out there… I have no idea what challenges you’re weighing, but I selfishly hope that when you balance the scales, we’ll be none the less for it. It would such a let-down if you were to withdraw before the new movie debuts, as I’m sure you know. I really hope you find the fixes you seek.

Whatever you decide, thanks for the entertainment; past, present, future.

741. Rose (as in Keachick) - October 31, 2012

#728 – “You win. Correct interpretation. Giving punchline away changes perception of joke or THE STORY as you move through it.”

Question for Bob Orci – I see the Countdown comic Star Trek Into Darkness is about to be released. Presumably this comic gives the story and background to the movie. Surely, much of what is in the comic could be considered spoilerish, so why release it six months before the movie’s first public screening date worldwide – 16 May 2013 (in Australasia)? Why not release the comic at the same time (May 2013) or a little bit later?

Just wondering…

742. Aurore - November 2, 2012

“In other news, I suspect that we might be seeing a trailer this Friday when Flight opens.
Just call it a well placed gut feeling.”

…Well, the movie opens today.

I want you to be right. I really do.
‘Still not “feeling it” myself, though….

743. Aurore - November 2, 2012

…..No matter what happens, I’ve got to say that I found it very interesting that you thought of that movie for a possible Star Trek trailer….


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