Exclusive: First Star Trek Into Darkness Trailer Also Premiering Dec. 14th [UPDATED] | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Exclusive: First Star Trek Into Darkness Trailer Also Premiering Dec. 14th [UPDATED] November 15, 2012

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Star Trek Into Darkness , trackback

Yesterday brought surprising news that the first nine minutes of Star Trek Into Darkness will be shown as a preview before IMAX screenings of the new Hobbit movie. But what about the first trailer for the movie? TrekMovie has exclusive news on that below.  

UPDATE 3: Wolverine report denied

This morning The Wolverine director James Mangold (via Twitter) debunked the report that a trailer for his film would be showing in front of The Hobbit. TrekMovie has reconfirmed that the 9 minute preview is still showing with the IMAX screenings of The Hobbit and we have reconfirmed that there is separate trailer being developed for release at the same time (for non-IMAX screens). We are still double checking on what film or films will be showing the Star Trek trailer.


UPDATE 2: Wolverine not Trek?

Another website (Lebanese Cinema Movie Guide) has reported that Star Trek: Into Darkness trailer wont be shown with non-IMAX screenings of The Hobbit, but instead there will be trailers for Man of Steel and the new Wolverine movie. TrekMovie is looking into this as we speak and should have another update when we get more. It is possible that plans have changed since this report. I am certain there is a trailer currently being developed and separate from the nine-minute preview. Stay tuned for an update.


Star Trek Into Darkness Trailer To Show With (non-IMAX) Hobbit Movie

TrekMovie has exclusively learned from multiple trusted sources that the first trailer for Star Trek Into Darkness will premiere with screenings of Peter Jackson’s The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey on December 14th. To be clear this Trek trailer is a completely different thing than the 9-minute preview of the beginning of the new movie which will be shown at IMAX screenings of the Hobbit film. Also TrekMovie has confirmed that the IMAX screenings will not be showing the trailer for Star Trek Into Darkness. So if you want trailer see non-IMAX Hobbit and if you want preview of opening 9 minutes see IMAX Hobbit.

Details are still sketchy on the trailer itself, however TrekMovie has confirmed it is not a condensed version of the 9-minute preview showing on IMAX. Specifically sources confirm the trailer contains material from many parts of the movie. We have also learned that this is a traditional theatrical trailer and not just short teaser trailer.

While the trailer will show exclusively with non-IMAX screenings of The Hobbit on the weekend of December 14th, it should be available with additional films by the following weekend, including Paramount’s new Jack Reacher film opening December 21st. It is also expected to be available online. If JJ Abrams sticks with tradition, the trailer would be released online after the first weekend. However, this is not the case for the 9-minute preview of Star Trek Into Darkness showing on IMAX screens. Sources tell TrekMovie the opening sequence preview will not be made available online.

Abrams continues to follow in Nolan’s footsteps

Before even their first Star Trek film was released, the JJ Abrams team have pointed to Christopher Nolan’s revival of the Batman series as a model of what they hoped to do for Star Trek. This approach appears to cover many aspects of how Nolan successfully reimagined the Bat, including marketing. For Nolan’s second film (Summer 2008’s The Dark Knight) a preview of the opening sequence showed with IMAX screenings of I Am Legend which (coincidentally) opened December 14, 2007. And the first theatrical trailer premiered with non-IMAX screenings of I am Legend

Hey JJ. If Christopher Nolan jumped off a bridge….  I keeeed.

Stay tuned to TrekMovie for more updates about the trailer and the preview for Star Trek Into Darkness.

UPDATE: Damon Tweets TrekMovie

Star Trek Into Darkness co-writer/producer Damon Lindelof has sent out a tweet to his followers linking to our story about the trailer. Just in case you needed even more confirmation.



1. Pat - November 15, 2012


2. Ben R - November 15, 2012

This just made my day!

3. KennyB - November 15, 2012


4. That Nutty Fanboy - November 15, 2012

And the great thing about that?
I come back from my trip to the US and Canada on the 13th. I basically drop into the Hobbit on my way home ;)

5. Jay Ley (The guy that never lost faith in Trekmovie) - November 15, 2012

Ohhh yeah!

6. Nick - November 15, 2012

Yay! I already have my tickets for the Hobbit for the 15th!

No Imax in my area, but the trailer will be just fine!

7. 5pock - November 15, 2012

So much excitement!!

8. cpelc - November 15, 2012

Had a funny feeling this might happen after hearing the news yesterday. It’s a pretty good movie to pair with considering there is actually quite a large percentage of the general population that got hooked on the LOTR films besides the fantasy/fiction fans. So this will be good exposure to both the “regular” Star Trek crowd and the moviegoing public at large.

Look for a preview of the trailer on Entertainment Tonight maybe in the week or days before.

I hope we get to hear some of the new score with the trailer as well.

9. (the real) Montreal_Paul - November 15, 2012

Hey MJ (the original)…

Still think it’s because of Star Wars? a couple of months ago (or was it last month?) Bob Orci said we would be getting a trailer during the Holiday season movies. And… bingo! Right on schedule. I think both the trailer and the 9 minute preview were already planned before the Star Wars announcement. Sorry, Charlie. ;) You know I like to tease you.

10. Gary S. - November 15, 2012

Good News.
I wanted to avoid the 9 minute preview.
Now,I can see the trailer and The Hobbit.
I hope there will be a spoiler area to discuss the preview so that we can avoid spoilers if we want to.

11. Calastir - November 15, 2012

a bone…FINALLY!

12. Walt Kozlowski - November 15, 2012

Things have been tight around here with the Mrs laid off. At least this will be a little more affordable than a long trip to an IMAX theater! Great News!

13. Platitude - November 15, 2012

Hobbit was already my most anticipated movie of the holidays, now I am even more excited for it. I saw Cloverfield just for the teaser trailer of Star Trek 09 so I’m glad that this time its actually attached to a movie I want to see :p

14. Thorny - November 15, 2012

Outstanding! The nine-minute sneak peak is cool, but too limiting at just IMAX theaters. Now the whole country (not just Trek fans) will finally know STAR TREK is returning to theaters next May! Woo hoo!

15. Disinvited - November 15, 2012

#9. (the real) Montreal_Paul – November 15, 2012

It’s one thing to have plans:


Quite another to have a major SW news event “stimulate” Paramount into releasing funds to allow you to implement them.

16. Emperor Mike of the Empire - November 15, 2012

Looks like Trekmovie is back in action along with Anthony.
I like this site!. it’s Exciting!.
I so can’t wait to see the first 9 minutes and to see the Trailer. When that happens. Trekmovie will blow up like a Warp Core breach!!!!!.

17. Anthony Thompson - November 15, 2012

Awesome news!!!

18. (the real) Montreal_Paul - November 15, 2012

15. Disinvited

Ummm… Huh? The article didn’t mention anything about that.

19. Emperor Mike of the Empire - November 15, 2012

Funny thing. Cumberbatch is playing Smaug in The Hobbit and a Villian in Star Trek Into Darkness. That guy is on top of Middle Earth and the Federation. Lol

20. a1071ccn - November 15, 2012

And we have lift off. Trekmovie.com when your good, your flipping brilliant. Less than a month to go and the wait is over. Think I might just crack open another bottle of romulan ale

21. Curious Cadet - November 15, 2012

It’s going to be so funny to read these forums the day after the premieres … Half the people will have seen the 9-minute preview but have no idea what else is in store for the rest of the film, the other half will have just seen the trailer and know about things in the rest of the film the others won’t, but not the details contained in an entire 9 minute segment. I can’t wait to watch the exchange of information unfold.

22. Emperor Mike of the Empire - November 15, 2012

Hey Curious Cadet. You just might make Engisn one day.

23. AJ - November 15, 2012

Mr. Pascale is on fire.

Good to hear we’re a month away from a trailer (The ST09 trailers were works of art in their own right). Hopefully, we’ll get the trailer in glorious HD QuickTime to watch on our devices while we wait for May.

24. Emperor Mike of the Empire - November 15, 2012

Anthony Pascale was given a clean bill of health by one Dr. McCoy.

25. Emperor Mike of the Empire - November 15, 2012

The Pascale is Back in Action!!!!!

26. Lt. Ricky - November 15, 2012

As if I needed MORE reason to go see The Hobbit…

27. Dee - lvs moon' surface - November 15, 2012

Hey Anthony … so glad you’re back!… ;-) :-)

btw… I want to see the preview of 9 minutes, the trailer and whatever else becomes available!

28. Phil - November 15, 2012

@9…of course, Mr. Bob was able to spill those details because he knew Disney was buying Lucasfilm!! it was all part of the grand master plan….

I kid…but there isn’t any connection between the Disney purchase and the marketing plan. The domain names were probably purchased prior to the announcement, too. All timed to come together in December.

29. PEB - November 15, 2012

the latest ongoing Trek comic about Keenser was actually good too. Makes you feel a little different about the character (althought I never thought he was as cringe worthy as some would like to make him out out to be).

30. Hat Rick - November 15, 2012

Anthony, don’t ever scare us the way you did the last almost couple of months; some of us thought you’d dropped off the face of the Earth. (Because, as we all know, the Earth is flat, and beyond this place, over there be dragons.)

Good get on these stories. I’m enjoying coming here more and more every day.

Needless to say, I cannot wait to see the trailer, although nine minutes of IMAX Trek does beat it by a nose. Or a Vulcan ear.

31. PEB - November 15, 2012

and his connection to the pre-altered timeline was a nice touch too.

32. Emperor Mike of the Empire - November 15, 2012

Top 5 reasons to see The Hobbit.
5. Cumberbatch is in both The Hobbit and Star Trek.
4. Great Story
3. It’s Shot in 3D.
2. Can’t wait to get to Middle Earth once again.
1. Star Trek Into Darkenss 9 Minute Trailor. Need I say more.

33. ronald - November 15, 2012

I have a legit question for Anthony: Will “LIEMAX” screens have 9-min preview or just regular trailer?


34. a1071ccn - November 15, 2012

Yes Anthony Pascale glad to have you back, can’t belive how long i have been coming to this sight. I was just before my mid 20’s and now pushing 30, love this sight so much. I don’t post often, but i do love the banter and the bitching between the posters lol

35. Craiger - November 15, 2012

Hope its a full trailer and not a teaser.

36. BulletInTheFace - November 15, 2012

OK, so we’re getting both a preview AND a trailer.

What will people complain about now?

37. olly - November 15, 2012

When will we get a poster. Someone on twitter said he’d already seen it. Hope Cumberbatch is on it.

38. olly - November 15, 2012

It came out today that Cumberbatch is recording Neil Gaiman’s cult story Neverwhere. Also if the Monty Python story is true thats another sci fi project.

39. Disinvited - November 15, 2012

#18. (the real) Montreal_Paul – November 15, 2012

What’s to say?


“Paramount Pictures, which has developed a reputation as the most frugal and conservative of Hollywood’s major studios”

JJ used Disney’s big news to get the Paratightwads to part with a buck. It didn’t hurt that he was on LA’s local morning news program declaring what a HUGE STAR WARS fan he was, either. As the article states, JJ feels the Paramount way causes him to be more “creative”. And after he got what he needed, he gives an interview saying he’d have to pass on directing Disney SW. Darn clever.

40. Justin Olson - November 15, 2012

@ 33. ronald:

That’s how they’re releasing this, in digital LIEMAX 3D. You didn’t think they would actually make 15-perf 70mm prints just for this 9 minute sneak peak did you? :)

41. porthoses bitch - November 15, 2012

Part of me almost wishes theyd hold the trailer to the end of the the hobbit.
gonna be having a geekgasm after the trailer and have to calm down the hobbit. Dont blame me Im the one who sat thru phantom menace s credits to hear Darth breath..

42. Emperor Mike of the Empire - November 15, 2012

I guess we can hold off on the title of the movie. The Search for Anthony Pascale. He was found back at work. Lol.

43. Phil - November 15, 2012

Wadda you mean a FULL trail, damnit!!! Where’s the teaser trailer??? I want it now now Now NOw NOW NOW NOW whahhhhhhhhhhh….

I’m bad. Sorry.

44. SarahSparrow - November 15, 2012

Do we know if the 9 minute preview is ONLY showing on Dec. 14th, or that weekend, or longer?

45. Joel - November 15, 2012

Not surprising. Had to figure they would launch a trailer around the same time as the IMAX preview. Seems likely that a poster and official website will follow soon. For all of the complaining, patience (and impatience), and angst over the lack of Star Trek news, things are going to hit warp speed in the next few weeks.

46. jvzilen - November 15, 2012

so how long until the first 9 mins is “Unofficially Released online” by a Pirate

47. TrekMadeMeWonder - November 15, 2012

I am almost embarrassed to tell my friends this “news.”

48. Ted C - November 15, 2012

@ #1 Huh?

49. njdss4 - November 15, 2012

Do you have to see it in 3D IMAX to see the 9 minute preview, or can you just go to a 2D IMAX and still see the 9 minute preview? I really don’t want to see The Hobbit, or any movie, in 3D.

50. gingerly - November 15, 2012

Ahhhh yeah. :)

Yeah, I’ll try my hardest to avoid that 9 minute preview, difficult as it may be.

51. Hugh Hoyland - November 15, 2012

Cool, I’ll watch both. The Star Trek action is kicking up!

52. Bill Peters - November 15, 2012

So Cool!

53. Red Shirt Diaries - November 15, 2012

MJ, this is all happening just as you predicted in early November. Well done!

54. Justin Olson - November 15, 2012

@ 49. njdss4:

Look at the official press release in the main article Anthony put up. It says 500 3D IMAX locations.

55. Jack - November 15, 2012

I still don’t think thar Star Wars announcement has much to do with this. But what do I know?

56. Sebastian S. - November 15, 2012

About time.
Can’t wait to see it. ;-)

57. DeShonn Steinblatt - November 15, 2012

I can’t think of anything to whine about. My life is without purpose.

58. LizardGirl - November 15, 2012

Oh my gosh…. he was right. 0_0

IMAX Hobbit: 9 minute blow your brains out trailer (or the longest teaser known to man)

Non-IMAX Hobbit and eventually the Internet: 2-3 minute full length trailer.


59. Commodore Redshirt - November 15, 2012

Best news I’ve had all day! Now I can start checking in on TrekMovie(dot)com 8 or 9 times a day like I did in the “before time”…

60. (the real) Montreal_Paul - November 15, 2012

53. Red Shirt Diaries

Pssst… not really a prediction when Bob Orci said we were going to get major news in November and a trailer during the Christmas season movies.

61. RenderedToast - November 15, 2012

No interest in seeing the first 9 minutes of the film, but very excited to have a trailer in less than a month. BRING IT ON!

62. Red Shirt Diaries - November 15, 2012

Montreal Paul, all I remember is JJ saying something “by the end of the year” I don’t recall this Orci statement of “November” that you reference — please provide a link to that remark?

63. crazydaystrom - November 15, 2012

I just can’t believe the Star Wars news was the impetus for any of this. The holiday season has long been the time when major films have been released and with trailers for upcoming major releases attached to them. All, or at least MOST, of this has been JJ’s and/or Paramount’s plan all along. Of course I could be wrong but until I hear official word of anything different, that is what I’ll believe.

In any case, re: these recent developements – HAPPINESS!


64. Richard - November 15, 2012

Man, this site is dead. Where is Anthony?!?

Oh, wait…. :P

All you whiners feel silly now???

65. Nony - November 15, 2012

Yay! I wonder if there’ll be a poster or any other advertising released before that? Website update on the day, perhaps, so people can come home curious from the theatre and have something to look up?

66. moauvian waoul - aka: seymour hiney - November 15, 2012

Oh shit. What are we going to complain about now?

67. (the real) Montreal_Paul - November 15, 2012

62. Red Shirt Diaries

Well, Red, it was said in here on one of the posts. He was commenting in one of these articles (not some other internet site) saying to stay tuned for big news in November. He also said that a trailer would be coming out for the Christmas movie season. Christmas movie season starts in December. JJ also confirmed that we would see a trailer by the end of the year. I’m not going to scan through thousands of comments on here over the past couple of months – you can scan through yourself. But I am sure other people will remember that as well. And if Bob Orci is reading this thread, he can confirm it too.

68. Jack - November 15, 2012

64. It won’t stop the whining, or my eventual whining about the whining.

69. MJ (the original) - November 15, 2012

Montreal Paul, Red Shirt,

My prediction was based that the Star Wars announcement at the end of October would force JJ and studio react in a big way with some major information within a two-week period. And that is exactly what happened. The only information I had when I made my prediction on 2 November was that JJ has promised a trailer by the “end of the year,” which is hardly early November, and which is hardly equivalent to the mega step of providing a 9-minute segment of the movie — that is groundbreaking, and is obviously responsive to the Star Wars announcement — this announcement of the 9-minutes of footage major event is the type of major response that I was anticipating withing the specific 14-day period when I said it would happen following the big Star Wars news.

PS: I don’t recall either this statement being attributed to Orci when I made my prediction on November 2nd? If that is so, please cite the reference for his statement?

70. MJ (the original) - November 15, 2012

@68. Well I’ve stopped my whining, Jack. I am one of the few people apparently who actually think this is awesome. And I am going to drive 1.5 hours to see this and The Hobbit in IMAX 3D in spite of all the whiners.

71. Jack - November 15, 2012

predictions, schmredictions.

72. (the real) Montreal_Paul - November 15, 2012

Hello… I mentioned it above… reference is a comment he posted on one of the articles here in Trekmovie. He said something like stay tuned for some big news coming up. This was before the whole Dull Wars story came out. I really don’t feel like scrolling through thousands and thousands of comments on each thread. It really isn’t that important and I really don’t care. I just remember reading it and anticipating what news he was talking about. He also talked about a trailer coming out for the Christmas releases. And I am not going to scroll through thousands of comments for that either.

73. Jack - November 15, 2012

70. It’s pretty great – I agree.

74. MJ (the original) - November 15, 2012

“He said something like stay tuned for some big news coming up.”

Well whoodie doo then. :-) You made is sound earlier like he said “November.” Major news coming up could mean December or January — fits right in with what JJ said: “before the end of the year.”

Again, I provided a very limited time-frame for my prediction of 14 days right after the Star Wars story took over the media. My prediction worked out exactly as I thought it wood. Of course you and anyone here is free to believe that I got lucky or that it was already in the works if they want to, but nevertheless it was proven to be correct.

I hear the doubters out there — sure. But my grandest prediction, the Khan one, which I made five months before Anthony’s groundbreaking investigative Trek journalism story — when that prediction is proven out next month — that is going to once and for all cement my predictions as LEGENDARY on this site. :-)

75. (the real) Montreal_Paul - November 15, 2012

74. MJ (the original)

I;m just saying that he mentioned the trailer bit before he mentioned big news coming up.

As far as your “Khan” guess … we’ll see. I feel it won’t be. Hope you eat crow as good as you gloat. ;) I don’t think it will be Gary Mitchell either. When I mentioned Mitchell, I was just using that as an example of how all your “clues” that lead you to believe it was Khan, could be used to lead it to being Mitchell as well.

I think he will be someone else. Canon, yes. But not Khan.

76. Red Dead Ryan - November 15, 2012

Yup, MJ (the original) was right on the money.

Remember too, that J.J Abrams and Paramount probably knew about the Disney acquisition of Lucasfilm and the “Star Wars” franchise days, even a week in advance. They work in Hollywood, and so it stands to reason then that they would be forced to release a trailer and a nine-minute clip several weeks earlier than planned.

Without the Disney news, we probably would have had to wait until January. Yes, Bob said by the end of the year, but he wouldn’t really have control over release dates. That is done by Abrams and Paramount.

77. Kowalski - November 15, 2012

1. I don’t like LOTR/Hobbit at all.
2. I don’t like 3D at all.
3. I’m not over keen on IMAX (but will see the new movie in every format I can get to).
4. I want to see the 9min preview.
5. I want to see the trailer too.

I can wait a few days for the trailer to appear online or see it at another movie (looking forward to Jack Reacher), but how do I get to see the 9 min in decent res? I’ll download the inevitable cam capture, but it’s such a shame that we can’t see it in HD online. Fail JJ.

78. Vulcan Soul - November 15, 2012

“Sources tell TrekMovie the opening sequence preview will not be made available online”

Not by Paramount at least, ha ha!

79. Phil - November 15, 2012

What Orci said was that there would be a fairly intense marketing campaign about six months prior to the release of the movie. A few of us did the math and figured it might be November or December, depending on if you were figuring an early release of STID in foreign markets.

80. Alain Prost - November 15, 2012

This had better be good

81. Richard - November 15, 2012

And sure enough #77: Kowalski, proves that people will still find reasons to whine.

The reason its not being put online is because they want to get more people out to see the Hobbit. Its called cross marketing. If they throw it online it defeats the purpose of having the 9 minutes out in front of the Hobbit. Its basic marketing 101. You sign a deal with the people behind the Hobbit to get your movie prologue previewed and in return the Hobbit people get exclusive rights to it which helps boost their ticket sales. Its ‘you rub my back, i’ll rub yours’.

82. Boldly Go to your IMAX Theaters 12/13 Midnight! (assuming midnight openings..) - November 15, 2012

On a technical note, will the IMAX-lite trailer be in the same format (48fps) as The Hobbit? Will the soundmix for the trailer be in the much touted Dolby Atmos format, too? If so, we’re in for a Trek tech fast… IMAX-lite..48fps and Dolby Atmos excitement.. boldly go!

83. noone - November 15, 2012

The wait is over! ;)

84. Richard - November 15, 2012

#82: No. Because the Star Trek movie wasn’t shot at 48fps like The Hobbit was. It was shot at 24fps.

In order to run a movie @ a certain frame rate, it needs to have been filmed at an equivalent frame rate.

85. Harry Ballz - November 15, 2012



86. Stephan - November 15, 2012


is there information if the trailer will be attached to the hobbit in germany as well? Im asking because I am planning to see the hobbt on december, 12th as a preview screening.


87. Nemesis4909 - November 15, 2012

It’s good to see that we’re FINALLY getting something, we will see some footage one way or another in just less than a month, I know I speak for many of us when I say “it’s about time!”

88. DonDonP1 - November 16, 2012

Cool! I shall see that trailer online on December 14th…and on Christmas Day, when I see Universal’s film adaptation of Boubil and Schoenberg’s musical “Les Miserables.”

89. Basement Blogger - November 16, 2012

Hey it looks like the Bob Orci is influencing us. I see above that Anthony is using Bob’s love of Triumph the Insult Comic Dog’s favorite phrase. ” I keeed. ” And by the way, Bob’s made me a fan of Triumph. What is next for us? Maybe Bob will have us believing in the Philadelphia Experiment. I keeeed. I keeeeed.

90. trekprincess - November 16, 2012

Brilliant news :):)

91. Basement Blogger - November 16, 2012

By the way, I was looking at Yahoo.com and “Star Trek footage” is trending as the number one search topic. Yahoooo for Star Trek. Um, sorry for that.

92. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 16, 2012

Can’t wait to see the first trailer, fingers crossed that it will indeed reveal that Cumberbatch is NOT Khan.

Lets just hope its not a case of phantom menace where the first trailer is incredible and then the movie is a bit of a let down. In anycase cant wait to see the poster in a few weeks as well.

93. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 16, 2012

I am going to laugh if 3 mins of the 9 mins shown is actually Leonard Nimoy singing a update on his Classic “Bilbo Bagins” song. :)

94. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 16, 2012

I assume that i will see the STID trailer on 13 December when the Hobbit first screens here in NZ.


Yet another reason to see the Hobbit…

I know I said that I thought that Star Trek should run alongside Peter Jackson Tolkien Hobbit movies and now it has come true. OMG!

95. BeatleJWOL - November 16, 2012

@77 “but how do I get to see the 9 min in decent res?”

Well, when the movie comes out, I think the resolution will be up to par on those first 9 minutes… ;)

96. janekliebe - November 16, 2012

Does anybody know if this news is valid for Hobbit showings outside the US as well, e.g. Germany or UK?

97. Tom - November 16, 2012

How can a fan of both Star Trek and the Tolkien Legendarium survive this movie-going experience?!! Cheesus!

Also, Cumberbatch!!! That guy… I have no words. I want his life. Smaug (and Sauron) and a Star Trek villain? You win at life my friend.

98. K-7 - November 16, 2012

“I know I said that I thought that Star Trek should run alongside Peter Jackson Tolkien Hobbit movies and now it has come true. OMG!”

Rose, so its OK for you to gloat about your ideas coming true, but when others do the same you get a free pass on attacking them?

I really don’t see much of a difference here between MJ gloating about his ideas coming to pass and you gloating about yours?

99. disgruntled - November 16, 2012

MJ, stfu about your goddamn ‘predictions’ – nobody cares, I’ve been a member here for all of 2 weeks and already you start to come across as a bit of an idiot. Cool it and enjoy the ride.

100. K-7 - November 16, 2012

@99. You, a new member telling someone to “shut the f up” already — you’ll fit in just fine here with MJ and Keachick. LOL

101. Richard - November 16, 2012

Welcome everyone, to the 1st annual TrekMovie poster awards. I am your host, Some Guy on the Internet. Let’s get right to the awards.

The “Has to have the last word at all costs” award goes to: Original MJ

*clap clap*

Next up, we have the award for “Least number of days until complaining about Anthony’s absence” goes to: Guy who makes up different aliases bemoaning the lack of updates any time there’s a lull.

*clap clap*

The award for “Poster most likely to complain in a thread about something they don’t even care about to begin with” goes to: Prometheus

*clap clap*

Finally, the award for the poster who probably isn’t who they say they are at least in the past month: boborci

*clap clap*

102. Mark Lynch - November 16, 2012

Oh boy, we need a proper forum here so that we actually know who the hell is posting…

As for the Hobbity thing. I have no desire to see the movie as I am not a Tolkien or fantasy genre fan, I find it very plodding and dare I say a bit boring.
However, my other half loves this stuff. So I have my IMAX 3D tickets already purchased for the 17th of December at the BFI IMAX in London.

She gets to see what I am sure will be an epic movie, I will get to see some Star Trek stuff in IMAX 3D.

A win for both of us. All I need is a good book to read… ;-)

103. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 16, 2012

K-7 Watch your mouth. #99 disgruntled did not say “shut the f up” – you did!

If I remember correctly, you are now the second poster to say that phrase on this site. The first poster to do so was Red Dead Ryan. What makes you disgusting is that you made up what another new poster wrote by using this phrase and discounting the “disgruntled” actually wrote.

As far as my gloating, well, I don’t know. Am I? MJ is always the one who likes to tell everyone “See, I told you so” even when something is often quite self-evident. Attaching a preview and trailer to the Hobbit movie was among a number of possible options. I just called it the way I saw it.

104. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 16, 2012

Edit: meant to write “…WHAT “disgruntled” actually wrote.”

105. disgruntled - November 16, 2012

Can’t WAIT for this trailer… excited excite excited… woooo!!

106. K-7 - November 16, 2012

@103. Rose, you are so quick to jump immediately on people like me without even clearly reading the post firsts. Go back to disgruntled’s post and see where he says:

“MJ, stfu about your goddamn ‘predictions’ ”

Hey Rose, just what do you think “stfu” stands for?


So please read the posts next time before you jump all over me criticizing me for “watching my mouth” and calling me “disgusting.”

Apology accepted!

107. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 16, 2012

I actually thought stfu meant “stuff you”. Gosh, learn something new everyday…:(

It may not be that complimentary, but it is certainly not as rude as “shut the f up”.

Perhaps you should verify that abbreviations mean the same thing to everyone before you jump all over them. The fact that I did not know that stfu could also be interpreted as you have done does not make stupid, hence the “Duh” comment was unnecessary.

Apology accepted!

108. Richard - November 16, 2012

Why arguing on the internet is a gigantic waste of life:

P1 = Person #1
P2 = Person #2

P1: I think this.
P2: You’re wrong.
P1:No I’m not!
P2: Yes you are.
P1: No I’m not, you are!
P2: No I’m not, YOU are!

*50 years later*

P2: You’re still wrong.
P1: No I’m not.
P2: Yes you are…

109. P Technobabble - November 16, 2012


Yes, an entire culture based on Python’s “argument” sketch.

110. chrisfawkes.com - November 16, 2012

Exciting stuff.

If the first nine minutes of Star Trek Into Darkness are as good as Star Trek then showing it with the Hobbit should hook a lot of people who otherwise may thing to see it.

I’m hoping the marketing pays dividends in terms of further increasing the fan base.

111. Hat Rick - November 16, 2012

I know I’m going to sound strange, but I intend to buy a ticket to see The Hobbit at an IMAX theater just for the nine minute Trek preview, and then, once the preview is over, I’ll probably leave the theater without actually seeing the movie.

Don’t tell me I’m wasting the cost of a ticket. I’m not, if you think about it.

I’m not really a big Hobbit fan, first of all, so why would I want to sit through it?

Also, if you consider that there will probably be 10 minutes of trailers, that’s 19 minutes of my time in the theater, right there. Plus, if you include time to drive there, find parking, line up and/or get the prepaid ticket from the machine, maybe buy a popcorn, then you can easily add an hour to that.

So, 9 minutes of the Trek preview, plus 10 minutes of previews, plus an hour or so for the process — tha’ts about an hour and twenty minutes, which is the average length of your typical theatrical release.

So I’d be getting my money’s worth even if I don’t see The Hobbit.

Rationalization is fun.

112. chrisfawkes.com - November 16, 2012

Sit through ten minutes of the Hobbit then walk out.

You may end up staying and get more than your money’s worth.

Being twice as rational is twice the fun.

113. Martin - November 16, 2012

When are we getting the first image such as promotinal photos of the film. usally before the trailer.

114. Chap - November 16, 2012

I don’t want to see a 9 minute preview. Show me the movie!!!

115. VulcanFilmCritic - November 16, 2012

Kind of strange cross-marketing. Is there really THAT much overlap between Star Trek fans and LOTR fans? Why not just release the regular trailer with as many holiday films as possible, the way the James bond films are marketed. That’s the kind of appeal the powers-that-be want anyway. They want a franchise that is desired by a wide ranging audience. Not the nerd niche. Right?

116. Trekboi - November 16, 2012

That’s a bit better, I will see the preview not the first 9 minutes

117. AJ - November 16, 2012


Aw, Come on Hat Rick…See “The Hobbit!”

118. Hat Rick - November 16, 2012

112, ChrisFawkes.com, that will bring it to one hour and 29 minutes in the theater. Okay, that’s reasonable, I could see myself doing that.

I have to say, all my lack of enthusiasm for The Hobbit is based on my complete lack of knowledge of the entire franchise. Mention “The Two Towers” and I’m more likely to associate that phrase with the late WTC towers in NYC. I know that’s awfully pedestrian of me, but there it is.

I do know that Peter Jackson is terrific director and that his films in the franchise have been monster superhits of the century. Yet aside from Bilbo Baggins purely as a name, and as a novelty song that I believe Leonard Nimoy sang at one time, and aside from a few pages of the Tolkien story I saw as a child, I just don’t have much vested in Frodo and the gang. Who IS Frodo, anyway? I suppose if he added a few starships to the mix, that’d be a different story.

Frodo, Frodo, Frodo. The name is familiar, I must say. To the Wikipedia!

119. Hat Rick - November 16, 2012

^^ @117 (AJ). I could be convinced.

But first, I’m going to look up the Bilbo Baggins song by Nimoy.

120. trekmaster - November 16, 2012

I guess it’s gonna be a teaser trailer.

121. Adolescent Nightmare - November 16, 2012

This will be everywhere. I’m going to see the 9 minutes before it’s gone.

122. Classy M - November 16, 2012

Another snippet from Chris Pine on STiD: http://www.radiotimes.com/news/2012-11-16/chris-pine-on-a-heavy-science-fiction-scene-with-benedict-cumberbatch-in-star-trek

123. JRT! - November 16, 2012

Apparently,it’s not a teaser trailer. If you read the article then you’d know it says traditional theatrical trailer. Hope it’s good!


124. BulletInTheFace - November 16, 2012

Anyone who pays almost $20 to see the nine-minute preview and then leaves without watching The Hobbit has got issues.

125. filmboy - November 16, 2012

Man, JJ you got some serious love for all things Nolan. You use the same marketing plan as he does and even do it on the same day he did for The Dark Knight. I am certainly not complaining, it will be good to finally get an idea of what we are getting with this sequel. I will probably skip the IMAX screening of Hobbit and instead opt for the non-IMAX one.

I will say this though, my money is still on Khan as the villain. It stands to reason that JJ will follow Nolan’s model and resurrect the most prominent villain from the Star Trek universe and redefine him. I also think we are going to get an ending that leaves things in an interesting place, just like Nolan did in TDK.

At this point I wouldn’t be surprised if in the third film Kirk gets his back broken and gets exiled yet again to Delta Vega, where the villain has monitors set up and will force Kirk to watch as he trashes his beloved Enterprise. And we find out the villain in the third film is the daughter/follower/exiled protege of Nero. If it worked for Nolan, right? I kid of course.

After next month we will have a better idea where JJ and company are going with this sequel. Until then, I say let the speculation fly.

126. Basement Blogger - November 16, 2012

@ 119

So Hat Rick you won’t stay for the Hobbit unless you see Leonard Nimoy sing “The Ballad of Bilbao Baggins.” You wish is my command. Here’s Leonard singing the song and Leonard at a convention signing albums where he gives a couple of phrase of it.

Now stick around, watch the Hobbit and get your money’s worth.

The groovy Leonard Nimoy video.

Leonard at a convention gives a phrase of the song.

127. Phil - November 16, 2012

@107. Right…

128. AJ - November 16, 2012

I love seeing the name “Gary Mitchell” bandied about on entertainment websites all over the place in speculation as to who will be the villain in STID. First of all, what a name for the nemesis: “Gary.” Spongebob’s pet to many younger viewers..

Second of all, you’ve come a long way, baby: from TOS’ second pilot to 2012.

Not bad.

And to Hat Rick: Screw Wikipedia on “The Hobbit.” Buy the book.

129. crazydaystrom - November 16, 2012

124. BulletInTheFace –
“Anyone who pays almost $20 to see the nine-minute preview and then leaves without watching The Hobbit has got issues.”

I must say that made me laugh out loud!

130. Stephen - November 16, 2012

Well Crap! I plan to see Hobbit in Imax!

131. Travis - November 16, 2012

Oh Boy! Since when did ” Star Wars ” ever come into the same topic as Star Trek? NEVER! Stop putting Star Wars on a Star Trek thread people! JJ Abrams has already said he is NOT interested in doing Star Wars so you little people… please put your lightsabers away!

Now on to topic you people are really going to be disappointed because yet again JJ Abrams said he wants the Star Trek sequel to follow a path like Christopher Nolan did with Batman. Heres a hint… Nolan= Joker, Abrams= Khan… you bring back the most iconic villian and BOOM you have a major sucess! I look forward seeing John Fredwick Paxton again trying to destory the Federation like he tried to with Archer but he failed! ( PS: Remember JJ and crew wants this film to have a terrorist plot theme to it… Hence Paxton was a terrorist when he tried to destory the beginning of the United Ferderation of Planets ) In this case he knows of a secret… a very big powerful secret floating that i like to call the Botany Bay… sounds like a Augment story to me huh??? Get ready Trek fans… Kirk vs. Khan 2013 is only the beginning into Darkness of Space!!

132. Andrew Lynch - November 16, 2012

@102 I would suggest reading something by Tolkien ;)

133. Hat Rick - November 16, 2012

@ 126 (Basement Blogger): Too late — I already Googled and found the “best” version of it on YouTube. I must say that I lived through the 1970’s and never quite understood how monistically groovilicious it was then. It’s only when I see old reruns of The Partridge Family, the Brady Bunch, and, last but not least, YouTube videos of a certain Spockian actor singing Tolkien’s entire oeuvre in but the space of minutes in the company of wigged-out children of all ages that I come to the conclusion that I really miss it. That and those crazy Krofft kiddie shows, which were akin to Sesame Street on LSD.

For good measure, I clicked on the related video of Nimoy on What’s My Line, the guessing game with blindfolded panelist-celebrities. It’s fascinating how he was almost called out as an actor from Mission Impossible, which of course he was, though now much better known for ST — how odd that the panelist thought it was Greg Morris! Why would the panelist even make the connection with Mission Impossible?

Don’t miss the mini-interview where he talks about his plans, including lectures at colleges, etc., about Star Trek and SF in general. No mention of “In Search Of…” yet — perhaps too early.

Anyway, to answer your implied question, Maybe I will.

@ 128 (AJ), if I ain’t got time for the movie, I’ll probably skip on the book. But I take your meaning; it’s a classic.

Hat (“Crazy for Trek”) Rick

134. Stargazer54 - November 16, 2012

“I like this site . . . its exciting!”

Glad you’re back Anthony.

135. Disinvited - November 16, 2012

#111. Hat Rick – November 16, 2012 & 112. chrisfawkes.com – November 16, 2012

It amazes me that people will drop $20 to see a flick but if it turns out to be less than expected will hesitate to ask for their money back and/or a free pass to see another movie. Paid $6 to see JJ’s STAR TREK opening weekend (Would have paid more to see it on film as JJ recommended but the local theater went total digital so I opted for the cheap show.) As expected, the cutting edge system screwed up after they blew away the Narada and totally lost voice sync. By the time the two Spocks met each other they were speaking with each other’s voice.} I settled for, not one but, two non-restricted passes good for much more expensive opening shows. In fact this digital cinema system’s been so marvelously “reliable” that I’ve enjoyed many bargains on such shows.

To be fair to digital cinema, I’ve had a lot of “bad” experiences with cutting edge systems and STAR TREK and STAR WARS premiers starting with ST:THE MOTION PICTURE. All of which were resolves with “golden” passes.

Note to movie goers in general: If you are there on a film’s opening day/weekend and the experience is less than it should be, don’t settle for passes that have opening day/weekend restrictions. Especially if you paid inflated prices for the privilege.

136. The Professor - November 16, 2012

Counting down to the STID Trailer!

137. Red Dead Ryan - November 16, 2012


K-7 posted something, you didn’t understand what he meant, and are now demanding he apologize? He rightfully demanded your apology, and you somehow, in a very arrogant fashion, tried to turn it around on him and make it his fault!


138. Kirk, James T. - November 16, 2012

I don’t agree for one second that this has anything to do with Star Wars. As the article clearly says and as Abrams and co have all said in the past, way before anyone ever knew about Star Wars. They are really trying to emulate the Batman franchise in how tey go about reviving Star Trek, marketing and so on…

I think Abrams was always going to do this, he has never said he wants to keep it a secret until you go and see the movie but has always said as well as the other members of the supreme Trek court that they would release information when the time was right to do so… That time was always going to be Christmas and was more than likely to be before The Hobbit to reach the maximum number of people.

Remember Paramount and Warner Bro’s. must have been in negotiations long before we all knew about Star Wars for Paramount to get 9 minutes of Star Trek added to the Warner Brothers Hobbit reel.

I’m happy that the trailer is going to be shown on the regular version of The Hobbit too. Well, look at this, when Lord of the Rings was out, there would have been no chance of getting a Nemesis trailer attached to something as big as this, now look where Star Trek is going. I hope hope HOPE its worth it :)

139. K-7 - November 16, 2012

“K-7 posted something, you didn’t understand what he meant, and are now demanding he apologize? He rightfully demanded your apology, and you somehow, in a very arrogant fashion, tried to turn it around on him and make it his fault! Pathetic!”

Agreed! Rose is a person who can’t even admit when she wrongly accuses someone of something. I was actually being critical of disgruntled to for saying ““shut the f up” – that was the whole point of my post. Then she comes back, guns blazing, accusing me of cussing that at disgruntled, telling ME to watch my mouth and calling me disgusting.

This is just unbelievable bully-like abuse here, full of twisting things around and personally attacking someone for something they did not even do. This is just not right.

How about her just saying, “Oh, sorry, I didn’t know what that acronym was; OK, now I see that you were actually just reporting what disgruntled said.”

But instead, I now get another mouthful of her abuse. And then she says:

“It may not be that complimentary, but it is certainly not as rude as “shut the f up”.”

Are you kidding me? That is EXACTLY what stfu means? It is the same rudeness. Is a-hole less rude than asshole? Is SS less rude than saying Gestopo. I think not.

What a jerk!

140. K-7 - November 16, 2012

@138 “I think Abrams was always going to do this, he has never said he wants to keep it a secret until you go and see the movie but has always said as well as the other members of the supreme Trek court that they would release information when the time was right to do so.”

Then you are ignoring the entire history of how he likes to keep things as secret as possible for as long as possible on his movies. Look at his history — this is obviously a major departure from how he likes to release information on his movies — that is a fact!

And so given this fact, you need to ask yourself what is different this time around, and why is it happening now? Well, there you have it — the SW announcement!

If JJ did not have this long history of super-secrecy, you would have a point here, but that is just not the case.

141. Mad Man - November 16, 2012

Good. I would rather watch a trailer than the 9-minute opening scene. I’m glad I’m going to see the Hobbit in 2-D anyways.

I wonder, how ticked off would you be if, even after watching the trailer and 9-minute scene, we still do not know the name of Cumby’s character? That it’s still ambiguous if he plays a classic TOS or new character?

Knowing how Abrams works, I wouldn’t be surprised.

142. Ensign RedShirt - November 16, 2012

141 Mad Man –

Bob Orci already said Cumberbatch is playing a character from canon.

143. Jack - November 16, 2012

142. He did?

140. Secrecy, yes. That means no script leaks and no details outside of official announcements. But that doesn’t mean he doesn’t market his films. His movies have trailers and posters and websites and massive ad campaigns and contests and media blitzes just like other big movies.

Dec will be 5 months before release — that’s about the time advance marketing usually starts…

144. Elias Javalis - November 16, 2012

Official Poster please!

145. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 16, 2012

Before you both go on your own warpath of attacking me, perhaps we could ask what “disgruntled” meant by the acronym “stfu”.

“stfu” still looks like “stuff you” to me. You keep insisting that “stfu” could only mean “shut the f up” even when I clearly wrote that I did interpret the acronym to mean something else and not what you keep insisting it means. Now, you are accusing me of twisting and effectively calling me a liar. I have not twisted anything. The fact that you could only see one possible meaning in the innocuous “stfu” speaks more to your lack of imagination and projection of your own generally unkind state of mind.

It is interesting how two or three (MJ, RDR and K-7) of you like to have a go at me, one person, each one backing up the other.

I suggest that three of you (MJ (the original), RDR and K-7) refrain from “talking” to me.

146. Anthony Pascale - November 16, 2012

Rose and everyone else. Perhaps chill pills are a good idea. Its Friday. Go out, relax, have a nice weekend. Don’t get so worked up over stuff said on the internets

147. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 16, 2012

Star wars isnt being released for another 30 months, the lucasfilm announcement has no bearing on a movie that is due out in 6 months.

Failing to properly promote a movie less than a year out, that on the other hand does.
and as much as some refuse to accept this, most big SUCCESFUL tentpole movies get a teaser trailer 9-12 months before release.

148. BJ (The Freshmaker) - November 16, 2012

I’m going to make a risky prediction here, and when I am proven right, I will be king of this site. Okay, now this is based solely on the fact that there will be a Star Wars movie coming out in 2 1/2 years, but I predict that sometime in the next 6 to 8 months, JJ Abrams will release a new Trek in theaters. Remember, you heard it from me first. I’ve scoured this site and have seen nothing about it.

149. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 16, 2012

Rose I know what you mean, they have done the same thing to me as well in various threads over the past 2 weeks.
Just ignore their posts, and dont respond to them and like Anthony said dont let stuff on the internets get your worked up.

150. ruue - November 16, 2012

This is GREAT news!!!
I surely will watch the HOBBIT during the first week
So much looking forward to the trailer
P.S. Its about time

151. boborci - November 16, 2012

148. LOL

152. star trackie - November 16, 2012

M.J. Tucker — you are not fooling anyone. You have been as big a problem here in baiting and fighting with people here recently as anyone else. Such hypocrisy is distasteful to me. You are part of the problem.

I would add that if people want to avoid the troublemakers here, then please add M.J. Tucker to the list that includes Rose, MJ and Red Dead Ryan. Collectively, these four people have been responsible for 75% of the acrimony on this site recently.

Everyone, just ignore all of these four peoples’s posts. That would be my recommendation.

153. VOODOO - November 16, 2012

It’s about time…The Star Wars movie that comes out in 2015 is getting more press than the Star Trek film that comes out in a few months.

154. disgruntled - November 16, 2012

boborci, I think, well, actually, I’m certain there are ‘villains’ in this movie as opposed to a central baddy. Uhura is absolutely integral to the plot. I think she had a previous romantic encounter with Cumberbatch which leaves her vulnerable to manipulation. She’s essential to the whole story.

155. Lostrod - November 16, 2012


Amen. :)


156. Ensign RedShirt - November 16, 2012

152 – star trackie

You are 100% on point. Cheers!

157. MJ - November 16, 2012

@155 @148

Making fun of some people is one sure way of shifting the discussion away from having to deal with the reality of what they are saying. Congrats on your lame tactic — ha! ha! ha!


Bob, why, suddenly, do you choose this issue to get all excited and defensive about when you have pretty much ignored everyone on Trek sequel questions for the last year and half? The timing here of you waking from your “answering fan questions on the sequel” hibernation mode here certainly seems odd?

158. Ensign RedShirt - November 16, 2012


Bob got excited and worked up because he couldn’t get over the idiocy on display.

Do you honestly believe you know more about Paramount’s intentions than Bob does? Seriously?

159. MJ (the original) - November 16, 2012

“Bob got excited and worked up because he couldn’t get over the idiocy on display. ”

Hey newbie, there has been much, much wackier and totally off-the-wall stuff said about the sequel by fans here over the last year and half, and Bob was silent THEN. Thanks for helping to reinforce my point here!

160. Jack - November 16, 2012

I really need a scotch.

Just saying.

MJ, so are you pissed off? Why? This is good news, and what a bunch of us expected (something by Christmas). The Hobbit has been burbling constantly out of the speculatron, as the logical movie to carry a Trek trailer. Was the announcement hastened slightly by Star Wars? Possible, I suppose. Who knows. Well, Bob does. But what difference does it make, ultimately? Or are you trying to argue that Abrams suddenly realized the error of his ways and was like ‘shit, we should probably start marketing this thing because, well, f**king Star Wars.’

As of this second, I think I’ll stay away from the preview — which will kill me. But I’d rather go into the thing without knowing too much. That TDKR preview (and maybe it was just that Bane scene) actually got me wanting to see the movie a little less. Same with those Amazing Spiderman trailers that were basically a visual cliff’s notes for the entire (awesome) movie. I may ask loved ones to handcuff me to my toilet during all IMAX show times for 6 weeks or so.

161. MJ (the original) - November 16, 2012

Jack, I am not pissed off at all about the IMAX preview I am really excited about this, and will be paying to see the IMAX preview and The Hobbit.

What I am doing though, is responding to all of the people who seem to be freaked out at that SW likely played a role in this. Here are a couple of observations that I am seeing here:

1. Most of us in our community here who think SW played a role here have been advancing some reasonably compelling circumstantial evidence to support our views.

2. Most of us in our community here who don’t think SW played a role have resorted to making fun of people, with a few even lowering themselves to engaging in personal attacks.

So Jack, what would a truly objective person take away from looking at the behavior of these two groups here?

162. Ensign RedShirt - November 16, 2012


You didn’t answer my question. Do you honestly think you know more about Paramount’s intentions than Bob? Or Anthony? Are you intimating that they’re lying?

163. Anthony Thompson - November 16, 2012

It seems to me that it is MJ who is in defensive mode now. lol. His little band of followers are abandoning him one by one.

164. MJ (the original) - November 16, 2012

@162. No, I don’t know more than Bob or the studio. As to lying, I won’t go there. It is very possible that JJ and the marketing folks are the only ones in the know about how AW influenced the decision. In fact, it might have a been a simple call from Spielberg to his buddy JJ in perhaps September, telling him to keep it quiet, but the SW would be moving to Disney by the end of October. Then, JJ could simply have played like it was “an oganic decision” to start with the IMAX ideal, and get everyone, including Bob, on board, without even mentioning what he knew about SW. So Bob and others may not even realize that SW influenced this at all.

Is it also possible that Bob can’t mention information to us about this because it violates his non-disclosure agreements — sure it is! And that might seem like lying to us, but Bob would have a legal basis to have to deny it, so his personal integrity would be secure.

@163. And you, my friend fit nicely into Group #2 in my post @161, i.e.,

“Most of us in our community here who don’t think SW played a role have resorted to making fun of people, with a few even lowering themselves to engaging in personal attacks.”

165. MJ (the original) - November 16, 2012

meant “SW” (for Star Wars) above, not “AW”

166. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 16, 2012

I have not made fun of anyone, but some have certainly made fun of me over the past few weeks, eh, MJ?

There is NO compelling substantial evidence of anything. The fact that I refute your statements makes me a bad person in your eyes and you have as a result resorted to unkind and personal attacks on me, starting with the Chris Pine references.

I really thought that it was one of the imposters or even someone from another site, JustJared, making these comments about my liking of Chris Pine. However, it really was you, MJ (the original)! WHY? WHY? WHY? What has my liking of Chris Pine got to do with you? What sort of person carries on like this?

Yet you still continue unabated, seeming to lack any kind of self-awareness or conscience… Now, you have started on Bob Orci. What the ?

I apologise, Anthony Pascale. I know you said that we need to take a chill pill. I just cannot understand what is going on with MJ and why he feels the constant need to twist the truth, among other things.

I am not the source of the acrimony on this site!

167. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 16, 2012

#164 – You know nothing about anything, MJ. Nobody does. So stop assuming/presuming all this stuff. If you feel that you have been personally “attacked”, it is because you have been insulting. This post #164 is one of those really insulting posts that you have directed towards Bob Orci, JJ and the team.

Also, leave off the psychobabble. Wow!

168. disgruntled - November 16, 2012

*yawn* you guys wanna download Skype or something and fight it out there?

boborci, any nerves for the first trailer release?

169. Disinvited - November 16, 2012

For the research impaired:

Way back in June:


Bob said “No exact date, but super soon!” in response to an interviewer’s question as to when we’d see the 1st teaser trailer.

A month later:


Bob said “So certainly fall at the latest for starting to role this movie out.”

As little as four months ago, the marketing plan for this film was definitely still up in the air. I’d say that, given those two end points (soon in June – fall at the latest), anyone that got within a stone’s throw of December 14th did a fair job of predicting.

Cutting it that close to the end of fall, sure seems as if somebody was reacting to something.

170. BJ (The Freshmaker) - November 16, 2012

My mom says I’m cool…and the best tongue kisser she ever had! Don’t believe me? Go upstairs and ask her!

171. Jack - November 16, 2012

Maybe it did, maybe it didn’t. Wait for Bob’s self-published tell-all in 2026. I.K.

172. MJ (the original) - November 16, 2012

“Bob said “No exact date, but super soon!” in response to an interviewer’s question as to when we’d see the 1st teaser trailer.”

I love Bob, but he was also the guy who told us 2.5 years ago that they were all meeting in an LA hotel to finish the script. And then JJ was the guy who committed to the movie coming out this past summer. There is some research for you!

The Supreme Court makes great Trek movies, and I love them for it, but they are habitual procrastinators. It took the Star Wars announcement to get them off the dime to get the marketing campaign going in a big way. That goodness for George Lucas, or all we would have at Christmas is a teaser.

@167. Yea, whatever, Keachick. One request — can you just use a sentence or two to insult me please. Hiding your insults in your maze of pages and pages of rhetoric is very inefficient. Just let loose on me in a sentence two and get your catharsis and endorphin release for slamming old MJ again out of the way in a manner that wastes less of both of our times please. Is that really too much to ask?

173. K-7 - November 16, 2012

I second the motion for Rose to be much more efficient in her posts where she is personally attacking us. It’s hard to have to read so much of her long-winded posts to dig down to where she is name-calling me or accusing me of things I never even did. Mean what you say, and say what you mean — she should take that approach instead of these obtuse pontification experiments that seem to always go awry.

174. K-7 - November 16, 2012

“My mom says I’m cool…and the best tongue kisser she ever had! Don’t believe me? Go upstairs and ask her!”

Folks that don’t believe SW influenced this — here is the kind of stuff one “on your side” posts here. Are you proud of this? This guy supports your position.

175. MJ (the original) - November 16, 2012

And BTW, for the record, I NEVER posted anything about Chris Pine and Keachick recently as she claims. Wasn’t me. I mentioned this is a post yesterday, but she chose to ignore it, of course. Getting personal like that is her style, not mine.

176. Red Shirt Diaries - November 16, 2012

I’d like to put thirds on that motion, please.

177. MJ (the original) - November 16, 2012

The motion is carried! ;-)

178. Disinvited - November 16, 2012

#172. MJ (the original) – November 16, 2012

I’m still in the “JJ used the Disney WARS’ club to knock some sense into the Paratightwads” camp myself. Otherwise they would’ve announced the trailer simultaneously with the preview in a much less disorganized manner, and not one shoe dropping and then another. Obviously these people know how to market and release movies. I just think they follow smart business practices and won’t say anything every time Paramount cinches Spyglass’ belt.

179. MJ (the original) - November 16, 2012

@178. Interesting take. That’s another plausible scenario on how SW influenced all of this.

And you are right, it was too disorganized with the trailer being announced later like they hadn’t really considered it, and Bob Orci finally choosing this particular topic to all of a sudden address fan comments on the production…it was all so obviously reactive.

180. Luke - November 16, 2012

On another note, everyone should just watch this video. It is awesome.

181. Luke - November 16, 2012

Well… Here is the video…


182. Jonboc - November 16, 2012

179 “it was all so obviously reactive.”

Yeah…so ummm…obviously reactive. :\ it couldn’t possibly have been a PR decision made long ago. I mean, just because JJ shot the movie in the IMAX format and there just happened to be an opportunity to run it before one of the most anticipated movies in years doesn’t mean he would use that opportunity the same way Nolan did so successfully with Batman. I’m sure it never crossed his mind until news broke that Disney was lining up a new Star Wars movie…for 2015. So obviously reactive. lol

183. thomas vinelli - November 16, 2012

J.J says this 9 min whatever will not be posted on the internet… i bet someone will post it

184. star trackie - November 16, 2012

Jonboc, you are forgetting this is JJ we are talking about — the most uber-secret director of our times. This is completely out of character for him to to do something like this. It is just not in in JJ’s DNA to release 9 minutes of any film of his in advance.

185. Elias Javalis - November 16, 2012


Its tempting! Nine minutes can be Special Effects heavy and I don’t want to know!!. I ll skip it. The trailer will suffice!!

186. K-7 - November 16, 2012

It is kind of funny that so many of the same people here who refused to ever accept Anthony’s inside information that Khan is the villian in the sequel, are now taking as gospel Anthony’s inside information that the IMAX preview is not at all related to the Star Wars announcment.

If Anthony’s information is so good for you all now to accept, then why wasn’t it good enough for you all to accept with the Khan statement? Do you all have some special powers of clairvoyance that allows you to KNOW which pieces of Anthony’s information is right,and which pieces are wrong?


187. Elias Javalis - November 16, 2012


Perhaps JJ’s becoming soft for the fans :):)!!

188. Red Dead Ryan - November 16, 2012


Good points, K-7! The people on this site who keep doubting us and accusing us of not believing Anthony are the same ones who automatically dismiss Anthony’s Khan sources.

In other words, the hypocrisy on this site is astounding!

C’mon, you can’t have it both ways, guys.

189. Jonboc - November 17, 2012

184″This is completely out of character for him to to do something like this. It is just not in in JJ’s DNA to release 9 minutes of any film of his in advance.”

I have to disagree. I think it boils down to the content of that those first 9 minutes. I can guarantee you the first 9 minutes won’t reveal anything. I suspect it will be a cliffhanger of sorts…a balls-to-wall opening that will suck you in fast, leave you hanging and leave you begging for more. All the while, revealing nothing. JJ knows what he’s doing and knows how to market. He doesn’t need any nudging from Disney.

190. Jonboc - November 17, 2012

#186. “It is kind of funny that so many of the same people here who refused to ever accept Anthony’s inside information that Khan is the villian in the sequel, are now taking as gospel Anthony’s inside information that the IMAX preview is not at all related to the Star Wars announcment.”

It’s sure is kinda funny, MJ-err I mean, K7. Funny that no one really has given it any thought…well, except those that have trumpeted the news that they predicted this mythical “star wars” connection and crave some type of recognition and validation for that conclusion. Amusing indeed!!

191. Captain Hackett - November 17, 2012

I am curious… Will it be available in Canada?

There are two things that we can except from a nine minutes-long trailer next month:

1) It will come out on Torrent world as soon as it is filmed on shakycam.

2) Thousands and thousands of comments from us will be made int his site on the same day and it may get this site overloaded.

192. Optimistic Doodle - November 17, 2012

I really really hope those 9 minutes won’t hit or spoil the web.
Unless these 9 minutes are opening credits ;-)

193. Harlock - November 17, 2012

“…the opening sequence preview will not be made available online. ”

Wanna bet?

194. (the real) Montreal_Paul - November 17, 2012

161. MJ (the original)

What colour is the sky in your world? Your second “point” isn’t true. Actually, your first “point” isn’t true either.

1 – SOME (NOT most) people think SW had a play in the news of a 9 min teaser.

2 – Some other people think it was planned all along and that SW announcement had no bearing on it.

195. (the real) Montreal_Paul - November 17, 2012

186. K-7

I, for one, do not believe the “inside source” regarding the Khan RUMOUR. Mainly because another “inside source” claims that it could be Gary Mitchell. What makes one more right than the other? Both are rumours and nothing more.

As for your second point – When news of the 9 minutes of footage appearing in theatres came out, a few people immediately thought it was due to the SW announcement. But at the same time, people felt that it was planned all along… had nothing to due whether Anthony said it or not. It’s 5 months before the movie comes out and studios usually start promoting the release 5 to 6 months before. JJ seems to take his cue from Nolan in how he is doing things… not from a SW announcement. The SW movie doesn’t even come out for years. By the time Trek comes out in May, people will have already forgotten about the SW thing until they start production.

196. (the real) Montreal_Paul - November 17, 2012

191. Captain Hackett

INNERspace on the Space Channel confirmed that it will be attached to the IMAX Hobbit screenings in major Canadian cities. ie. Toronto, Montreal, Calgary and Vancouver.

197. Ahmed - November 17, 2012

@ 196. (the real) Montreal_Paul – November 17, 2012

“191. Captain Hackett

INNERspace on the Space Channel confirmed that it will be attached to the IMAX Hobbit screenings in major Canadian cities. ie. Toronto, Montreal, Calgary and Vancouver.”

Great, I was a bit worried that they may not show it here in Calgary.

198. K-7 - November 17, 2012

#190 “It’s sure is kinda funny, MJ-err I mean, K7. Funny that no one really has given it any thought…well, except those that have trumpeted the news that they predicted this mythical “star wars” connection and crave some type of recognition and validation for that conclusion. Amusing indeed!!”

Well, Rose-err I mean Jonboc, you are certainly free to ingore the cirmcumstntial evidence that supports this.

199. K-7 - November 17, 2012

#195 “I, for one, do not believe the “inside source” regarding the Khan RUMOUR. ”

And what then if that particular source is the one that provided Anthny the “Iknow for a fact there is no SW connection” information that Anthony is so confident about? Then, according to your theory about the Khan story — in which you believe that source is probably lying — well, there is a good chance he’she’s probably lying again here then, isnt there?

You see what a slippery slope this is, right?

200. Ahmed - November 17, 2012

Any ideas when the official site will go online ?

If they are going to release the trailer online a week after its theatrical release, then I’m guessing it should be done from the official movie website.

201. steve - November 17, 2012

Boborci, got a question about the decision to release the 9-minute IMAX preview. I’m one of those who’d rather walk into a movie completely unspoiled, so I’ve been a pretty strong supporter of JJ’s efforts to reveal as little as possible about the new film.

But showing the first 9 minutes is a pretty huge step; how much of the story will be given away? I’m now contemplating how I’m going to dodge any mention of the 9 minutes of footage for 5 months… Will the “meat” of the storyline still be a surprise for those who have seen the first 9 minutes? (I’m hoping that opening 9 minutes might be an old-school Bond movie type opening, a great sequence that doesn’t connect too much to the ensuing plot…)

202. Ahmed - November 17, 2012

@ 201. steve – November 17, 2012

“(I’m hoping that opening 9 minutes might be an old-school Bond movie type opening, a great sequence that doesn’t connect too much to the ensuing plot…)”

I like that idea & hopefully the preview will turn out this way & not be connected to the movie plot in a major way.

203. MJ (the original) - November 17, 2012

@201 “But showing the first 9 minutes is a pretty huge step.”

Yes, it is completely unprecedented for JJ Abrams. Agreed!

204. Captain Hackett - November 17, 2012

No. 196 – Montreal_Paul

Sweet Jesus! :)

205. (the real) Montreal_Paul - November 17, 2012

199. K-7

My opinion about no SW connection is my own. That is my belief before any “inside source” said anything to Anthony. No slippery slope here.

206. MJ (the original) - November 17, 2012

@205. Reminds me of when I was a kid and use to believe in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny. ;-)

207. (the real) Montreal_Paul - November 17, 2012

206. MJ (the original)

We all know that Christmas is a touchy subject for you. ;)

Believe what you want MJ – if you like to think you are right about everything. Go right ahead. The rest of us will live in the real world. :)

208. MJ (the original) - November 17, 2012

@207. LOL — good response, MP!

209. MJ - November 17, 2012

Just got m IMAX HFR Hobbit tickets for December 15th!

YES !!!!!

210. boborci - November 18, 2012

201. good question.

what do you think?

211. boborci - November 18, 2012

I think it is time for us to come clean. A few weeks ago, the very day that the Star Wars deal was announced, I happened to be out having dinner with Harrison Ford on an unrelated project. I asked him if the Star Wars thing was true because I didn’t believe it. He just winked, but it was enough for me to immediately call JJ and Damon and Brian to tell them that we better drop our previous plan of not advertising our movie at all and instead drop all our plans to put out as much material as soon as possible, otherwise the unshot Star Wars movie’s marketing could soon overtake us. They immediately agreed, and we were lucky enough to get the first ten minutes of the movie in totally releasable form, amd we were also lucky enough that no one had planned on doing anything significant in front of the Hobbit, one of the most anticipated movies of the season. So we were able to stuff our newly minted nine minutes there. Sorry for lying to you. Won’t happen again.

212. boborci - November 18, 2012

and though we all knew about the Star Wars deal ahead of time, in total violation of SEC rules governing insider trading, we invested heavily in Disney just in case, though we didn’t really believe it and took no action nor made any announcements in anticipation of Star Wars announcement. Luckily, our stock has gone through the roof. sorry, again, for not being honest with the 3 of you (4?).

213. Ensign RedShirt - November 18, 2012

I heart Bob Orci.

214. dmduncan - November 18, 2012


They don’t seem to get that real conspiracies are backed up by multiple independent corroborating sources of evidence that make belief in any given real conspiracy rational to believe.

215. Aurore - November 18, 2012

“….and though we all knew about the Star Wars deal ahead of time, in total violation of SEC rules governing insider trading, we invested heavily in Disney just in case…”

I KNEW IT !!!!!!!!!

Hack writers and…crooks!



216. Hat Rick - November 18, 2012

Whew! No need to worry about spoilers in the preview, fellow travelers in Trek.

Why, I heard it from a very reliable source (my invisible friend, who is always next to me, whispering suggestions and things, and who looks just like giant blue bird, except invisible, of course) that JJ actually shot ST 2013 and its sequel simultaneously, explaining the delay (just a cover story).

This he borrowed from the Superman movies, the first two of which were shot at the same time (yes they were — look it up).

So (sez my invisible source), the nine-minute preview is actually of the sequel AFTER the 2013 movie. That way, no spoilers.

That’s my story, and I’m (not) sticking to it.

By the way, Blue Bird says hi.

217. Ahmed - November 18, 2012

Trekweb reported that Zachary Quinto might not return after Star Trek Into Darkness. In his interview with EW, Quinto said:

“While the Asylum experience has been rewarding, Quinto says he’s also ready to “go in a different direction” with his career after Star Trek Into Darkness hits theaters next summer. “It’s like an era of association with certain roles – a specific part like Spock, or a kind of part, like Sylar — is coming to an end,” he says. “I think it’s safe to say this will be the last serial killer I’ll be playing for the foreseeable future.””


I was under the impression that the actors signed contract for 3 movies. But it seem that Quinto is not interested in returning as Spock!!

218. Aurore - November 18, 2012

“Trekweb reported that Zachary Quinto might not return after Star Trek Into Darkness. ”

Roberto Orci, and some of his friends, are going to jail soon.

….Of course he’s not returning as Spock….


219. Aurore - November 18, 2012

Regarding Mr. Quinto.
I posted this on another thread :

Maybe he’ll have to “clarify” what he meant as he did the last time there was a similar rumour .

Memmmmmmmoriiiiiies :

“i have been inundated with questions and confusion about a comment i made during an interview with wired – about the new atari Star Trek online game – in which i said i am stepping away from Trek for the next two years. obviously i will be a part of any upcoming films… reprising my role as spock. what i meant was that in the meantime i won’t be making any public appearances related to the franchise – or doing any more auxiliary projects pertaining to the trek universe. i will be focusing my efforts on other projects and preparing to shoot the next film – which will be released in june of 2012… two years from now. hence the no Trek for two years remark. worry not trekkers. it was a misunderstanding of context. i am not spock. but i am spock. all at the same time.

ll & p.



220. steve - November 18, 2012

“201. good question.”

“what do you think?”

Honestly I’m not sure what to think. My guess is that the 9 minutes will at least hint at the main storyline, but still leave lots of surprises for later. Unfortunately for a spoiler-phobic person such as myself, that would still be too much…

221. Hat Rick - November 18, 2012

I’m looking forward to backtracks in the future saying that this was just a misinterpretation and that what he meant was that in addition to Spock, he will also be associated with a more diverse set of characters.

The “curse” of being a Trek actor is being stereotyped, according to a lot of the “backstory” books I’ve read. Chris Pine has escaped that trap, since he’s Jack Ryan, FDR Foster, and even Jack Frost. Has Quinto?

Other than Sylar, he’s known basically for Spock. He’s probably just interested in getting roles that show the diversity of his acting abilities. And it can be done, no doubt about it.

Before he broke into the movies,Tom Hanks was known for being one-half of Bosom Buddies. George Clooney was known for playing a janitor on a TV sitcom. And now look at them.

I think he’s looking for a breakout role that he can call his own. Spock is a very big character and tends to overwhelm even the ablest actor.

Perhaps one day, Quinto will write a book: “Nimoy Wasn’t, and Neither Am I.”

222. Hat Rick - November 18, 2012

^^ I meant “typecast,” not “stereotyped.” D’oh!

223. Disinvited - November 18, 2012

#211. boborci

I thought something was up when KTLA preempted my ALIEN CONSPIRACIES!

Of course, as anyone on the knoll knows, whenever the MAN comes our with an official story, they can’t help but let slip a little of the truth that’s out there. Brace yourself for a pommelling of queries as to whether the missing tenth minute is why TREKWEB is reporting Spock walks. ;)

224. dmduncan - November 18, 2012

Well, if Zach calls it quits, you can softly shoehorn his twin into the role of Spock without missing a beat:


225. Ahmed - November 18, 2012

Actually what I’m thinking, if Zach & other actors decide not to come back for the 3rd movie, then Paramount should go back to the Prime universe & give us a TNG/DS9/VOY movies.

226. Disinvited - November 18, 2012

STAR TREK: The Tenth Minute

While on a routine science survey, a procedure that should have taken 10 minutes is completed in 9…and then all hell breaks loose. Romulans and Klingons accuse the Federation of violating the new Cloaking Ban Treaty. A crewman is murdered and Spock and McCoy determine it could only have happened during those missing 60 seconds. Kirk has to wade through real and/or imagined conspiracies around every corner…

227. Jonboc - November 18, 2012

225. That just isn’t an option. they need to nurture the folks who supported JJ’s vision and brought almost 400 million dollars to the box office as opposed to the fans of TNG’s 24th century Trek….who stayed home in droves, bringing a paltry 67 million or so, to the franchise…effectively nailing the coffin shut on future films set in that universe.

228. K-7 - November 18, 2012


Funny, Bob! But not offense, the writing team would not be let in on such info.

I find it very odd though, that most of us pretty much grew tired of discussing this controversy two day ago, but here you are again, showing up and being very defensive again about this? Why so defensive? Hmm! Very interesting!

229. NerdRage - November 18, 2012

Why can’t Trek fans understand that the Prime Universe is done? Other than comics and novels and maybe games, we will not see that universe again? Part of reason we got what we did in 2009, was so the masses could go see a Star Trek movie and feel like they didn’t have to know much about any back story. If they switched back to the Prime Universe, the only people that will know that going in are the fans and the rest will be confused. Paramount is not going to do that and why should they? The” non-fans” are what made the 2009 movie make money, not the “fans”. If they go back to trying to cater to fans, it will just slip again. With that said, I have been a Trek Fan for nearly 40 years and yes I do miss the Prime Universe and it feels a little sad that we won’t see those characters on screen again, but if thats what needs to be done to help keep it alive, then I am for it. I don’t understand the fans that just want more of the same. Why crave just fan service and pandering? It’s like all the Star Wars fans out there that are convinced that whatever SW novel they liked HAS to be what Episode 7 is about. Why do you want something that has been done before? Don’t you want something new and fresh? Or is it you just want your “knowledge” validated? Things need to change in order to grow. I see posters on here constantly going on that “so and so, just doesn’t get what Trek is really about!” I thought it was at it’s core the philosophy of IDIC. Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations. At its heart Trek is about change and moving forward. Not standing still and living in the past.

230. Ensign RedShirt - November 18, 2012


Bob and Alex are also executive producers on the film, so they would be privy to those things.

You’re wrong. Own up to it.

231. Disinvited - November 18, 2012

#230. Ensign Redshirt – November 18, 2012

According to the IMDB there are 12 production credits. If you are correct as to their title that’s not even upper tier. But that’s beside the point. The press releases clearly state these were Paramount decisions. So unless Bob has further clouded his Disney S.E.C. investigation by taking on a Paramount executive position too, there’s plenty of wrongness to go around here.

232. Disinvited - November 18, 2012

Here’s what I believe. As a result of the Disney deal, JJ held in his hands treatments in regards to a STAR WARS directing offer. Within the confines of an NDA, Paramount knew about that offer before it broke in the press. JJ used that (perhaps, subtly or perhaps not so) in negotiating the best deals he good for all his projects, including Trek.

233. Disinvited - November 18, 2012


“…best deals he good…” should be “…best deals he COULD…”

I think my subconscious is trying to tell me something.

234. D-Rock - November 18, 2012

@ 225.

It’s amazing people think this will/would/can happen. Amazing.

235. Aurore - November 18, 2012

So you met with George this past summer and he told you about his plans to make another trilogy?
Yeah, last August, he asked Carrie and I to have lunch with him and we did. I thought he was going to talk about either his retirement or the Star Wars TV series that I’ve heard about — which I don’t think we were going to be involved in anyway, because that takes place between the prequels and the ones we were in and, if Luke were in them, he’d be anywhere from a toddler to a teenager so they’d get an age-appropriate actor — or the 3-D releases. So when he said, “We decided we’re going to do Episodes VII, VIII, and IX,” I was just gobsmacked.


Last August.

I took it to mean August 2011.

Assuming I did not misread the quote, I think Mark Hamill knew a lot back in August 2011.

And, although he found out about the deal online, it is possible that others in Hollywood knew more than he did. Especially when Georges Lucas started talking about retiring.

I’m not saying that these people, whomever they may be, necessarily knew who would end up owning the Star Wars franchise. But, in my opinion, they might have known, or at the very least, suspected that Georges Lucas would eventually sell it.

Then, the deal was announced…and surprised many.

Except, perhaps, people like that historian who thought the deal was rather predictable since according to him, Disney buys “things that look like Disney itself”.

Or people like those Mr. Lucas was referring to, in a recent interview, when he said:

“When I first made Star Wars everyone in Hollywood said; “Well, this is a movie Disney should have made…”

(Link if authorized, here):


236. Ahmed - November 18, 2012

@ 234. D-Rock – November 18, 2012

“@ 225.

It’s amazing people think this will/would/can happen. Amazing.”

What I was saying, that if the current team didn’t come back for a third movie, where would Paramount go from there, will they reboot again or go back to the Prime universe or choose a third way.

But, I find it surprising that Zachary Quinto will make such a comment even before the sequel is out.

Again, if the main cast already signed 3 movies contract, then this is all just talk & nothing will come out of it.

237. Disinvited - November 18, 2012

#236 Ahmed

Depending on the contract, there can be all sorts of time limits that possibly could be exceeded by another “extended” production. I seem to recall that at one point in time there was talk of breaking the script down into two. Maybe the third movie’s been filmed silmultaneously? I’d have to check the actual head count, but I did get the feeling that a larger number than normal of “name” actors were being hired for non-recurring roles?

238. Anthony Pascale - November 18, 2012

to clarify Bob, Alex and Damon are all producers and co-writers. Not ‘executive producers’. They have been involved in all aspects of the film in pre production, production and post production. They are not just the ‘writing team’

I know its hard to dispel a conspiracy because denials only seem to fuel the people pushing the conspiracy. Of course there is an irony here with Bob now moving from theorizer to alleged conspirator. However, this one really just doesn’t pass the smell test. But hey, who am I to get in the way of people enjoying fan fiction. As I always say, there is no right way to be a fan. So have at it I guess.

239. MJ (the original) - November 18, 2012

Anthony, I do see your point. I do find it amazing here though how many fans are picking and choosing which pieces of your inside information they believe when it comes to your reports that they like or don’t like. For example, many of the people here who are accepting your assurances that SW had nothing to do with this Trek IMAX preview are the same people who choose to believe that you were somehow misled/duped by your inside sources on your groundbreaking news story last Spring when you confirmed that Khan was the villain???

So these fans “pick and choose” which stories of yours to trust you on based simply on their personal beliefs about what they want to be true. That is a naive way for those folks to go through life. Right or wrong, I like to look at the information and circumstances that makes up each major item that comes up, and try to keep my feelings or intentions of scoring points here against other posters out of the equation.

As far as this issue goes, I am done with it. Someday we will all learn conclusively “what went down” here — I can be patient and wait to learn that later. I recommend to others that we move on from this issues as well — at this point I am actually becoming quite bored now in discussing this, even though Bob Orci, for some unknown reason, seems obsessed and very defensive with it, and is trying his bes to keep this discussion going???

Keep up the great work, Anthony — its great to have you back!!!

240. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 18, 2012

Oh Bob Orci – Thank you for coming “so clean”…to have finally been able to get that off your chest and confirm so many people’s suspicions, like MJ’s, must be such a relief and surely a source of much joy…;)

To be honest, I have been rather downhearted of late… but coming online just a few minutes and reading your dissertation of events surrounding STID’s promotional material has brought cheer again. All is well…:)

I almost came to the conclusion that I may not need either you and/or Chris Pine to hold my hands while I watch this Star Trek tumbling into darkness, what with a man in a suit going into a blindingly bright volcano etc, however that is not the case. I will still that essential handholding by yourself and/or Chris Pine.

Anyway, Bob, love you…you’re the best!

241. MJ (the original) - November 18, 2012

BTW, Keachick, you keep conveniently ignoring my posts where I have responded to you on this “making fun of me and Chris Pine” stuff. I repeat, if there are any recent posts labeled, “MJ (The Original)” or “MJ” that make fun of you, THOSE ARE NOT MINE. When I want to be critical and contrast my arguments, I will use my usual wise-ass brand of sarcasm and overly clever remarks, but personal attacks like you are describing is not how I roll. I never posted that crap your are describing…period!

242. (the real) Montreal_Paul - November 18, 2012

239. MJ (the original)

No, MJ. You feel you are so right about everything… the villain being Khan, SW announcement having an affect on the Trek news, etc. On what basis? What make YOU believe that? Your own hypothesis is based on how you looked at certain facts and coincidences.

The same can be said for myself and others. I look at the facts and clues and base my hypothesis on that. For it NOt being Khan, for the knowledge of how movie & TV marketing works, etc. And yes… even listening to what Bob Orci said about when to expect a trailer.

To say that this is a naive way to for an opinion is BS. One could say that the way you have a very egotistical way of looking at things. I’m just calling it as I see it, MJ, based on what I read and based on what I see.

What makes your opinion and hypothesis any more right mine or anyone else? We all have different opinions on things… you have to respect that. I respect your theory, I may not believe it, but I respect it. When you cut people down for not having the same opinion or view as yours, frankly, you come across as very egotistical and condescending. No offense. :)

243. Disinvited - November 18, 2012

The LONE PHASERWIELDERS will be ever vigilant with tricorders at the ready to capture that missing 10th minute. If we ever see those opening minutes and time jumps from minute 9 to minute 11 skipping over minute 10, we’ll know who to hold responsible.

244. Disinvited - November 18, 2012

FWIW MJ listened to my take on the information, acknowledged it did not agree with his but found it equally plausible. I can’t deduce from this that he’s as totally obtuse as some suggest. Maybe he openly enjoys this more than some would care to have him, but I’ve just accepted that as enthusiasm for the exchange of ideas.

245. Hat Rick - November 18, 2012

@Disinvited (237), when you said,

“Maybe the third movie’s been filmed silmultaneously? I’d have to check the actual head count, but I did get the feeling that a larger number than normal of “name” actors were being hired for non-recurring roles?”

I want to clarify that I was just kidding about that possibility. My post at 221 was satirical and an attempt at humor, particularly since I, too, am inordinately concerned about spoilers in the 9 minute preview.

(By the way, Blue Bird told me to post this. ;-) )

(Wouldn’t it be strange if my entirely made-up rumor turned out to be true and in fact there WAS a third JJ-ST movie already in the can? Given the passion for secrecy around this movie which rivals that of the NSA and CIA combined, perhaps that would be the Ultimate Secret to end all secrets and why trailers have been so late to the table (in the view of some fans).)

(Also, the name of ST 2013, STID, suggests that there will be a journey out of it, which invites speculation about the third sequel. Blue Bird sez, BTW, that the third sequel has already been named: “Star Trek Flips On the Light Switch” … and it’s a doozy….)

246. MJ (the original) - November 18, 2012

@242. Sorry you feel that way, Montreal Paul. My response was really intended to bury the hatchet with Anthony on this topic and move onto other topics. However, Bob Orci, you and some other folks who disagree with several of us on this SW topic seem to keep getting extremely and unusually defensive about our theory about the effects of SW on the IMAX preview?

But in the final analysis, we obviously have differing views on this, and I agree with you that is no reason to cast dispersion on each other, and if my comments came across to you that way, I apologize. And I have never claimed to know the definitive final answer to any of these issues, but I do certainly reserve the right defend my theories, and many people here have resorted to personal insults and sarcasm regarding my views — so. believe me, I know exactly how you feel when you tell me that you perceive me behaving in that type of negative manner.

Anyway, I am no longer sure what we are arguing about here? For my part, as I mentioned in my response to Anthony, I am getting bored with this topic and ready to move onto other stuff here.

@244 “FWIW MJ listened to my take on the information, acknowledged it did not agree with his but found it equally plausible. I can’t deduce from this that he’s as totally obtuse as some suggest. Maybe he openly enjoys this more than some would care to have him, but I’ve just accepted that as enthusiasm for the exchange of ideas.”

Thank you disinvited — I appreciate it!

247. Hat Rick - November 18, 2012

^^ 216, not 221. Sorry.

248. star trackie - November 18, 2012

#241 – MJ (the original) said: “BTW, Keachick, you keep conveniently ignoring my posts where I have responded to you on this “making fun of me and Chris Pine” stuff. I repeat, if there are any recent posts labeled, “MJ (The Original)” or “MJ” that make fun of you, THOSE ARE NOT MINE. When I want to be critical and contrast my arguments, I will use my usual wise-ass brand of sarcasm and overly clever remarks, but personal attacks like you are describing is not how I roll. I never posted that crap your are describing…period!”

MJ, it is very telling for me of her intentions here in how Rose has still has not responded to you on this. You have made multiple attempts to provide this information to her, but she seems to be deliberately determined to avoid having to address this with you?

I guess it must be more convenient for her if she can continue to portray you as an evil villain with her playing the poor victim card?

249. boborci - November 19, 2012

228. I am also the producer, dude.

250. boborci - November 19, 2012

249. as is the rest of the court, as I just saw that Anthony pointed out. Don’t mean to sound defensive. I just like ridiculing the ridiculous.

251. Disinvited - November 19, 2012

#247. Hat Rick.

Sorry, I thought it was clear I was having fun with the whole “Spock walks because they cut his tenth minute riff.”

But something I’m a little more serious about is I have JJ regularly appearing live on my morning news saying what HUGE SW fan he was and is. ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY telling me he’s looking at SW treatments. Everyone reporting he was offered a SW directing chair. And yet some want me to believe that he is absolutely not using “the force” that any SW fan would get from going through that in his creative processes and business dealings – especially with regards to his Trek. That doesn’t pass my smell test.

252. Aurore - November 19, 2012


Georges = George

253. Max - November 19, 2012

If there happened to be Klingons in STID should they or should they not have brow ridges? I mean do we go along with the Enterprise Affliction /diversion story line where they lose the ridges? Or do we go along with Gene who said they were always supposed be be there but they didn’t have the time and budget? (And before someone mentions DS9 Trails & Tribblations, that was never meant to be Cannon, just a bit of fun.)

254. Disinvited - November 19, 2012

#253. Max

To my mind, your words cause a question to arise via a paraphrase:

Was Cannon never meant to be just a bit of fun?

255. MJ (the original) - November 19, 2012

@249 @250

I get why you would need to say what your saying.

Looking forward to a great movie, Bob.

Thanks for your response!

256. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 19, 2012

MJ – I’m not sure you get much of anything – who knows. It’s really not my problem.

As for your repeating that you did not say anything re me and Chris Pine that occurred a few weeks ago on this site, what I find more interesting was that, while you were always very quick and adamant about pointing out which posts were not your at the time, you said nothing about these particular posts with your name on them at the time. This was in spite of the fact that I noted my objection to them. Only now, do you claim that they were not your posts.

So you must see how your sudden denial now, instead of at the time, must seem to me, given everything else that has gone down here. OK, I will accept that what you are now saying is true and that you had nothing to do with those other posts in question. However, I do not believe any apology from me is in order.

I have only just come on line, however i would ask anthony Pascale to monitor/warn/delete? this Red Dead Ryanne posts which mention my name, Rose and that of Chris Pine’s. My sense of humour has become somewhat jaded of late so instead of laughing as others might, I am just annoyed and offended. Maybe my humour re certain matters may return; maybe not.

Thank you.

257. MJ (the original) - November 19, 2012

“As for your repeating that you did not say anything re me and Chris Pine that occurred a few weeks ago on this site, what I find more interesting was that, while you were always very quick and adamant about pointing out which posts were not your at the time, you said nothing about these particular posts with your name on them at the time. This was in spite of the fact that I noted my objection to them. Only now, do you claim that they were not your posts.”

First of call, I have been trying since late last week to tell you in multiple posts that those were not mine, but you kept ignoring me?

Secondly, at one point a couple weeks back, I was so frustrated with the impostor, that I took four days off from this site. I guess that was when this might have happened? I never saw these posts your referenced, and I certainly didn’t make them. That is not my style — I know you don’t like me, but when have a I ever “got personal” with people like that? Answer = Never.

That wasn’t me. You can choose whether to believe me or not, but I am sleeping well at night knowing I have been 100% truthful on this.

And I agree with you completely that Antony should perma-ban the Red Dead Ryanne (not the real Red Dead Ryan) creep.

See, we can agree on some things.

Best Regards,


PS: Neither of us need to apologize. Let’s just move on, and I for one, will try to be nicer to you — sorry if I have been “grumpy” of late.

258. sk8r_gurl - November 19, 2012

Just saw this on IGN:

“Additionally, it looks like previous reports of a Star Trek Into Darkness trailer accompanying The Hobbit were incorrect. Look for a different trip into darkness, however, with the trailer for The Hangover 3 coming the last week of December.”

(full article: http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/11/19/wolverine-and-man-of-steel-trailer-dates)

What’s the good word TM, think we’re still getting a regular trailer with the Hobbit?

259. (the real) Montreal_Paul - November 19, 2012

246. MJ (the original)

I hope you didn’t take what I said with any offense… I was just trying to explain how I saw it and I feel that you are a no BS kind of guy. I think since no one here knows what to expect for the movie… all interpretations and opinions are valid. As for being defensive, if you look at it from the other way, one could say you and the Khan believers get defensive too. It all depends at what side you are looking at it from.

I, too, am looking forward to another great Trek adventure. It is fun to speculate and think everyone tends to get a little emotional when someone slams their opinions and beliefs… it’s only human nature.

I respect your point of view, MJ, and I am glad that we can agree on a few things.

260. Disinvited - November 19, 2012

#258. sk8r_gurl

It’s off to the Lindelof Twitter feeds we gooooooooooooo!

261. BulletInTheFace - November 19, 2012

What the heck? Now TrekWeb is saying the trailer will NOT be attached to THE HOBBIT. Grrrrrr!

262. MJ (the original) - November 19, 2012

“What the heck? Now TrekWeb is saying the trailer will NOT be attached to THE HOBBIT. Grrrrrr!”

SEE !!!!!

The folks who claimed this has all been in the works for month now have egg on their faces. This shows that this whole marketing approach was pulled together recently — in line with the response to the SW news.

If this had been done months ago before the SW annocument, something like this would NOT be happenning here. This reeks of last-minute procrasination style marketing in response in SW, just as a number of us have tried to point out.

263. Red Dead Ryan - November 19, 2012



264. K-7 - November 19, 2012

#262 and #263

Vindication guys! Vindication!

265. Anthony Pascale - November 19, 2012

There is a website (Lebanese Cinema Review) saying that STID trailer wont be with HOBBIT. I am looking into it. My info was accurate when I made this report based on multiple very trusted sources but plans can change. I hope to have an update soon. I do know for sure there is a trailer being developed that isn’t the preview but its own thing. It was always the plan to have the trailer out by the end of the year.

I suspect in the end that it may be the trailer may be attached to multiple movies. I hope to know more by tomorrow but a trailer is coming for sure.

266. dmduncan - November 19, 2012

Hahaha! Paranoia guys! Paranoia!

267. (the real) Montreal_Paul - November 19, 2012

262, 263, 264…

…and the trio jumps to conclusions… again. How about you wait until it is confirmed and not just hearsay.

268. Anthony Pascale - November 19, 2012

I’m not sure what this has to do with the SW conspiracy. Plans like this change but they were always making a trailer which is what you do. And they were always planning on doing it by the end of the year. Its just a matter of what film or films to go with. My description of the trailer itself (not a teaser, not just part of the preview) still stands 100%. The trailer exists, it has been planned for a long time and it is coming. Just a question of which day in December really, but I’m pretty sure it is still Dec. 14.

269. BulletInTheFace - November 19, 2012

Yeah, there’s no SW connection–that’s just paranoid conspiracy. These things happen in the business.

But the real question is this: Will the IMAX Hobbit still contain the first nine minutes of the film?

270. Anthony Pascale - November 19, 2012

No change to the nine minute preview with HOBBIT IMAX. The only Q is about the normal trailer and how it will be distributed.

271. Ahmed - November 19, 2012

As long as they don’t attach it to a crappy movie, I don’t care which movie they will put it with.

272. (the real) Montreal_Paul - November 19, 2012

I’ve been thinking that it will be attached to Jack Reacher on the 21st. It’s a Paramount release… and the timing is right. Mark my words… Jack Reacher.

273. MJ (the original) - November 19, 2012

Well this does show that Paramount doesn’t really have their act together on the trailer. And it that is the case, then the argument that “this was all in the works months ago” becomes harder to believe. So this does provides some evidence that the timing that the marketing campaign solidified was perhaps just in the last month.

And so if the marketing campaign was only solidified in the past month, then, whether by coincidence or intent (each person will need to decide that for themselves), this all was put together about the same time as the SW announcement.

274. E meter this - November 19, 2012

Oh frack that, I don’t care if it’s the most spectacular trailer for the greatest movie of all time with Shatner selling the tickets & Nimoy handing out the popcorn. There is no way in this or any mirror universe that I’m shelling out 1¢ to anything that involves that psychotic megalomaniac Tom Cruise

275. MJ (the original) - November 19, 2012

“No change to the nine minute preview with HOBBIT IMAX,”

Thank goodness. Already have spent a ridiculously high $55 online for reservations for my two boys and I to see it at a theaters 1.5 hours away from us.

Looking forward to seeing The Hobbit in 48 FPS IMAX 3D as well. For those of you going to an IMAX to see the trailer and The Hobbit, I highly recommend you go to an IMAX that is showing the 48 FPS version of The Hobbit — that is the new technology in which 3D is going to look so much better and real. Not all IMAX 3D’s will have it. My tickets say: “IMAX 3D HFR” — the “HFR” means “high frame rate.” which is 48 frames per second, which is double the frame rate of virtually all movies in theaters for the modern history of cinema.

276. (the real) Montreal_Paul - November 19, 2012

MJ… they are talking about the regular trailer… not the 9 minute preview. Both were planned months ago. Like Anthony says, where a company places it’s trailer can change even at the last minute if they feel that the movie they pair it with is not a good match and they feel they can better get their audience attached with a different film. I never though they would be attaching it to Hobbit… I always thought they would be attaching it to another Paramount film… and Jack Reacher is the same demographic and is indeed a Paramount release. Months ago I felt they would be attaching it to this film.

As far as marketing a film… MOST companies will go with a 6 month marketing plan. They will usually start releasing their trailers at the 6 month mark and the second version trailers usually at the 3 month mark. At the 2 month mark, the marketing campaign ramps up and a bigger push is made.

This is nothing new. I know you spout that Avengers was released a year in advance… blah, blah, blah. This is not the marketing norm in the film business.

Leading up to the first trailer, you will start hearing more news about the movie. Once the trailer is released you will get more buzz going and so on.

You’ll see… stop being so paranoid! LoL ;)

277. MJ (the original) - November 19, 2012

@274. He is an actor playing a fictional role — he’s not running for President, dude.

278. MJ (the original) - November 19, 2012

@276. MP, you gotta admit though, that the studio confirming the trailer would be with The Hobbit, and now we learn that it is not, supports the view the marketing campaign and agreements were only solidified in past month? (you don’t have to agree about SW, but I would hope you would at least agree with this, right?)

” I never though they would be attaching it to Hobbit…”

Sorry MP, but that just doesn’t make any sense given they are providing the entire first 9 minutes of the movie in from The Hobbit at the IMAX theaters???

279. (the real) Montreal_Paul - November 19, 2012

278. MJ (the original)

Actually, it’s completely normal to move and attach the trailer to another movie. Most of the time, a company like Paramount will want to attached their trailers to their movies. That is why I always believed it would be with Jack Reacher. Marketing campaigns don’t end with a signed agreement and they wash their hands. A marketing campaign will continue to move as needed. That is actually when it kicks into high gear. Like Anthony wrote, this is completely normal and nothing should be read into this. Seriously.

As for the 9 minute preview… that isn’t a normal movie marketing strategy. They are following Nolan’s lead. And with not many movies opening in IMAX, it would make sense to put the 9 minute IMAX trailer with an IMAX movie… that being Hobbit.

280. MJ (the original) - November 19, 2012

Hmm, I recall on many previous sf and major tentpole movies, including Trek 2009, when they first announced a trailer was going to be attached to a movie, there was no change in plans. You make it sound like this happens a lot, but while I am sure that it happens a few times per year, I really doubt that this happens for major tent-pole films a lot — if you can provide stats to the contrary though (for major tentpole movies where trailers are announced in advance), I am open to be convinced otherwise?

“that isn’t a normal movie marketing strategy.”

Exactly, though perhaps not in the way you intended to make this statement. :-)

I guess we are just going to have to agree to disagree here. As I said earlier, at some point in the future, I bet we will hear “what went down” here, and I would not be surprised is SW was in fact a factor.

281. (the real) Montreal_Paul - November 19, 2012

280. MJ (the original)

No, really, it happens more often than you know. When they choose a movie to attach it to… that movie may get moved to another date or another movie comes out in a better date, etc.

I see this all the time at the TV station. We get movie trailers ahead of time from the distributor and have a DO NOT SHOW BEFORE whatever date. Sometimes we get a delay in running the trailer or a go ahead to run it earlier.

I see in the entertainment wires all the time of changes in marketing strategy for films.

I see it all the time, my friend.

282. Disinvited - November 19, 2012

#268. Anthony Pascale

The way I see it, if things are in flux it is extremely difficult to defend the position that there’s an absolutely zero percent possibility that whatever decisions are being made may be influenced to some degree by current events To wit, JJ hearing of DISNEY WARS, JJ given DISNEY WARS treatments, JJ offered DISNEY WARS director’s chair, Paramount being aware of these stated events, etc.

For me, it’s a matter of degrees. I don’t cotton to either extreme, I think this version of movie TREK and the previous one was influenced (to some degree) by STAR WARS and continues to be – even by new SW developments..

283. Red Dead Ryan - November 19, 2012

I wonder if the trailer is being pulled as a tactic of denial? Maybe Paramount is doing this to make us believe that they have control over when the trailer is released, and that SW has nothing to do with it?

284. MJ (the original) - November 19, 2012

@281. I’m not talking about TV trailers, MP. I am talking about “major tent-pole” sf, fantasy and action movies with trailers in theaters on opening day releases. I can’t really recall on any recent blockbuster type movies like these, when a trailer was announced as being attached to a certain movie, that then that was completely changed around? Again, I am talking about major tent-pole blockbuster movies, and I am talking about them being attached to specific film releases, not TV station trailers.

In my opinion this is unusual for these types of movies, and points to the studio not really having their ducks in a row when they made this announcement — which, in turn, points to the marketing plan for the trailer and preview being only very recently finalized — which, in turn, puts the time-frame right in the same ballpark as the SW announcement — which it turn, provides credible circumstantial reasons for us to wonder it there is a connection here to the SW announcement.

285. MJ (the original) - November 19, 2012

@282 “For me, it’s a matter of degrees. I don’t cotton to either extreme, I think this version of movie TREK and the previous one was influenced (to some degree) by STAR WARS and continues to be – even by new SW developments..”

Agreed. There is a middle ground here, and you’ve found it. I don’t pretend to have the definitive answer myself, but with the new breaking story on the trailer snafu, I don’t think people can simply dismiss the possibility of a SW connection anymore. And add in the strange Bob Orci reaction –after months of silence on the sequel, to be so strangely engaged and defensive on this relatively minor issue — and it provides a legitimate reason to wonder what really went down here?

286. boborci - November 19, 2012

285. my comments say nothing about the sequel.

287. Red Shirt Diaries - November 20, 2012

Mr. Orci,

No one would blame JJ and all of you for feeling the need to do something big to respond to Lucas’s announcement. There is nothing to be embarrassed about here. We all know we have the better franchise right now.

288. (the real) Montreal_Paul - November 20, 2012

284. MJ (the original)

I have worked in both Television and Film. Believe me, this is normal and not unusual. You are overreacting and being paranoid. If there is one thing I know, it’s my business.

289. boborci - November 20, 2012

287. agreed. no one would blame us. so what is my motive?

290. Jonboc - November 20, 2012

Wow. MJ, till beating this dead tauntaun? Oh well, its been my experience that there are a lot of people on this big blue marble that argue just to argue. i enjoy reading or partaking in a good spirited debate as much as the next guy, but this “star wars dictates Trek’s marketng strategy” non-issue is too far out in left field…even for me! lol

Oh, I do have one comment on the 48 fps Hobbit. I really want to check it out, Doug Trumbull had a novelty many years back called “shoscan” that used the same process. Amazing stuff. Not entirely convinced I want to give up the grain and signature look of film just yet…but, like you MJ, I’m anxious to see what Jackson does with it.

291. Ensign RedShirt - November 20, 2012

@288 and 289

Don’t waste your breath, guys. Our paranoid friends will believe there is a Star Wars connection even if Gene’s ghost came and told them that it wasn’t so.

They don’t work in the business, and they have no proof whatsoever to back their claim, but that doesn’t matter. They just KNOW, perhaps through some incredible mind link to J.J.’s brain.

Bob, thanks for trying to reason with them, but it’s clear they live in a logic-free zone.

292. Aurore - November 20, 2012

@235. Aurore.

You misread.

He meant August 2012.

He still knew a lot, though…


293. Anthony Pascale - November 20, 2012

I have updated article again with the following…

This morning The Wolverine director James Mangold (via Twitter) debunked the report that a trailer for his film would be showing in front of The Hobbit. TrekMovie has reconfirmed that the 9 minute preview is still showing with the IMAX screenings of The Hobbit and we have reconfirmed that there is separate trailer being developed for release at the same time (for non-IMAX screens). We are still double checking on what film or films will be showing the Star Trek trailer.

294. Disinvited - November 20, 2012

#263. Red Dead Ryan – November 19, 2012

I’m putting my silly hat on here.

You do realize the implications of what you just pondered?

The righteous boborci, the REAL Puppet Master with title “Producer Dude” emblazoned on his office door pulled the strings on the puppet Puppet Master to have the trailer pulled just to mess with MJ’s retirement from this boring topic!

Now THAT’S what I call reactinf to current events!

#289. boborci

Bob, way to stoke the publicity and keep your film in the forefront of inflamed fan furrowed brows, Dude.

P.S. I’ve been wondering why I even came out of hiatus? Now, I know I have you to thank. Mahalo.

295. MJ (the original) - November 20, 2012

Wow, Bob Orci’s still posting obsessive messages about this fairly inconsequential topic? Very interesting!

296. MJ (the original) - November 20, 2012

Sheesh, do we really need another Wolverine movie? I get it, he’s an conflicted werewolf with blades who can”t have steady relationships and has anger management issues….Enough already! This is nearly as bad as Hollywood deciding we all need a Kickass 2….wtf?


297. BulletInTheFace - November 20, 2012

#275: You wrote “Looking forward to seeing The Hobbit in 48 FPS IMAX 3D.”

If your theater is claiming to be showing the IMAX 3D version in 48 fps, then it’s incorrect in its information. The 48 fps version is the non-IMAX version.

298. Disinvited - November 20, 2012

#289. boborci – November 19, 2012

I know you had your tongue firmly planted in your cheek for some of it, but didn’t your comments kind of, sort of, let slip that, using the final cut 35mm print as a guide, the first 10 minutes of a spectacular IMAX 3D edition had been completed?

Because if that’s “nothing of the sequel” then I’m beginning to understand my communication problem with the zero percenters.

I know your motive question wasn’t directed at me, but to give kudos where kudos are due; I think your motive is to tell the best, most compelling and most entertaining story to the most eyes and ears possible. And as tempted as I might be to dismiss something you’re producing as THE THIRTEEN TAPES OF SCOOBY DOO, for example, I am absolutely in awe of your ability to find some hook that causes me to tune in and stay that way until you are done.

299. MJ (the original) - November 20, 2012

@297. That is simply not true. They have a 48 FPS IMAX version as well.

300. MJ (the original) - November 20, 2012

“I know you had your tongue firmly planted in your cheek for some of it, but didn’t your comments kind of, sort of, let slip that, using the final cut 35mm print as a guide, the first 10 minutes of a spectacular IMAX 3D edition had been completed?”

That was my take as well from Bob’s response. Another reason why I think this decision did not need to happen months ago.

301. MJ (the original) - November 20, 2012

IMAX Hobbit 48FPS locations:


302. K-7 - November 20, 2012

Disinvited said:

“Bob, way to stoke the publicity and keep your film in the forefront of inflamed fan furrowed brows”

I agree. The reason is Orci is out of the woodwork on this seemingly minor issue is to get all of us fans all riled up about this, including the SW connection.

303. Disinvited - November 20, 2012

#.300 MJ

Even if they come back from this with proof that these plans were locked down months ago, it’s going to be extremely hard to put the “There’s nothing unusual with this – marketing plans change.” genii back in the bottle. If plans usually change, then meetings in which decisions to change or not are being made, are ongoing. Very difficult to support a position that in these meetings absolutely no mention of current events ever occurs or ignites a discussion.

304. Sk8r_gurl - November 20, 2012

well, now EW says the regular trailer will be in front of The Hobbit:


ahhh, so many blogs, so many conflicting reports…guess we’ll just have to keep being patient :).

305. star trackie - November 20, 2012

Sk8r girl, well, it seems intuitive now that these trailer deals are being put together here in real-time as we speak. This points to the Star Wars announcement timing scenario being mentioned by MJ and Disinvited as definitely being in play here. The more we learn about the catch-as-catch-can marketing approach here with this messed up trailer situation, the less I am buying Orci’s story about this all supposedly being in the works for months. I wasn’t born yesterday.

306. Anthony Pascale - November 20, 2012

let me be clear, there is no ‘messed up trailer situation’. The plan was always to make a trailer to be released by the end of the year. In the end I’m pretty sure that it still will be with HOBBIT but even if it is attached to other films or both HOBBIT and other films that doesn’t mean anything.

I’m sure there is a marketing plan with notes for TV commercials in April and May. They will start making those in advance. But right now they have no idea what TV shows they will attach those commercials to, nor will they once they start making them. But if there is some Star Wars announcement on April 1 and you see a new Star Trek TV commercial on April 15 are you going to think that there is some causal relationship? Hopefully you are smarter than that.

The attached movie(s) is not the first decision made in developing a trailer, it is one of the last decisions made. Regardless, it clearly has nothing to do with SW.

307. K-7 - November 20, 2012

So we first learn the studio has got a deal to put the trailer on with The Hobbit. Then we hear the deal is off. Now we hear the deal is on again. What a clusterfrack by Paramount and Bad Robot.

This is nearly a complete confirmation of all these deals for the Trek trailers and IMAX preview being put together in the last month — right in line as a response to the Star Wars announcement as many of us have been saying.

308. Anthony Pascale - November 20, 2012

you may have ‘heard’ the deal was off but that doesn’t mean it was. The site that reported that has already been debunked by the director of WOLVERINE. You guys are seeing phantoms. So far I haven’t been able to find anyone who says it isn’t with HOBBIT or that anything has changed but I am waiting for 100.00000% for sure before I post new article. And also the PREVIEW thing is 100% confirmed. That hasn’t changed for sure.

But again the selection of the movie to attach is not a big deal. The work on the trailer and the preview began before the SW announcement. It was always the plan to have it done by the end of the year.

please stop making crap up.

309. sk8r_gurl - November 20, 2012

you know, I have to agree with Anthony here. If I had to guess, I’d say that if whoever’s in charge of marketing this flick talked about Star Wars, they probably decided that it wouldn’t and shouldn’t impact their original marketing plans for STID and that was that. And that’s based, of course, on absolutely no insider knowledge whatsoever.

What I do know is that we’ve got a new ST movie coming out in less than six months! In just a few weeks, extended footage is gonna debut that is likely gonna blow people’s socks off, and then the marketing is gonna stay in high gear after that. There’s gonna be a new JJverse video game, two series of ongoing JJverse comics, a novelization, TV ads, and probably an absurd number of other tie-ins/products that we haven’t heard about yet. It’s time to be excited!

Moreover, the success of STID really isn’t gonna be based on how much it’s marketed in advance, but how well it’s marketed once the campaign kicks in, not to mention the quality of the film itself. Thus far, the supreme court really hasn’t steered us wrong – I say we let them do their work and let the anticipation build, and the hell with all this SW stuff :).

310. dmduncan - November 20, 2012

Poor K-7. Guy hitched his wagon to a fake horse, and he’s commanding it to giddyup.


311. K-7 - November 20, 2012

DM Duncan, you’ll never guess what I’ve named my horse? Take a guess?

Hint: it begins with an “M”


312. Disinvited - November 20, 2012

#309. sk8r_gurl – November 20, 2012

Now THAT I can accept as a defensible position. Not the going to the 0 percent extreme.

I might entertain doubts that while this SW news was breaking that someone at Paramount wasn’t at least a little concerned that they had the head of their big tentpole property saying what a HUGE SW fan he is. But I’d accept as plausible a response “Yeah, we discussed the news (Who wouldn’t?) but ultimately when we crunched the numbers we decided to stay the course.”

313. MJ (the original) - November 20, 2012

Seriously folks, it it walks like a duck, swims like a duck, flys like a duck and craps like a duck, then is probably is a duck.

I mean come on, given the latest fiasco with the trailer, just put two and two together here folks. It is not that difficult.

314. BJ (The Freshmaker) - November 21, 2012

@313 For someone who stated earlier in this thread that they were tired of taking about it, you sure as hell can’t stop talking about it. This whole “issue” isn’t even an issue. Firstly, Paramount is a multi-million dollar company, with more than Trek on it’s plate at the moment, I strongly doubt the execs that actually run the company and answer to the shareholders, care about what, 3 maybe 4 people on this site think. Secondly, to act as if there is some sort conspiracy involved over just a trailer is ridiculous. I read a post of yours saying essentially “one day we will know the truth.” About what?! Is someone going to write a tell all book about the ST/SW trailer intrigue? Lastly, WHO CARES!?!?!?!?! If you believe you’re so adept at predicting things like this, move to Hollywood and become a industry analyst and make millions and laugh at the rest of us. I almost miss all the complaining about no updates…

315. BJ (The Freshmaker) - November 21, 2012

I don’t know why that posted twice, but…yea…

316. Stephan - November 21, 2012

The arguments for the SW connection remind me on the stories like the moon landing that hasn’t happened or other conspiracy theories. You can find arguments on everything to be a duck if you want to see a duck even if it is a horse. ;)


317. Disinvited - November 21, 2012

THE HOLLWOOD REPORTER is reporting Disney’s retained Kasdan to write either its 2nd or 3rd SW movie and to producer dude its franchise.

If true, I definitely’d like to know how JJ passed on that and avoided at least sleepless nighr mulling it over?

318. Disinvited - November 21, 2012

#313. MJ

You just HAD to mention ducks (see #315. Stephan)!


319. Disinvited - November 21, 2012

#311. K-7 November 20, 2012

You named him Mike Tyson because your horse keeps getting in your cornfield and nibbling your ears.

320. Anthony Thompson - November 21, 2012

“Multiple trusted sources” just aren’t what they used to be. ; )

321. Disinvited - November 21, 2012

#302. K-7 – November 20, 2012

I feel for Bob. It may well be that he rather innocently stepped into this to “set the record straight”.

But it becomes increasingly difficult for him to argue that breaking SW news isn’t part of his zeitgeist and by extension that of BAD ROBOT’s when it’s clear it’s still breaking and he’s right here reading us all typing about it – at least for the month of November.

322. Disinvited - November 21, 2012

#315. Stephan – November 21, 2012

The irony is Bob likes to study conspiracies. He recently introduced us to the concept that he triages them which really blew my mind. I harken from an era where “The truth shall set you free.” and not knowing the real truth can be deadly. But the concept that someone has a formula or system for figuring out the maximum number of lives to be saved by releasing truths in a certain order fascinates me.

323. Disinvited - November 21, 2012

Hat Rick,

KTLA’s Sam’s live as I type, “More

324. boborci - November 21, 2012

one big difference with the conspiracies I like to bring up and the Star Wars conspiracy is that, in the conspiracies I like to discuss, we have no acccess to the alleges conspirators. At no time have we gotten a direct response from Dick Cheney or Wolfowitz or Rumsfeld. In the case of Star Wars I AM RUMSFELD. Think about that a bit and then come back at me.

325. sk8r_gurl - November 21, 2012

315 – Stephan.

Amen :)

326. boborci - November 21, 2012

Here’s a real conspiracy to deal with:


On the eve of JFK assassination anniversary,
How do you refute this man’s testimony?

327. sk8r_gurl - November 21, 2012

323. boborci

Are you Rumsfeld for STID too? That would certainly help explain all of our known unknowns….

328. Carl - November 21, 2012

Anthony or Bob, in my market the Hobbit in Imax is being shown in the HFR format. is the 9 minute opening of Star Trek Into darkness also In HFR format or do i need to try and hunt done a regular IMax 3d screen???

329. Disinvited - November 21, 2012

#323. boborci – November 21, 2012

Well, I certainly hope you don’t feel I’m coming “at” you. If I’m to be lumped in as a “SW conspiracist” (and I don’t have a problem with that.) I want to be clear that I’m the one that belives that you obviously know how to market a Trek movie, as you did in 2008-2009, and had plans.

I am having trouble parsing your use of the phrase “no access”. Those were all public figures (as you are now) who served at various times in our government (unlike you?). I was alive when they served and as a citizen, as do all citizens, I had “access” – mail, postcard, telegram, phone message and later email.

What we didn’t get, as you pointed out, was answers.

See, your camp keeps using phrases akin to “no access” in their retorts but “I don’t think it means what you think it means.” to quote William Goldman.

330. MJ (the original) - November 21, 2012

@324 But why Bob, all of a sudden, after years about not discussing the movie’s production, do you deliberately choose to “come out of woodwork” here on this relatively minor fan debate, and to also be so defensive about it? To me, your sudden participation and defensiveness actually convinces me we have hit on something potentially real here. Seriously, I think if you had never even commented on this, we would all have gotten bored a week ago on this topic and basically dropped it by now.

Right or wrong, you participation has people wondering if you may have something to hide (or be defending a marketing decision by JJ and the studio that you might not agree with) and Anthony, who has been gone for months as well, keeps posting about this minor issue a lot as well — almost like he might be perhaps coordinating with you in an active effort to try to make this relatively minor issue go away.

331. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 21, 2012

I have only come online after taking a break from all this nuttiness that has pervaded this site ever since it was announced that Disney had bought all of George Lucas’s goodies. Would you all FORGET about bloody Star Wars? Why this obsession with another franchise that has actually been in abeyance for a while now?

Bob Orci has every right to be/feel “defensive”, “obsessive” when MJ is constantly on his back with their peculiar form of browbeating of the producer/writer’s attempts to bring a little fresh air and sense to all of this.

@MJ – No, I am NOT butt kissing ANYONE, not even Bob Orci’s. Besides, he has a lovely Melissa to do that…:) And no, MJ, I don’t hate you, but you have to got to admit that you do say things that might make people feel a little dispirited and less kindly disposed towards you/your words.

If, indeed, there was “change of heart” in Paramount with having the STID trailer/preview released with the Hobbit, it is much more likely that it could have something to do with the sudden controversy surrounding certain aspects in the making of the Hobbit and that, also on the *eve of the Hobbit’s premiere, the Tolkien family are suing Warners Bros for $98M. It is much more likely that Paramount may want to distance themselves from this controversy, but I still think it unlikely. Paramount/Bad Robot have nothing to do with the making of the Hobbit or with any other Tolkien material.

* I could be wrong, but the timing is just a little too convenient and looks like a cynical attempt at money grabbing…but what do I know?

332. MJ (the original) - November 21, 2012

BTW, unless Bob has a response I need to address, my post @330 above will be last one this issue. In the big scheme of things, the Supreme Court not wanting to admit that SW announcement did indeed effect their marketing of STID, but they are too proud to admit it, is really not that big of an issue.

New topic, anyone?

333. MJ (the original) - November 21, 2012

@331. You interjecting me as some kind of attack dog on Bob was not necessary. I thought we had agreed to try to keep things more civil in our posts to each other, Keachick? I am disappointed.

334. boborci - November 21, 2012

330 as stated before, I am not discussing the movie’s production, what have you learned from me about the movie? NOTHING. The tsunami in Thailand had nothing to do with Star Trek. The re-election of Obama had nothing to do with Star Trek. so what have you learned about Star Trek? Nothing. Let me tell you what I have learned… I have learned never to respond to you again. truly. never. Goodbye.

335. boborci - November 21, 2012

329. disinvited. goodbye.

336. boborci - November 21, 2012

Last thing I will say – you two or three morons remind me of Brad Pitt in Burn After Reading. CIAO!

337. MJ (the original) - November 21, 2012

Sheesh Bob, and I have bee listening for years on all of your conspiracy theories but never attempted to blackball you like this? Your over-the-top response proves the connection conclusively for me then. Otherwise, why get so out of shape over a few fans theories on your marketing campaign???

I will have nothing ever more to say on this topic. Heaven forbid I ever dare question the Supreme Court on this site.

338. Stephan - November 21, 2012

Now what is the issue? I really don’t get it. I had known for month that there will be a trailer around the end of the year long before the star wars news. And it seems logically 6 months in advance of the movie. Only because some webpages don’t agree about the exact release date there has to be a connection with star wars or even some issues? I don’t get it.
I think what anthony said sounds reasonable.

I am looking forward to the trailer whenever it comes out.

339. Disinvited - November 21, 2012

#332. MJ

If the opposing camp wants to admit the possibilty that PARAMOUNT reacts to current events via THE HOBBIT news, then I’m good.

But I’ll dream of the songs we could have sung in Klingon if this had morphed into the STID HOBBIT CONSPIRACY! ;)

340. Disinvited - November 21, 2012

FWIW when I composed 339, messages 333-338 were not posted to my screen.

341. K-7 - November 21, 2012

#340. Then you missed the part where Bob Orci casted you and MJ into the Phantom Zone for all eternity to pay for your crime of doubting him. LOL

342. Disinvited - November 21, 2012

#341. K-7

It’s all surreal. One second, I’m typing what I think is the wind down for SW – looking forward to moving on to the real conspiracy Bob wants to discuss. The next, a butterfly flaps its wings in a Thailand tsunami and BAM! – I’m in the PZ.

343. Ensign RedShirt - November 21, 2012

K-7…He meant you too.

Congrats, guys. You’ve managed to irritate the one person from the production who is generous enough to spend time with the fans and answer questions when he can, all so you can push your idiotic and imaginary Star Wars theory.

Got a news flash for you….the studios don’t care about “Star Trek vs. Star Wars”. Only fanboys do, and your obsession over this just proves that point.

Paramount doesn’t care about a movie that is at least 2 1/2 YEARS away from release. That’s an eternity in the movie business.

344. Disinvited - November 21, 2012

#343. Ensign RedShirt – November 21, 2012

Just to be clear and to stave off revisionist history, this:


is the ultimate source of this “imaginary” theory.

345. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 21, 2012

No, Disinvited, the trekmovie thread is NOT the ultimate source of the theory. Even before the article was posted, people here were already posting such theories. It was in fact those questions, conspiracy theories and whatnot that lead to the article to being posted in the first place.

Ensign Redshirt is right. Now, some of you, cease being rude to Bob (see my post #342).

I am hoping that Bob Orci will return…

346. Disinvited - November 21, 2012

#345. Rose (as in Keachick) – November 21, 2012

I did a fairly thorough search. There were a lot of jibs thrown at JJ but no mention of the Trek Trailer and/or marketing with respect to STAR WARS.

I’m not infallible so I look forward to your proof that I, K-7, MJ or the mysterious 4th musketeer broached that particular theory prior to the trekmovie article.

Also, post #342 shows as my post – not yours. But I do so wish that butterfly hadn’t flapped its wings.

347. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 21, 2012

I meant my post #331.

348. (the real) Montreal_Paul - November 21, 2012

343. Ensign RedShirt

Completely agree with you on all your points. Paramount isn’t shakinh in it’s boots because they are doing another Star Wars movies in 2 years. Paramount isn’t changing their marketing plans because of an announcement a few weeks back when their movie opens in May. If they were announcing a Star Wars movie in May of 2013… then you may have something. If they announced that Quinto was jumping the TREK ship to play a part in SW… then you may have something. If they announced that JJ or Bob Orci or the others were jumping ship to cozy up with Disney… then you may have something. But really guys, base your theories in reality.

The “Trio of Pessimists” that usually pisses people off in here with their “theories” finally pissed off Bob. Doesn’t surprise me. They have managed to piss off 90% of the people in here at one point or another. I’m just surprised it took this long. Bravo guys, bravo.

349. K-7 - November 21, 2012

@347 / Ensign Red Shirt. “K-7…He meant you too.”

Bob, this Ensign Red Shirt guy is claiming that you won’t talk to me again? I don’t think that is true, as I have not joined in this latest portion of the debate. So I hope you and I are still cool and that Ensign Red Shirt doe not speak on your behalf as he is boldly proclaiming here for all to see.

In fact, I would recommend you not address Ensign Red Shirt at all in the future, as claiming to speak on your behalf seems beyond presumption.

And for what it is worth Bob, since you seem so passionate about this, I’ve decided to take you at your word and drop this topic, as far as I am concerned.

350. star trackie - November 21, 2012

Montreal P, I find your joyful “piling on” of people you disagree here with rather distasteful. It sounds like you have been waiting for this moment and are really enjoying it…i.e. “Bravo guys, Bravo.”

It’s interesting to see how some people react when they perceive that something goes their way in a discussion here. Some people take the high road, and some people can’t help themselves but to take the low road.

I don’t see anything joyful about Bob being criticized by fans here and by Bob then overeating to these fans. This whole episode seems a rather negative experience for all involved, and seeing some people gloat about it now just makes me sick.

351. Disinvited - November 21, 2012

For clarity, because there seems to be some confusion, it’s my belief the article “Will Star Wars Episode VII announcement hurt Star Trek Into Darkness marketing rollout?” Broached the theory and I know for certain I didn’t mention it prior.

352. (the real) Montreal_Paul - November 21, 2012

350. star trackie

Joyful? Buddy, do you know what sarcasm is? Good Lord. Perhaps read my post a little better.. you seem to has misunderstood what I wrote. By “bravo guys, bravo” I was using sarcasm. Meaning that I am not “joyful” about Bob being criticized by people in here. That was the whole meaning for my post.

353. Red Dead Ryan - November 21, 2012

I think I’m going to drop it myself. I’ve already made my thoughts on the subject clear, and most of you disagree. I didn’t mean to tick Bob off.

Me, MJ, and K-7 will probably continue to stand by our belief, and the rest of you will disagree. That’s fine. I don’t think anything more will come out of arguing about this any further.

To continue this is to beat a dead horse, and that is a waste of time. The movie is coming out in six months, and I look forward to the nine-minute clip along with “The Hobbit”.

354. (the real) Montreal_Paul - November 21, 2012

353. Red Dead Ryan

That’s because you, MJ and K7 are the same person! LoL. Just kidding. Had to lighten it up in here a bit. ;)

355. Ensign RedShirt - November 21, 2012

353 Red Dead

I agree. Let’s all agree to disagree and move on. Lot more important things in this world to worry about than the timing of movie marketing.

Happy Thanksgiving, all! (to those who celebrate, of course).

356. Red Dead Ryan - November 21, 2012


Funny guy, eh?


357. Disinvited - November 21, 2012

Even a turkey can get a pardon.

Happy Thanksgiving to all that celebrate. And to them that don’t, have a piece of your favorite pie anyway.

358. MJ (the original) - November 21, 2012

Agree with the last few posts. Let’s move on, everyone. And Bob Orci, I apologize if I came across a personally offending you.

Happy Thanksgiving Everyone!!!

359. Disinvited - November 21, 2012

#335. boborci

I sincerely apologize, if anything I participated in and/or contributed to, caused you to enjoy the holidays one iota less with your family and friends than you so rightly deserve.

I don’t know why I feel this way (Maybe it has to do with how I feel I came to earn my monicker in the first place.), I certainly don’t know the other three from Adam, but I will fall on my sword for them. You can forbid yourself, all Bad Robot employees, all employees from your other productions, and all your subcontractors from communicating with me. Just keep the others off your ignore list. I don’t know what kind of logs Anthony keeps but I suspect he has a sense that I’ll not play games with my monicker. I’ll even
bear a scarlet letter if it’ll seal the deal and Anthony’ll allow it: I’ll add a parenthetical, (banned from Bad Robot for life) to my nome de plume.

360. MJ (the original) - November 21, 2012

Bob, I feel the same way as Disinvited. My sincere apology, dude!!!

361. Harry Ballz - November 21, 2012

326. boborci “On the eve of JFK assassination anniversary”

Bob, I find this frustrating……next year will be the 50th anniversary of the JFK assassination.

The date will be Friday November 22, 2013.

At that time Interest in the JFK assassination will be at a fever pitch.

It’s a FRIDAY, Bob. Most movies open on a Friday, Bob.

Commercially, wouldn’t that be the perfect date to open a movie pertaining to the Kennedy assassination?

I think so….

I think a little movie called THE GRASSY KNOLL would prove very popular at that time.

But, that’s just me. Thoughts?

362. MJ (the original) - November 21, 2012

Outstanding and beautiful piece of Trek animation on YouTube — Happy Thanksgiving!


363. star trackie - November 21, 2012

#361. Who really cares anymore? Even if it was a conspiracy, everybody involved would be dead or in nursing homes by now. I don’t think the 50th anniversary is really going to get much play beyond the a few tv specials the week of the event. Besides, no one under 40 really even cares.

The 50th anniversary of this will be the last hurrah for those interested in this. The era of the JFK conspiracy marketing phenomenon has already seen its best days past by.

364. boborci - November 22, 2012

363. star tackie

A common erroneous misperception. There was a coup in 1963 that subverted our democratic process. Do you think the perpetrators just retired Nov 23rd? Is that logical? no. they were finally in a position to expand and codify the completely undemocratic shadow gov that has been and is to this day affecting your life more than anything you see on CSPAN.

Bush was in Texas. Is the influence of his family now over? tell me that again when Jeb runs.

365. star trackie - November 22, 2012

If only this shadow government could increase revenues and decrease spending, I might like them. ;-)

366. boborci - November 22, 2012

they do. they increase their recenues and reduce your spending.

367. boborci - November 22, 2012

correction – revenues

368. Number 3 - November 22, 2012

Meh to all the rant.I’m just looking forward to seeing another really good Star Trek movie.

369. star trackie - November 22, 2012

They sound similar to our actual government then.

370. star trackie - November 22, 2012

Mr. Orci, are there any good books you recommend that detail this shadow government?

371. boborci - November 22, 2012

start at the beginning with JFK with:

JFK and the Unspeakable

372. star trackie - November 22, 2012

Thanks, I will. As a single mother who always has to make ends meet in my life, it really irritates me that the government can’t get its act together. If there is something or someone behind the scenes that is preventing this, I would certainly like to know more about it.

Also Mr Orci, the acrimony on this site has been out of control recently and I did not appreciate several folks here being critical of you and not believing you. Nevertheless, it seems that they have “seen the light” now and offered apologies to you. I would encourage you to consider accepting their apologies. Life it too short for Trek fans not to get along with each other.

373. boborci - November 22, 2012

Also read anything by Peter Dale Scott, especially:

Deep Politics and Deep Politics II

374. boborci - November 22, 2012

Star Tackie

Well said. You are quite eight. Since it is Thanksgiving in my home country, and you have made such a caring case, let’s call the whole thing off. All is forgotten.

New beginnings. Thanks Star Tackie

375. star trackie - November 22, 2012

You’re welcome! You are a true gentleman. May God and/or The Universe (you pick?) bless your family this Thanksgiving, Mr. Orci.

Good night!

376. Aurore - November 22, 2012

“Also read anything by Peter Dale Scott…”

Thanks for the book recommendations.

(About two weeks ago, I received “The Road to 9/11: Wealth, Empire and the Future of America” , and, “American War Machine: Deep Politics, the CIA Global Drug Connection, and the Road to Afghanistan”…..I should start reading them, now…)

Happy Thanksgiving to those who celebrate!

377. Disinvited - November 22, 2012

I remember my first introduction to martial law was what my Hawaiian born and raised father and my relatives there called military government before and during WWII. Mom gave the stateside WWII version of what I later came to know as “martial law”. I also recall hitting the stacks at the Library researching for my first vote in the “Watergate” election and how steamed I was to find that, in essence, the WWII martial law imposition had NEVER been lifted and was still in effect during the Nixon regime. I clearly recall martial law ending because I remeber doing a big PHEW about it. I’m fuzzy on who lifted it but I deduce that it must have been Ford becaused he seemed to be trying all sorts of things to take the edge off having pardoned Nixon. Then Carter had trouble in the Middle East and that must have been when it was reimposed. I can research this timeline in the morning if someone needs.

It is to be hoped the current Lincoln movie is complete enough to cover his role in all of this.

378. Harry Ballz - November 22, 2012

Bob, any comment regarding my post at 361?

By the way, I assume it was the REAL Bob Orci who gave me feedback on a certain script?

379. Carl Finnell - November 22, 2012

anyone have an answer to my question at post 328???

380. Disinvited - November 22, 2012

#379. Carl Finnell – November 22, 2012

Try https://www.48fpsmovies.com

381. Anthony Thompson - November 22, 2012

378. Harry, where the hell have you been??? Please stay – you’re needed!

382. pilotfred - November 22, 2012

how long after the 09 is this is set? if its not straight after as suggested by the comics (which is a good read by the way)could the per-titles be a two or three mini adventures?! which would make scene 1st give the movie a bit more depth 2nd re-do some classic scenes from tos 3 tie in nicely the comics and 4th would mean the first 9 minutes of the film would give nothing away so not a problem showing with the hobit

383. Disinvited - November 22, 2012

#379. Carl

I punched in hobbit in their search engine and did a quick scan. I’d say the odds are against you in this first wave of its release.

As HOBBIT’s run expands into more theaters, there’s always a possibility PARAMOUNT might expand the 9 minute sneak into the venue you desire but I don’t think you want to hang your hat on that. I’d also keep an eye on the news as there are current mentions of HOBBIT related lawsuits and those can cause entertainment plans to change.

384. Harry Ballz - November 22, 2012

381. Anthony Thompson

Anthony, I’ve been here all along, but I didn’t bother posting while this place was being ravaged by impostors!

How’ve you been, old friend?

385. MJ (the original) - November 22, 2012

Bob, Star Trekie, I appreciate the second change. Thanks!

386. MJ (the original) - November 22, 2012


387. Disinvited - November 22, 2012

I too celebrate Thanksgiving and to shorten a rather long list of things I’m thankful for at this site to the top 3:

1. star trackie for her heart of pure Trek

2. Bob Orci for a lot of things too numerous to mention but most recently for letting himself be reminded of his big Trek heart.

3. Anthony Pascale for a list equally as long as Bob’s but for most recently exercising a deft hand in letting an impassioned Trek debate blow itself out and thecommunity at large resolve it.

Happy Thanksgiving everyone!

388. dmduncan - November 23, 2012

What’s offensive is how much energy you guys put into a piece of absolute nonsense that you clearly concocted in your heads.

You had ZERO evidence that your cockeyed theory was true, but you pushed it anyway, as if you lack the wherewithal to distinguish fact-based conspiracies from paranoid conspiracies. As if it’s the “conspiracy” rather than the “evidence” angle we find important.

I for one wish Bob would not let you guys off so easily.

389. star trackie - November 23, 2012

DM Duncan,

Your post is offensive to all of us who want to move on from this topic.

Please all, let’s stop immediately with the mean-spirited remarks, gloating, and score settling.

Just say to yourselves, “I’m not going to post anything negative today.” It starts with one person, having the commitment to not post negative remarks for one day. It’s not really that hard. It’s call “self-discipline.”

390. dmduncan - November 23, 2012


Oh boo hoo, whoever you are. Get over it, or learn to ignore me.

Your post responding to me is negative, so don’t even try to act like you’re some bringer of peace.

The topic was moronic, and if I hadn’t been laid out with the flu the past two days I would’ve said something sooner on the matter. Now that I feel better, you can bet I’ll speak as I feel is necessary and your sophomoric platitudes won’t stop me.

391. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 23, 2012

star trackie – With all due respect, what dmduncan is talking about here has been going on in various forms over a long period of time. He is correct and believe me, he has not been the only poster to write remarks that many might consider “mean-spirited”, “gloating” and “score settling”.

I also agree that there has been a lot of negativity written on this site of late.

This should be a time of celebration in that now has come the time for us to get to see the first of STID’s trailers or the nine minute preview if one is able to get to see it on an IMAX 3D theatre preceding the Hobbit movie screening.

Fingers crossed for an amazing trailer, but hopefully not as amazing as the STID movie itself…

392. MJ (the original) - November 23, 2012

Keachick, DMD,

Speaking for myself, I apologized to Bob as I felt I owed it to him on a personal level and wanted to bury the hatchet on this. I never apologized based on the merits of my opinion on this topic (which I will not bring up again per my pledge to Bob), and it does seem rather negative to me as well that you both are trying to stir the pot again here on this topic.

I refuse to the take your bait and be drawn into this topic again. Several of us apologized to Bob and it seems as through you are twisting this to try to score points by saying that our apologies proved us wrong on our overall opinions — that is lame. I apologized to Bob because I was rude to him and out of line, not because I lost faith in my overall opinions on that old issue that we were discussion for a couple of weeks.

393. Harry Ballz - November 23, 2012




394. DonDonP1 - November 23, 2012

Aw, darn it! I wish the teaser for “Star Trek Into Darkness” would be attached to the Universal Picture adapation of Boublil and Schönberg’s “Les Misérables,” based on Victor Hugo’s legendary novel.

395. MJ (the original) - November 23, 2012

@393 So Harry, are you saying that “the Orci” posting here on the recent issue that I will no longer name is not the real deal?

396. Harry Ballz - November 23, 2012

MJ, that’s just it, I don’t know…….

…..and once you can’t trust what you’re reading here, all bets are off!

397. MJ (the original) - November 23, 2012

Well that’s just great. If he’s not Orci, then he’s an impostor who was faking that he was discussing that recent issue with several of us here in good faith, and several of us even ended up apologizing to him as he came across like we had really upset him. wtf???

398. Disinvited - November 24, 2012

#396. Harry Ballz – November 23, 2012

boborci has a rather distinctive pattern of making typos from what I presume to be his mobile and/or handheld device. You can see it in the way he mistyped star trackie’s name.in 364 and 374. I’m pretty sure he’s the real deal. You can compare those to MJ’s in 385 which is why I think they are 2 distinct people. I share your frustration with all the impersonating.

399. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 24, 2012

“#251 Anthony Pascale – November 15, 2012
Just in case anyone was wondering, that is the real boborci. The spoofers have been banned.
And this is the real me.
any issues post a comment at

@ Harry Ballz – This was cut and paste from the thread that first told of the STID preview to be released with the screening of the Hobbit on IMAX 3D beginning 14 December 2012.

400. dmduncan - November 24, 2012

I’m not baiting anybody. Had a piece to say, and I said it. Would’ve said it sooner had I been able.

401. Aurore - November 24, 2012

Correction. 235.

But, in my opinion, they might have known, or at the very least, suspected that Georges Lucas would eventually sell it.


But, in my opinion, they might have known, or at the very least, suspected that George Lucas would/ could eventually sell it.

in a recent interview = in a recent discussion

402. Ahmed - November 24, 2012

Do we know for sure which movie the trailer will be attached to ?

403. Disinvited - November 24, 2012

The ideal solution would be to digitally sign our comments. Trouble is trekmovie.com employs some sort of filtering system on characters that seems to be implemented to block roboposts. And a dicitonary of certain words or the character sequence that spells them occuring in anyword that would make doing so a difficult chore. Add in that people are using mobile and handheld devices too, and most don’t support it very well or at all.

404. star trackie - November 24, 2012

DM Duncan,

If I offended you in any way, I am deeply sorry. I hope you are feeling better today.

405. Disinvited - November 24, 2012

#392. MJ

I’d have thought the most appropriate venue to continue the discussion would be:


but my device says his Trek comment section is closed.

406. Harry Ballz - November 24, 2012

I wasn’t trying to say the latest posts WEREN’T by Orci, I was just expressing frustration at not knowing for sure if it’s him or not.

Take it easy, folks!

“This is not my first rodeo!”

407. MJ (the original) - November 24, 2012

OK Harry, DMD, well, in any case, this is about to become a “page 2″ story on Trekmovie.com. I’m done here (for this story). See you all the next STID story.

PS: Thanks Disinvited, but I am a bit demoralized from this experience and want to move on from this story. You and I may yet have our day on this when at some point in the future someone documents the inside story on the planning for STID.

408. dmduncan - November 24, 2012


Thank you.

Feeling rebooted.

409. K-7 - November 24, 2012

For the record folks, Joseph Dickerson is at least somewhat responsible for the SW announcement’s effect on Trek marketing debate — it was his editorial that really set the stage for all of this theorizing:


Here is some of what he said:


“Here’s the (potential) problem… this Star Wars buzz will fade over time, but it won’t go away completely. The window to promote the new Star Trek movie is about to open (some say it should have opened several months ago, but that’s another discussion). All this Star Wars Episode VII buzz and future news could “suck the oxygen” out of the room, distracting media attention from the new Star Trek movie when it needs it the most.

And then, the incendiary remark of his which started this whole issue discussion:

” I’d wager that the marketing people at Paramount are concerned about this as well, and (hopefully) are adjusting their marketing plan accordingly.”

Then, shortly after Anthony let Joe run his editorial on Trekmovie.com, Anthony reported the huge IMAX preview news, followed by the trailer clusterfu*k situation (and we still don’t know about that?).

So really, Trekmovie.com is responsible for this theory and for the debate that ensued given the editorial that Anthony allowed to be published here on his site.

410. Commodore Adams - November 25, 2012

Im curious if anyone knows, will the 9 minutes of star trek footage only show opening night with The Hobbit in Imax or will it be shown as long as The Hobbit is in Imax?

411. Disinvited - November 26, 2012

#410. Commodore Adams

The press release says “…beginning December 14th.” That fairly strongly implies longer than just opening night.

412. star trackie - November 26, 2012

number 1..nobody cares ahout this star wars-connection foolishness.

number 2. “star trackie” ….I am the one,…the original star trackie…a name so unique that either, you have a great mind or you are one of the many imposters created by whomever to lend legitmacy to your arguments and agendas. Regardless, please stop using my name. Ive been coming here for years and have no intention of changing my user name.

That is all.

413. Disinvited - November 26, 2012

#412. star trackie

I believe the link in message 399 provided by Rose is the appropriate one to post complaints about monicker usurptions.

Thanks for the heads-up that it is still occurring.

414. Gatortrek - November 30, 2012

Disinvited–thanks for the information for my question on post #328. I have confirmed with the theater that i will be attending a midnight show. the HFR Imax 3D will have the 9 minute opening sequence to the new Star Trek movie in front of the screening!!

415. Disinvited - December 1, 2012

#414. Gatortrek – November 30, 2012

You are welcome. Is this Carl in Gorn uniform?

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