Watch: New Alternate Teaser Trailer For Star Trek Into Darkness | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Watch: New Alternate Teaser Trailer For Star Trek Into Darkness March 9, 2013

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

As TrekMovie first reported, Paramount released a new teaser trailer for Star Trek Into Darkness this weekend, attached to showings of Oz The Great and Powerful. This new trailer is now (unofficially) available online. This ‘kids-friendly’ trailer has about a minute of actual film footage and about 50% is new. You can it below. Of course it contains some spoilers.      

 

New Star Trek Into Darkness Teaser #2 (aka "kids teaser")

Here is the new teaser trailer for Star Trek Into Darkness which is showing this weekend with Oz The Great and Powerful. The trailer is about a 50/50 mix of new footage combined with stuff seen in the IMAX preview and/or other trailers or the Super Bowl commercial.

This appears to be an unofficial release, however it is very high quality and not taken with a camera in theaters. It is possible that it may get removed from YouTube. As we reported before, Paramount sees this trailer as being the one that is more "kid-friendly." If they follow the same pattern they did with the more kid-friendly trailer for the 2009 Star Trek film, the trailer may not be made available on the official site but could get aired on kid’s TV, like the Kid’s Choice Awards on Nickelodeon, which is what they did in 2009. The Kids Choice Awards airs on Nickelodeon on March 23rd.

And as TrekMovie reported earlier this week, the full (longer) theatrical trailer will be released in 3 weeks with G.I. Joe: Retaliation on March 29th. If Paramount follows their usual patter, that should be available exclusively on iTunes the following Monday April 1st and then via YouTube and elsewhere by Tuesday April 2nd.

Analysis coming up!

TrekMovie will have the usual shot-by-shot analysis of this trailer coming soon.

Comments

1. Elias Javalis - March 9, 2013

sweet!!

2. Stephan - March 9, 2013

I think shorter trailers are better because they don’t tell to much and are concentrated on a few eye-catchers. So you long for more and aren’t oversaturated.

3. a_phake - March 9, 2013

wow this is the trailer we’ve been waiting for

4. Dee - lvs moon surface - March 9, 2013

I LOVED it!!!

;-) :-)

5. bjdcharlie - March 9, 2013

Stun. Ning. !

6. SherlockFangirl - March 9, 2013

I think they meant May 9th at the end! :P

*hides*

7. Hawkeye53 - March 9, 2013

Looking good.

8. Weerd1 - March 9, 2013

Huzzah!

9. SherlockFangirl - March 9, 2013

May come in handy for some…

http://keepvid.com/

10. JohnnieHF - March 9, 2013

The ship Kirk and Spock are flying looks a little like Star Wars.

11. David - March 9, 2013

Looks so good ! Each new trailer makes me MORE Excited. Only 8 weeks to go !!

12. Hugh Hoyland - March 9, 2013

Man this movie looks like its going to rock! :]

13. David - March 9, 2013

6. SherlockFangirl – March 9, 2013
I think they meant May 9th at the end! :P

Yeah May 9th in the UK :) :) x

14. Cinema Geekly - March 9, 2013

And the trolls roll in………………..3………………………..2………………1……………

15. This is going to be a long year - March 9, 2013

Ok noticed this:

Peter Weller’s voice: “By now all you’ve heard what happened in London”

Kirk say “Punch it” to go to warp like Pike did in Star Trek 09. If I recall correctly the shot is also framed in a similar way.

16. RenderedToast - March 9, 2013

For gods sake, we’re 2 months from release and there’s nothing so far that even comes close to explaining what the hell is going on in this film.

Where’s a trailer that comes even close to conveying a sense of scale as this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ETDE0VGJY4

Didn’t give away the whole plot, but still really felt like a sprawling and enticing story, and that MUSIC… god. Still gives me chills.

So far for this one we know a starship crashes into some water, Kirk, Spock & apparently Uhura pilot some dumb looking shuttlecraft and Spock makes a quip at an inappropriate time. And Cumberbatch looks menacing.

Less than 2 months until this thing is released in the UK. How about some PR?

17. King Zooropa - March 9, 2013

Wait, wait! TrekMovie staff, you didn’t call this an EXCLUSIVE. I’m disappointed. I only read this blog for the EXCLUSIVE content that you EXCLUSIVELY get. After all, you never cease to remind us that it’s EXCLUSIVE.

What’s the deal?

18. SherlockFangirl - March 9, 2013

Just as Kirk says “Punch it!”, he has a cut on his cheek that looks suspiciously like a Starfleet delta shield.

LULZ

19. Hugh Hoyland - March 9, 2013

And I’ll add IMO I hope Abrams can come back to direct the sequel (I know I’m jumping ahead and its probaly unlikely) because from what I’m seeing in these trailers the Bad Robot team has taken TOS and moved it up to a visual level that MAY even be ahead of ST:TMP, and thats saying something.

I mean these trailers are visually stunning IMO, epic even. I’m crossing my fingers and hope they can continue to be directly involved in any further Trek films or TV especially. These guys have nailed it.

20. SherlockFangirl - March 9, 2013

Ruins of a Starfleet ship at 0:25 seconds…

21. SherlockFangirl - March 9, 2013

Harrison’s hovercraft is some kind of emergency vehicle…

22. SherlockFangirl - March 9, 2013

Qo’Nos suddenly looks like Coruscant… XD

23. Platitude - March 9, 2013

Love it!

24. J.R. Ewing - March 9, 2013

Hate to say it, but this looks like a big, dumb loud action movie that takes place in space…Kind of like TOS meets Die Hard V.

25. Theatre Historian_Levi - March 9, 2013

Thats awesome!
Excellent Teaser, can not wait to see the new full trailer at the end of the month.

Thanks for posting it Anthony!

26. SherlockFangirl - March 9, 2013

The ship docked at Spacedock (just as the Enterprise goes to warp) at 57 seconds has red warp nacelles!

27. JohnRambo - March 9, 2013

Punch it! BOOOOOM!!

AWESOME!!!!!!

28. Elias Javalis - March 9, 2013

Love the Enterprise next to the Starbase…Absolutely stunning wallpaper if applied!

29. J.R. Ewing - March 9, 2013

Anybody remember when Star Trek wasn’t just about revenge and big explosions?

30. Cinema Geekly - March 9, 2013

@29 Yeah that was the TV Shows. Most of the Trek movies (and as it happens the best ones) were all action movies about revenge.

31. Paul - March 9, 2013

Looks awesome …….1080P download please Bob!!!

32. starfish - March 9, 2013

How come Chekov isn’t in any of these?

33. starfish - March 9, 2013

also, when Kirk says “Punch it”, isn’t there just footage from the 2009 movie?

34. Luther Sloan - March 9, 2013

USS Newton Type: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=166898130127322&set=a.138479519635850.31674.135569723260163&type=1&theater

NCC-07??

35. Exverlobter - March 9, 2013

“Anybody remember when Star Trek wasn’t just about revenge and big explosions?”

Yeah, that was Star Trek 1 and 4.
Two Movies out of 12. The other ones were always that kind of way.

36. Dean-O - March 9, 2013

Looks like a good couple of hours of popcorn movie entertainment. I m looking forward to seeing it.

37. Bill Peters - March 9, 2013

Tell me this is going to work, I Belive in you” is such a cool line.

38. Luther Sloan - March 9, 2013

NCC 07 – ¿B?

39. SherlockFangirl - March 9, 2013

Looks like “NCC-07 9″ to me. Doesn’t seem to be anything between the seven and the nine, so could it be a nod to Seven?

40. YankeeWhite - March 9, 2013

At :28 what starship is that!?!?
http://i.imgur.com/1OTggMn.png?1
April’s old decommissioned Enterprise? This guy says YES!

41. MJ - March 9, 2013

“Anybody remember when Star Trek wasn’t just about revenge and big explosions?”

Anyone ever remember a post from this guy where it wasn’t about whining and bitching about JJ-Trek?

— This trailer looks awesome!!!!!

42. Nony - March 9, 2013

…Bones? Doth mine eyes deceive me? Is it really you, buddy? What are you doing in Star Trek promotional material? Silly guy, he must have wandered into the frame by accident.

43. t'cal - March 9, 2013

Looks great and can’t wait! I hope Scotty is more than comic relief in this film. He has tremendous potential to be a badass.

44. Hawkeye53 - March 9, 2013

@40 YankeeWhite, nice catch there pal.

What a twist that would be if two Enterprises turned up to the same distress call.

45. Poliander - March 9, 2013

Really nice trailer, liked it! Very much “not our fathers Star Trek” – but for movies it will work pretty good. But still can’t imagine a new TV show in this style.

46. Flake - March 9, 2013

Don’t see how Trek can return to the small screen when we are getting movies of this scale. Animated is the way to go for TV imho because then the ‘budget’ is as limitless as the movies.

47. PEB - March 9, 2013

@16 Dude…calm down. The longer 2 minute trailer that will probably be equal to that trailer you linked is supposed to be coming with Gi Joe at the end of the month. That exact concern was mentioned in the article 2 posts back from this one.

48. PEB - March 9, 2013

That shot of the Enterprise at 1:00 remindes me of the shot from TMP!

49. Drunk Garak - March 9, 2013

In the sky diving scene, you can see a federation-looking ship in the background we’ve never seen before that looks like the ship crashing into San Francisco bay.

50. John - March 9, 2013

Wow that was a good Star Wars trailer!!

51. jim beam - March 9, 2013

Awesome!

52. MattR - March 9, 2013

Has anyone seen the IMAX version of OZ? I’m wondering if this is attached to that as well.

53. Flake - March 9, 2013

Star Trek is action adventure with strong characters in a scifi setting. I would say these trailers convey that concept very well. Roddenberry said these words in his original pitch.

54. PEB - March 9, 2013

Why should we limit Trek to being slow with very little REAL action sequences? I never understood that. If it’s faster in pace and has incredible action sequences then ‘oh my it caaaant be Star Trek anymore!’ As a fan, I never understood that because before JJ and even before TNG films actors and fans ALWAYS brought up the fact that Trek could be so much more if there was a budget given to the shows and the films. Now that we have one, it’s all of a sudden not ‘real’ Trek? Why should there only be one type of Trek, with the same tired Dennis Mccarthy background music and same very huma-looking aliens and recycled plot threads? I love Trek in all its different shades but it’s always been backwards that the fans, many of them at least have been so resistant to change. Imagine if Enterprise’s first season was done the way they wanted and season 1 was all about Earth and the construction of the ship and familiarizing the audience with the crew? It would’ve been scoffed at as ‘the bad season’ that didnt have a ship and didnt take place in space. And more than a few fans would shout ‘How is this Star Trek and we’re not even in space??’ I’m not saying that fans dont have a right to their own oppinion but lets try different things. Star Trek is not ONE crew, or ONE ship or even ONE perfect set of ideals. It’s a whole universe…or multiverse…of different people, species, planets, ships, themes, and ideas. We can expand and explore all of that for the better of the franchise.

55. TigerClaw - March 9, 2013

In this new Teaser Trailer when they showed the part of that ship squeezing through a narrow spot kind of reminds me of that scene from Empire Strikes Back with the Millenium Falcon squeezing through a narrow spot in that Astroid.

56. RAMA - March 9, 2013

29. You mean Star Trek II…oh wait, that was called Wrath of Khan..

57. PEB - March 9, 2013

^^And there lies the problem of JJ having his hand in both pots. The comparisons will so much more frequent now and Wars will snag much more of the media attention. I’m waiting for the filmed interviews where the questions asked of JJ and team drift off into Star Wars territory. I’m a fan of both but I’m a Trekkie through and through. The idea that this will cause an even bigger shadow the be cast over Trek in the public’s point of view is infuriating.

58. RAMA - March 9, 2013

ST often has wonderful messages, but above all else it is adventure. As much as I liked much of the series in the Berman era, after awhile it seemed we lacked that. The movies often lacked scale. I think we have that now…this trailer really looked adventurous, and Cumberbatch has been a favorite of mine for a number of years now. I honestly think it’s going to be a major hit, as it should be.

59. rogerachong - March 9, 2013

@ 50 You Wish! If Star Wars Ep.1 to 3 (Episode Lame, Episode Boring and Episode Revenge of the Lameness) didn’t suck sooooo hard!!

They even had to bow down, beg and then kiss the Starfleet Ring from JJ Abrams Rock to try and salvage Star Wars again. Kiddy Star Weeps has already bowed down to the greatness and superiority of Star Trek. LLAP.

60. Copper Based Blood - March 9, 2013

Fan-Tas-Tic!!!!!!

61. RAMA - March 9, 2013

57. I only see it as a plus…more publicity, more interest in ST. JJtrek still seems distinctly like Star Trek to me.

62. Bird of Prey - March 9, 2013

0:53: “There be whales here!” ;-)

63. Jason S. - March 9, 2013

*sigh*

What has come of my beloved Star Trek? :(

64. Capt. of the USS Anduril - March 9, 2013

Very nice trailer. Enjoyable, flashy, but still has some elements of Trek that we should all love.

Still seeing a lot of Han Solo in the new Kirk, and that’s not bad. AND PIKE IS OUT OF THE WHEELCHAIR!!!

65. rickindc - March 9, 2013

Looking GOOD!

66. al - March 9, 2013

I’m really enjoying JJ’s trek. Eventhough, I am a die hard fan of the original prime universe. I love this one because this is what Trek have seriously been missing from the original big screen movies…a sense of fun and hyper kinetic energy. I hope JJ returns after he’s done with Star Wars. I’ll wait another 4 years for Trek 3

67. Theatre Historian_Levi - March 9, 2013

MattR,
I have not but it should be as OZ IMAX is only playing in Digital IMAX screens as far as I am aware. but even if there is a film IMAX theatre playing, I would imagine it would be playing the teaser, since the only reason that 15/70 IMAX theatres didnt play the prolouge, was due to the run time of the Hobbit and the size of the film print on the IMAX platter.

Oz is only 2 hours and 10 mins quite a bit shorter than the hobbit and fewer reels so no issues fitting OZ and the regular compliment of trailers before the movie.

Though again I do think that OZ IMAX is strictly Digital IMAX

68. JohnRambo - March 9, 2013

@63
“What has come of my beloved Star Trek? :(”

My beloved Star Trek:-)

69. bmar - March 9, 2013

63 – Jason S.

It’s a good question, and don’t take this as picking a fight – it’s just an honest (in my opinion) answer to your question.

Well, a couple of thoughts.

First of all – your beloved Star Trek killed itself…accidentally, but killed itself nonetheless. Cause of death – ponderous, bloated plots and technobabble based dialogue. Navel-gazing, self-referencing, exclusionary plot lines. I hold as evidence, much of Voyager, Enterprise, Insurrection and Nemesis. And quite frankly – even though it’s sacrilege to say it, a good number of TNG episodes (recently went back and watched all of them…a lot of great ones, but also a lot of ho-hum). A contributing factor to the death is the dreaded overkill – too much Trek.

It got to the point that no one was watching – except the die hard fans, and most of the time, even they were not happy with it, but watching it out of habit – and to trash it on the internet.

Declining ratings, declining box office. No is to blame except Star Trek itself. You can point your finger at the “suits at Paramount” but they didn’t write the scripts, they didn’t come up with the plots. All that Paramount wants to do is make money – and there’s no crime in that. If the scripts were great, and the plots were great – then people would have watched, people would have gone to the movies, but they didn’t.

So – Trek’s only hope of any resuscitation was to give it a well needed shot in the arm of adrenaline, excitement, and commercially appealing plot lines. And that means reaching out to more than just the fans – it means re-engaging the public.

Which brings me to my second point – don’t judge too much by action packed trailers. They’re not made for you. You’re going to go anyway. As am I. As are all the fans. The trailers are for the rest of the world – the public who needs to come to this movie if there is going to be more Trek. If you made a plot heavy, dense Trek-ified trailer with lots of continuity, lots of characters that we know and love, and lots of talk – no non-fan or borderline fan would be interested.

So – to all of those out there who turn up their nose at the current incarnation of Trek, all I have to say is that I’d rather have this Trek than no Trek. I like it. It’s fun. It’s exciting. It makes you think. And it’s leaps and bounds better than nothing.

70. Flake - March 9, 2013

March 15th, 1964:

Star Trek is…

A one hour dramatic tv series

Action – Adventure – Science Fiction with strong central lead characters and other continuing regulars.

The only thing JJA has done is provide this concept with a budget of $200 million dollars and modern 21st century special effects.

71. Creed - March 9, 2013

Full write up and spoilers for the first half hour http://www.radiotimes.com/news/2013-03-09/dont-read-this-unless-you-want-to-know-what-happens-in-the-first-28-mins-of-star-trek-into-darkness

72. John - March 9, 2013

Prime Timeline fans right now!
http://i.imgur.com/fkLF9.gif

73. Exverlobter - March 9, 2013

@ 63.
“What has come of my beloved Star Trek? :(”

Whats your problem? This trailer captures the essence of Trek more than the first one, which seemed like a Dark Knight Ripoff.

74. Flake - March 9, 2013

I am a fan of the prime timeline and I like the new movies.

We got some god awful stuff in the prime timeline, remember?

75. bterrik - March 9, 2013

@40 It looks to me like it has the flatter, angular nacelles similar to the ship that appears to be crashing into the water in other trailers. Good catch! Maybe we see our crew interact with more than one starship!

76. Flake - March 9, 2013

I guess the people in the suits are Kirk and Spock going toward a ship commanded by Harrison that ends up crashing and both Spock and Harrison emerge from the wreckage and the chase scene happens?

77. njdss4 - March 9, 2013

Great trailer, but the story is what will make or break this movie to me, and I think it’s the same for most hardcore Trek fans. We already know the movie has the budget for big effects and explosions, but will it have characters we can relate to and care about? Does the villain have any depth this time around? Gotta wait to see the whole movie to find out, unfortunately.

78. New Horizon - March 9, 2013

16. RenderedToast – March 9, 2013

I have to agree. None of the trailers for this movie have drawn me in the way that one for Star Trek 09 did. The Trailers for Trek 2013 seem so disjointed, loud, and generic that I can’t find anything to grab onto.

This short one with Pike is good, but it still doesn’t grab the imagination and spark the awe filled fantasies in my head.

I’m hoping the marketing department will get their act together and really sell this movie to me. As a long time fan, I’m looking for something of a bit more substance. Explosions and ships crashing into the water don’t wow me. Thought provoking ideas that challenge my way of thinking do….the effects and pow pow boom boom are just icing.

79. AyanEva - March 9, 2013

Just bought a third IMAX 3D ticket for my sister’s boyfriend who we’ve (easily) talked into coming with us on May 15th. Party of three! I’m so excited and this trailer is great. I love the banter between Kirk and Spock and hope we see more of it.

80. MJ - March 9, 2013

@79. No, I won’t go there. :-))

81. Cervantes - March 9, 2013

The Two Steps From Hell music from the 3rd 2009 trailer was truly epic-sounding. I’m STILL disappointed it wasn’t heard in the actual movie!

Wish the next, longer trailer for this one could end up sounding as awesome.

82. MEh - March 9, 2013

Has the feel of Star Wars

83. Jemini - March 9, 2013

BONES! Bones Bones
Sassy Spock in the shuttle LOL I love him

my two favorite things in the trailer

(oh and Uhura is still gorgeous with that wetsuit, I love she’s in the shuttle with K/S and I love the bit from the nine minutes preview between her and Spock )

84. Lurker - March 9, 2013

3 IS a magic number…

85. MJ - March 9, 2013

With JJ’s rigid super-secrecy policy, the pre-release of the 30-minutes of footage in Brazil and France, plus the opening in so many parts of the world of STID six days earlier than in the U.S., seem incredibly hypocritical to those of us fans in the U.S. who have been essentially forced to financially double-dip here to pay for the IMAX Hobbit preview and now the IMAX Fan Sneak on the 15th. With my two boys, that is about a $200 investment (for tickets, driving 2 hours to the nearest IMAX, and food).

With this significant personal investment many of us fans in the U.S. are making, we should at least be getting to have the opening night date that is not preceded by others anywhere else in the world.

86. AyanEva - March 9, 2013

@80 LOL I thought of that the second after I posted it but it was too late to fix it!

87. Paul - March 9, 2013

Not having seen the the IMAX 9 minute preview, this teaser contained about 75% new footage for this very pleasantly surprised viewer!

88. We get to see it FIRST!!!!!!! - March 9, 2013

Yeah It’s great we get it here first in the UK, (I’ve also heard a rumor that Europe are also doing the 2 day early promotion for the Imax, so we’ll get to see it on the 7th, Woo!! Hoo!!!) and only at a box standard price for the Imax seats too. if you US guys want the full synopsis of spoilers one week beforehand, just let us Europeans know & we’ll spill the beans…

It’s not very often….but ain’t life great….

89. ObsessiveStarTrekFan - March 9, 2013

… and May is still too far away!!!

90. RAMA - March 9, 2013

69. One of the best posts I’ve seen on this site. Kudos

91. MJ - March 9, 2013

@90. I’m not going there, even though you have pitched such a great softball to me right over the plate (given our recent discussions). ;-)

92. RAMA - March 9, 2013

91. Ah, you think I didn’t notice that?? lol

93. MJ - March 9, 2013

@88. If I was single, I think I would take a vacation to London and join all of your in seeing it a week early. But also, the mortgage, kids in school, wife out of work… But very cool for you all! I am happy for all of you who do get to see it early — my being upset is only directed at the studio and JJ.

94. MJ - March 9, 2013

@92. Yea, and BTW, I agree with you. bmars post @69 really put this all in the proper perspective.

“See, we are starting to get along”

:-)

95. Aix - March 9, 2013

May the gods bless you, bmar!

96. RAMA - March 9, 2013

94. Incidentally MJ I noted you have kids and can understand your concerns about sexual content, but firstly, this’ll be pg-13, I doubt there will be much you have to explain to your kids (“oh yeah, those kitty cats needed somewhere to curl up and keep warm”). Secondly, the notion that ST was only for kids disappeared long ago, it has to appeal to all ages.

I hate to be too general I agree with most of what bmars has to say, though of course I loved the 4th season of Enterprise and Voyager had it’s winners as well here and there.

97. sisko - March 9, 2013

I have nothing to add to this thread other than: This trailer works for me!

98. MJ - March 9, 2013

@96. While I would certainly prefer my youger boy not be exposed to a bunch of sex in movies right now (older is 16, no problem), that really has nothing to do with my opinion.

I have been a huge fan of Trek since the early 70’s, and love most of it, including Trek 2009, which has revitalized the franchise. Given that, I very much know what kind of Trek works best, and what doesn’t. In this case, at first glance, I don’t think that scene works. And in general, there are a lot of movies out there — many of which I have seen or will see in the future — that cover sex, adult humor, etc. — I am perfectly happy getting my feel of sex an adult humor from those movies, and I don’t really need to have have this stuff in my Star Trek movies. It just doesn’t fit well, and is usually handled rather clumsily by Trek when the have tried it (re: the much ridiculed Wes Crusher “Justice” episode in TNG and the silly 3-breasted Total Recall-ripoff catwoman in STV)

Even it we will never agree on this, hopefully, this will make you understand my view better?

99. We get to see it FIRST!!!!!!! - March 9, 2013

#94 MJ

I do understand your concerns directed at JJ, but you have to think of the entire history of Trek. The US has always got it first. (obviously Star Trek is a US production)

Back to the 1960’s when Trek was first shown, as a boy, we did not get it until the 1970’s.

Then there’s all the new series, starting with TNG, had to wait ages, before it got aired on UK TV.

Film Release, the UK were always behind, Had to wait until the US & Canada had finished showing the film in their cinemas, before they shipped out the 35mm films to the UK theatres to be shown.

Video releases, always behind…..

it’s only recently with the digital age that we have caught up a little, take for instance, say, “The Walking Dead” you get it on Sunday Night, we get it on the following “Friday”

So you guy’s are always that little bit ahead of Europe.

So when we get something first, I can’t help but be over excited & do cartwheels & back flips.

100. MJ - March 9, 2013

@99. Yea, OK, I get that! Cool !

101. Red Dead Ryan - March 9, 2013

For all you Trek fundamentalists and Talifans out there, stay home and watch your TOS VHS tapes instead of bitching about how these new Trek movies “aren’t real Star Trek”. The rest of us will go and have a great time at the theatre without having to put up with you crapping in your pants beside us.

The thing is, these movies are made for the mainstream. But they are also made for Trekkies. Trekkies who are open-minded, and willing to accept a new spin on our favorite film and tv franchise.

102. Disinvited - March 9, 2013

#96. RAMA – March 9, 2013

There is no way to know what rating it will have until they are done with it, submit a version to the Ratings Board, and decide whether or not cuts are warranted for that rating.

“…what we showed was work in progress. as we progressed, we decided it was better another way. we may change it back before it’s released!” – Bob Orci

103. somethoughts - March 9, 2013

I love that space chase scene, feels very epic late 70s, early 80s style cinema, can’t wait!

104. Pensive's Wetness - March 9, 2013

any thoughts into that, maybe, that attack that is mentioned previously, results in the the space station (and maybe some of the star fleet ships) is the wreckage seen in the space insertion by Kirk?

105. DisgruntledTrekkie - March 9, 2013

101.
You mean Trekkies who will swallow whatever line Abrams and Orci feeds them.

106. Gary S - March 9, 2013

101, Is a Talifan a Fundamentalist Trek Fan with the Rabid mentality of a member of The Taliban?
I ask out of curiousity.
I have not seen that term before .
If so, I do not fall into that category .
I am Very much looking forward to the film.

107. JRT! - March 9, 2013

Good thing I’m not a Trekkie,I’m just a simple Trekker which means I can enjoy whatever crap they churn out,LOL! Roll on new episodes of Doctor Who at the end of this month,and the new Superman movie in June and Pacific Rim in July, Yeah,even new Spidey next May,lol! I love my short attention span at times like this!

J-R!

108. MJ - March 9, 2013

The way the release dates are stacking up, not doubt real members of the Taliban will be able to see STID at the Kandahar cinema a week before us in the states.

109. Newdivide1701 - March 9, 2013

@ #29, you mean before Wrath of Khan?

110. Bmar - March 9, 2013

90, 94 & 95 – thanks for the kind words. I just calls ‘em as I sees ‘em. I’ve been in and around Trek for most of my life – both personally, and fortunately, professionally – and it’s great to see that it has life again. Some may take exception to some of the ways that they’ve crafted it, but no one can deny that for the first time in a long while, Trek is relevant again.

111. Ahmed - March 9, 2013

@ 108. MJ – March 9, 2013

The way the release dates are stacking up, not doubt real members of the Taliban will be able to see STID at the Kandahar cinema a week before us in the states.

L0L,
You know, it is kinda insane that people in North America get to see the movie AFTER its release in half dozen countries.

112. MJ - March 9, 2013

@110

I realize this may be a stretch. But given your post here where you say you have worked in Trek, I see”

Berman, Rick = Bma R = Bmar

?????

Are you Rick Berman, dude?

If so, welcome, Mr. Berman!

113. somejackball - March 9, 2013

short and sweet, and full of fun! only 2 months away now =)

114. Bmar - March 9, 2013

You guys make it pointless to try and hide! Lol. Thanks for having me. I have built my life around Trek and I am proud to call the people of Star Trek my family. Hopefully, once the new movies start dying down in popularity I can start a new Star Trek series…even if it is animated!….If I am still alive that is! ;)

115. Valenti - March 9, 2013

Well dang, colour me excited!

116. somethoughts - March 9, 2013

#114

Hey Mr. Berman! I grew up watching TNG and loved it. Really enjoyed best of both worlds, yesterday’s enterprise, all good things…First Contact was good also. I figure I praise you for all the good you did also since I have been critical in the past over Insurrection, Nemesis and the budget for those films and scope.

Was there every a consideration for a Q film? and if so why did it not happen, thanks!

117. Red Dead Ryan - March 9, 2013

Gary S., you are right about the definition of Talifan. You are clearly not one, as you haven’t slammed the new movies or J.J Abrams.

Talifans are hard-core Gene Roddenberry worshippers who adhere to a rigid line of thinking when it comes to what constitutes “true Star Trek”.

They consider “Gene’s Vision” as holy scripture, and deem “Deep Space Nine” as non-Star Trek, and J.J Abrams and co. as heretics and infidels.

As for Rick Berman posting on this site, don’t count on it. He’s never been one to interact with the fans during his Trek days, and I doubt he’d have the guts to do so now.

At least Brannon Braga has shown a willingness to at least appear at conventions and even post a comment or two once in a while on this site.

118. Holt - March 9, 2013

You suck Berman. Go back into hiding.

119. MJ - March 9, 2013

Well if this is not Rick Berman, using the “Bmar” label and waiting for someone to decipher it was pretty dang clever.

120. Bmar - March 9, 2013

Heh, I was going to chat, but people like Holt are the reason I usually stay away from these internet hotspots. I am too old for this stuff! ;) Enjoy Star Trek guys, and try to be good.

121. MJ - March 9, 2013

@120. Rick, if that is really you, I apologize for anybody here being rude to you. Although a number of us have issues with the latter half of your tenure on the new Trek series, being rude here to your face is just not cool.

Best Regards,

MJ

122. Buzz Cagney - March 9, 2013

I just peed my pants watching the new Trailer. I’m putting it down to the water pills my doctor has me on.

123. Promo Boy - March 9, 2013

Agreed- great trailer.
Question: Is Pike standing? Seems like he’s eye level to Kirk while reprimanding him. Wasn’t he in a wheel chair last we saw him?
I assumed his condition was permanent-with a nod to the original series
where the elder Pike was also confined to a wheelchair.
I guess this new JJ universe Pike got better.
Thoughts?

124. MJ - March 9, 2013

@122. That is good sign, Buzz, considering your been pissing all over Trek 2009 here for the past several years.

You are going to like this new movie I think — bring adult pampers to the premiere!

:-)

125. Buzz Cagney - March 9, 2013

#124 lol.
Do I see just the suggestion that you are getting your doubts about this new one, MJ? You find the thought of 3 boobies a bit intimidating? :))

I have to admit, Kirk having it away with catwomen is a bit much. Though you do have to wonder what their tongues feel like!

Do you reckon thats really Berman above there?

126. Red Dead Ryan - March 9, 2013

#122.

Well I guess that happens when you lower your expectations as far you did!

You’re in (urine?) for a good time at the theatre.

127. Buzz Cagney - March 9, 2013

I was wondering if perhaps Data’s cat will turn out to be a descendant of Captain Kirks! Now that really would be a twist we didn’t see coming. Apart from just there, where I saw it coming!!

128. Buzz Cagney - March 9, 2013

#126 oh yea, RDR, my expectations are at rock bottom. Only one way to go from here. ;)

129. Vultan - March 9, 2013

#127

That might explain why Spot changed from male to female over the course of the show, Buzz. Kirk and his catwomen orgies create a race of shape-shifting Meow Mix mutants!

130. Red Dead Ryan - March 9, 2013

I don’t know for sure how Kirk ends up doing the two cat-women in bed in the sequel, but I’m sure he was very upfront with them and didn’t pussyfoot around the issue.

Unless someone’s LION about something?

131. MJ - March 9, 2013

Buzz, I think that really might have been Rick Berman.

The only three boobed gal I ever had a crush one died in a bar on Mars.

I am still very positive about this movie, even though their may be that groaner of a cat scene thrown in.

132. MJ - March 9, 2013

@130. Of course Kirk didn’t. He’s not a pussy!

(memo to Bob Orci: this is just the start of the never ending jokes you are going to hear for the rest of your career if the scene stays in…LOL)

133. MJ - March 9, 2013

I wonder if the feline aliens in the movie shave?

And given this key question, now it makes complete sense to me why that scene premiered in Brazil.

;-)

134. Red Dead Ryan - March 9, 2013

I also hear one of the Cat-Women has a spotty track record when it comes to being faithful to her partner(s). They classify her as a serial Cheetah, and she has lots of dates on her speed dial.

An actress as well, she is the star of “The Fast And The Fur-ious”.

135. Buzz Cagney - March 10, 2013

Sorry to hear of your loss, MJ. No wonder you are feeling touchy about it. :)

I was wondering if, after Kirk has had his way, he puts the catwomen outside for the night? A bloody brilliant way of keeping rodents to a minimum on the Enterprise. Keenser should probably worry though!

136. Red Dead Ryan - March 10, 2013

I wonder, prior to meeting Kirk, how many cat-calls the feline women got?

Though they obviously thought of Kirk as being the “cat’s meow”!

And they spent their first menage a troi in CAT-MAN-DO!

137. Buzz Cagney - March 10, 2013

pmsl you are enjoying this aren’t you!
They’ll not cut the scene, MJ, its the high point of the movie.
I reckon Scotty is going to catch that bloody big fish- beam it to the cargo deck most likely. It’ll keep Kirk’s feline gals happy for years.
He’ll be the cat’s whiskers. The pussies meaoww.

138. MJ - March 10, 2013

All four of them?

139. Red Dead Ryan - March 10, 2013

I got to wonder, though, just how far we can go with our “catty” remarks?

And I don’t mean to in-fur anything, either!

140. MJ - March 10, 2013

One thing I will not accept. If that fish Scotty sees get’s eaten by a bigger fish, and Spock says, “there’s always a bigger fish,” I will walk out of the theater.

141. Theatre Historian_Levi - March 10, 2013

MJ Theproblem with it opening any earlier in the U.S. is two fold

First if you open Trek intoDarknes even a week earlier your encountering what is still be a very strong second weekend of Iron Man3
Lets face it even in its second week Iron Man 3 will still be at the top of the box office.

Second Iron Man 3 is contractually set to play on the majority of US domestic IMAX screens for a specific amount of days, if the Trek Into Darkness moves up a week, the maximum number of Imax screens (especially the important 15/70 film print IMAX screens)would not be availble, because Iron Man 3 is allready booked on them through the afternoon of the 15th.

So while I to wish that we could get this before other parts of the world the theatre exhibition side of it cant really allow for it in this case.

142. MJ - March 10, 2013

Perhaps Kirk ends up with with them after violating the Starfleet penal code?

143. MJ - March 10, 2013

@141. OK, I get that. But why does it need to open earlier in other parts of the world? What the rush on the foreign end?

Thanks

144. Red Dead Ryan - March 10, 2013

#140.

I can’t see the producers baiting us with that one…

145. Marja - March 10, 2013

#69, Bmar, made many excellent points, but I am interested to note [if he is Berman] that he points out tehnobabble dialogue as such a turn-off … because that happened a lot during Rick Berman’s tenure.

Technobabble was the big reason I quit watching Voyager …. Jiminy crickets, whattabore.

Holt, jeez, hate much?

146. Red Dead Ryan - March 10, 2013

#142.

“Perhaps Kirk ends up with with them after violating the Starfleet penal code?”

Wouldn’t he be in violation of the “penal” code WHILE he’s with the pussies?

:-)

147. Red Dead Ryan - March 10, 2013

Geez, where’s Harry Ballz? This thread would be a purr-fect one for his humor!

Unless he’s busy coughing up hairballz?

148. Theatre Historian_Levi - March 10, 2013

143 MJ, that I can not give an exact answer for.

Generally its been happing with a number of summer tent pole movies in the last few years, its generally to put a dent on pirating, which is still a huge issue for the studios in foreign markets.

Its had great effect on the international grosses of some of the big summer tent poles,so I imagine (but in no way certain) that is probably the mindset.

149. Jack - March 10, 2013

69. Bmar. A belated ‘great post.’

150. shamelord - March 10, 2013

Kirk’s ship on Vulcan could well be the Captain’s Yatch.

What do you think?

151. Star Trek Nemesis is a sequel to movie, in a series of films - March 10, 2013

Enough with the lame cat jokes.
We have had Feline women in the federation before.

152. Star Trek Nemesis is a sequel to movie, in a series of films - March 10, 2013

Now JJ is apeing Stuart Baird with the ship to ship jump.

Data did it much more gracefully in Star Trek nemesis

153. Buzz Cagney - March 10, 2013

#151 ok, ok, one more. There really will be Pussy Galore in this Trek.
There, i’m done. :)

I can’t believe that was Berman whining on about technobabble. He was the guy that overused it in the first place.
I remember James Doohan saying, after filming Generations, that he said to Berman it was overdone but Rick disagreed saying it was what the fans wanted! er, not really. Not so much at any rate.

154. Marja - March 10, 2013

Buzz, if in fact it was Berman at #69. But it was a great post!

I agreed with much of what Bmar said.

Trek of necessity has become a “tentpole” franchise [which word to me always has had unfortunate connotations with adolescent boys, but nevermind].

I am sorry we have to wait for IM3 to run for its first two weeks. In fact I hope week 3 of IM doesn’t whomp STiD in box office. [shaking fist to sky] DAMMMN YOUUU IRON MANNNN

Nope fans don’t want technobabble. They want MEANINGFUL stories. And evolving characters. And yeah, some adventurous sci-fi type stuff. Explosions and vengeance, meh. But that’s part of the mix now. As a fan, I accept it; I know durn well I’ll be in line on opening day.

Let the “Heroes’ Journey” continue [yes, deliberate plural there]. Let the Talifans rant if they must, but I bet lots of them will be in attendance May 9th/17th.

I’m so glad Pike plays an important part in this movie. I just HOPE he doesn’t die at the end … nonononono

I saw where Spock “is assigned to the Bradbury” … nice tribute, guys! Ray Bradbury, R. I. P. among the stars …

155. kevan - March 10, 2013

All the reference to star wars. Wow. So star trek has no other space ships but huge starships, really they have no idea how to make small sleek spacecraft. I wish people would stop the reference to star wars. I could reference tmp with2001 a space odyssey. Star trek nemesis with star trek 2 etc…

Two space franchises that have big spaceships etc, you can infer anything with them that are the same.

156. Janice - March 10, 2013

So glad to see some PIKE in the trailer. AND he seems to be up on his feet! Really happy about that. Also nice to hear Kirk say “Punch It” just like Pike did in ST 2009. What I’m really looking for in this new movie though is for PIKE to be alive and kicking at the end. I can deal with injured Pike but not dead Pike.

157. Bmar - March 10, 2013

Wow…never though I’d have my name stolen. Guys I’m Bmar. Have been posting under that handle since Trekmovie began. Posts number 69 and 110 are mine. The subsequent posts are someone else using my name. Anthony can check and verify.

No, I’m not Rick Berman. I just a guy who has loved (but not idolized) trek for a long time on a personal level, and my professional career has given me the opportunity to work in the trek world (albeit briefly). Do you think that Rick Berman would have said the things I said about trek, back in post 69? :)

Posts 114 and 120 are not me, so whomever has decided to appropriate my name, I wish you’d stop, please.

Anthony, any way you can post a note clarifying? Thanks.

158. Jonbc - March 10, 2013

From #69 “First of all – your beloved Star Trek killed itself…accidentally, but killed itself nonetheless. Cause of death – ponderous, bloated plots and technobabble based dialogue. Navel-gazing, self-referencing, exclusionary plot lines. I hold as evidence, much of Voyager, Enterprise, Insurrection and Nemesis. And quite frankly – even though it’s sacrilege to say it, a good number of TNG episodes (recently went back and watched all of them…a lot of great ones, but also a lot of ho-hum). ”

I have no problem believing Bmar has worked in the franchise after reading this spot-on observation. But at the same time, everything I’ve seen and read about Berman would indicate there’s no way he would ever say such things because he truly believes the opposite. He was blind to the reality of current Trek’s real state of unpopularity.

159. ObsessiveStarTrekFan - March 10, 2013

Having spent some time trawling through Internet sites to read how the media are reacting to this trailer (and it seems quite positive in general), I am finding myself increasingly annoyed/frustrated at the number of sites with incorrect information. There are a number of them reporting that it is Spock running with Kirk through a red forest – we know this is McCoy, not Spock. Don’t reporters bother to check things any more? One gets it wrong and the others just copy it.

I suppose at this stage only the trekkies/trekkers care – but it still gets my goat.

160. Bmar - March 10, 2013

158 jonbc – see my post at 157. I’m not Berman, and I did not work in the franchise directly, but worked with the TOS cast in an earlier incarnation of my career, and as a writer, had the opportunity to be in the Trek offices at paramount several times, pitching stories.

161. JimJ - March 10, 2013

I feel a Trekgasm coming on!!!!

162. jamesingeneva - March 10, 2013

Anyone have a new link to the trailer? Seems the one in the thread is dead. Thanks!

163. Spockchick - March 10, 2013

@ 160. Bmar
*sigh* we really need proper sign-in for this place. And, wow, you lucky thing :-)

164. CarlG - March 10, 2013

Now…. THIS trailer got me excited. :)
Makes it look much more fun and less gloomy than the other ones.

165. Jonboc - March 10, 2013

…sorry Bmar, I must have just missed your post, it looks like it was right before mine. Yeah, I was like, no way Berman would have ever said those things! lol Like I said, your observation were right on the money. Fortunately, a new dawn is upon us and the powers that be are using THE Star Trek as their blueprint. I can’t imagine how amazing it must have been to work with THE definitive cast of Trek, very cool.

166. bmar - March 10, 2013

Jonboc & Spockchick – Yep, I was truly lucky. Not often in life you get to love something from an early age, and then be able to, as an adult, work in an arena that allows you access to the thing you loved. I was lucky to work with the entire Original Cast, just before De Kelley died, and, amongst many amazing moments, had two that stand out.

One – me, Nimoy and Shatner having lunch. Just the three of us. Me, calm and professional on the outside, and the inner geek exploding on the inside.

Two – Knocking back Scotch with Captain Kirk, toasting the end of our project. I don’t even LIKE Scotch – but hell, how many times do you get to drink with the MAN himself, right?

Anyway – I don’t say these things to brag – I say them to give perspective. I have a deep love of Trek, and I, for one, am happy to see it in the hands of people who both love it and see it for what it is – an amazing adventure. Silly, sublime, inspiring, exciting, provoking – and fun.

167. Sebastian S. - March 10, 2013

That is one of the most exciting and well-cut trailers I’ve seen in awhile. Only hope the movie is as good.

Kudos to the team who put it together. ;-)

168. John - March 10, 2013

Oh my god, Han, Leia and Luke might be in the Episode VII.

Discuss!

169. bmar - March 10, 2013

168 – John – Nope it’s not “might” – it’s confirmed. All three have signed. As matter of fact, Lucasfilm apparently did the deal with all three of them before the sale to Disney.

170. bmar - March 10, 2013

168 – And furthermore – the even BETTER news is that Lawrence Kasdan is working on the script.

171. richpit - March 10, 2013

It looks awesome to me! Can’t wait to see it in the theaters 3 or 4 times. I think I saw Trek 2009 4 times in theaters and countless times on Blu-Ray.

172. Mr Abrams world - March 10, 2013

#168 John.

Hamill, Yes….Ford, Yes….Fisher, yes, but my god why?

Why can’t they recast her, with an actress who pleasing to the eye to look at. Looking at Carrie Fisher now, spoils all my teenage fantasies I had of her in the Jabba’s Palace Attire. Hubba, Hubba!!

173. Read Dead Ryan - March 10, 2013

#172.

Yeah, agreed! I think only Harrison Ford was needed. Unlike him, neither Mark Hamill nor Carrie Fisher have starred in any major roles in a long time, and both are drastically out of shape and lost their looks a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away.

174. DeShonn Steinblatt - March 10, 2013

Nice. Definitely Bigger and Bolder.

175. Commodore Adams - March 10, 2013

@ 22. SherlockFangirl – March 9, 2013

Yea ok….it looks like Coruscant, but even Coruscant had more unique structures. Qo’Nos no longer looks like Qo’Nos, hopefully we’ll see more but the structures look like generic modern and cliche futuristic forms, nothing unique like the Klingon architecture we know from TNG and Enterprise. Then again you could nerd out and say Klingons ruling the empire of this time are the half human hybrids dominating the full-bloods therefore they will forge the empire the way they see fit. And we never saw Qo’Nos in TOS.

Just wish it looked a little more unique and interesting is all :)

176. Calastir - March 10, 2013

Looks like a thrilling carnival ride, but also just as forgetful.

177. MJ - March 10, 2013

“Yeah, agreed! I think only Harrison Ford was needed. Unlike him, neither Mark Hamill nor Carrie Fisher have starred in any major roles in a long time, and both are drastically out of shape and lost their looks a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away.”

I agree completely. JJ may have to use CGI on Hamill and Fischer if their roles are going to be more than cameos. Or, perhaps the studio has put in their contract appearance/weight goals to get them motivated to look good for the movie.

178. MJ - March 10, 2013

Bmar, sorry I caused all the hoopla late last night by dissecting your post name to Rick Bergman. I mean, the letters did kind of fit. Whoops!

Anyway, I loved your original post. Well said!

179. Keachick - March 10, 2013

I have not watched the trailer. I might *learn* too much. I am not sure how long I will be able to hold out, but so far so good. Perhaps it is because I have assuaged myself of various chocolate – caramel, peppermint… over the weekend so I don’t feel quite so deprived. However, my waistline is grumbling…sigh…just can’t win here…;)

MJ – I doubt the sex scenes are that long. The entire episode of Kirk and two alien women should probably be longer in order to give the audience a better sense of who these women are and how the three feel about one another. I doubt that will happen though – too many explosions, leaping from tall buildings, hanging etc to be done and only so much time to do it in. I am not complaining though. I know Kirk to be a fairly decent guy, even in youth, so it’s all good. I have no idea if such a short scene is in the movie, but perhaps it might be included, even at this late date – it seems that Kirk is abruptly called back on duty when he is with the women and he leaves in a hurry. A later scene could have him send a *message to the women apologizing for his hasty exit, telling them that he had a nice time, was glad to have met them and hopes to catch up with them again soon. (I assume that all three did enjoy the company). That is the *MESSAGE that (teenage) males need to get from the movie, ie Kirk showing respect and friendship towards the two women.

My kids have seen stuff like sex and violence on TV and DVD. It is hard to shelter them from everything that comes across the airways or is it by internet cable…technology – such big words for me. Perhaps it is not necessarily even a good thing to do. My teenage boys know that it is not real, as does my little girl.

We do not allow access to internet p-rn sites. I am not sure the older boys (17 and 19) are that much interested. They know the women are suctioned, botoxed, breast enhanced – in other words, there is probably very little that is real about these women shown on such sites….and similar could be said of the men as well, not breast enhanced but…It is just a crock.

180. MJ - March 10, 2013

Again, my opinions on this are not related to what is appropriate for children. Rather I am focused on what Star Trek should be focusing on. I’ll repeat what I said earlier on this:

I have been a huge fan of Trek since the early 70′s, and love most of it, including Trek 2009, which has revitalized the franchise. Given that, I very much know what kind of Trek works best, and what doesn’t. In this case, at first glance, I don’t think that scene works. And in general, there are a lot of movies out there — many of which I have seen or will see in the future — that cover sex, adult humor, etc. — I am perfectly happy getting my feel of sex an adult humor from those movies, and I don’t really need to have have this stuff in my Star Trek movies. It just doesn’t fit well, and is usually handled rather clumsily by Trek when the have tried it (re: the much ridiculed Wes Crusher “Justice” episode in TNG and the silly 3-breasted Total Recall-ripoff catwoman in STV).

181. bmar - March 10, 2013

178 – MJ – No prob. Thanks…

182. Keachick - March 10, 2013

MJ – For a start, this Star Trek movie is not just your Star Trek movie. You keep saying that and now I think you are being a little rude. Why shouldn’t this revitalized Star Trek focus a little on relationships and sexuality? Do you think that such realities will not exist in any 23rd century future?

These main characters are human beings or human/vulcan beings and relationship/sexuality is a core of who we are and I very much doubt that will change over the next 200 years and nor should it. So far, the new Star Trek has dealt with the deranged, destructive mentality of an aggrieved Romulan out for revenge because he lost his entire world and would not believe that prime Spock was not somehow responsible for his world’s demise. Now in STID, there is a John Harrison who appears to want to punish humankind (or certainly London and San Francisco) for whatever (I’ll wait for 9/5/13). There is certain to be a lot of focus on Starfleet’s/Federation’s attitudes and readiness to deal with such attacks etc. The trailers so far have depicted some of this.

However, in the middle of all this, humans and others are more than likely, in relationships of various kind, including romantic/sexual ones. I see no reason why some aspects of this cannot/should not be shown in this movie, whether it be Spock and Uhura, or Kirk and whoever she/they may be… Relationships (not just in a work environment within Starfleet) in a 23rd century Star Trek world are entirely APPROPRIATE!

Although these are fictional characters, they also represent a facet of our real humanity. Therefore, humour, sexuality, relationship are important as they ground the characters and the viewers and give us something we can relate to. That is important in attracting large audiences, both male and female.

Kirk is not just a (demoted?) Starfleet officer. He is also a young man with interests, needs, desires, some of which work will not fulfill. The mistake that so many make is to think and even write a character and story around the notion that simply being a captain of the best ship and crew can, of itself, fulfill all that is Kirk. It is unhealthy, disrespectful to him (and all the other characters as well) and presents a false message about ourselves as human beings to a wider audience.

To say that this scene does not work is a bit foolish, since we have not seen it in its full context.

183. sean - March 10, 2013

#180

To be fair, Trek V was *before* Total Recall, so they can’t have ripped that off.

But I’m with you that it was silly.

184. Keachick - March 10, 2013

Edit: meant to write “…SHOWING relationships (not just in a work…”

Sorry, re-read your comment and saw “at first glance” re the threesome scene.

185. MJ - March 10, 2013

@182. Knock it off. When I am saying “my Star Trek” I obviously am meaning my personal relationship with the product. Come on!!!

Sheeh, you can be just such a jerk at times, Keachick.

And by the way, once I saw that asinine personal attack on my in your latest super-long post, I decided not to read the rest of your post — no longer interested.

186. Keachick - March 10, 2013

#185 – No, MJ, you knock it off. Your “personal relationship with the product” means that you think you can dictate what the producers and writers can show or not show in *your* Star Trek.

People have made fun of me referring to Captain Kirk as “my captain”. I refer to Kirk as “my captain” as a way of conferring affection towards the character. However, what you are doing is different. By constantly stating that it is YOUR Star Trek and then saying what you don’t want to ever see in YOUR Star Trek, that is CENSORSHIP. Paramount/Bad Robot should not give into such notions as you have expressed, because you seek to exclude.

I have never said that Star Trek movies should not show wars, fighting, battle scenes, other scenes showing grief, sadness, revenge filled insanity, whatever, because I know that is unfortunately a part of life (and the movie business). All I do say is that such stories and scenes should perhaps be tempered by other smaller stories/sub-plots which show beings behaving in ways that allows for intimacy and friendship and not just be about protagonists fighting or fleeing violence and/or saving a vessel and crew.

A small scene (sub-plot) that appears to give the viewer a glance into such a more plesanter situation has been called out by you and others, because you do not want to see that kind of thing in “my Star Trek”.

I always thought Star Trek was about inclusion, not exclusion. You seek exclusion. I seek INCLUSION, not exclusion!

187. Red Dead Ryan - March 10, 2013

Keachick’s long-winded, bloated lectures got tiresome a long time ago.

For the last time, just because sex is natural doesn’t mean we need to see it in Trek. Just like we don’t need to see Uhura changing her tampons, or Chekov wiping his ass after using the crapper. Those things are “natural human activities”, too, but nobody (except maybe Keachick) is clamoring for that to be included in future Treks.

188. Keachick - March 10, 2013

I am not necessarily clamoring for sex to be included in Star Trek. The real problem is that you and MJ in particular are clamoring for sex to be excluded from (future) Star Trek and complaining if any is included in any film.

You want to censor the producers and writers. That is what I am against.

Once again, you, RDR, as well, equate sexual intimacy as being similar in act to going to the crapper and wiping one’s arse afterwards. That is biologically ignorant and very offensive. Making love, having sexual intercourse is NOT the same as taking a crap and I feel sorry that you insist on likening one with the other. Women generally do not wish to sexually engage with anyone while they are menstruating, so to liken sexual intercourse with a female changing her tampon is also a biological inaccuracy and ludicrous.

Besides, I did not bring up tampons, crapping and ass wiping. You MALES did that, which not only shows how offensive you are but also how ignorant you are basic human biology and of most women.

Now – be gone and take your crap and menstrual soaked tampons with you. I mean, what possessed you even to think of those functions in relation to sexual intercourse? Holy Moly.

This film shows Kirk being sexually active with two females, not about MJ’s and RDR’s fantasies about crapping and tampons. Just so we are clear!

PS – I am not sure that I am not being trolled here by you guys. It is just too lewd and unbelievable. MJ – I think you have really outdone yourself this time and not in a good way.

189. MJ - March 10, 2013

@186

That is an unacceptable response. Criticizing my love of Star Trek where I use a simple personal term like “my Star Trek,” is the last straw here. I am sick and tired of your personal attacks and twisting everything I say into some kind of perceived insult that you then try to use against me — thus fitting everything I say into your Fkd-up view of the world here. You are not going to bully me any further here. ENOUGH !!!!!

190. MJ - March 10, 2013

@188

W O W ! ! !

??????

191. Red Dead Ryan - March 10, 2013

Keachick:

Once again you deliberately distorted what I wrote. I never compared sex to crapping or menstruating. All I said was just because sex is natural, doesn’t mean it has to be included. Just like how menstruating and crapping are perfectly natural but yet nobody includes those facets of life in movies.

Sheesh!

Talk about not getting through the all white noise!

192. Spock's Bangs - March 10, 2013

189 – You are not going to bully me any further here. ENOUGH !!!!!

Whoa! If that ain’t the pot calling the kettle black, I don’t know what is!! Hilarious!

193. Red Dead Ryan - March 10, 2013

#192.

Hmm……never seen you here before. Convenient that you happen to show up after another one of Keachick’s crazed rants!

194. Keachick - March 10, 2013

MJ – You are the one who loves twisting up what I say. You have been the one complaining about a small sex scene being shown in STID and saying you don’t want to see it in your Star Trek. Another poster even wanted to producers to delete the scene.

MJ – “Rather I am focused on what Star Trek should be focusing on…
I very much know what kind of Trek works best, and what doesn’t. In this case, at first glance, I don’t think that scene works. And in general, there are a lot of movies out there — many of which I have seen or will see in the future — that cover sex, adult humor, etc. — I am perfectly happy getting my feel of sex an adult humor from those movies, and I don’t really need to have have this stuff in my Star Trek movies. It just doesn’t fit well…”

And you think that the writers and producers (you know, those who wrote the scene(s)) and others like me are not focused about what would be good for Star Trek? It is your stance that bothers me. You act sometimes as if you are the only one who seems to know what’s best and what’s more, you would like to see that happen by having the producers/writers exclude normal healthy human behaviour from being written into storylines. You also seem to be a bit of a bully yourself and no stranger to twisting what I say to suit yourself.

How is my view of the world Fkd-up? You compare human sexual activity with the use of tampons and taking a crap. That’s a pretty fkd-up view, imo.

If my husband ever referred to sex in the way that you have here, he would have had his ass so thoroughly kicked that he would now be living in the northern hemisphere where he could happily go on confusing taking a crap with making love (sexual intimacy). Then again, he is clearly a much smarter and more discerning individual than most males and I know it would never even occur to him. It never occurred to me either, until your posts. Thanks for nothing, MJ.

As I said, you’ve really outdone yourself…:(

195. Spock's Bangs - March 10, 2013

187 -For the last time, just because sex is natural doesn’t mean we need to see it in Trek

Dude, speak for yourself! I love Kirk’s flings with the hot alien babes in TOS!!

196. Red Dead Ryan - March 10, 2013

#194.

Keachick, just lay off MJ, alright? He and I expressed opinions that differ from your own. Big frackin’ deal! GROW UP!

You’re the one acting immature here. Deliberately distorting other people’s comments into another diatribe/lecture. I would actually call that bullying.

Sheesh!

197. Keachick - March 10, 2013

Why not, RDR? In that case, we should not show anyone eating or drinking because that is also a damned messy business. People, adults, not just children, can be messy, spilling food and drink over themselves etc – yet Star Trek has often shown crew and other eating and drinking and what’s more, they have been shown drinking alcohol. Scotty’s drunken binges have become the stuff of “legend”.
Eating and drinking are also natural functions.

Oh and btw, the most natural, the cleanest, safest, least messy method of nutrient consumption is via the human female breast, ie breastfeeding and yet I doubt any film maker would dare show that activity because of the uproar from the ignorant prudes.

I do not want to see anyone pissing or crapping (although we did manage to see a guy attempt to take a crap in Cowboys & Aliens) and I don’t need to see Carol’s or Nyota’s tampons either. But sexual intimacy, more often than not, involves conversation, humour, affection and passion – that is a different activity altogether from the other stuff mentioned. I can’t believe I even need to explain this stuff. I guess that is why my posts seem so “longwinded” and “bloated” to some people – Worthwhile education often requires constant repetition…sigh…

198. Keachick - March 10, 2013

I have not been distorting anyone’s comments.

199. Red Dead Ryan - March 10, 2013

Yeah, but eating and drinking aren’t intimate activities like sex is. Depicting eating and drinking on screen doesn’t lead to objectification of people like sex tends to do.

CASE CLOSED!!!

200. Spock's Bangs - March 10, 2013

Red Dead Dude, you’re a hoot! YOu write “you’re the one acting immature here.”. And you have the nerve to say it right after you said, and I quote : “Big frackin’ deal! GROW UP!”.

Now I ask you, after that little tantrum, who is acting immature here?? Were you stomping your feet and holding your breath when you typed that?
You guys take the cake! I’m off to another article, as funny as you guys are, I wanna read some Star Trek news.

201. Curious Cadet - March 10, 2013

@197. Keachick,
“Scotty’s drunken binges have become the stuff of “legend”

And is is also a problem. I believe however, that in ST09 Abrams successfully showed the negative affects of binge drinking. Kirk was an alcoholic when we are first introduced to him in that bar, going nowhere. He spoils the responsible evening of drinking the Starfleet cadets are enjoying. Then we see Kirk give up the bottle and become Captain of the Enterprise.

It looks like STID is going to once again show us e perils of the bottle. I sincerely hope they are not going to ruin that by showing Scotty as a jolly drunken Scottsman based on his otherwise established reputation.

And remember, this has more to do with the targeted audience than it does with the actual subject matter. Adults theoretically have formed a solid sense of self, and can asses the behaviors of others without necessarily being swayed by them. Teenagers are impressionable. Showing a successful character, like Scotty, engaged in irresponsible behavior without any repercussions, indeed embraced by his fellow mates, sends the wrong message. And as long as Abrams is going after the “Transformers” audience, he has a responsibility as a filmmaker to temper his characters actions accordingly.

202. Admiral Archer's Prize Beagle - March 10, 2013

Ms. Keachick,

You are embarrassing all good women here with your disgusting posts about bloody tampons, etc. I mean, really, was it necessary to say:

“Now, be gone and take your crap and menstrual soaked tampons with you.”

How rude and inappropriate! Again, I am embarrassed for all of us women here in reading this. Shame on you! Go wash your mouth out with soap!

And if you really cared so much about women and sexual openness as you claim, then you wouldn’t be supporting this obvious objectivazation (is that a word?) of women in this really bad idea of a Kirk bad-boy bottoming out scene from the Supreme Court.

Grow up!

203. MJ - March 10, 2013

All, here is the original exchange between Keachick and I on this?

Keachick: “If the intimacy between Kirk and two catwomen was consensual and mutually beneficial, then no harm done.”

MJ: “Sure, but I don’t need to see in the movie. Just like I don’t need a scene of scotty on the crapper, or uhura stowing away a box of tampons in her quarters.”

I am equating the need to actually see an implied kinky-sex threesome with Kirk and two cat people with my need to actually see a tampon on Uhura’s dresser, or Scotty reading a paper on the crapper. THESE ARE THINGS THAT I WOULD PREFER NOT TO ACTUALLY SEE IN THE MOVIE. And I stand by these statements, as is (i.e. without allowing the distortion attempt by Keachick).

Nowhere do I mention this disgusting idea of bloody tampons, or looking and experiencing defecation on screen — I NEVER SAID ANY SUCH THINGS AS THIS AND SHE KNOWS IT.

So compare this to the warping and twisting that Keachick is attempting to put on me here?

And the weird thing is, she actually agrees with what I said:

Keachick: “I do not want to see anyone pissing or crapping (although we did manage to see a guy attempt to take a crap in Cowboys & Aliens) and I don’t need to see Carol’s or Nyota’s tampons either. But sexual intimacy, more often than not, involves conversation, humour, affection and passion – that is a different activity altogether from the other stuff mentioned.”

Agreed! And the scene here in question is obviously not a sexual intimacy scene. It’s a scene of Kirk bottoming out and using two girls in kinky threesome sex as F-toys. That is as far from sexual intimacy as you can get folks.

SO YEA, SHE ACTUALLY AGREES WITH ME! That is what is so sad about her posts here.

204. DiscoSpock - March 10, 2013

MJ, don’t worry, most of us can plainly see the attempted distortion that is going on here. We know.

205. ObsessiveStarTrekFan - March 10, 2013

@197. Keachick
“… breastfeeding and yet I doubt any film maker would dare show that activity because of the uproar from the ignorant prudes.”

Funny you should say that… I ‘watched’ The Hangover the other night, or rather I sat on the lounge half-heartedly trying to read a book while my 24 year old son sat next to me watching The Hangover. Guess what it showed? Breastfeeding a child. I’m certainly not holding The Hangover up as any paragon of a movie – it isn’t. My husband actually left the room because the movie was too crass – not over that scene, but in general – but apparently I have lower standards if it means I get to chat to my kids…

Anyway, that’s bye the bye. Be careful with generalisations, we all make them from time to time (like I just did then, I noticed).

206. K-7 - March 10, 2013

#205. Telling Keachick to “be careful with generalizations” is like telling a Meth user to “be careful with those needles.” :-)

207. K-7 - March 10, 2013

“If my husband ever referred to sex in the way that you have here, he would have had his ass so thoroughly kicked that he would now be living in the northern hemisphere where he could happily go on confusing taking a crap with making love.”

Like he isn’t already the most pussy-whipped poor guy south of the equator.

(I’m joking!)

208. Red Shirt Diaries - March 10, 2013

Give the description of this dumb-ass threesome scene, I actually would prefer to see Scotty on the crapper.

Bob Orci, any chance you can replace the cat-Kirk threesome scene with a humorous scene of Scotty stinking up and Enterprise corridor while reading Tech Manuals on the crapper?

209. MJ - March 10, 2013

@204 “MJ, don’t worry, most of us can plainly see the attempted distortion that is going on here. We know.”

Thanks dude! I think it should be pretty obvious to folks what is going on here, but it is good to get independent validation that people are seeing what is really going on here — with these incredibly negative and extremely misleading posts. Posts that are besmirching my character and love of Star Trek.

At some point you just need to say “enough,” and stand up to the bully.

210. Dave H - March 10, 2013

This Keachick person seems to be baking with a half a loaf.

211. Dave H - March 10, 2013

I mean, with Keachick’s logic, why not include a masturbation scene in the movie to show how male crew members deal with long trips into space with no partners readily available for them?

Yea, I’d really like to see that….NOT!

212. Buzz Cagney - March 10, 2013

#202 Keachick, with her ramblings, routinely embarrasses herself on here. It was she does. I just scroll on past her posts. Life is too short.

213. Theatre Historian_Levi - March 11, 2013

I have had the pleasure of being apart of several hundred premieres at the ChineseTheatre in my 11 years of working there, my two fav premieres though hands down.
Star Trek Nemesis, and Star Trek (2009).
The courtyard set up for 09 was so cool, the talent doing press interviews in a queue set up like a Delta sheild that exited out to right infront of the fan pitt.

plus between both premieres getting to see or meet everyone still with us from TOS and TNG casts.

Say what you will about Nemesis, but it will always hold a place in my heart as the first premiere I did welcome announcement greetings at before the start of the film.

214. Keachick - March 11, 2013

You are all quite weird and distorted people who cannot read all the posts and be able to follow a line of reasoning. Instead you skim through posts and pick out posts of mine that you can sensationalise about and take completely out of context. Buzz Cagney admits he doesn’t bother even reading my posts so I suggest he should shut up about anything I may have to say and not comment at all. Buzz – you are rude person.

My point is – that eating, drinking and sexual activity are social ones. Defecating, urinating, changing tampons when menstruating and masturbation are considered completely private activities. One engages in them by oneself, alone, therefore one would not expect to see those activities in a movie.

Eating and drinking are far more social than sex. However, sexual intimacy is engaged in between two or more people and therefore a social activity, albeit a more private one than eating or drinking are.

These are all natural bodily functions. Actually one can eat and drink alone, but one cannot engage in sex alone because that would be called masturbation, therefore consensual sexual intimacy is by its very nature, a social biological function. This allows it to become part of a movie, just like eating and drinking can be shown.

“And the scene here in question is obviously not a sexual intimacy scene. It’s a scene of Kirk bottoming out and using two girls in kinky threesome sex as F-toys. That is as far from sexual intimacy as you can get folks.”

You have absolutely no idea what this scene entails, other than brief details being posted about the scene out of context. It is “obviously” not anything. Who are you to judge what kinky sex is anyway?

MJ – I am not misleading anybody, but I think that you are. You admit here that you were the first to mention not wanting to see someone on the crapper or tampons – not me. Now, you all stop distorting what I have been saying.

Admiral Archer’s Prized Beagle – why should menstrual blood soaked tampons embarrass you? You are a woman with children. Presumably you are a healthy woman. Why are you so embarrassed by discussion of a normal healthy biological function of a human female of childbearing age? No, I don’t want to see such a scene, but since MJ mentioned the sight of tampons, well – that is how most tampons end up being – blood soaked. I am not the one who needs to grow up here and I do not need to wash my mouth out at all.

Now I will always associate MJ with crapping and tampons. I have no doubt that MJ is well acquainted with one activity but certainly not the other.

However, sexual activity between individuals has nothing to do with either defecating or menstruation. In fact, they do not belong in the same sentence and in fact, I never thought they did, until MJ came along.

Once again, I am on my own – the lone voice…

215. Theatre Historian_Levi - March 11, 2013

My favorite memory of Trek 09 world premiere was getting to walk Walter and his wife Judy down to their seats in the main auditorium before the start of the movie while talking to walter about when he placed his handprints in the theatres forecourt with the rest of the cast for Star Trek VI back in 91

216. James - March 11, 2013

Keachick, sorry but you have “Cried Wolf” one to many times and used the victims card up.

217. James - March 11, 2013

MJ,
I want to apologize yet again for any dust ups we have had in the past.

It is so blatantly obvious now reading the B.S. you have to deal with from commenters like Keachick, as to why your posts sometimes come off the way they do.

You are a stronger person than I realized, bless you man for what you put up with on here.

As for Keachick wow can we say cukoo cukoo much lol

218. Keachick - March 11, 2013

MJ – “I am equating the need to actually see an implied kinky-sex threesome with Kirk and two cat people with my need to actually see a tampon on Uhura’s dresser, or Scotty reading a paper on the crapper.”

I have not distorted anything. A crapper, I assume, is a toilet and what he is doing while reading a paper, is defecating (the correct term), or attempting to, while reading the paper.

Why would it bother you if you did see a tampon on Uhura’s dresser? A tampon is what menstruating women use to catch the flow. That clearly bothers you and the mother with two children. You are supposed to be adults, not only that, parents and yet you can’t come to terms with fundamental biology. Once again, AAPB, you are very rude to me, even though it was not me, Keachick, who brought up any of these topics up (taking a crap and tampons) in the first place.

I repeat – I did NOT equate defecation or menstruation with sexual intimacy/activity between two or more people. MJ DID and now he should have to account for his need to associate such disparate biological functions with the other. I am not twisting anything!

I find MJ’s equating defecation and tampons (menstruation) stupid and offensive. I am being a bully. Even I was, I see all his sheepish supporters are now standing by his side, casting their whips, as they always do.

219. NCC 20937 - March 11, 2013

MJ did keachick just compare you to a defecated maxi pad in that last post?
Holy ummm welll Crikey.

220. crazydaystrom - March 11, 2013

Guys and gals, not being on either side of this/these forum snipe wars, all I can say is WOW!

And

SNIPE WARS: Re- The Motion Picture! Wonder if JJ will direct this one as well. And who do you want to play the characters based on you?

221. rogerachong - March 11, 2013

LLAP. There is NO threesome scene!! This is PG13 Movie not XXX.

Repeat: here is NO threesome scene!! This is PG13 movie not XXX.

In less than 5 seconds Kirk is shown waking in bed with 2 extratresstrial females. Immediately there is a call from Pike. CUT and Kirk and Spock are heading for debriefing where Kirk receives a harsh reprimand!

Note this happens B4, that’s right B4 Kirk is reprimanded. Pike finds Kirk just having a few drinks after the reprimand and sais “lovingly” in the trailer “I still believe in you,”Just like that old country tune that I can’t quite remember the male snger’s name. (Need help from one of you American trekkers please.) Don’t be so harsh on the supreme court. We aren’t even sure this will make it to the final cut even.

Anyways those opposed to it have a right to air ther complaints as I have noticed that the movie seems to be evolving and if you logically state your case and get Anthony to do a proper poll. Then the producers will be better able to make a decision wether to keep or snip this 5 seconds from the film. I am 100% sure JJ and the marketing team put this in to get feedback to acertain how well it plays with the general audiences.

I think everyone who bought the Star Trek 2009 DVD can tell that they cut way more from that film than just an obvious “5 second throwaway widgit” that they can now choose to keep or cut depending on feedback.

Anthony give the fans a poll and on opening night we will know whose side the producers are on. Are they with the hardcore fans on this site or on the side of the rest of people. As Kirk said, “It’s gonns be Fun, Fun Fun till your daddy took the Starship away.”

222. Locutus - March 11, 2013

This is NOT Star Trek!

223. Keachick - March 11, 2013

#219 – No I did not. Don’t be facetious and obnoxious.

Oh look, the gang bangers or are you snakes hiding the undergrowth? have come circling. I guess that is because they cannot mount an adequate post discounting my assertions about MJ’s inappropriate equation of human sexuality with defecation and menstruation. It must be because of the big clinical words I use. MJ prefers to use schoolboy words like crap and crapper. It is also because I actually discuss issues that are taboo but should not be. That incenses some people and makes them say dumb and rude things.

Another poster crawls from under whatever that was just to say he doesn’t bother reading my posts – another useless, dumb and derogatory post.

K-7 – another crawler posts this – “Telling Keachick to “be careful with generalizations” is like telling a Meth user to “be careful with those needles.” :-)” and goes on to inform everyone that “Like he isn’t already the most pussy-whipped poor guy south of the equator.” and then he says he is joking. Yeah right.

And yet another poster crawls out from wherever to console MJ on how difficult his life must be dealing with someone like me and just how strong he really is after all.

However, none of these latecomers added anything legitimate to the discussion. They just insulted me. Good going, guys…:(

MJ made an inappropriate and disgusting comment way back and you all crawl out to take swings at me and console a person who just chucked human sexuality, my sexuality down the toilet with faeces, urine and menstrual waste because he thinks that sex (and showing aspects of sexuality) is just so much waste. Toilets receive humanity’s waste products.

Sexual activity/intimacy can and should NEVER be equated with these other biological functions. That is INDECENT and immoral. All sexual acts come under the definitions of sexual activity and that includes sexual assault and rape. However, what Kirk and the two women would be engaging in is sexual intimacy, because I do suspect that there was conversation, humour, affection, curiosity, warmth, consideration etc. It does not matter if this relationship lasts an hour, a year, a lifetime. It is about what occurred between the individuals in the time allowed.

Defecation and sexual activity/intimacy do not belong in the same room, let alone the same sentence.

Now do any of you get it? Sadly, I am not holding my breath.

224. Curious Cadet - March 11, 2013

@208. Red Shirt Diaries,
“Bob Orci, any chance you can replace the cat-Kirk threesome scene with a humorous scene of Scotty stinking up and Enterprise corridor while reading Tech Manuals on the crapper?”

I believe you are thinking of Orci’s earlier work on the Transformers franchise. I don’t think he does this anymore since he and Kurtzman walked away from the third installment over “creative” differences with Michael Bay, presumably clutching bulging round bags with dollar signs on the sides.

@223 Keachick,
“Defecation and sexual activity/intimacy do not belong in the same room, let alone the same sentence.”

Not to fan the flames on this, because really I have no dog in this race, but I’m sure you are aware that there are mature consenting adults who participate in sexual activities (fetishes if you prefer), involving exactly that, as well as urination and menstruation.

You make a sweeping generalization writing “That is INDECENT and immoral”, however, that seems awfully intolerant and judgmental from someone who is professing to be so open minded. Granted these sexual activities are not traditional romantic intimacy, but then neither is an orgy or even a threesome. While not my cup of tea, I’m certainly not going to condemn consenting adults who are not only turned on, but drawn closer to each other through such “ultimate” intimate sexual acts.

Just saying.

225. star trackie - March 11, 2013

Keachick, dont feel so surrounded, I think MJ, K7, Disco Spock , Red Shirt Diaries and Archer’s Beagle are all MJ. Where there is one there are always the others not too far behind, no matter when or where I suffer through these debates! Usually plopped in to support his side ofthe debate. Just my 2 quatloos worth. Take for whatever its work, just an observation.

226. Keachick - March 11, 2013

#224 – Wow, my innocence, naivety? being shaken yet again. No, I am not aware that people include defecation, urination and menstruation in their sexual activities. I know that bondage, sexual sado/masochism, dominatrix stuff goes on.

Orgies or threesomes do not really bother me.

However, I think/hope that most movie producers prefer to stick to showing more traditional types of sexual activities/intimacies, between two or even three people and scenes that don’t involve toileting or violence. Anyway, that is what I hope to see in a Star Trek movie – people who are passionate, sincere, warm and friendly.

227. Red Dead Ryan - March 11, 2013

#218.

“I am being a bully.”

Well, for once I agree with you there!

Hee hee!

:-)

228. Disinvited - March 11, 2013

#221. rogerachong – March 11, 2013

The sequel is a work in progress and there is no completed work that has been submitted to a ratings board for a rating. Repeat: The sequel is a work in progress and there is no completed work that has been submitted to a ratings board for a rating.

And even at that, there is no guarantee the capricious boards will give it the rating you wish no matter how hard they try.

229. Check the Circuit - March 11, 2013

Anyone have any comments on the subject of the post? If the comments of the 4-5 posters sniping at each other were deleted, the rest of us could actually read what people have to say about the new trailer.

It sure looks like we’re going to a see more “classic” Constitution Class starship play a role in STID. Wonder who is in command? Marcus? Ultimately Harrison…whoever he really is?

The ship crashing into the water looks like this mystery ship to me…based on the engine structure in Anthony’s close up still. Guess we’ll know for sure in a couple of months.

Can’t wait!

230. Michael Hall - March 11, 2013

Crikey. Well, I happen to disagree with John Tenuto’s claim about Kirk’s always having been “serious” about his sexual dalliances–what about the slave girl Drusilla in “Bread and Circuses,” or even the original Writers/Directors Guide for TOS, which certainly implied that Kirk felt free to let his hair down while on shore leave? And why not? Occasional sexual activity is healthy and necessary for just about everyone, and I’m sure anyone serving under the good Captain would have appreciated his improved mood and outlook after several days or weeks’ “rest and recreation” in port. That said, like some others here I”m having a pretty hard time picturing Shatner’s Kirk involved in a threeesome–but then, I also have a hard time seeing TOS’ lead character making smartass quips while running for his life through a forest or dodging disruptor fire over Q’onos, let alone falsifying a report on his own conduct. And while you can put this down to “young Kirk” or “alt.universe Kirk” all you like, to me what it really boils down to once again (*sigh*) is J.J. Abrams, Roberto Orci and the rest of the Supreme Court just not getting the appreal of the original source material. Well, in fairness I don’t think Nick Meyer ever really got it either, but he brought enough to the table to make a couple of great films anyway, and I’m still hoping we get another one in May.

231. rogerachong - March 11, 2013

@ 228. Disinvited: What I meant was they ae shooting for a PG13 rating most likely, just as the last film and all the other blockbuster PG13 summer fare. Folks have been posting things unsuitable for PG13 minds. This should be a family friendly site and we adults should be responsible and keep the posts out of the gutter and the bathroom.

I have a marketing background and I like so many others feel that the endless bickering on these boards distracting. If there was a poll then a marketer / producer can get meaningful data in order to make clear decisions. That way the heated emotional posts may subside a little until the next trailer comes out month-end. As for me a 5-second piece of male and most likely female (Pine fans) eye candy is just fine. I can handle it with a smile.

232. Trekkiegal63 - March 11, 2013

#230 Michael Hall:

what about the slave girl Drusilla in “Bread and Circuses”

Ah, “Bread and Circuses”. i.e. the one where Kirk, Spock and McCoy are all captured by Roman Empire wannebes (and a rogue starfleet captain with delusions of grandeur who had ordered his crew to their deaths), told they’re going to be executed, and just prior to meeting Drusilla, Kirk had been forced to watch Spock and McCoy, his best friends and officers under his command, fight gladiators in an arena, with McCoy barely making it out alive? I believe we can chalk that one up to coercion as well.

Coercion is the practice of forcing another party to act in an involuntary manner (whether through action or inaction) by use of threats or intimidation or some other form of pressure or force.

I think the question here is: would Kirk have slept with Drusilla if he was not desperately looking for a way out of all the crazy and attempting to save members of his crew and himself, like if he had simply met her at a party?

I believe the point John Tenuto is trying to make is that when Kirk was attracted to a woman by his own accord, without circumstances that could be considered coercion, he was usually interested in more than a casual encounter. For example: he dated Janice Lester for a year before her crazy got in the way, he was engaged to Ruth at one point, he told Spock he was in love with Edith Keeler, he and Areel Shaw had dated for awhile but parted amicably because they both wanted to put their careers first, etc.

233. Lt. Bailey - March 11, 2013

We went to see the Oz movie this weekend and there were 7 trailers shown, none were STID.

I think some one got it wrong when they said it was tied to this OZ film. Not that it was a waste of time, the OZ film was very well done and visually stunning with what Disney did.

234. JP - March 11, 2013

#231 said:

“What I meant was they ae shooting for a PG13 rating most likely, just as the last film and all the other blockbuster PG13 summer fare. Folks have been posting things unsuitable for PG13 minds. This should be a family friendly site and we adults should be responsible and keep the posts out of the gutter and the bathroom.”

Ok dad…

235. Michael Hall - March 11, 2013

#232 Trekkiegal63:

No disrespect intended, but if you think that James Kirk was “coerced,” in any meaningful sense of that term, into sleeping with that girl–well, I’m not sure that word means what you think it means.

Now, if you were to say that Kirk was facing a probable death sentence, and that in deciding to avail himself of the opportunity to, in the procounsel’s words, “spend [his] last hours as a man,” that behavior could not be considered typical, you might have a point. But that would still overlook all of the other examples of what was apparently a pretty healthy libido, not to mention that pesky Writer’s Guide. Since Kirk was in many ways Gene Roddenberry’s idealized image of himself, I find it difficult to think that an entirely casual (or even inappropriate) liason would be completely out of the question for him. But then, it’s a fictional character, and your mileage (or interpretation) may vary.

236. Keachick - March 11, 2013

PG13, I believe, stands for Parental Guidance for persons 13 years and under. Has this discussion really been unsuitable for younger people?

Given the fact that the average age for females to begin their menstrual cycles is between 10 and 11 years, it is hardly something an older girl would not be familiar with. Everyone urinates and defecates, even a foetus. The only aspect that such children would/should not experience is sex with another.

However, children can become naturally quite aware of their own sexuality. It is just that others should not take advantage of any awareness that a child may exhibit, because it is still forming and their minds and bodies are not mature enough to handle such an encounter. Nor is a girl who has just started to menstruate. Her body and mind are still in flux and need time to properly develop, at least another four or so years. Taking advantage of a child/teen in early puberty can be extremely damaging both physically and emotionally. Unfortunately, advertisers are the ones who often take commercial advantage of such people when they are most open and very vulnerable.

The 5 second scene is about Kirk with two ADULT females and if there is any message for a young person who may be wearing their first bra, needing mum to buy her tampons or the boy getting sore throats all the time, is that they are not old enough yet; their time will come and to be patient. That is what parental guidance is about.

237. Trekkiegal63 - March 11, 2013

#235. Michael Hall:

I posted the definition, I know exactly what it means. ;)

And my point still stands. Kirk was looking for a way out, not just for him, but for Spock and McCoy. He also had a rogue Starfleet Captain on his hands, one who committed a cardinal sin as far as Kirk was concerned, he had ordered his crew to their death, one he wanted to take back with him to face charges. Also, Claudius wanted Kirk to order his own crew to their deaths, as Merik had. His getting out of the situation, getting his crew out of the situation, depended on him playing his cards right. Give Claudius any reason to suspect something afoot, aka outright deny the slave girl sent to him, then there goes everything. Remember, at that point Kirk didn’t know he was also scheduled for execution the next day. He thought he might still have some time to buy, having alerted Scotty that the landing party was in danger.

Thus my question remains: would Kirk have slept with her if they had met under normal circumstances? Especially considering that, aside from being split into an evil and good self at one point, he kept away from Rand after having admitted to being attracted to her. Same with Noel, despite once having flirted with each other at a Christmas party, his answer to her was also no. It was she who later tried to use the Tantalus machine to alter his memories on having denied her and convince him that he loved her.

If you’re looking at patterns for Kirk, patterns did not indicate a tendency towards casual encounters unless there were mitigating circumstances, i.e. coercion.

Also, that ‘writer’s guide’ was contradicted by canon quite a few times. ;)

238. Keachick - March 11, 2013

I think that, with Drusilla, it was an offer Kirk would find difficult to refuse. Drusilla had been conditioned from a very early age to satisfy the desires and needs of “he who owns me”, ie to obey him. What “he who owns me” did was order her to take care of Kirk sexually and otherwise. I doubt that her owner, the procounsel ever allowed her to witness things like executions. He needed to keep her innocent, even naive, acquiescent and compliant. He treated her well, said nice things about her etc. Bear in mind, that Drusilla did not/ was not allowed any opportunity to find out that other people did not behave in this way or follow the same laws.

As for James Kirk, many describe him as the opportunist whether it is about taking advantage of any opportunity for some romance/ sexual gratification or when it came dealing with a difficult situation involving an antagonist. I agree that Kirk seemed to like and be able to engage himself full on in a romantic relationship and maintain them for several months, a year or more. He clearly wanted to be around for Carol and their son. Carol pushed him away. However, he could also be engaged in a (sexual) relationship which was of limited duration, eg with Drusilla. It is just the amount of time, but how well that time is spent…

239. Keachick - March 11, 2013

I meant to write “…It is NOT just the amount…”

240. Trekkiegal63 - March 11, 2013

#238 Keachick:

I think that, with Drusilla, it was an offer Kirk would find difficult to refuse.

I both agree and disagree with this. I agree that Kirk felt he couldn’t refuse, I disagree that it was because of uncontrollable hormones.

If someone captures you, and the rest of your landing party, a landing party composed of your two best friends no less and threatens execution. Then forces said best friends into a gladiator match. While also indicating that you had to call your crew down to either participate in a public execution via the televised arena events, or adapt to their society. Keeping in mind that this had already been done once before to another starship, and the captain of that starship was still alive and kicking, rogue on their planet, with most of his crew slaughtered… you’re going to feel a bit of pressure do whatever it takes to survive, and to ensure your crew survives. Not denying a ‘gift’ from the crazy dictator, thus alerting him to your passing judgement on their ways, and their use of slavery, being one of them. If Kirk had said “NO, go away Drusilla, this is wrong!” how fast do you think it would take Claudius to pass Kirk off as a lost cause, one who was never going to break and order his crew down the way Claudius wanted? He was already teetering on the edge with Claudius as it was for not giving the order Claudius wanted him to give.

Thus, coercion.

241. MJ - March 11, 2013

James: “I want to apologize yet again for any dust ups we have had in the past. It is so blatantly obvious now reading the B.S. you have to deal with from commenters like Keachick, as to why your posts sometimes come off the way they do. You are a stronger person than I realized, bless you man for what you put up with on here. As for Keachick wow can we say cukoo cukoo much lol”

James, thanks so much. It means a lot to me.

As you may have noticed, I am done talking to the crazy person. I stand by 100% on all my previous posts on this topic — proudly, and without reservation. That scene does not belong in a Star Trek movie — I am ironclad on this point.

242. MJ - March 11, 2013

Michael Hall: “That said, like some others here I”m having a pretty hard time picturing Shatner’s Kirk involved in a threeesome–but then, I also have a hard time seeing TOS’ lead character making smartass quips while running for his life through a forest or dodging disruptor fire over Q’onos, let alone falsifying a report on his own conduct. And while you can put this down to “young Kirk” or “alt.universe Kirk” all you like, to me what it really boils down to once again (*sigh*) is J.J. Abrams, Roberto Orci and the rest of the Supreme Court just not getting the appreal of the original source material.”

Wow, we never agree on stuff. Well said!!!

243. Michael Hall - March 11, 2013

“I posted the definition, I know exactly what it means. ;)”

“Coercion is the practice of forcing another party to act in an involuntary manner (whether through action or inaction) by use of threats or intimidation or some other form of pressure or force.”

I can certainly accept, say, a despotic planetary ruler’s threat to subject your two officers to death by gladitorial combat if you don’t do what he says as an example of the definition you posted. But since Drusilla didn’t exactly come with a note that said “Do the slave, or both your friends get it! I mean it this time! Yrs. Truly, Procounsel Claudius,” I’m unconvinced it applies in that case. And even if I did buy into your characterization of that scene and how Kirk viewed what was on offer, it’s certainly interesting you seem to believe that his refusal to give in to “coercion” in the first instance, but not in the second, doesn’t speak volumes about his character and propensities in any case.

244. Trekkiegal63 - March 11, 2013

243 Michael Hall:

…it’s certainly interesting you seem to believe that his refusal to give in to “coercion” in the first instance, but not in the second

Which is precisely the point. Kirk was already walking on egg shells as it was. He was told he was going to die. He was told they wanted him to order his crew down to either join the society or fight in the arena. He had warned Scotty covertly, and needed to buy time. Claudius, through Merik, knew all of Starfleet’s protocols, and had Kirk quite literally by the balls. He didn’t know yet that he was to be executed the next day, thus felt the only thing keeping him alive, the only reason he hadn’t yet been ordered to death was because he was holding out ordering his crew down. Having not known that Claudius already ordered his death, and not wanting Claudius to give up on him before Scotty could work a miracle, he had to keep the only leverage he had, while not rocking the boat too far the other direction.

From the script:

CLAUDIUS: Interesting. And you, Captain, which world do you prefer?
KIRK: My world, proconsul, is my vessel, my oath, my crew. What happened to your vessel you’ve explained. What happened to your oath is obvious.
MERIK: And as for my men, those that were able to adapt to this world are still alive. Those who couldn’t adapt are dead. That’s the way it is with life everywhere, isn’t it?
KIRK: You sent your own men into the arena?
MERIK: Just as I did, Jim, you’re going to order your own people ashore.
MCCOY: You must know that’s impossible. Starfleet regulations
CLAUDIUS: Are designed to circumvent any such order. There may be over four hundred men on your ship, Captain, but they can be brought down if it’s handled properly. Say, a few at a time. You see, I have the advantage of a trained ship captain to tell me what is and what is not possible. Your communicator, Captain Kirk. Now do save us all a lot of unnecessary trouble and issue the appropriate orders.
MERIK: They’re going to be arriving soon, anyway, Jim. A recon party, then a rescue party, then another rescue party. I had less men. It added up the same.
KIRK: Do you really believe I could be made to order my own people down?
CLAUDIUS: I believe this, Captain. That you would do almost anything rather than see these two dear friends put slowly to death.

KIRK: Scotty, if you have a fix. (guns are pointed at his head) Stand by, Scotty.
CLAUDIUS: Very wise of you, Captain. No point in sending up bullet-ridden corpses.
KIRK: Yet on the other hand, my chief engineer’s standing by for a message.
CLAUDIUS: I do hope so, for your sake. Now, Captain, what are you going to order your men to do?
KIRK: If I brought down a hundred of them armed with phasers
CLAUDIUS: you could probably defeat the combined armies of our entire empire, and violate your oath regarding noninterference with other societies. I believe you all swear you’ll die before you’d violate that directive. Am I right?
SPOCK: Quite correct.
MCCOY: Must you always be so blasted honest?
CLAUDIUS: But on the other hand, why even bother to send your men down? From what I understand, your vessel could lay waste to the entire surface of the world. Oh, but there’s that Prime Directive in the way again. Can’t interfere.
MERIK: Jim, you’ve already started a message. Your engineer’s waiting. What are you going to do?
KIRK: Scotty. Sorry to keep you waiting.
SCOTT [OC]: We were becoming concerned, Captain. You were a bit overdue.
CLAUDIUS: Order your officers to come down.
KIRK: Condition Green, all’s well. Kirk out.
CLAUDIUS: Guards, take them. Prepare them for the games.

Later, with Spock and McCoy in the arena:

SPOCK: Need any help, Doctor?
MCCOY: Whatever gave you that idea?
ACHILLES: Fight, you pointed-ear freak!
MCCOY: You tell him, buster. Of all the completely ridiculous, illogical questions I ever heard in my life!
(McCoy falls, and is vulnerable. Achilles is distracted so Spock punches him out then goes and neck-pinches Flavius.)
MASTER: A clear foul, Proconsul. Your decision?
CLAUDIUS: Your opinion, Merikus? After all, they’re like yourself.
MERIK: It’s your decision, Proconsul.
CLAUDIUS: Your opinion, Captain Kirk? Would you like me to kill them now? An easy death? Then you’d gladly accept whatever happens to you. Take them back to their cage. Well, it won’t go that easily for them, Captain, nor for you. Take him to my quarters.

With Drusilla:

DRUSILLA: I was told to wait for you and provide wine, food, whatever you wish. I am Proconsul’s slave Drusilla. Although for this evening. (pause) For this evening I was told I am your slave. Command me.
KIRK: It won’t work.
DRUSILLA: What will not work?
KIRK: Whatever he has in mind, whatever tricks. You hear that, Proconsul? It won’t work. I’m not co-operating. I may die, but you won’t get any entertainment out of it.
DRUSILLA: We’re alone. Please believe me. I’ve never lied to one who owns me.
(The wine is being poured.)
KIRK: Very good. (he tries a grape) Excellent.
DRUSILLA: I was concerned. I am ordered to please you.
KIRK: I’ve been in some strange worlds with strange customs. Perhaps this is considered torture here.

Was Kirk ever shown to seek out a pleasure slave on his own time with his own dime? No. Did Kirk have the threat of death over his head, Spock and McCoy’s heads, as well as the rest of his crew? Yes. Thus coercion.

245. Keachick - March 11, 2013

What uncontrollable hormones? I agree that coercion was very much a factor in Kirk accepting Drusilla and all that she had to offer.

#243 – I was talking about Drusilla’s situation as much as Kirk’s. An awkward situation for both of them. It is quite possible that Drusilla would not have understood Kirk if he did refuse her and may have felt that she was to blame and feared that the “one who owns me” would be unhappy with her conduct…

The other factor was, just to complicate things a little more, that it was more than likely that Kirk was very attracted to her…

To fully understand any scene, especially a sexual one or one alluding to sex, one needs to see it in its full context.

246. Keachick - March 11, 2013

From memory, Drusilla replies very honestly, “I do not wish to see you hurt in any way”. Drusilla’s role was to provide for all of Kirk’s needs for that evening. Neither of them were going anywhere. I doubt that even Drusilla could just leave if she wanted to.

247. Jonboc - March 11, 2013

#230. “…but then, I also have a hard time seeing TOS’ lead character making smartass quips while running for his life through a forest or dodging disruptor fire over Q’onos…”

#242.” Wow, we never agree on stuff. Well said!!!”

…how about 2 leading TOS characters making quips
From a dangerous showdown in Omega Glory?

Kirk: Don’t they ever rest?
Spock: Not that I have observed, Captain.
Of course, should they wish to do so,
one could always rest while the other keeps you occupied.
Kirk: Thank you, Spock.
To his aggressors: Tell me why you want to kill me!
Spock: Good, Captain. Try to reason with them.
Keep trying, Captain.
Their behavior is highly illogical.
Kirk, while in the middle of a dangerous brawl : No point in repeating that it’s illogical, Spock, I’m quite aware of it! (as he dodges punches)
Spock then delivers neck pinch to native.
Kirk: Pity you can’t teach me that.
Spock: I have tried, Captain.

And who can forget, as the doomsday machine is swallowing Kirk and the ship he’s is in, death is almost certain…but the transporter malfunctions…
Kirk: Gentlemen, I suggest you beam me aboard…

or in Friday’s Child…a seeming no win scenario is at hand with warriors heading their way..

Spock: Over here, Captain.
Spock to Enterprise.
Kirk: The cavalry doesn’t come in the nick of time anymore.
Spock: If by that you mean
we can’t expect help from the Enterprise, I must agree.

And there are many more, I’m just too lazy to dig them out! lol . Such behavior by Pine and Quinto and Urban is fully in line with the characterizations of TOS…not really sure what TOS you guys (Michael Hall and MJ ) have been watching.

248. Trekkiegal63 - March 11, 2013

#246 Keachick:

I doubt that even Drusilla could just leave if she wanted to.

This is true and very, very sad. An unfortunate situation for both Kirk AND Drusilla. Poor girl. :(

249. Michael Hall - March 11, 2013

Wow. That’s quite a lot of trouble you went to, quoting all that dialogue! Unnecessary; as it happens, since I have much of it committed to memory. Still, I’m flattered. :-)

Nothing you’ve quoted, though, lends any creedence to your notion that in bedding the lucious love-slave Drusilla, Kirk was only doing what duty and the grim circumstances required and no more. There is just nothing in dialogue to suggest that Kirk fears reprisal for rejecting the Procounsel’s “gift.” The Captain’s reaction to Drusilla’s appearance is, in fact, completely nonplussed–after the previous unpleasantness and threats, he’s as unsure as the audience as to exactly what’s going on, and drops his defiance not after any suggestion that he’d better get on with this unpleasantness or else, but only after Drusilla assures him that they’re alone, and that she’s properly enthused at the prospect of performing her responsibities in this case.

It’s pretty funny, the way people can see things differently. I have the well-established libidinous nature of this character, modeled on that of the guy who created the series and co-wrote this episode. Not to mention a knowledge of how men think, being one myself, that includes a half-million-year history of horniness in all situations both appropriate and otherwise. You have your notion that Kirk did only what he had to do, only because he had to do it, and you’re sticking to it. Okay, fine. As I said before, we can argue all day about the psychology and morality of a fictional character. But based on what you’ve written I would respecfully suggest you don’t understand men, let alone the principle of Occam’s Razor, all that well.

250. Michael Hall - March 11, 2013

“And there are many more, I’m just too lazy to dig them out! lol . Such behavior by Pine and Quinto and Urban is fully in line with the characterizations of TOS…not really sure what TOS you guys (Michael Hall and MJ ) have been watching.”

I thought of the “Doomsday” quip after posting that message. I do think the TOS stuff was better-written; but overall, you’re right. I was being unfair; it’s a distinction without a real difference.

251. Trekkiegal63 - March 11, 2013

#249 Michael Hall:

No worries, it was no trouble at all. Just copied and pasted from a transcription website. ;)

But based on what you’ve written I would respecfully suggest you don’t understand men, let alone the principle of Occam’s Razor, all that well.

Fair enough. I’m not a man. Though I have been married for twenty years to one, grew up with a male sibling only two years older than myself, and had the benefit of parents who remained happily married until my father’s death a few years back, thus had my father’s influence while growing up.

And I also have TOS committed to memory, thus am aware that a significant number of Kirk’s ‘ladies man’ reputation is grossly exaggerated, and quite of number of Kirk’s ‘conquests’ come from cases of coercion. Elaan with her ‘potent love potion’ tears, Deela with taking Kirk out of time to use him a stud till he ‘burnt out’ and threatening to do the same to his crew, Helen Noel with the Tantalus machine, Nona who had him bewitched and drugged, Miramanee whom he married without any memories of who or what he was… shall I go on?

And then there are the romances that Kirk sought on his own freewill. Carol Marcus, who bore his son, and whom Jim stayed away from at Carol’s request. Janice Lester whom he dated for a year. Areel Shaw, whom he had dated but wanted to put her career first, as did Jim and they parted on amicable terms. Ruth, whom he mentioned in “Where No Man has Gone Before” that Gary had introduced him to and he had been engaged to at one point. Edith Keeler with whom he had announced to Spock that he loved…. none of these women were ‘one offs’ for Kirk.

Even if I were to concede (which I’m not) and say Drusilla was not a coercion (I noticed you’ve never answered my question about Kirk seeking Drusilla out on his own if he hadn’t been in the circumstances he was), you’ve given one example to a dozen that would argue against TOS Kirk being a Lothario.

So, whether I have a full understanding of men or not (and I doubt any woman can claim they do) I do understand Star Trek and patterns. ;)

252. Keachick - March 11, 2013

I mentioned that the situation was an awkward for both Kirk and Drusilla. All Drusilla had known was that she was a slave; that was normal for her. She had a role and responsibilities and if she performed them well, she got to live fairly well. She grew up not being allowed nor even expected to make many decisions for herself. Claudius Maximus told her what to do, with whom and when and in exchange took care of her basic needs. Drusilla, I doubt, would have understood Kirk’s outlook and attitude. Indeed, she was surprised that he thought she wanted to hurt him.

This was a win-win scenario of sorts for Kirk. He was offered something he’d best not refuse and indeed saw absolutely no reason to refuse. Drusilla was a beautiful woman who was *freely* offering herself to him. It was a case of him acquiescing to the circumstances.

Having to spend an evening with Drusilla was one of the nicer coercions…

253. Keachick - March 11, 2013

I have thought that James Kirk was rather unlucky in love. I think he was actually quite lonely much of the time (and horny as well). He lived for the Enterprise and valued the friendships he managed to forge with Spock and Bones.

I also think that the absurd “falling in love” with the android Rayna was symptomatic of something deeper within Kirk that was not being satisfied. He snapped. This was why Spock gave him the mind-meld to make him forget. It allowed him to function again, enabling him to perform his duties properly. However, it would not have dealt with the underlying problem of loneliness, loss of love (later we find out that he has no access to his growing son), sexual frustration. Kirk, by nature, is not naturally a celibate man.

254. Trekkiegal63 - March 11, 2013

#253 Keachick:

I have thought that James Kirk was rather unlucky in love.

I would agree with that. Poor man probably needed therapy after Edith Keeler.

255. Michael Hall - March 11, 2013

“I noticed you’ve never answered my question about Kirk seeking Drusilla out on his own if he hadn’t been in the circumstances he was. . .”

Fair enough. If your husband is also a fan of the show (or if you could bring him up to speed on the plot), I’d be interested in his view as to whether Kirk was “coerced” into sleeping with Drusilla or not. To me, the unfortunate aspect of the scene in “Bread and Circuses” (and what I think would make it pretty problematic with feminists, of which I consider myself one) is the inequality of the relationship, in that Drusilla had no power of refusal. It seemed that Coon and Roddenberry danced around the issue by making it obvious that the slave was into Kirk anyway, and thus any enjoyment derived from the experience would be mutual. Still, the whole thing is a little wish fulfillment-creepy, and probably would play quite differently if that episode were being produced today. But if Kirk had met Drusilla in a bar while on shore leave on Proxima IV, would he have gone with her then? Well, he obviously found her attractive (as most men would), so if he also liked her on a personal level, why not?

Given the nature of his job any romantic relationship Kirk experienced would have to be casual by definition. So it’s either embrace the idea of an occasional fling, or experience years of celibacy. Based on the understanding of the series you allude to, what makes you think the captain of the Enterprise would choose to be celibate?

256. Trekkiegal63 - March 11, 2013

#255 Michael Hall:

I shall ask him… if I can get him to watch it with me. I’m a bit more into Star Trek than he is (<- understatement) and any exposure he's had through the years is because he indulges me (as I indulge him with his WW2 or Civil War movies, as well as the 101 viewings of Evil Dead 2).

Ah, I should have formulated the question better… do you feel Kirk would have sought out Drusilla, as a pleasure slave, had he not been in the circumstances he was in?

To me, the unfortunate aspect of the scene in “Bread and Circuses” (and what I think would make it pretty problematic with feminists, of which I consider myself one) is the inequality of the relationship, in that Drusilla had no power of refusal.

In this I agree with you 100%, in regards that it was exceedingly problematic that Drusilla had no power.

Given the nature of his job any romantic relationship Kirk experienced would have to be casual by definition.

Not necessarily. Sulu married at one point, and early enough in his career to have a fully grown daughter for the Enterprise B launch, and he was a captain. Matt Decker had to be in a pretty serious relationship at one point to have Will Decker. And although never really mentioned in TOS, if you count Harve Bennetts unfilmed movie script (and the first prequel attempt way before ST2009 was a blink in anyone’s eye) as canon George Kirk, Sr. was also a Starfleet Officer.

I’m not saying it wouldn’t be problematic, as any relationship with career officers are, even in real life. But there is canon support to indicate that some pulled it off… not that I’m advocating Kirk going out and getting married. Just stating that it can be done.

257. Admiral Archer's Prize Beagle - March 11, 2013

“Admiral Archer’s Prized Beagle – why should menstrual blood soaked tampons embarrass you? You are a woman with children. Presumably you are a healthy woman. Why are you so embarrassed by discussion of a normal healthy biological function of a human female of childbearing age? No, I don’t want to see such a scene, but since MJ mentioned the sight of tampons, well – that is how most tampons end up being – blood soaked. I am not the one who needs to grow up here and I do not need to wash my mouth out at all.”

Because I have the discretion and class not to show share them with the public at large. Duh. You are exhibiting really, really bizarre behavior here. Are you going through some issues on the home-front, perhaps?

And what you said here is simply untrue, as well as pretty damn disgusting:

“MJ made an inappropriate and disgusting comment way back and you all crawl out to take swings at me and console a person who just chucked human sexuality, my sexuality down the toilet with faeces, urine and menstrual waste because he thinks that sex (and showing aspects of sexuality) is just so much waste. Toilets receive humanity’s waste products.”

I’ve just reviewed all of his and your posts, and I don’t ever see anything said by MJ about flushing menstrual blood, feces and sexuality (jism?) down the toilet? Why are you making this nonsense up, and being so disgustingly overly dramatic about it. You think we wan to read your shock value comments here about you be such a know it all about sex, menstruation, etc. Are you having post traumatic stress episode from being the “Period Queen” at your local High School, perhaps? You seem obsesses with the blood and shit aspects of this conversation — I think you need to see a doctor. You are nor right.

God help that you are raising a daughter, and god bless that poor man who is your husband. I can’t imagine your temper and the things you say to them in a home environment when they don’t agree with you. My husband was a mean know-it-all like you, and I divorced him so that I could raise by babies in a positive structure environment with love and support. Kids should not be raised around negativity, craziness and apologetically extremist views.

I feel sorry for you and hope that you can get some help soon.

258. Dave H - March 11, 2013

Yea AAPB, I am so shell-shocked from of the disturbingly sick stuff this nutty Keachick broud wrote, that I am afraid to post here, given that she might go nuclear on me as well, and force me to eat a “MJ Dog”, which would consist on menstruation blood and human shit, boiled in a condom, and then served on a bun like a hotdog…and then make me eat this while having sex with her (where she is wearing a Chris Pine Mask and I am dressed like a cat) to force home to me once and for all to acknowledge her point. LOL

259. Keachick - March 12, 2013

I think the producers of the 1960’s Star Trek TV series were having to deal with the strict sexual mores of the day, where monogamous marriage was really still the only acceptable sexual relationship. Now other relationships are more accepted. Casual romantic/sexual relationships were difficult to show, which is why Kirk seemed to be always tricked, coerced in some way in order to engage in any kind of sexual liaison. The only full on legitimate sex that he could be shown to have was with Miramanee, because by the laws of that society, they were married.

Kirk did not necessarily choose to be celibate or more accurately sexual inactive/chaste, but that is the state he found himself in for much of the time.

Hopefully, where more sexual permissiveness is understood and allowed for, someone like Kirk may be able to *legitimately* engage in a casual fling, which might continue on for some time, depending on various factors…or not.

*Permissiveness just means that society is more accepting of various kinds of (sexual) relationships and where showing single people engaging in consensual sex can also be part of a film. Permissiveness is not a bad thing. It is about permitting others the right to engage in consenting sexual activity, without censure.

260. Admiral Archer's Prize Beagle - March 12, 2013

NO !

“Permissiveness” is a slippery slope, starting with underage sex, moving to meaningless disposable sex among adults, then moving into threesomes, moving to orgies, and eventually moving to stuff like sex with animals and sex with children.

Permissiveness lead to the devaluing of the human body and soul.

261. Keachick - March 12, 2013

#258, #259 – Of course, you have misread and misunderstood my posts. Then again, I should expect this kind of thing. The problem is that you are not that bright…oh dear…oh well…

MJ compared seeing sex scenes with seeing someone on the crapper. What do you people do on the crapper? He also compared seeing sex scenes with seeing a tampon on Uhura’s dresser. Tampons have only one function.

I was merely taking his stupid comparisons to their logical extreme just to demonstrate just how lewd and ridiculous his comments were. Generally, people do not think about engaging in sexual intimacy in the same room or sentence as they would when thinking about needing to go to the toilet or change a tampon.

Therefore, I repeat, it was ridiculous and crude of him to equate filming of sexual intimacy between characters with either of those activities.

“You think we want to read your shock value comments here about you be such a know it all about sex, menstruation, etc. Are you having post traumatic stress episode from being the “Period Queen” at your local High School, perhaps?”

HUH? What, you, a mother, did not know all about sex and menstruation? Oh dear…
WTF is a “Period Queen”? Go speak for yourself…oh wait, I guess you must be because you are certainly not speaking about me. I am not obsessed with feces etc, because I did not bring up the crapper (as you guys so politely refer to what we call a toilet) or tampons. MJ DID THAT. If you want to call anyone crazy, call him crazy, because he is the one who mentioned going to the toilet and tampons in the same sentence as sex. Get it, you dumbasses.

I cannot believe how dumb so many people are on this site. You are also very mean as well. Once again, nothing new there either.

BTW, 12 March is our 21st wedding anniversary and yes we are still together and yes, my Chris still loves me and I am also pretty fussed on him too. Life is not always easy, bringing up three children on a small income because of major health issues etc, but we have managed to stay the distance.

Shame about your relationship…

262. Keachick - March 12, 2013

#261 – More ignorant bulls**t. Gosh, it never stops with you, does it?

263. Admiral Archer's Prize Beagle - March 12, 2013

You are not “The Oracle of Womankind” here. You seem to think you are some family and womans issues expert who can not only lecture men, but make assumptions that you are speaking for women in general here.

I am here to tell everyone that you have largely extremist views on women and family issues, views that this person and most of modern women will never share.

You are also mean-spirited and rude, and you attempt to force-feed people to accept your view of these issues. You seem to be without class, compassion, empathy — key features admired in women by all people.

You make me embarrassed to be a woman here.

264. Admiral Archer's Prize Beagle - March 12, 2013

“More ignorant bulls**t. Gosh, it never stops with you, does it?”

So anyone who doesn’t agree with you is ignorant. This is exactly what I saying earlier. You actually believe that you have a elite view here of women’s and sexual issues, and that you are fulfilling some mission by bringing that great knowledge of yours down to the level of us poor ignorant slobs.

That sad thing is that you have some kind of weird 1970’s view of woman’s issues and sexuality which worked OK when hippies roamed the earth, but which has been passed by now by our modern multicultural teenagers. Teenage girls would be laughing if they read your lectures here on sex and women. You are so of out touch, yet you think you are this expert, and you try to force your views down everyone’s throat here.

265. Dave H - March 12, 2013

Looks like we got ourselves a cat fight, folks. Someone get Kirk!

LOL

266. charity grants cancer - March 12, 2013

Some really nice and utilitarian info on this site, as well I conceive the design and style contains good features.

267. Bmar - March 12, 2013

Oh well, it was fun posting again here for a little bit, but once again we’ve gone off the rails. Back to lurking…

268. crazydaystrom - March 12, 2013

*Checks in to thread, shakes head and moves on*

IDIC, my friends, IDIC

269. Michael Hall - March 12, 2013

““Permissiveness” is a slippery slope, starting with underage sex, moving to meaningless disposable sex among adults, then moving into threesomes, moving to orgies, and eventually moving to stuff like sex with animals and sex with children.”

You’re kidding, right?

270. K-7 - March 12, 2013

Somewhere in-between Keachick and Admiral Archer’s Prize Beagle lies the real world that most of us live in.

271. K-7 - March 12, 2013

Looks like Keachick found here worst nightmare here. Another woman as insane. rude and as super-aggressive as she is.

If only we had a dilithium core handy, we could throw them both in, and the reaction of opposites could power the mains for months! We might even be able to make a Genesis Torpedo from this?

:-))

272. Trekkiegal63 - March 12, 2013

I am going to preface the link I’m about to share with a little disclaimer: I am not claiming to be perfect, I, too, have lost my temper on this site from time to time, it’s very easy to do when we’re all very passionate about Star Trek (and as a feminist I’m also pretty passionate against sexism, so apologistic attitudes towards sexist things tend to piss me off… I need to learn to step away and count to ten before replying whenever I see someone make an untorward offhand comment I deem sexist). Nor am I claiming anyone else is ignorant to what I’m about to post, granted it has been a long time, but when I was in college ‘Philosophy: Logic’ was a required course, it counted as three units towards language arts, so I’m sure a great number of you have taken it and already know this material. The thing is this, the bickering has gone too far. It’s uncomfortable and ugly and it makes it difficult to have a logical discussion while its going on. It also appears to be scaring people away.

So here is a link to an article entitled “How to Argue”, it goes over how to construct a logical argument, while also addressing the logical fallacies that you want to avoid. I hope somebody, anybody, finds this helpful.

http://www.theness.com/index.php/how-to-argue/

273. James - March 12, 2013

Wow you go to sleep for 8 hour and wake up to this lol

274. James - March 12, 2013

K7 I am thinking more along the lines of throw them in the airlock and open the door. lol

275. Curious Cadet - March 12, 2013

@265. Dave H,
“Looks like we got ourselves a cat fight, folks. Someone get Kirk!”

Haha, that’s it! That completes the joke … Kirk later runs into the cat-women at their job, female mud wrestling at Kirk’s favorite watering hole — “Pussy Galore”.

Cat women: Hey James, why don’t we see you around any more?
Kirk: (standing next to Carol Marcus, sheepishly) Oh hey girls … (Improvising) I know I haven’t been to “our AA meetings” in a while … Um hey — did you guys happen to see a really pasty white, super-strong mean-looking guy come through here, wearing a black trench coat and carrying a big gun?
Cat women: (exchange confused glances and step into the wrestling ring) um no, sorry Jimmy … But call us the next time your in town with your big gun …(The cat women begging wrestling) meow, sssssss! rowr!
Kirk: (Carol eyeing him suspiciously) they were just … Hey! Is that Harrison!?

276. Red Shirt Diaries - March 12, 2013

James, the airlock solution would not work. Keachick generates so much hot air that she can provide herself a continuous O2 supply.

277. Keachick - March 12, 2013

I do not set myself up as being some kind of expert. YOU, AAPB, are describing me as being that as well as calling me a “know it all”. Calling someone a “know it all” is a putdown. You also manage to make a discussion personal, making attacks against me, instead of talking to the topic. Clearly, you have proven once again, that you are not able to speak to the topic, but choose to denigrate me as a person/woman.

Referring to menstruation (or even blood-soaked tampons) may be a taboo subject, but that is all it is and it really shouldn’t be. I am not putting down any woman by stating facts about our female biology. It is you who have been rude and crass toward me because I happen to bring these issues into discussion.

I repeat – I did not bring up the issue of going to the toilet, toilet humour or tampons, because such things NEVER even occurred to me as belonging in a discussion about sexuality. MJ DID THAT.

As for hot air – most of the guys on this site make more than enough hot air of their own…along with all the stupid, crass, schoolboy *jokes* about the idea that we may see our protagonist enjoy the company of women who appear to be Caitians. Really? Seriously?

278. Michael Hall - March 12, 2013

“Ah, I should have formulated the question better… do you feel Kirk would have sought out Drusilla, as a pleasure slave, had he not been in the circumstances he was in?”

No, I definitely don’t believe that Kirk would seek out the company of a slave on his own, however attractive, any more than he would be inclined to hire the services of a prostitute. The character was always portrayed as enjoying the pleasures of the chase, and he certainly has enough of a conscience to be troubled by the lopsided power inherent in such a transaction. But Kirk was on a mission to that planet to find survivors from the Beagle, not on shore leave. Given the evidence onscreen it seemed that in the end he made the decision to bow to the inevitable and enjoy himself in the process. And why not? Sending Drusilla away would only prevent her from following the orders she’d been given, and might even land her in some trouble. If there was any “coercion” involved it seems to me it would be related to the reasonable inference of what the girl might suffer if she didn’t perform her duties adequately, rather than your entirely speculative notion about Kirk fearing the consequences for Spock and McCoy if he didn’t play along.

279. NCC-278917 - March 12, 2013

Aww darnit Red Dead,forgot about that hmmm.
How about the site owners just slam the permanant BAN Hammer down on her once and for all :)

280. Keachick - March 12, 2013

#279 – Why would the site owners want to permanently ban me when you are yet another newcomer/lurker who only comes out to troll?

I guess that is the extent of your capacities…oh dear.

281. James - March 12, 2013

Oh by the way 279 is actually me, I thought i hit copy on my screen name when i pasted it into name section.

wish the site still was set up to save your name and email info.

Sorry for any confussion the different name for my post 279 caused.

282. Keachick - March 12, 2013

“Sending Drusilla away would only prevent her from following the orders she’d been given, and might even land her in some trouble. If there was any “coercion” involved it seems to me it would be related to the reasonable inference of what the girl might suffer if she didn’t perform her duties adequately, rather than your entirely speculative notion about Kirk fearing the consequences for Spock and McCoy if he didn’t play along.”

That is, more or less, said further up on this thread. Besides, Kirk was really in no position to send Drusilla anywhere.

283. James - March 12, 2013

Why Keachick,
this bloody/ crap nonsense is just the latest.
Do you really need a list, beyond the obvious ones

You have harrased MJ and others ad nauseum, you belittle major events that effect numerous people as media hype, you talk down to EVERYONE.

There was a truce called a few weeks back and you broke that peace on this site.

Apologies were made all around by numerous people on here myself included.

284. Keachick - March 12, 2013

James – you are still trolling and being quite nasty as well towards me. You come in near the end of the discussion/debate to add nothing new, original, worthwhile. You just come to be nasty towards me and about me.

The only person who has added anything of value was Curious Cadet at #224 in his comment to me in that post.

Now go back to that boulder…

285. Keachick - March 12, 2013

James – the opposite has been pretty much the truth – people who take my comments and either hype them or belittle them or both.

As for the other event, I worry that if what Chris Dorner did could put so many of you off balance, I shudder to think what effect a pack of wolves might have on you and your capacity to cope logically and carefully. Chris Dorner was small fry, a lone wolf.

And my view is supposed to be insensitive, fkd-up, crass or whatever other names all of you love to label me with

Seriously – holy moly.

286. Keachick - March 12, 2013

MJ obviously had toilets, toilet humour and tampons on his mind when he wrote that first post.

If anything he talks down to people with terms like “Nice try”, “Hey, Genius” or “Hey, Einstein”. He is often sarcastic and demeaning in the way he writes (He thinks he is being humorous). Not only that, he is adamant about scenes that should not be in a movie, in “my Star Trek” as he puts it. Never mind that STID’s writers, producers, director, actors, editors – those actually involved in doing the story, have chosen, at this point, to include such a scene in the movie. He seeks to exclude and this is because he equate scenes depicting some form of sexual activity/intimacy with seeing “Chekov sitting on the crapper reading the newspaper” or seeing Uhura’s tampons on her dresser.

I DID NOT equate such scenes with the above, nor am I so “iron-clad” about what scenes should or should not be in a movie that no one has even seen yet. MJ is arrogant enough to be so ‘iron-clad’.

So much negative projection seems to go on here and I really do not honestly believe that I am doing it. I do know that I am being constantly subjected to it though.

287. Red Dead Ryan - March 12, 2013

#285.

Here you go again, belittling an event that you don’t understand, and haven’t experienced first hand. Luckily I haven’t either, but I don’t go around belittling others who have been in the vicinity of a tragedy such as the Chris Dorner rampage in Southern California. I don’t like reducing the impact of these tragedies, as they clearly affect entire communities and damage/destroy lives in the process!

I hope to see you fall off your high horse one day. It’ll be a hard fall, one that will humble you, hopefully.

288. James - March 12, 2013

287 Better yet Red Dead Ryan, I hope to see the day she has totaly lost her ability post here ever again, and stick to her little hole over the IMDB forums.

moving along thugh I am excited to see what the Preview infront Gi Joe 3D has instore. cant believe we are now just 62 days away from Trek returning to the big screen.

289. James - March 12, 2013

Keachick your exact words were “THE MEDIA was over hyping”
that very terrifying event that was being experienced first hand on the streets of my hometown.

How the F@^k do you know what we were witnessing in our own streets and neighboorhoods for several days durring that event.

And how dare you belittle the tragic loss of life of hard working Officers, who were attacked by one of their own, in cold blood.

I have no use for you, and I hope I can seriously ignore your comments in the future without having to respond.

talk like a grown up or leave us be.

And sorry everyone for my rant there.

290. Trekkiegal63 - March 12, 2013

#278. Michael Hall:

I think we’ll probably have to agree to disagree on this one, because my bottom-line is pretty much this…

I don’t feel Kirk was in a place to refuse, regardless of whether or not he wanted to. He was under all of the pressure we’ve already discussed in detail. He was distrustful of Drusilla right up until she kissed him and I seriously doubt that a kiss ended that lack of trust. When has James T. Kirk trusted anyone that wasn’t Spock or Bones? He was always suspicious, always predicting the potential moves of those around him, and measuring actions and reactions, which is what made him a fantastic strategist (and chess player). Lastly, as you indicated, he had Drusilla’s fate to consider.

In my opinion all of those things equate to coercion. If Kirk didn’t seek out the sexual experience of his own freewill, which he didn’t, and had mounds of pressure weighing on him from all corners? That’s coercion.

291. Linda - Yar Fan - March 12, 2013

Hello Mr. Pascale,

This is my first message ever here. You have a great website. My two teenagers and I like this site a lot, as it is our major source for news on the new Star Trek movies. Thank you!

I am typing this message to you because my 13-year old daughter showed me some of the recent messages of this Keachic person, who had been talking in detail about things like blood soaked tampons and bloody feces; and also the weird information about her views on sex and children that she decided she just had to share with everyone here.

This is a bit shocking to have to hear that my daughter read this crude and bizarre material that was provided by a Star Trek fan on this site. I would ask you take a look here at what is going on with this person and this type of unnecessarily graphic messaging from her?

I also wanted to make you aware that teenagers do enjoy this this site, and some of them like my daughter are young teenagers. While I realize there is some adult language on this site (and my daughter can handle that), I don’t think that the type of graphic descriptions that this Keachic person uses are acceptable — this is real “sick puppy” stuff. And I don’t really want to hear from this person or anyone else on a Star Trek site people’s weird thoughts on the sexual awakenings of children.

I am a big believer in free speech, so I would not want to see this person banned. However, if you can step in and perhaps calm her down and explain to her that nobody wants to read these kinds of severe gross descriptions, I would be grateful to you.

Best Regards,

Linda

292. DiscoSpock - March 12, 2013

#291. I am kind of surprised it took this long for somebody to complain to Anthony about this?

Keachick, you are so far off the reservation with this ill-defined, clusterfuk of a collection of bad arguments, that I find myself feeling sorry for you.

293. Admiral Archer's Prize Beagle - March 12, 2013

“As for the other event, I worry that if what Chris Dorner did could put so many of you off balance, I shudder to think what effect a pack of wolves might have on you and your capacity to cope logically and carefully. Chris Dorner was small fry, a lone wolf.”

Rose, I can’t believe you are bringing up Chris Dorner again? Remember, you APOLOGIZED to all of us for your horrible behavior with your awful insensitive posts for over a week. Only after you were universally condemned by 95% of us here, did you finally give us an apology. Your belittling of this tragedy again here shows me that you never really offered a true apology. You just apologized to avoid the continued criticism and embarrassment.

You are showing your true colors now.

294. James - March 12, 2013

Linda- Can I also suggest that you use the contact link at the bottom of the page, and send an email directly as well, sometimes its easy for a message like yours to Anthony to get lost amongst all the other posts.

I would also hope that Keachick offer you and your daughter an apology but most likely that will not happen, based on her past behaviors on here.

295. Anthony Pascale - March 12, 2013

Keachick

Final warning for trolling, hijacking and generally making a mess of things. You need to tone it down in general please. Don’t take everything as some kind of personal attack and returning attacks in kind.

thank you

The Management

296. James - March 12, 2013

On a happy note Altantis featuring Leonard Nimoy as the king of Atlantis is now on HD streaming on Netflix :)

297. MJ - March 13, 2013

Thanks Anthony.

298. Phil - March 13, 2013

@291. Forwarned – Rose isn’t bashful about expressing her opinions. I made a comment about age appropiate material a while back and got a full broadsides about how horribly inadequate I was a a parent. Don’t be suprised if you get an earful about what what an uptight prude she thinks you are.

Kudos for stepping up, though. And thanks for speaking your mind.

299. Phil - March 13, 2013

@297. Man, step away from this thread for a few days, and look what happens. Amazing that she won’t let anything go now, and for whatever reason you really seem to be the target of her ire. Atta boy for not taking to much of the bait…. :-)

300. Keachick - March 13, 2013

All trolls, all of you!

301. Commodore Adams - March 13, 2013

So why isn’t this up on the Apple trailer website for download?

302. MJ - March 13, 2013

Phil — yep!

303. Phil - March 13, 2013

@300. To the bitter end, eh?

304. K-7 - March 13, 2013

Re: Phil: “To the last, I grapple with thee; from hell’s heart I stab at thee; for hate’s sake I spit my last breath at thee.”

LOL

305. Michael Hall - March 14, 2013

In my opinion all of those things equate to coercion. If Kirk didn’t seek out the sexual experience of his own freewill, which he didn’t, and had mounds of pressure weighing on him from all corners? That’s coercion.

Yes, I tend to think you’re right about us having to agree to disagree. But just out of curiosity, do you believe that it would be possible for Kirk or any other man to perform under such circumstances, absent desire? And if you do not, how far would the desire/coercion dynamic have to skew in favor of the latter for desire to be non-operative?

306. Trekkiegal63 - March 14, 2013

#305 Michael Hall:

Are you asking me what I think you’re asking me, aka can our bodies, um… act accordingly even in immensely stressful situations?

The answer is subjective to the individual. Kirk, as a character was always pretty unflappable. Chemically, given the nature of his job and the fact that he was a bit of an adrenaline junkie, I’m willing to bet (just my opinion here) that his body was well suited to controlling cortisol levels (the stress hormone). Besides of which, cortisol usually only dampens, uh, responses after increased exposure over a prolonged period of time, thus, having been in Rome less than a day, even under dire circumstances, he would still be able to do as the Romans do. ;)

None of that negates coercion, however, cortisol or no. They are not mutually inclusive.

If that was not what you were asking and I missread the question, then to quote Gilda Radner, “nevermind!”. ;)

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