Post-release Into Darkness odds & ends and General Discussion [CLOSED] | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Post-release Into Darkness odds & ends and General Discussion [CLOSED] June 24, 2013

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

stid_strip_6

With Into Darkness out for more than a month, here are a few news items about the movie and the possible sequel, along with a place to continue discussion about the movie.

UPDATE: General discussion of STID has now moved to its own page.

http://trekmovie.com/into-darkness-open-discussion/

fxlogo
US cable channel FX will have the rights to STID in 2015, joins 2009′s Star Trek and other big summer blockbusters:

FX continues to load up on blockbusters, acquiring the TV rights to The Purge (Universal), Fast & Furious 6 (Universal), Star Trek Into Darkness (Paramount), and this past weekend’s box-office champ, Man of Steel (Warner Bros.) The Network has also picked up This Is The End (Sony) – last weekend’s #2 film — along with The Internship (Fox) and Epic (Fox). With the latest acquisitions, FX has now secured 71% of the highest-grossing weekend films of 2013 – 17 out of 24 weekend releases

Deadline.com

 

burton
LeVar Burton - I’ve Got a Problem With New ‘Star Trek’ Flick:

“At the end of the movie, I really care about what happens to the characters …  but I’m pretty much missing Gene Roddenberry in J.J.’s  interpretation … and at the end of the day, that’s just not OK for me.”

TMZ.com

 

b_burke
Trek
producer Bryan Burk on screening Into Darkness and the editing process:

Well consciously what we were doing when making the film was, we really wanted to make sure it was a film about – in our mind it was never really a sequel, it was its own movie going forward and it’s why the movie doesn’t have a number by it.  It was a film that you should be able to jump in, if you’ve never seen it before you’d be able to jump right in, and obviously if you have seen it then you’ll be bringing your own emotion to it.  We wanted to appeal to both.  It was really important to try to reach a whole new audience so we had a lot of people in who not only had not seen the last film but were not Star Trek fans, or thought of themselves as not being Star Trek fans, or they had seen bits and pieces of Star Trek in the past and it was just not for them.

– Read much more about various Bad Robot project over at Collider

 

orci_kurtzman
Orci and Kurtzman discuss Khan and what constitutes an homage versus remake:

From the ’09 movie, we thought of getting Leonard Nimoy as freeing us from canon while also honoring it. The movie should harmonize canon. While we were free to do whatever we wanted, we wanted to echo what happened before. For example, in the first movie you have the Kobayahshi Maru. It’s possible in the universe before we came along that was how Kirk and Spock met. Spock may have been the administrator of that test. To free ourselves from canon, we think about what might’ve happened in those days, even if it wasn’t an alternate universe. For us, it’s interesting what could’ve been the same. We didn’t just want to do whatever we wanted. We wanted to free ourselves, but take a stab at what might’ve happened in the previous series. Some people have complained, “Well, they’ve freed themselves, so why even do Khan?” For us, the exciting idea was…we’d freed ourselves, so how can we do the things we know but in a new way? That’s parallels, echoes, and harmonies of what we know as Star Trek, and that’s how we approached it.

– Read all the details at Film School Rejects

 

lindelof
Damon Lindelof says he already knows the bad guys and key plot points of next Star Trek movie:

So presumably, based on that logic, you guys have some plans for the third one then.

“I think that is a reasonable conclusion. You should always know where you’ve been, you should always know where you are, but most importantly, and I learned this from Lost, you should know where you’re going.”

And a little more prodding led to:

“You can never see enough Klingons, and I think in this film we’ve given the audience a little taste, but there’s also a promise that there’s a larger conflict on the horizon, and that would be fun to see.”

– Read more teases from Lindelof over at Hey You Guys!

 


Previous Into Darkness Discussion Threads

May 28 – Second week

May 20 – US Opening week

May 17 – Open Weekend

May 15 – Domestic Fan Sneak Open Day

May 8 – Early Countries Open Day

 

DISCUSS STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS (WITH ANY SPOILERS)

Feel free to chat about the movie in the comments section below, including discussing any spoilers.

WARNING: This open thread is for people who have seen the movie. If you haven’t seen the movie you really shouldn’t be reading this as you are sure to get spoiled.

NOTE: The usual rules of Internet forum decorum apply (keep it family friendly, no flaming, trolling, being annoying, etc).

Comments

1. El Chup - June 24, 2013

The Klingons were one of the few things i liked about STID, so I’d be happy to see them in the next one.

First?

2. Chris( K of K )Pike - June 24, 2013

Praise the Great Bird of the Galaxy! A new topic: a miracle.

LLAP

All the best to AP.

3. Mr Mike - June 24, 2013

I really don’t want to see a Klingon War or another movie about a bad guy or bad guys. Can’t we see something different? Exploration on the 5 year mission and a deeper look at the characters. Maybe some dialogue that doesn’t have to be a thin minute between long action scenes.

4. Ahmed - June 24, 2013

@2. Chris

Actually it was Matt who updated the site, given that he was the one who closed the previous thread. Although I might have an issue that he deleted all the comments after post # 649!!

But at least, we got a new topic :)

“Damon Lindelof says he already knows the bad guys and key plot points of next Star Trek movie:”

I hope NOT, keep him away please.

5. Matt Wright - June 24, 2013

No comments have been deleted. I just closed it. That post is huge and takes a number of seconds to load the 2,500+ comments. It loads them in chunks. Go back and you’ll see they’re all there, they just slowly fill in.

6. Ahmed - June 24, 2013

@Matt,

Thanks for the clarification & most importantly for the updates.

7. AyanEva - June 24, 2013

Yay! New post. I saw something elsewhere that said a sequel was already guaranteed. Is this true or just someone making assumptions?

8. Praetor Tal - June 24, 2013

Good lord! Is this a new article?

More Klingons! More Romulans! Conflict and subterfuge and villainy that gives way to opportunities for peace.

9. Matt Wright - June 24, 2013

@ 7 – I’ve not seen anything that says it’s guaranteed. But STID has done well enough and the actors have a contract for three films. So I think it’s a pretty safe assumption there will be a third film.

10. jas_montreal - June 24, 2013

@ 5 – Hi Matt, As a Software Engineer, I gotta say you guys gotta revamp the site. Loading the comments should be done on demand, when a user continues to scroll below the comments section header (like other major sites are starting to adopt). Just a suggestion.

—-

I also have a general question to everyone here… Why hasn’t the Into Darkness sequel been announced already? Into Darkness was announced right away after Trek 2009 was released.

11. Ahmed - June 24, 2013

I think Paramount need to think now not only about the the 3rd movie but beyond that as well. They should follow what Marvel is doing with their movies & their massive plan that progressed from phase 1 to phase 2 now.

12. jas_montreal - June 24, 2013

@ 11

I really think both the original series and next generation franchises should co-exist at the same time. If thats Paramounts “Phase 2″ plan for Star Trek. They should also have completely different people writing TNG movies.

13. Star Trek Into Darkness Doldrums -JoeTrekFan - June 24, 2013

After several viewings of STID in IMAX-lite and regular digital projection, I have to echo the sentiments of what LeVar Burton is saying. From the early movie posters of Kirk, Spock and Uhura all holding guns, I had a not too favorable feeling about this movie. We should have gone right into the exploration part..though the ending of the movie seems to indicate that is where our crew is heading in the next film.

At least Kirk and Spock seemed to have grown some in their roles, at the expense of the rest of the cast. I hope in the next film, the ones who got shortchanged (Sulu, Chekhov, Scotty and Uhura) have more than just token scenes. Yes, I know..compared to the TOS films..the supporting four had barely much to say beyond; aye, sir; course heading; hailing frequencies, open; and warp (insert number here).

Bones seems to be the old Bones that we all know from the TOS era, BUT..in this movie, he’s always grumpy, complaining and muttering something negative. Enough already! He needs to have a romantic interest or get laid or something! Why is it just Kirk that has to in bed with a woman, or two? Just because Bones’ is divorced doesn’t mean he has to be all tight assed all the time onscreen.

I do have some nitpicking. I hate the Enterprise’s warp drive visualization. Why is there a light trail that goes straight and then perpendicular that looks like either fairy or pixie dust? Is it supposed to depict some kind of warp drive exhaust particles?

The dissolve from the alien’s crude drawing to the actual ship was a good idea, but the actual Enterprise looked so CHEAP. It looked like a $20 hobbyist’s model. Hardly any detail, grace or sense of grandness that The Motion Picture had. If you’re seeing a movie on a huge IMAX-lite screen, you’ve got to have the right visual perspective to take advantage of all that largesse. The first movie’s transphotic warp trail would’ve looked far better and yielded that first-person perspective that at least made that film engaging to an extent. And enough with the old-style warp engine sounds. Make it modern. You’ve got the cool looking interiors. The sounds need to be as cool. Ben Burtt, are you listening?

The music is a little better this time around, although I still contend the theme or the use of it in the movie is lacking. The use of piano in the London scene and the tune is very appropriate to the tenderness of the daughter dying. Spock’s theme is just awful. Why the compose chose to use an Asian instrument to depict Spock’s theme is beyond me. If the sound effects people are going retro with the ship sounds, then why not reuse the TOS tv Spock theme and update it a little. That would be a great homage to its past, musically, aside from the Alexander Courage fanfare.

As I’ve been saying for years, they need to do a really good Klingon story. Delve deep into its culture with the appropriate modern day allegorical references. I do not know if the old Soviet Union one during the tv series would be appropriate. Back in the day, they were the country’s enemies. Perhaps a reworking of today’s alQaeda and the themes of honor, dying for a cause through self sacrifice, etc would be powerful themes to explore.

We’ve hardly seen the Klingon homeworld except in TNG. This gives the filmmakers an opportunity to turn up the volume when it comes to alien landscape creativity. I’d like to see a Klingon homeworld much like the set up in Dune. You’ve got the homeworld, itself, surrounded by say, 10 or 12 moons that are ‘houses’..the house of Mogue, house of Kaless, etc etc. Each moon would be a contrast in environments; desert hot like Arrakis in Dune; perhaps continental ice masses like a Europa; a tropical planet like the Bahamas, etc. To save money, maybe they could use some of the CGI programs they used in the Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith movie where they showed all the Sith being killed off from the various planets.

My box office predictions were wrong. It seems the movie has sputtered domestically now at barely over $200M. The film plays much better than Fast & Furious 6, yet that movie has outgrossed Trek! It won’t even make it past the first film’s gross. At least the international gross is about equal to the domestic gross and an increase from before. In the final analysis folks, the math says it all. On a $200M film, plus advertising, its $400M gross is barely 2x its cost. It looks like the film did not do as well as it should have.

I have a feeling that they may reduce the budget in the next film to say, $120-$140M given the so so grosses of the recent one.

14. Joe - June 24, 2013

I couldn’t care less what they do for the next film. This was such a waste of my time and money I hope they use the Spock”s Brain as the next different but new story.

15. dmduncan - June 24, 2013

Combing all the post release “sticky” threads puts this same discussion at over 4500 posts.

16. Pensive's Wetness - June 24, 2013

at least we are not argueing (yet)… though i wish things had gone different in STID, i guess i go back to wait and see mode for the 3rd flick. I think most people will agree that JJ will mostly not be part of this (honestly i want him to concentrate on SW).

and Mr. Lindelof? I truly think STID would have been better had -Khan- been the one to die in Ent’s Core. Killing and then Saving Kirk like that? that wasnt much of a ending to remember, sir.

17. Ahmed - June 24, 2013

@12. jas_montreal

“I really think both the original series and next generation franchises should co-exist at the same time.”

Agree, they should work on a series of movies that co-exist in the two timelines & explore the various stories from TOS to VOY. They could go the way of spin-off movies like what Disney is planning to do with Star Wars now.

@14. dmduncan

“Combing all the post release “sticky” threads puts this same discussion at over 4500 posts.”

wow, that is huge number but I can believe it, the last thread alone was over 2500 !

18. Phil - June 24, 2013

@7. The business pages have been saying that the third installment will be made. They just have not said when. Paramount has not made any announcements – they have gone quiet after the first weekend. Given some of the squabbles that have been aired recently, it seems that Paramount isn’t in any hurry to green light the next project….

Keep in mind they have announced the return of Gov. Grab-Ass in the next Terminator movie, and the WWZ sequel….

19. Phil - June 24, 2013

Interesting. I went over to the Paramount website, to the merchandise page, and entered Star Trek in the search window. Got an error message back…..

20. Sean - June 24, 2013

ST3 will be “war is bad” as a theme, & be no deeper…& will reduce the Klingons to barbarians….which to be fair they were in the 60s tv show & 80s movies, but were given much more depth & respect in TNG…..I’d hope ST3 would treat them more like Ron Moore did….be a fun political thriller (maybe involving the romulans as well). Or use the andorians (they were fun in ST:E) or here’s a bold idea, come up with something new. ST is endangered if becoming Bond films…same arc, same villain different name, etc.

But I’m really sick of these being revenge movies as a re-occurring theme in these reboots. I wish STID was more daring & not rest on the laurels of past through cheap tricks in nostalgia..it was charming in 09, a bit tired this year & will be disappointing in 2016. So to the writers…burn more bridges & make up something new…I’m getting sick of gen-x rehashing their childhood.

21. Spiral Sea - June 24, 2013

—I’m pretty much missing Gene Roddenberry in J.J.’s interpretation … and at the end of the day, that’s just not OK for me.”— LeVar Burton

Exactly.

It was a fun and entertaining movie, but in a largely superficial way—more of a popcorn-munching action movie than something at least partly resembling thoughtful science fiction. It lacked the meaningfulness, depth and the spirit of Trek. Gene Roddenberry was a great one for asking questions and challenging the audience with his themes, a quality sorely lacking in the JJ movies.

There were some plot holes and problems with some of the characters. The TWOK death scene rip-off was pretty much unforgivable—a totally unforced error.

But the worst thing about “Into Darkness” was not a specific problem with the story (of which there are plenty to choose), but rather that JJ & Co., by and large, repeated the same, exact mistakes that they made in the first movie: a watered-down villain with a less than compelling motive for revenge; superficial treatment of the movie’s themes; and making a largely superficial action movie as opposed to a (somewhat thoughtful) Star Trek movie.

The one slight improvement of Into Darkness over ST09 was the attempt at a main, overarching theme running through the movie, namely the love of “family” motivating the decisions and actions of the characters—to vengeance, violence and self-sacrifice. But even so, there just wasn’t enough substance in between all of the break-neck action sequences to really support the film’s main theme, so it feels more like a subtle, secondary theme than like the main thrust and point of the movie.

I’d expect pretty much the same level of quality in the third movie. Much higher production value than artistic value. Fun but fleeting. Much more titillating than meaningful. An action movie, not a sci-fi movie…especially if JJ is involved. This is obviously the kind of movie that he likes and knows how to make well.

Unfortunately, JJ chose to make his kind of movies on the premises of a rich and beloved 40-year old franchise with which his style of film-making and storytelling are largely incongruous. JJ didn’t set out to make Star Trek movies because he loved Star Trek (indeed he has stated many times that he never liked Star Trek until he started making Star Trek movies); rather, he exploited a long-running franchise for his own movie-making purposes, changing the core of the franchise to suit his tastes more so than applying his own interpretation to the core of the franchise. JJ’s movies seem to lack the spirit of Gene Roddenberry because JJ has replaced Gene’s spirit with his own spirit…however one might characterize it.

22. rfk - June 24, 2013

I’m guessing Paramount wants to be sure they get a better, more original movie in three years than they just got after four. We shall see…

Given I turn 50 shortly after ST does in Sep 2016, I’m looking forward to the countdown (really!).

23. Ahmed - June 24, 2013

@18. Phil

Yep, I just tried that as well. And I got this

Search results for ‘star trek’ : Your search returns no results.!!!

24. MORN SPEAKS - June 24, 2013

I really don’t want to see the Klingons as the main villain in the next movie. I think could be part of the story not the whole. I think the JJ team has earned the right to make a new threatening species.

25. Ahmed - June 24, 2013

@23. MORN SPEAKS

“I think the JJ team has earned the right to make a new threatening species.”

Not sure about they earned the right, but agree with coming up with new dangerous species instead of the Klingons.

And I thought Morn NEVER speaks :)

26. SoonerDave - June 24, 2013

@Matt

Just as an FYI of which I’m sure you’re aware, this site is virtually unusable on a handheld device when the thread grows to much of an appreciable size. I know its been mentioned before, but allow me to offer again FWIW that upgrading the forums on this site is an urgently and respectfully offered request. I think doing so would also eliminate some of the problems associated with Mysteriously Disappearing Posts. I had a post in the 2470 range that never saw the light of day, and it was not anything particularly inflammatory, so I rather doubt it was deleted editorially.

Thanks for letting us know the place is still alive.

27. Isaac - June 24, 2013

The new villain in the next movie should be The Brog. It would combine the two series and with a updated Borg Collective, would be freaking cool.

28. Phil - June 24, 2013

No Klingons, no Borg, Jem H’Dar, Cardassians, Ferengi (villians or comic relief versions), etc. No whale probes, peace planets, Nexus, or anything associated with a Treks Greatest Hits mash up. It didn’t turn out to well this time, there’s no reason to think that amping up a fan boys wet dream will be any better received next time…..

29. Bucky - June 24, 2013

*sets up camp in thread for the next month* Anyone bring food and provisions?

30. Dee - lvs moon surface - June 24, 2013

There’s this interview with Chris Pine about ‘Star Trek Into Darkness’, they asked him:

Q: William Shatner made seven Star Trek feature movies. How many do you think you will make?

A: I’m committed to two more at this point. Er, not sure I should have said that! [Laughs]

I think he was saying two more after Into Darkness!

here: http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/star-trek-darkness-chris-pine-1871313

31. Ahmed - June 24, 2013

@27. Phil

Are you expecting the writers to actually come up with something originally, really ? No way this will ever happen. If they kept the same team, it will be probably something that we seen before but done badly as they did with Khan in STID.

32. Vultan - June 24, 2013

If they must use the Klingons (yet again), could they be a little less… Middle Earth? Looked like Uhura was chatting with an Orc.

33. Phil - June 24, 2013

@30. Well, I’d like them to. To be clear, I liked the movie, but it’s flaws were obvious.

@29. The interview was dated 7 May. STID, plus one, is two movies.

34. Hat Rick - June 24, 2013

They will keep making Star Trek movies until Chris is past Bill’s age, whereupon he will ask to be included in the new series of movies starring the next generation of cast members.

Just think: The next person to play Star Trek’s Captain Kirk in the official movie productions probably hasn’t even been born yet.

It could be YOUR (future) son, for all you know. ;-)

And then, THAT new Kirk will be replaced by a third “official” Kirk, the parents of whose player may only be a glint in the eye of two of our contemporaries. Of course, by then, all babies will be test tube babies, as the birthing process would be deemed by then too inconvenient and messy. ;-)

By the time the 23d Century does come, there will probably have been ten or fifteen official players of Kirk….

35. Ahmed - June 24, 2013

@33. Hat Rick

“By the time the 23d Century does come, there will probably have been ten or fifteen official players of Kirk…”

oh man, this is so depressing! I hope they will move on & come up with something new & not reboot every single Star Trek series.

36. Hat Rick - June 24, 2013

LOL, Ahmed (34). :-) Well, they will all be directorially different, but potentially linked by one common theme we now know so well: A love of lens flares. Eventually to such an extent that the five-D glasses with which they are used will have an automatic dimming feature, not unlike that of an automatic welder’s helmet.

Also, free sunscreen lotion will be distributed at the theater entrance.

;-)

And now for my ideas about Star Trek: The Next Sequel:

(I already posted this once before, but didn’t get a whole lotta feedback. (Or maybe I did. I stopped tracking the last monster track a week or so ago.) Please forgive.)

Speculation about Star Trek (2016):

Tentative Title: Star Trek Restored (2016)

(Project Title: Turquoise Gathering.)

Shortly after the events of STID, Section 31 is now more powerful than ever and is under the leadership of a wizened Starfleet officer whose existence would have surprised the crew of the Enterprise, now embarked on their five year journey.

Unbeknownst to the general public, Admiral Marcus’ actions in bombing the “archives” had wiped out information needed primarily by Starfleet Intelligence; Section 31′s servers and personnel were in actuality located in an uncharted area of the Galaxy, near the planetary system occupied by the Guardian of Forever.

In fact, Marcus himself had “died” only for the purposes of public relations. Like the fictional Hari Seldon of old, he had fancied himself the progenitor of a psychohistory that predicted the future with extreme accuracy. Unlike Seldon, Marcus had access to several sources of future history, none of which was known even to Starfleet Intelligence.

His first act upon “discovering” Khan was to excavate all known records of his criminological record. His second, and far more fateful, act was to investigate and duplicate the technology that had made Khan the ruler of a third of humanity. And his final act, months before Marcus “died,” was to clone himself.

It was a clone that had died that fateful day that Vengeance had its due.

Behind it all, Marcus’ plan was unfolding still.

Beyond the stars, the rumblings of war were intensifying as the Klingon Empire saw the opportunity to strike at a Federation without moral authority, and corrupt at its very core.

And, in the midst of it all, the superbeings from three centuries ago began to stir from their cryogenic sleep ….

Across the chasm of time, Kirk and Spock stared at the various versions of themselves.

“The good of the many outweigh the good of the few … or the one,” said one of them.

“It is a statement with which I am… familiar,” said another.

The first and foremost task of Starfleet’s most celebrated half-human, half-Vulcan science officer had always been to create a New Vulcan. But in what sense was it to be “new”?

Kirk now knew his fate in the universe from which Nero had torn the elder Spock. It wasn’t his desire to know, exactly, but circumstances had made it imperative that he understand the manner of his own future death. At least in that universe.

He was tasked with understanding, as well, the fates of other Kirks, and other Spocks. The Guardian had no desire to guide him along. Forever was a long time to explain.

The conference of equals and near-equals was dance of the reluctant and the eager. What each man said to another could determine the fate of universes. Kirk chose his words carefully.

“I need to know what you know,” he said simply.

And across the chasm of time, the Elder Kirk said to the younger: “You already know too much.”

37. Melllvar - June 24, 2013

#34

While I do agree with your general sentiment…. I want to see a reboot of TNG. Imagine the Galaxy Class is the JJ-verse! The mind boggles.

38. Steve J. - June 24, 2013

RE: Star Trek Into Crapness on FX – I haven’t seen, and won’t see, this movie in a theater, and I certainly won’t be watching it on “free” TV or on DVD! I still regret seeing the first one in a theater!

39. KJTrek - June 24, 2013

As bad as the Khan rip off was, the most disappointing part of the movie for me was the writing. Did anybody else feel that the characters were acting like angsty adolescents more than trained professionals? Admiral Archer was especially bad. I think the bad writing largely contributed to the laughable Kirk death scene.

40. K-7. - June 24, 2013

@2450 – MJ (responding to Keachick): “These are EXACTLY the types of significant Trek stories that Anthony covered back in 2009 during the release of the original movie — go back and look at the archives here if you don’t believe me? The movie is in release right now. Other Trek websites are covering this type of news daily. To come outright and say that the reason we have not had an article on this website since May 23rd is because there is “nothing new in Trek of any real consequence is…I am sorry to say…an outright fib — you are misleading every objective person here. You are not credible in making that statement which insults our intelligence here.”

MJ, I agree completely. Those articles you referenced on Trekweb from the past four weeks when Anthony has been silent, cover: the next movie, the villain for the next movie, a deleted scene from STID, the importance of STID’s financials to Paramount, LaVar Burton’s review of STID, and how Treks marketing issues with CBS may have led JJ to leave for Star Wars. These are all major relevant Trek stories, and I agree with you in that had these stories been out in June 2009, Anthony would have covered all of this stories.

Keachick is be untruthful in saying that their has been now news in the past four weeks, which is why there has been nothing on this site. Other sites are coverall all of these stories and more; some sites have an article almost daily.

41. Hat Rick - June 24, 2013

Did you mean Admiral Marcus, not Archer?

While I’m asking about corrections, I oughta correct my own reference to a “monster track.” I meant “monster thread.”

I also want to amplify the fact that the Zeitgeist appears to focus on the use of covert means (especially drones) to spy on and/or (attempt to) kill people who shouldn’t be spied on and/or (attempted to be) killed. SPOILER ALERT for Man of Steel:

/
/
/

Supes does the world a solid by getting rid of a $12 million nosy neighbor near the end of the movie. (A rather different movie from the 1970′s ones, and even the last reboot.)

42. Red Dead Ryan - June 24, 2013

Honestly, the last villains they should bring back are the Klingons.

As for LeVar Burton’s comments, while he is entitled to his opinion, he has to remember that Gene Roddenberry has been dead for over twenty years. What he’s approve/disapprove of is now completely irrelevant.

43. KJTrek - June 24, 2013

Hahahaha oh my… yes Admiral Marcus. Wow I have no idea how “Archer” came out! Must be something about his beagle…

44. Hat Rick - June 24, 2013

On a more serious note, as long as we’re talking about beagles, I was thinking about Scotty (who felt guilty about beaming the good Admiral’s beagle to a place, or various places, unknown) and his role in the new Trek universe. Thanks to his his interaction with Spock Prime in ST09, apparently transwarp beaming has now become a “thing.” By the time of STID, this could be accomplished by means of a device about the size of a footlocker (or so I seem to remember), which was discovered by said self-same Scotty as the means by which Khan had beamed himself to the Klingon Homeworld.

(Is anyone else freaked out by the fact that so soon after STID, Snowden did his disappearing act, not unlike Khan? And that he did secreted himself to one or two of only a few places effectively beyond the reach of the Federatio — I mean, the United States?)

Life imitates art.

;-)

45. Ahmed - June 24, 2013

@ 35. Hat Rick

I like the idea of a person controlling & directing events from behind the scenes similar to what Hari Seldon in Asimov’s Foundation series was doing.

But I don’t think this belong in a Star Trek universe. After all, the Trek universe supposed to be this shinning future that we all look for & hope to live in one day :)

OT: Speaking of Hari Seldon, I hope the planned Asimov’s Foundation movie will steer clear from Roland Emmerich. It is such a bad idea that I can’t believe that someone actually suggested that.

46. Matt Wright - June 24, 2013

@ 40 K-7 — that’s enough of that, don’t start slinging mud in this fresh comment chain. That subject has been rehashed in the old one ad naseum.

47. Matt Wright - June 24, 2013

@ 26 — This site uses a customized version of WordPress and unfortunately that’s not changing any time soon. But I feel ya, I know it’s not mobile friendly. The forums are also something that probably won’t happen any time soon, Anthony had certainly looked into in the past, but he last said back in one of the first STID discussion threads that it was quite costly to implement the way he wanted it.

48. Dee - lvs moon surface - June 24, 2013

#33. Phil

The premiere of STID in UK was in May 2… the movie was finished already at that time… so I dont know…

49. Khan was Framed! - June 24, 2013

Now that the film has proven a success, It’s time for Hasbro to start releasing a complete line of toys: action figures, transformers cross-overs, etc.

50. Hat Rick - June 24, 2013

@Ahmed (45), thanks for the feedback. :-) I’m kinda partial to grand conspiracy theories so I would beg to differ. But I do agree that Trek is all about exploring, so we could meld (mindmeld?) the two themes together, maybe, somehow. (In fact, a year or two ago I suggested an interstellar pursuit of a secretive villain (not Khan) involving Kirk and, I think, Pike, as a possible ST2013 plot. (Alas, it was not to be, obviously. But I still totally love STID even though it wasn’t exactly the sequel I thought could be done.)

I’m a big fan of DS9, which a lot of people also said was a betrayal of the “one big happy family” (apologies to Khan Prime) idea that GR presented, particularly in the TNG years. (There is some debate as to whether GR was as utopian in TOS; after all, in a very obvious manner, “The Way to Eden,” a.k.a., The One With the Space Hippies, ridiculed the idea of an idyllic pursuit; and then, of course, there were all those crazed admirals or commodores in the classic series, not to mention Daystrom and his infernal M5. It could be argued, and has, that GR never intended all to be paradisical in the 23d Century (at least). But I digress.)

Drama is difficult to do without conflict, anyway.

51. Ahmed - June 24, 2013

Star Trek star to answer fan questions.

“Actor Zachary Quinto, best known for his role as Spock in Star Trek (2009) and Star Trek Into Darkness (2013) and as the serial killer Sylar in cult TV drama Heroes, will host two live Q&A sessions at this year’s Galway Film Fleadh, as well as the Actors Masterclass.

Quinto will take questions from the audience following screenings of Star Trek and Margin Call, a sobering feature which depicts the last days of Wall Street following the collapse of the markets and starring Kevin Spacey, Jeremy Irons and Demi Moore.”

http://galwayindependent.com/20130624/news/star-trek-star-to-answer-fan-questions-S20183.html
———————————————

Guess we might hear some news after all about the 3rd movie during the Q&A sessions.

52. Rastaman - June 24, 2013

It appears like LeVar is throwing stone in glass houses with his review. While I understand where Burton is coming from, I don’t think Star Trek Into Darkness is any more remote from Gene Roddenberry’s vision than most the Star Trek movies. The Next Generation movies where some of the worst culprits of this. Star Trek: Generations is a mash-up of studio demands, something Roddenberry likely would not have cowed to. First Contact is as much a popcorn action flick as Into Darkness. Insurrection really covers a lot of the same territory in terms of a dark underbelly of the Federation. Nemesis, please! garbage. Into Darkness is much closer to Gene Roddenberry than the Next Generation movies.

The real solution is getting Star Trek back where it belongs on Television!

53. Ahmed - June 24, 2013

@52. Rastaman

” Into Darkness is much closer to Gene Roddenberry than the Next Generation movies.”

lol, with all due respect to you Sir, this is the best joke I read all day long.

54. Ensign RedShirt - June 24, 2013

For those asking: the entire cast, as well as Bad Robot itself, are on 3-picture deals, which expire after the next film is released. After that, the cast will get much more expensive, so expect at least some recasting on the horizon, or even another reboot.

55. Ensign RedShirt - June 24, 2013

Ahmed -

I would’nt expect to hear anything about a third picture until sometime next year. They’re going to have a lot to figure out before they announce anything.

56. Roddenberry Worshipper - June 24, 2013

@42. Who are we to determine what Gene Roddenberry would or wouldn’t approve of today or what he thought was relevant or irrelevant in regards to Star Trek as it exists today? LeVar Burton worked with the man the first few seasons of TNG until his death so I would like to think he would know a thing or two about what he would or wouldn’t want. That being said…yes I do agree he is entitled to his own opinion. I do happen to agree with him in that Star Trek wasn’t just about dog fights between two starships in space or shootouts with phasers on some alien planet. There were some real issues to be addressed in the 1960s and in the late 1980s/early 1990s in TOS and TNG respectively. But even the issues presented in those series could still be echoed in the current J.J.-verse version of the franchise. Though we do have wars there are other issues such as tolerance, bullies, wrongful imprisonment, the homeless, the hungry, the poor, the sick…all of which and more were presented in Gene Roddenberry’s Star Trek. Action movies have become cheap thrills. Forget any real respectable writing. The more guns and weapons and the more blood and guts an action movie can offer the better. As with most action and adventure films today, the franchise has lost its way and those whom have been entrusted with its legacy should be ashamed for how they’ve cheapened what was once a strong and proud franchise….all for the almighty dollar. I know there’ll be others who will agree AND disagree with me and that’s their right. But all of this needed to have been said.

57. Ahmed - June 24, 2013

@55. Ensign RedShirt

“I would’nt expect to hear anything about a third picture until sometime next year. They’re going to have a lot to figure out before they announce anything.”

True they need to figure out stuff like the director & the writing team, but that shouldn’t delay an initial announcement of a sequel.

World War Z was just released on Friday & Paramount already approved a sequel. STID was released more than a month in North America & not a single word yet.

58. Hat Rick - June 24, 2013

I was just wondering why Scotty’s friend, the alien, was even in STID. Anyone know? He does even less than in ST09, although I hadn’t thought it possible.

Also, the android in the bridge had one line, and that was it, and it’s the kind of line that could have been spoken by an extra. Why was he even there?

Potential answer: Possibly as partial setups for ST2016. :-) At least with the android. (Is he designed by this universe’s version of Dr. Noonien Singh? The timing would be a bit off, if so, though.)

Maybe the truth will out in the Special Blu-ray Edition with deleted scenes (inevitably to be released; the only question is when).

59. MJ (The Original). - June 24, 2013

@54. None of the actors have really made it big yet. So you are assuming an awful lot when you say “really expensive.”

We’ll get five movies in this itteration of Star Trek — that is my firm prediction.

And as others have learned here, doubt my predictions at your own peril. :-)

@54

Ahmed, dude, enough with the doom and gloom. They are pretty much committed to 3 movies. Don’t get hung up on the hype of these types of announcments for other movies. That is not relevant.

60. Ahmed - June 24, 2013

59. MJ (The Original).

” None of the actors have really made it big yet. So you are assuming an awful lot when you say “really expensive.””

Agree, looking at IMDB, I don’t see much there for the current cast. I doubt they will get too expensive in the coming years.

“Ahmed, dude, enough with the doom and gloom. They are pretty much committed to 3 movies. Don’t get hung up on the hype of these types of announcments for other movies. That is not relevant.”

All I want that they start the ball rolling & not waste time like they did with STID. The earlier they start with the script, the better chance of getting a decent one, not a rushed script.

61. spock69 - June 24, 2013

The next movie should be a completely different flavour just like The voyage home was.
A “piece of the action” springs to mind. It would be such a welcome change of pace after into darkness.

62. reni - June 24, 2013

I would love to see a real sci fi movie.
While I understand action flicks get butts in the seats, I think something different from the last two films would do well.

63. Photon70 - June 24, 2013

50th Anniversary year celebrations?

What do people think Paramount are likely to do?

Any chance they could re-release maybe 2 of the original movies and 1 of the TNG movies in the cinemas during 2016 leading up to ST13?

Stoking the fires and building up anticipation?

********

Any early comments about a World War Z sequel from Paramount may be more along the lines of ‘if we announce we’re reviving our franchise plan for World War Z, maybe that’ll get a few more people to watch it’.

So relaxxxxxxx.

********

Any more Damon Lindelof bashing?

His rewrite of the last 40 minutes of World War Z can now be clearly stated as one of the reasons the movie didn’t bomb.

In an interview, he even said that if the movie did bomb, the studio could lay the blame on him

64. Captain Karl - June 24, 2013

Wow…They really tap danced around the questions asked of them with such long winded responses. If they were such canonphiles, they would know that Spock was on the Enterprise with Captain Pike well before meeting Kirk as Pike’s successor. The only time they existed together as youths at the academy (before ST09) was in Harve Bennett’s mind. He was the first one who wanted to bring Trek back to those days.

65. Red Dead Ryan - June 24, 2013

#56. “Roddenberry Worshipper”

“Who are we to determine what Gene Roddenberry would or wouldn’t approve of today or what he thought was relevant or irrelevant in regards to Star Trek as it exists today?”

Read my post again. I said that it doesn’t matter what Roddenberry would approve or disapprove of. He’s long dead. Times change, and Trek has to change with it.

Why do you think Roddenberry was pushed aside after TMP, and after the first two seasons of TNG? It was because he became too wrapped up in his own creation, and couldn’t/wouldn’t see the changes in how tv shows and movies were being made. Then there was that silly “no conflict” rule, which was broken on DS9, a show that Roddenberry (at least in his latter years) would no doubt have hated and disapproved of.

66. Other Guy - June 24, 2013

They should switch up the writing staff and bring in new blood. Preferably writers who are familiar with the originals many, many nuances, but also smart enough to write intelligent stories. After all, these new movies are supposed to be replicating the original series.

Glad to be aboard the new 1st 100 posts! Thanks, Matt!

67. captain spock - June 24, 2013

no I dont think gene roddenbery was pushed aside after two seasons of star trek:TNG for that reason red dead ryan i dont know if any body knew this that gene roddenberry had series of strokes his health was declinding that why the cast of the ST;TNG said they seen gene roddenbery less & less on the set after the second or third season that the Next generation was on the air due to gene health problems.if you had watch trek nation you would know that..
would gene roddenberry approve of JJvirse interpretation of trek cant answer that yes he been gone for a long time almost 22 years. maybe we should ask gene roddenberrys son Rod Roddenberry if he would have approved of JJvirse trek.may be he can answer that question for you.
lets hope the surpreme court dont have the borg or the Q or klingons a baby Picard in the next movie, the borg have been on how many series 4 & over done to many times, the Q on 4 series no thanks ,the klingons no thanks done to many times even to count. & all 5 series .
lets stay with the origonal series please. renagade vulcan maybe na the gorn or the tribbles what ever…a new speacies for the enterprise crew to defeate yea on the 5 year mission they are now on.

68. Blue Thunder - June 24, 2013

It seems the conflict will never end between what could be best described as old Star Trek versus new Star Trek. Even if it is a new timeline. It’s almost like that decade old argument about the Star Wars prequels.

Like I said before, half of the film I did like and the other half I did not. What I did not like was the half that was cliched in some areas. We really didn’t need a role reversal of a certain scene from TWOK.

It would have helped if the writers had explained how Khan in the new timeline looks like a Caucasian Englishman instead of a Sikh Indian(i.e. like Thelev in Journey To Babel – Khan being surgically altered to look and pass off as a Caucasian Englishman).

I haven’t read Alan Dean Foster’s novelization of Star Trek Into Darkness, but one is hoping that the aforementioned explanation is a possibility. One documented in the novelization.

By the way, on the subject of the love/hate viewpoints concerning Star Trek Into Darkness, was this advertisement really necessary?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUCwHAtg6XQ

Not only do they(John Broughton, Michael Bednar, and Dean Rogers)not look good in those uniforms, their acting was certainly not all that great.

To quote Alec Peters concerning Starship Farragut, ‘They can’t act.’

If anything, their production could be better equated with a sophomoric high school stage production than the real deal at Paramount Studios.

It’s bad enough that there has been a lot of infighting between Star Trek fans concerning the 2009 film and its 2013 sequel, the DS9 and babylon 5 feud, the Star Trek vs. Star Wars controversy, and the original Star Trek vs. Space:1999 conflict.

It’s really worse when you have a fan film organization(one being based out of the District Of Columbia no less)being allowed to continue by CBS/Paramount when they have done the following violations:

1. Stirring up a major, heated controversy by stooping so low as to violating the law and taking what is not theirs from another fan film production.

2. Allying themselves with someone who has obviously broken the law too many times to count.

3. Letting that someone already ruin their reputation by committing other illegal acts. Especially when one of those acts involved the illegal and unauthorized release of another production’s property.

4. Causing another professional fan film production a lot of unecessary and unwanted frustration, when they have their own issues and business to attend to.

Calling the executives at CBS Paramount. Have you been paying attention to the BS concerning Farragut Films lately?

69. MC1 Doug - June 24, 2013

Thankful for a new news post!

A few thoughts about the movie:

A starship is NOT NOT NOT and never should be a submarine (or visa versa). That was the most asinine thing I have ever seen in a TREK film, Sorry, Roberto, but that plain dumb! In fact, that whole planet scene was so wracked with illogic that it could have derailed the film for me.

Just because it may look cool does not make it logical or likely. Tell me, if a ship can reside in the atmosphere, has operational transporters and has shuttlecrafts, why why why would engineers design a ship to be able to withstand the crushing pressures of an ocean when all the aforementioned attributes were available to it? And a shuttlecraft could not stand the heat of a volcano? C’mon, the temperatures of re-entry are surely equal to, if not exceeding of lava…

If a transporter can beam a person from Earth to the Klingon home world, why have starships???

This franchise currently bears almost no bearing to Roddenberry’s view of the future. I think Roddenberry would have been horrified of this.

Okay, now that I may have conceivably pi**ed off some people, I did like this movie. I liked it a lot… much better than the 2009! It’s just not true TREK.

The Easter eggs were nice, but they do not a movie make.

I liked Kirk much better in this film. Loved his closing moments with Admiral Pike. Very heartwarming.

The Enterprise is not a submarine. AND please let’s try to be more scientifically accurate the next time.

This film got a lot of things right, and nearly as much wrong and still I like it.

I hope that the closing monologue that we grew up with means the next movie will finally be about exploration. But I won’t hold my breath.

I liked how the movie did pay homage to a lot of TREK’s history and to “the Wrath of Khan.”

Think there won’t be a “next film?” Think about it, do you honestly think Paramount would be stupid enough not to make a film to celebrate TREK’s 50th anniversary?

Did I mention that the Enterprise is NOT a submarine (grin)?

James Bond got it right for its 50th, I just hope they can do something worthy for TREK’s anniversary.

AND finally, let’s take TREK back to the small screen where it is far more compelling.

70. MC1 Doug - June 24, 2013

Just how much money has the movie made now?

Paramount is not going to continue bankrolling 200-250 million dollar movies if
it has little expectation to recoup its investment.

Enough of these super-big budget TREKs! Let’s see some less expensive, but more thought-provoking movies

71. MC1 Doug - June 24, 2013

And why was Kirk stealing an artifact from the alien culture in the opening moments of the film?

72. ilker - June 24, 2013

I do not want to provoke anyone, it is my right as a 41 year old fan to say that STID sucked. Even the superhero film Man Of Steel is a far better science fiction film than the glued-together-mindless-action-scenes-mess I was presented after such a long wait. Sorry to say this, sorry it turned out like this.

73. MPMonroe88 - June 24, 2013

@71 He stole it because it was a precious abd revered artifact to them and by taking it, they chased after him, therefore clearing them from the blast zone. It was Kirk’s way of getting them out of danger from the volcano without running in and screaming, “Hey, everyone run away!” because that would have given his identity away.

You can see one of them toss the scroll to the side at the end of the sequence as they’re drawing the Enterprise in the ground, signifying that they now rever the Enterprise and not their original religion, therefore altering their natural progress.

74. RNase-free Jeff - June 24, 2013

Alright, as much as it isn’t necessary, I’m going to put my two cents in:

-First, I loved Into Darkness, and I thought in many ways, it was better than ST09, and is in the top tier of Star Trek films.

-Second, I hold this film in high regard because the arc that Kirk undergoes in this film. Particularly when he climbs through that Jefferies tube into the warp core. Everybody complains that it is repeating the events of Wrath of Khan, but I feel that it was incredible to see Kirk sacrifice himself for this ship and crew that he knows he doesn’t deserve. Even though he was brought back, this is a Kirk who has really faced the Kobyiashi Maru (something we never really saw before from Kirk).

-Third, I understand Levar Burton’s feeling about Into Darkness, but I don’ t think that Gene’s vision is missing in the film, it’s just in the background. I do agree that it should be further brought out to the front (and that is something they could have done easily in this film with a few additional lines of dialogue).

-and Fourth, I want to remind everyone who complains on how JJ and company have defiled Gene’s vision, because everybody who has written Star Trek (including the great Nick Meyer of the Wrath of Khan) called bullshit and defied Gene’s wishes of a humanity devoid of fault, because A) even in 200 years, we will still have the ability to be bigoted and racist (I recall Kirk saying “Let them die” about the Klingons once upon a time) , and B) it is nearly impossible to make a piece of popular media in this day and age where there isn’t some kind of conflict (even Picard, the great diplomat, was touting revenge in films).

But this film featured many of the best features of the Star Trek universe and ethos, and I think can lead to a phenomenal third film. I just hope that we get one.

75. Photon70 - June 24, 2013

70. MC1 Doug – June 24, 2013

Maybe I’m stating the obvious but box office gross up to $430m and counting.

STiD’s publically stated production budget was $190m, not $200m to $250m.

One of the issues for Paramount is that they have such a tiny number of films each year and for reasons best known to themselves, even now do not appear to have any intentions of expanding ST universe/multi-verse at the movies.

They could quite easily launch a lower budgetted 2nd ST film franchise, with a new film every 2nd year interspersed with the more expensive reboot films.

Say around $125m in budget, with expectations of making $175m in North America and $175m Internationally.

There are any number of potential past TV series, and even something completely new and stand-alone within the ST genre could be done.

The point is if you only have 1 product and it comes out only once every 3 or 4 years, the cashflow just isn’t there.

An aweful lot is then riding on the one expensive film every 3rd or 4th year.

Lets face it, Marvel have the right business plan and its no shame to borrow it.

76. HubcapDave - June 24, 2013

@70 MC1 Doug

About $50 million more worldwide than ST09….and counting!

77. Chief Engineer - June 24, 2013

Don’t mind the Klingons being the villains for the next movie just as long as the main premise is space exploration and strange new worlds… No earth and less military.

78. Chief Engineer - June 24, 2013

Star Trek To Strange New Worlds

79. shedai - June 25, 2013

Klingons! Sounds like “war” in the next movie. I want to see strange new worlds, I want to see optimism and not just in the last sentence of the movie! I somehow like the JJ´s version, but they should be pretty careful not to destroy it afterwards with more action, more conflict, more good versus bad. I would really like to see a movie with a strange, really strange new world and how they take care about it and find out, it is not so bad as they thought when they saw it first time. Or something like that. More like “Close Encounters”, more like “2010… “, more like “martian chronicles” (without its negative input). Because there is also another promise in STID: Strange new worlds, new civiilisations, to boldly go, where noman has gone before…!” ” And THAT promise we won´t forget, Boys!

80. Charlie Zayas - June 25, 2013

OK listen this should be the next movie…
The Enterprise is shown for the longest possible time going through space not at warp first and after a long time warps and the movie continues inside the the ship as Captain Kirk goes to bed with Carol Marcus played by any actress, but only a kiss and to sleep they go. We are then shown a horta as incommand of the night shift , alarm goes of at Uhuras cabin played by any actress and she finds Spock having morning tea in the other room of her cabin of course.
They reach an Alian world with a humanoid race that can’t believe they come from someplace other then there world, but must be from the inner core of there planet because they Kirk and company are so ugly looking to them. They send us deep, deep inside there planet, there we indeed find a race that wants to kill the surfice race because they are drilling deep into their space, once we make peace with all concern the movie takes a turn back to war because Klingons arrive to claim the planet.
Organians intervene but only after a lot of destruction and a small damage to Enterprise because our new friends shot down so many of the shots from theKlingons plus Enterprise has far superior Shields then ever on original time line . we go back toward Earth and near Venus a massive invasion force from Romulans and this time the Organians do not want to get involve at all, the Romulan war begins Spock is captured Uhura does not cry, just put on war gear , so does McCoy and Chekhov and we warp to the next movie and we actually get the date for it and a teaser plus poster with a lot of clues.

81. Elias Javalis - June 25, 2013

Its all about Borg baby!!!:) Remember the narada? Half borg tech? A nice theme to be picked.

82. Captain Braxton - June 25, 2013

Kirk vs Borg = doing something new with this timeline for once!

Hell with this maybe Starfleet can broker a peace with the Klingons to tackle this new threat in STIII.2, imagine Kirk & Kor joining forces in an uneasy alliance? Make it so!

83. freejack_1971 - June 25, 2013

They should do a time travel episode to 2016 a la Voyage Home or Gary Seven.

We’re not going to get an honest-to-goodness exploration story. And I’m sick of Klingons, Romulans, and Borg–basically the last five films. So do something for laughs. The hell with it.

84. Toonloon - June 25, 2013

Welcome back everyone.

I found Levar Burton’s comments interesting. At first I agreed with him, then I realised that the GR ‘quality’ is more at home on TV than the big screen. TMP is a prime example of that (pun intended). Stuff like the “prime directive” works great as a thought piece, something to dwell on. TNG was superb at that as it was anything but the action adventure series that TOS was.

JJ’s movies are not only based on TOS but they are also movies, therefore they have to deliver in certain areas. If they went off on a major tangent about the prime directive or the no money concept or any of the others that GR became famous for, then you won’t deliver a movie that will stand on it’s own two feet in today’s market place. You end up with a slow, thinky movie like TMP.

I thought Orci and Kurtzman did a great job in giving us some of that old time GR Star Trek with STID and the non-interference stuff with the Nibiru. They also managed to give us social commentary that speaks more of who we are today than what we’ll do when we meet people with bumpy foreheads. That certainly is what GR wanted to do with Star Trek and I think he would be very happy with STID.

I can’t wait to see what they come up with next. The only thing that troubles me is how high they have raised their own bar. I hope it’s not impossible to meet.

85. Killamarshtrek - June 25, 2013

Trek Movie is ALIVE, thank the lord!!!

86. ironhyde - June 25, 2013

I agree with Lavar Burton. Pretending you can’t make a movie without conflict among the main characters and without humanity acting like spoiled brats is just limited imagination. They always say, You can’t write smarter than you are. That’s what happened here. This team couldn’t write better than it is. Gene’s vision is definitely possible and it was very apparent throughout the Star Trek that I used to know.

Even so, I liked this movie. I enjoyed the ideas and the potential for discussion that it brought up. I thought Khan was a bad move, I thought the choice of redoing a previous story with fanboy twists but a very similar outcome was in no way trying anything new. It was packaging the same old in a kind of shiny wrapper.

At the end of the day, Levar Burton is right. He was part of the best Trek there ever was IMHO… and at the end of the day, what’s happening to the Star Trek that taught me and guided me and was a friend as a kid — it’s NOT okay at the end of the day.

Fix it, Bad Robot.

87. Mel - June 25, 2013

@ 5. Matt Wright – June 24, 2013

“No comments have been deleted. I just closed it. That post is huge and takes a number of seconds to load the 2,500+ comments. It loads them in chunks. Go back and you’ll see they’re all there, they just slowly fill in.”

No, they are gone. Only yesterday they still all loaded, but not anymore. Now this is the last comment I can see no matter how long I wait:

“650. Matt Wright – June 13, 2013

Alright I think we’re done here guys. This thread has long ago derailed. It’s become a place for bashing for the sake of bashing, and all sorts off topic posts. We’re done here folks time to move on.”

88. Mel - June 25, 2013

My mistake. I accidentally clicked on the wrong thread. The order of the threads changed.

89. Bryan with Pointy Nacelles and a Large Disk - June 25, 2013

The story was sophmorish and shallow. One can tell the writers are from the video game generation. So you wanted an alternate timeline, great, then truely run with that. You cannot catch lightening in a bottle, leave Khan alone.
The Enterprise still looks like a 50′s Buick. Over designed and bulbous.
The interior set of the bridge is just awful…too cluttered, too lit, too much plexiglass. The other sets are not worth mentioning.
Actors do a fine job, but they are just alittle too cute and pretty.

90. star trackie - June 25, 2013

““At the end of the movie, I really care about what happens to the characters … but I’m pretty much missing Gene Roddenberry in J.J.’s interpretation … and at the end of the day, that’s just not OK for me.”-Levar Burton

Well Levar, the “Trek” you were involved in was, for the most part, mediocrity tied up with a pretty bow. While it was a decent TV show, it was as far away from Classic 1966 action/adventure-based Roddenberry/Coon Trek as you could get. Of course, the writing on the walls, that Gene’s creative talent and “vision” wasn’t what it used to be, was evident from The Motion Picture. The man had changed, and without the creative input from other behind the scene notables like Gene Coon and DC Fontana, Trek, sadly, was changing as well. By the time TNG came around, Gene’s “vision” of what Trek “was” had so radically changed, it was barely recognizable. So, Levar, look long and hard at JJ’s Trek and you WILL see Gene’s vision of Star Trek. What you WON’T see, is Gene’s vision of TNG. And that’s really o.k. with me.

91. Horatio - June 25, 2013

Why not Klingons?

TOS Klingons were actually the antithesis of the TNG variety. TOS Klingons were sneaky, conniving and had little – if any – honor. It was TNG that turned them into those barbaric yet loveable & honorable clam heads that they are known as today.

Then you have the Enterprise episode which tried (unsuccessfully IMHO yet still gets thumbs up from me for the effort) to bridge the TOS and TNG era Klingons.

If whatever powers that be that are controlling the movie franchise at this time want to revisit a reimagined Klingon Empire in the next movie – count me in. That’s a part of the TOS Trek universe that really hasn’t been fleshed out.

I’ve been reading a lot online from some Trek purists who aren’t the biggest fans of JJ-Trek’s Abramsverse. Though I can understand that – as I actually prefer the original timeline and original series – I think everyone needs to realize that, ya know, its been almost 50 years since Trek has been on TV. Two of the major actors of the series are now gone. The rest are just a few years away from beaming up and, to use Shat-speak, there…. will…. be….. no …. more….. Original Series…. Trek again.

So what to do? I think it was correct for Paramount to reboot the whole franchise. Fandom can debate until they are green in the face about the alternate timeline, the new actors, the Spock-Uhura romance, the destruction of Vulcan, lens flares, CumberKahn or the sanity of the writers. The fact is for Trek to continue on it MUST appeal to a younger audience: the type of people who like lens flares, lots of action and explosions and gratuitous bikini-clad blondes.

I am of the belief that there are two separate Trek’s. The cinematic and the television kind. For any film, especially a high budget space based film to succeed it has to follow a formula. Don’t blame Paramount or JJ Abrams on that one. The kind of Trek that most of us are still waiting for won’t be found again until Star Trek makes its leap back to television -which will happen eventually. Until that time, i’m willing to live with the lens flares and treatment of Original Series canon as a sandbox. Whenever I need my fix of TOS I still have three years of episodes and 6 movies to run to.

So I take New Star Trek as an inevitable consequence growing older. I am actually now older than what Shatner, Nimoy and even De Kelly were when they first started filming the series. Ouch. That hurt just realizing that. “Young minds, new ideas. We must be tolerant.” Kirk says to Scotty at the end of Star Trek IV The Voyage Home. Scotty responds ” I sir, thy will be done.”. And its with similar resignation that I find myself growing older and watching something like Star Trek change for the newer 21st century audience. I’m just actually glad its still around, relevant and has a heart beat. I can’t wait for the next film or films. Go ahead, flip the canon on its head. Play around in that rich sandbox that Roddenberry and so many others created. And I can’t wait for the new series, whenever that happens, to start. However, if they screw that one up then I may not be as forgiving.

92. Weerd1 - June 25, 2013

No need to argue about anything at this point, as I am sure we are all firmly entrenched in our opinions about this film. Those of us who wanted to see “GR” in this movie did; those who didn’t don’t. Prime example is Levar Burton’s opinion versus Wil Wheaton’s. Many people saw character and story, many didn’t. Regardless, the movie was successful so we can hope for more Trek of any ilk.

Meanwhile, I am going to be all giddy and love this movie like cake. THE most TOS-like movie made yet, and Man of Steel could have learned something about villain preservation from Into Darkness.

@91 Horatio- great pragmatic comments.

93. SoonerDave - June 25, 2013

I saw Into Darkness for the third and likely final time in the theater this week, as it was under the “Ending Soon!” banner on the theater’s tagline, and I came away with this sentiment:

I loved it. Again. All three times.

Okay, okay, fine, so it has some plot holes – and some big ones. Granted. But why on earth should we hold “Into Darkness” to some higher literary standard than its ancestor TOS only rarely found, and in so doing gave us embarrassing gems like “Spock’s Brain?”

Why can’t we just sit back, recognize we are still being given fresh interpretations of a nearly *fifty* year old entertainment franchise, this time with powerhouse budgets and production values, and enjoy it? Why do some have to work so hard to try and forge literal reality from an escapist science fiction franchise, and in so doing beat to death all the strangulating minutiae that can be dug up?

As far as missing “Roddenberry’s Vision,” that’s just no small measure of retrospective hogwash. Roddenberry created Trek, we all know that, but we also know he was, at times, incredibly difficult to work with, much of his writing contribution(s) had to be discarded, and was pushed *out* of a movie leadership role when “Wrath of Khan” was greenlit and Harve Bennett given the torch to “fix” the franchise. The key is not to bash GR, but to keep the reality of his influence in the proper perspective. Burton’s comments are interesting, but for him to be complaining about the absence of the “GR vision” given his TNG time under Berman’s watch is pretty ridiculous. Berman was happy to turn TNG into unending waves of Treknobabble and perpetual sophistry, neither of which reflected much of GR’s “vision.”

@Matt

Thanks for the feedback re the forums. Heck, I’d be happy if this site just converted to some fairly generic version of vBulletin that most every other major forum these days offers. Doesn’t have to be particularly complicated. But that’s obviously not my call.

94. DeflectorDishGuy - June 25, 2013

Totally agree with LeVar! STID was interesting, but it’s not Star Trek anymore… and that’s not okay. Jumping and fighting on flying cars? May as well give Spock a lightsaber and hope he uses the force. Star Trek is Star Trek FOR A REASON.

Oh well. I’ll just have to watch my TNG on BluRay.

95. DesiluTrek - June 25, 2013

If a “war with the Klingons” movie is what Lindelhof has in mind, that would be great some other time, but assuming the movie will be released in ’16, it would be a horrible homage to Star Trek on its 50th anniversary. We all know damned well that were he here, Gene Roddenberry would not approve of a plot like that.

96. MAXIMUS - June 25, 2013

My sentiments exactly Mr. Burton. These movies are star wars movies and have nothing to do with Star Trek.

Star Trek Into Garbage

97. Horatio - June 25, 2013

@95 You’re right. Roddenberry would instead want to do a film where the Klingons go back in time and disrupt the timeline by preventing the assassination of JFK which causes a series of events that eventually leads to a nuclear war which wipes out humanity. The Enterprise goes back in time to fix the timeline which ultimately leads to Spock (acting as the always suspected 2nd gunman) taking JFK out at Dealey Plaza and thus restoring the timeline.

This is an actual story treatment that GR submitted to Paramount as a follow up to Star Trek: The Motion Picture. Its also one of the reasons why he was put to pasture and the keys to the franchise given to Harve Bennett.

Roddenberry was a visionary, yes. But does he deserve sainthood in some kind of Church of Trek? No.

98. USSEXETER - June 25, 2013

@91 Well said!

I’m 46 and have followed Star Trek since 1972. My whole life I have never waivered on my Trek worship. To see STID with that kind of movie budget was amazing. I hope the trend of big budget Trek continues, and a move to the small screen (HBO are you listening) is highly anticipated.

99. NTRPRZ - June 25, 2013

@90 – You got it. There were about 10 TNG episodes worth anything, the rest should have led people to question the wisdom of holodecks, transporters, and Picard character largely could be reduced to the lyrics “I am the very model of a modern major general, I’ve information vegetable, animal, and mineral.” DS9 was the highest expression of Trek, and it was dark, where the Federation had to admit its high falootin’ nonsense wasn’t gonna matter if they didn’t survive first. TWOK was darker, so was TUC and First Contact. Enterprise sucked until the Xindi arc. Those were really the only 3 good movies out of the first 10. Honestly, by the end of TNG, Geordi was such a sanctimonious little bitch, I was rooting for him to get killed. Riker after saving the Federation from the Borg went on to become a tool of epic proportions. Worf and Troi!?!?! Go back to reading rainbow.

The new movies are what they are. They primarily are designed to draw a different audience, a larger audience. As much as devoted Trek fans want their little vision of Trek, and as die hard as they are, there aren’t enough of them to pay the bills. Also, budget cuts for the next movie would not be the worst thing. Budget cuts mean less special effects, more story. TWOK was the result of the budget cuts after TMP. They even reused visuals for goodness sake. But the delusion that any of the Trek series other than DS9 really produced huge numbers of quality episodes that can appeal to a mass audience is just fantasy. TOS probably had 15 out of 79 at best? TNG with 179 episodes only managed about 10 I would bother to rewatch. DS9 had about 50 good ones, Voyager not so much, Enterprise whatever by that point. They were out of ideas and many of the shows had the same plot with stuff moved around.

The new movie wasn’t perfect, I still am mildly annoyed with certain things, mostly that Kirk wasn’t vaporized in the engine core, who would seriously design an engine that if it misaligned couldn’t be maneuvered remotely, and who in their right mind doesn’t shoot Khan and his entire merry band into the sun after they get what they need from him, I mean, are you ever seriously going to wake this guy up?

I actually think the actors did a very good job, but basically the first two movies constitute the reboot to get the series back to where it was when you all fell in love with it at the beginning of TOS. Kirk had to earn being in the Captains chair with more than one heroic act, this movie took him from who he was, to who he will be. Also, it very much echos Roddenberry in that it at the end it has Kirk/The Federation turning his back on revenge and the Section 31 approach. If it were me, I would be looking for the recipe for those torpedos and build about 12 of those Dreadnoughts while rearming the Enterprise and the rest of my ships so they don’t get the crap kicked out of them like Enterprise always does. But that is me, you know, in the real world.

100. Other Guy - June 25, 2013

I showed a friend some of those YouTube clips. Kirk’s death/Spocks Khan scream, etc. He threw his hands up and said, “Proposterous, Star Trek is Dead.”

Nuff said.

101. Phil - June 25, 2013

Sorry, but LaVar was having his Bart Simpson moment. “Hey, look at me! I’m over here. Look. At. Me!!! Lookatmelookatmelookatme…Down here, I’m down here”

LaVar, you are entitled to your opinion, but at least one of your co-stars loved it, so obviously Gene was in there, somewhere. Maybe you just missed it.

102. Holo J - June 25, 2013

Why don’t we have proper hand phasers in this new reality? It would be good to see a proper phaser used in the next film and have someone actually get vapourized, at the very least stunned! Why were phasers abandoned in JJ’s Vision of Star Trek? It’s a very small point I know but it’s one extra thing that when I watch makes it feel like it is not Star Trek I’m watching but Star Wars.

103. The Sinfonian - June 25, 2013

There’s no reason that a threequel couldn’t have Klingons at war…. with someone else. The Kinshaya. The Romulans. The Breen. The Kelvans (my fave idea). Even >gasp< the proto-Borg. (The Borg could have been clued in by the Narada's transmissions and thus are curious about the Affa Quadrant sooner than TNG.) Or even a Klingon Civil War where the little brainstem critters from TNG have taken over part of the Empire. Those things never had a good name. Alas, poor Remmick.
.
The Klingon Empire, suffering already from the destruction of Oraxis (the planetoid that comes before Praxis?), the biogenetic consequences of rapid use of Narada data to return the ridges lost in the ENT era, and this 'war' the Klingons have been fighting…. leads them to "enlist" the Federation.
.
The Narada, Khan Harrison, and even the Federation were the least of the Klingon Empire's worries. Marcus was wrong. The Klingons weren't arming up to take out the Federation… they were fighting a war "they didn't want to talk about".
.
That's how you bring in Klingons, having Kirk having to work with {Kor|Kang|Koloth} to investigate something… (Laurentian System? Antares Maelstrom? Moons of Nibia?) that will help the Klingons defeat the extradimensional Kelvans (or Borg, or Breen, or Romulans, or whatever) that are on the edge of wiping out the Empire and the Federation next.
.
You get exploration, war action, morality plays on "the enemy of my enemy is my friend"/"war makes strange bedfellows"/"consequences of inaction"… and can also followup on Alexander Marcus' terrible miscalculations. However, his advanced tech he got Khan to develop…. now is exactly what the Klingon Empire needs to defeat the now-common enemy. Also an excuse to keep Carol Marcus (and Alice Eve) around…. so that in the threequel, she's fully clothed, and Pine is seen in only his jockstrap.

104. 35+ Year Star Trek Fan - June 25, 2013

@13 The movie is still in circulation and has yet to be released in some countries. Let’s wait until we get the final numbers before we assume anything. Also I loved this movie and cannot wait for the third installment.

105. Other Guy - June 25, 2013

Y’know that scene when Kirk, Scotty and Khan take the Vengence’s Bridge? In TOS they would have just stunned the whole room. No shootout needed.

When you dumb down the science you ruin the Trek.

Star Trek was never about the shootouts. It was about a deeply moral obligation to peace and exploration.

106. crazydaystrom - June 25, 2013

I’m not a violent person. And I don’t advocate the use of violence or assault to make a statement or as a means to an end. But after what was for me the HUGE double disappointments of Prometheus and the decision to retread Khan, every time I see a photo of Damon Lindelof I imagine how satisfying it would be to smash a pie into that face! Not a cream pie, oh no, oh no, but a double-crusted pie of substance…apple. Or better yet, blueberry.

Wow. Just making this post is bringing back the intensity of my disappointment in STID. And it’s such a damn shame because I love the new cast and the new look of the rebooted universe (though I’d like to see the E further tweaked…no, make that improved). And I was an outspoken defender of ST09 despite the several issues I had with the film – they were rebooting and leeway was to be given. And there was much in 09 that is to me truly wonderful. But it is now obvious the direction Trek is now going is not the one I would find ideal, though admittedly my ideal big screen Trek would probably not be as comercially successful as Bad Robot’s. BR’s Star Trek for me needs, if not a balance then a better action/story ratio. STID almost seems to be afraid to let the story and characters flow and develope naturally and logically but “what the hell? More flash, dash, whiz and bang will keep their heart rates up.”

I’m an old school, ‘old fart’ fan since the sixties but as I said I love this new cast. I’d love to see them handled in a bit more of a mature fashion- ‘science fiction-wise’ and ‘Trek-wise’. They certainly are able to handle any and all ‘good’ writing handed them. They’re a very talented group of actors. Chris Pine in particular. Of the the original crew Spock was my favorite with Kirk being a very close second. Of the new guys and gals Kirk is by far my fave and NuSpock is about fourth on my list. I like Quinto but his Spock doesn’t move me the way Nimoy’s has all these decades. There’s a ‘soulfulness’ that’s missing…

But anyway, Star Trek is a science fiction, action-adventure franchise. It always has been. I’d like to see more emphasis on the SCIENCE FICTION (of intelligence and quality) but Star Trek now has become more action-adventure oriented than ever at the expense intriguing and interesting science fiction storytelling. Perhaps this is necessary to keep Trek ‘on screen’ but as things have evolved I will for the first time NOT be waiting for the next movie installment with the extreme excitement and anticipation that I have for the thirteen films in the franchise up to now. And that makes me a little sad. I saw Star Trek ’09 ten times at the theater, eight of them IMAX viewings. More than I’ve seen any other movie in theater before or since. STID I saw thrice: once each IMAX3D, regular 3D and 2D. The next one I’ll see because I’m a fan but…

Whew! Good thing I’m sending this from my iPhone or I would’ve ranted and rambled much much more than I’ve done here. This is the first time I’ve really let myself express my disappointment re the current state of the franchise post STID. My Star Trek fandom has gone through several phases over the decades. I suspect I’ll survive this phase. And hopefully TINTS (The Inevitable New Trek Series) will satisfy.

Yeah now I’m a little sad. Think I’ll go get some coffee and a slice of pie somewhere. Apple…or better yet, blueberry. Yum!

107. Other Guy - June 25, 2013

106. crazydaystrom

“Wow. Just making this post is bringing back the intensity of my disappointment in STID. And it’s such a damn shame because I love the new cast and the new look of the rebooted universe (though I’d like to see the E further tweaked…no, make that improved). And I was an outspoken defender of ST09 despite the several issues I had with the film”

Crazydaystrom, I had to stop reading right there and whole heatedly agree with you.

108. Other Guy - June 25, 2013

I like the blueberry pie idea! But as for seeing ST09 ten times. A bit of an overkill.

109. Toonloon - June 25, 2013

@ 93 well said soonerdave.

110. Mark Anton - June 25, 2013

Honestly, this movie really wasn’t very good when you compare it to what people like LeVar Burton say is should be. First of all, just because you can hide the Enterprise under water because you’re production budget says you can does not mean you should do it. If you’re trying to avoid detection from primitive aliens, landing a giant craft in the ocean and then ultimately flying out of it is not a very good strategy. It makes too much sense to the audience to have the Enterprise orbiting from space like it always has in the past. This Khan rehash was so disappointing. The audience in my theater collectively groaned when Harrison revealed that he was Khan. He didn’t even say his full name– just Khan, like this alternate-universe Kirk should immediately know who he’s talking about. The rehashed dialogue that leads to Spock shouting “Khan!!!!” demonstrated to me that somebody else needs to write and direct the next feature.Stop giving us a Star Trek on Steroids version of a movie like Into Darkness is. The studio can deliver a much more meaningful film for fans for a lot less money, and produce it in a lot less time than four years.

111. Horatio - June 25, 2013

@110 and others re: Enterprise underwater

Why is the Enterprise being underwater any more unbelievable than the Enterprise sputtering through protoplasm on its way to a cell nucleus or being shrunk to the size of an AMT model and sitting on a table stand on Holberg 917-G?

(BTW, those references are from TOS episodes The Immunity Syndrome and Requiem for Methuselah.)

112. Other Guy - June 25, 2013

Yeah! So suck on that, JJ!! Another NEGATIVE critique.

Go mess up Star Wars, JJ. I really don’t care about that franchise after what Lucas did to it for the past 20 years. It appears only Disney and you like that turd series.

113. Other Guy - June 25, 2013

111. Horatio

Because I.S. was set in SPACE!

114. JTK2099 - June 25, 2013

This isn;t meant to be “trolling” or me being a “hater” but I am done with Abrams Trek. I paid to see two movies and didn’t care for either of them. I’m not going to pay to see another one.

115. Dr. Image - June 25, 2013

What the hell?? I thought STID was entertaining and awesome- and I’m a purist! And every Trek fan I know loved it, warts and all.
I just don’t get all this hating…

116. Other Guy - June 25, 2013

Dr. image.

Simple. It was stupid. Trek is supposed to be smart.

Khan designing Starfleet’s most advanced torpedoes? Khan smuggling his compatriots out in the same torpedoes?

What? NO ONE saw this happening?

So many other examples. Almost EVERY scene was directed to a STUPID conclusion. Grow a pair of brain hemispheres, and think!!!

117. crazydaystrom - June 25, 2013

108. Other Guy
“…as for seeing ST09 ten times. A bit of an overkill.”

Perhaps, but I was riding a wave of ‘fan glee’ – a new big-budget Star Trek adventure rebooting my fave Trek characters, looking wonderful on an IMAX screen a bicycle’s ride away from where I live. The Kelvin scene was and is one of my favorites in all Trek history and I am in the minority who loves the lens flares (ha! and one of the few around here who knew what a ‘lens flare’ was before ST09). I’d just broken up with a girlfriend, was making pretty good money and to support my beloved franchise I decided to make a little ritual of pedaling over to the IMAX on Sunday mornings and transporting to the 23rd century. I did this every week it played there. That was a great spring! STID did not inspire anything that in me at all. Saw it the second time to see if I’d like it better now that I knew we were revisiting Khan :-( Saw it a third time because…there are elements of STID that I like despite the overall disappointment of the thing. And I’m a fan.

But yeah, I was probably overkill. Loved it!

118. Other Guy - June 25, 2013

114. JTK2099

Y’know. With enough vocal criticism of ST13, perhaps Paramount will do the smart thing and actually make a good Star Trek movie next time.

That’s the real purpose of my critiques here.

119. Other Guy - June 25, 2013

HA! ST13 got me in such a bad mood I lost my girl friend!

120. crazydaystrom - June 25, 2013

116. Other Guy -

“It was stupid. Trek is supposed to be smart.”

^^^^^HEAR! HEAR! Oh so very much THIS!

121. Marja - June 25, 2013

Lindelof: “You can’t see too much of the Klingons”

[Raising hand] “Ummmm…I have.”

Ahmed said: All I want that they start the ball rolling & not waste time like they did with STID. The earlier they start with the script, the better chance of getting a decent one, not a rushed script. Ahmed, I could not agree more.

Dear crazydaystrom: How you can watch Quinto’s performance as Spock and think soulfulness is missing is a mystery to me, but perceptions are always subjective. For me, his performance, every nuanced use of expression, was perfect, and drew me back again and again.

122. Spock's Bangs - June 25, 2013

#115. “What the hell?? I thought STID was entertaining and awesome- and I’m a purist! And every Trek fan I know loved it, warts and all.
I just don’t get all this hating…”

Yeah. Same here. No worries Dr., it’s the squeaky wheels you’re hearing, and they are far and few between! JJ’s Treks have collectively made over 800 million bucks. Old Berman era Trek, that these fanboys are longing for, could never come close to those kinds of numbers. JJ Trek is rocking it, TOS style, and the Next Gennie fan boys and Khan purists can’t handle it. Oh well! Like the Eagles sang “Get over it!” Lol

123. Other Guy - June 25, 2013

Look. I dso not want to sound like a hater.

But every part of this movie was EXTREMELY well made, except for the writing. Learn your lesson JJ. FIRE THOSE THREE IDIOTS!!!! The writing destroyed your beautiful move.

If you do not learn, perhaps Paramount will.

124. Original Mr Sulu - June 25, 2013

Massive drop (from $14 million to $3.4) in China last week for STID, due to the release of Man of Steel

http://english.entgroup.cn/boxoffice/cn/

125. PC3 - June 25, 2013

I saw STID once and don’t ever plan on seeing it again in a theater. How about a poll on just how many have seen this movie once or more.

126. MC1 Doug - June 25, 2013

re: #111 “Why is the Enterprise being underwater any more unbelievable than the Enterprise sputtering through protoplasm on its way to a cell nucleus or being shrunk to the size of an AMT model and sitting on a table stand on Holberg 917-G?”

That’s easy. Because in the context of the TOS stories there was a logical reason for these events.

But give me one good reason, one logical reason, why the Enterprise should have submerged below the surface of an ocean.

Why do this IF the Enterprise could have just as easily beamed the crew down to the surface of the planet? AND in doing so remove all chances of the starship being detected.

Why do this IF the Enterprise could have sent down a shuttlecraft to the planet’s surface? A smaller craft would stand a far less a chance of being detected than a huge starship. If you want to submerge a vessel, why not an aquashuttle such as the one in the animated episode “The Ambergris Element?”

Why do this when a starship is designed to travel in space and not beneath the crushing pressures of an ocean?

I don’t think anyone can come up with a good reason other than the “hey! wouldn’t it be cool?” And no, it was not cool. It was dumb.

Try and convince me the Enterprise can be a submarine anymore than I would believe the Seaview or Seaquest could be a starship.

There is such a thing as suspension of disbelief in science fiction, but to do so, there HAS to be a good reason for such an action to occur. AND there just is NOT a good reason to turn the Enterprise into a submarine.

127. DaveK69 - June 25, 2013

Much of what people describe they want to see in the next film is mostly what gets done in episodic television…NOT in a summer blockbuster type movie. The big issue was the four year gap. Four years and nothing leading up or leading into the next film (except the comic). JJ Abrams insistance on secrecy doesn’t give people much to invest in. I mentioned a few times, going back to a post from 3 years ago, that a Khan origin story in the beginning of the film would have been a better opening. People who don’t even familiarize with Star Trek know who Khan is. If it had been in the forefront there probably would have been an even bigger opening to the weekend box office.
i enjoyed Into Darkness. I can leave my love of the 60′s TV series in past and open my mind to the new while many others can’t. It’s interesting to see people say that they want to see new exploration, but in descriptions of their idea of the next incarnation still mention what has already been done.
Here’s what many here should realize, and what Bob, Alex, JJ, Damon, and Bryan have already known…Star Trek Into Darkness was the highest rated summer blockbuster movie by both critics and movie goers…87% on Rotten Tomatoes by critics and 92% liked by over 150 thousand fan reviews. It has made, up to date, over $430 million worldwide. They succeeded in what they wanted to do. They took Star Trek beyond the confines of just Trekkies and Trekkers. They have made it a success in places that it never was before. If done right, and perhaps and bit more promptly, it could reach much higher limits in the future. They have done what Paramount wanted them to do.
It’s pretty evident that where it was placed in the summer calendar didn’t help it’s opening weekend. It probably would have done better to have been placed a couple of weeks earlier than Iron Man, or a week and a half after FF6.

128. Other Guy - June 25, 2013

126. MC1 Doug

Don’t try and overthink that, MC1.

The Avengers did it, so apparently JJ felt the need to copy it.

129. Other Guy - June 25, 2013

Hey! Effects guys and writers. This is what a torpedo does with PRESENT DAY tech.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdLHkqrwb7g

Now don’t you think a torpedo built by Starfleet 200 years from now might make a bigger explosion than those in any trek since the 60s show?

Say what you like about some of the poorer written episodes, but the old Trek had correctly estimated how impressive weapons of the future could be.

That’s another terrible example of this new Trek. 72 torpedoes go off INSIDE the Vengence and its not destroyed? HELL! Half of our Solar system would be obliterated with that much firepower!

We’ve really lost a lot of intelligence since the 60s.

130. Robman007 - June 25, 2013

“What the hell?? I thought STID was entertaining and awesome- and I’m a purist! And every Trek fan I know loved it, warts and all.”

Agreed. It sure didn’t put me to sleep like Generations, Insurrection and Nemesis. THOSE were horrible films.

Then again, the “fanboys” bitched and complained when those films were in theaters..bitched and complained when Enterprise and Voyager were stinking up the joint. Failed to show up when Nemesis hit theaters…so, if anything, I guess the hate of this film is just consistant behavior

Also, when did Trek fans become a bunch of easily offended wimps? Here is a warning to all…don’t watch TOS or TNG..at times, they objectified women. It’s offensive

131. Phil - June 25, 2013

@126. There was no good reason. Someone decided it was cool, so they did it. I’d expect the opposite to hold as well, any deep sea submersible should be able to fly into space. And watching a wing of Constitution class starships flying in formation in atmosphere should be just as acceptable.

It is what it is, I’m afraid…..

132. Robman007 - June 25, 2013

“There is such a thing as suspension of disbelief in science fiction, but to do so, there HAS to be a good reason for such an action to occur. AND there just is NOT a good reason to turn the Enterprise into a submarine.”

Consistant with past Trek films…there was NOT a good reason that the Enterprise-E was able to be controlled by a PC JOYSTICK that happened to pop out of a slot on the ground…or the fact that that same ship had a dune Buggy with it’s own special shuttlecraft to cart it around….

133. Emperor Mike of the Alternate Empire - June 25, 2013

#129. You are right. On any of the other trek Shows. A Single Photon Explosion would have Severly Damaged the Ship and or Destroyed it. 72 Torpedoes would have simply Destroyed it all together. Some of the Science of Trek Into Darkness was just way and I mean Way off.

134. crazydaystrom - June 25, 2013

121. Marja –

“Dear crazydaystrom: How you can watch Quinto’s performance as Spock and think soulfulness is missing is a mystery to me, but perceptions are always subjective…”

Subjective indeed Marja, and a word like “soulfulness” can and does have more than a single connotation. I don’t hate Quinto’s Spock he just doesn’t compel or move me the way Mr. Nimoy’s Spock always has. Personal preference. AND a connection that was made pretty much instantly back in ’66 and has only grown and strengthened over the decades. Pine’s Kirk, on the other hand, could outshine Shatner’s for me one day. And I’m a ShatKirk fan.

As I think about it a little more one difference is Nimoy’s Mr. Spock seemed to have deep inside layers of non-emotion a sadness and perhaps even pain. Quinto’s Spock has, barely beneath his thin veneer, a seething anger. I know. I know. The same character in different situations and experiences. But my preference.

135. Other Guy - June 25, 2013

133. Emperor Mike of the Alternate Empire

Perhaps “Conn’s” blood saved the Vengence, too.

136. sean - June 25, 2013

It’s worth noting that Wil Wheaton disagreed with his good friend Levar, and thought that the film lived up to Roddenberry’s ideals.

http://wilwheaton.net/2013/06/my-review-of-star-trek-into-darkness/

“And this leads me to answer another criticism I’ve heard frequently: Into Darkness doesn’t live up to the ideals Gene Roddenberry instilled in the Original Series and The Next Generation. Again, I can’t disagree with this more strongly…even though it doesn’t give us the same moral punch as Tapestry or Darmok or The Doomsday Machine or A Taste of Armageddon, (which it can’t, due to blockbuster film economics among other things), it still addresses a subject that is very relevant to our lives today. It also does that in a way that isn’t preachy, and it does it in a damn entertaining film that may just provide an infection vector for a whole new audience — the next generation if you will — to explore the existing Star Trek world.”

137. Robman007 - June 25, 2013

“You are right. On any of the other trek Shows. A Single Photon Explosion would have Severly Damaged the Ship and or Destroyed it. 72 Torpedoes would have simply Destroyed it all together. Some of the Science of Trek Into Darkness was just way and I mean Way off.”

Wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong. Don’t you guys watch Star Trek? Remember a little episode called “The Changeling”? The Enteprise was hit by Nomad’s torpedo and it’s shields absorbed energy equivelant to 90 Torpedoes…and it only took up 20% of the shield power…and it did this 4 more times!!

So, apparently a 23rd century Federation ship can take getting hit by 450 warp 15 torpedoes..

138. sean - June 25, 2013

#129

Sorry, but that’s nonsense. There are times where we’ve seen previous Enterprises being absolutely pummeled by torpedoes (in Star Trek VI the Enterprise-A is repeatedly hit by torpedoes without any shields), and it certainly didn’t involve enough energy to ‘destroy half the solar system’.

139. Robman007 - June 25, 2013

@136…Wil’s review was the most spot on review I have read yet. That line about “due to blockbuster film economics among other things” is something that cry baby “it’s not my trek” fans need to understand. They can’t do YOUR Trek in film form because YOUR Trek would not make money.

140. sean - June 25, 2013

#139

I also felt he was quite fair, as he did call out the Marcus in her undies scene for being stupid and out of place.

141. Phil - June 25, 2013

@132. As I recall, the joystick and dune buggy have been plenty chastised as being WTF moments. I guess what you are saying is because bad science was used in previous episodes, that justifies it in future episodes…

142. Gene Rudderberry - June 25, 2013

#140,
by ‘stupid and out of place’ I think you mean ‘sexy and there was nothing wrong with it unless you’re retarded and trying to find something to complain about’.

Small difference, but it’s there.

143. sean - June 25, 2013

#142

No, stupid and out of place because it’s stupid and out of place. There was no reason for it other than, ‘Hey, the boys in the audience might be getting bored right now because people are talking, we should flash some T&A to win them back’.

144. Horatio - June 25, 2013

@143
So, what exactly is wrong with that, anyway? TOS was dripping in scantily clad women (and don’t tell me that those costumes were for anything other than showing as much female body parts as possible on 1960′s tv). JJ and the boyz are just continuing the tradition!

145. sean - June 25, 2013

#144

Well, the ‘tradition’ was started in an extremely sexist era, so maybe we should examine whether or not it’s a tradition worth continuing?

That aside, this wasn’t just a sexy outfit. I have no problem with sexuality and having pretty people to look at. But in Trek 09 it was organic, the scene with Kirk, Gaila & Uhura in their undies made sense in context. The scene in STID is not only incongruous with the Marcus character up to that point, it literally makes no sense for her to randomly strip in front of Kirk. It was just an excuse to show Alice Eve in her unmentionables.

146. Old Guard - June 25, 2013

Decided not to spend a penny seeing STID at the theater and for a good reason. I came to accept that I also felt like LeVar Burton did, for what a trusted friend told me about the film just sat all wrong with me. I’m disappointed with this creative team and also long for Gene Roddenberry again to sling things back into shape! I’ll wait for it to come to video. Paramount won’t be making any money from me on the run of this movie.

Old Guard

147. boborci - June 25, 2013

hiya. new thread. good. where are we these day?

148. Harry Ballz - June 25, 2013

@147

We are in Toronto, Bob. Where are you?

149. Horatio - June 25, 2013

@147
Well, I’ve been pondering who invented liquid soap and why and if the third film will be a big Klingon-bash.

Any news on that front? Paramount happy? What do you think of the US receipts? You know the drill…

150. Phil - June 25, 2013

@147. Aimless speculation at this point. One could throw a random sentence off the business pages on here and generate 20 responses…

151. Phil - June 25, 2013

@147. As you asked, Rose would like to know if you guys gave any thought to the type of radiation in the warp core that killed Kirk.

I know, but it would make her happy. My choice is microwave, personally…

152. Red Dead Ryan - June 25, 2013

A couple of thoughts….

I would bet that some of these haters are actually sockpuppets. One hater posts his/her hate, then another hater responds favorably to that hate justifiying it with more hate of their own.

Also, I can’t believe we’re going into the underwater Enterprise thing again. A ship that survived close proximity to a blackhole, and which is built to survive the extreme conditions of space and faster-than-light travel should, with its thrusters and structural integrity fields, be able to survive just fine underwater. Besides, it also looked neat.

CASE CLOSED!!!

153. sean - June 25, 2013

#152

I agree, I find the complaints about that scene baffling.

154. Phil - June 25, 2013

@152. Besides, it looked neat is the only rational explanation. Plenty of people have explained the differences between buoyancy, aerodynamics, shear, compression, and a number of other differences between design stresses for the different environments and no one wants to hear it. I get it, but it doesn’t change the fact that it’s just plain fiction. In a no limits universe, I fully expect to see her orbit the sun one day, why not?

155. michael K - June 25, 2013

I still haven’t seen the movie :( because the powers to be had the fantastic idea of releasing the movie 10 weeks later here.

156. Other Guy - June 25, 2013

In the spirit of the combined logic behind all the recent posts that say this movie was good.

Suck it.

157. Hat Rick - June 25, 2013

STID is officially the highest-grossing Star Trek film in the history of the universe — and that’s adjusted for inflation. :-) Just as I had outlined would be quite possible. Double :-)

The source of this information is the TrekWeb website (and no, it wasn’t me that posted the article; I haven’t posted there for many years). Quite a nice breakdown there.

Brad Grey, who holds the title of Chief Honcho at Paramount, apparently is good with the numbers, although I’m not sure where that comes from except maybe from a “very pleased”-type comment after the movie came in at around $81 million the first weekend (not $100 million as had been hoped).

I’m truly stoked about STID and I love it to death, but even so, I still think that uber-cost conscious Paramount will reduce the budget for the next film, maybe back to around $150 million (which is nothing to sneeze at).

The overseas returns are beyond belief, they are so good. (Despite the drop in China’s take this past weekend because of MOS, as stated by another poster.)

I’m not worried about whether the next sequel will be made; the question is how much they will put into it. If it’s much below $150 million, then I am going to be slightly disappointed. If it’s actually around $190 million, then I will be shocked, but over the Moon (of course).

Paramount and CBS did not coordinate the merch and this actually screwed up the film’s potential take; the confusion about the opening date also did not help.

The next sequel has the potential to make even more money for Paramount than this one, or even Star Trek (2009) (which, despite it all, may still be more profitable percentage-wise than STID, all things considered).

However, I should warn you that my crystal ball has been acting up lately and they don’t make magical appliance repairmen the way they used to.

158. Hugh Hoyland - June 25, 2013

Bob, any word on the sequel as far as you guys writing it goes?

159. Marja - June 25, 2013

THANK YOU MATT WRIGHT!!

147, BobOrci, There were questions about:
- Spock’s ethics at the end of STiD (when he wanted to kill Khan in revenge, seemed totally OOC based on his earlier position of justice not revenge – I put it down to PTSD);
- whether a sequel has yet been staffed;
- will there be room enough in the next movie for the character development you and Alex K. are so good at … thru the last oh, 200 posts or so ;)
- (and I’m hoping there will be more S/U, and still together)

152, RDRyan, 154, Phil, I just wish I’d seen a better picture of the whole ship rising from the water. It looked like she had to turn 180 degrees before ascending into the atmosphere – wish to heck they’d shown that. Her huge size was evident, but I couldn’t “put the pieces together.” At least not rising out of the water. That was a grand shot of the saucer rising thru though!

160. Other Guy - June 25, 2013

Hmmm. Bob shows up and the discussion is trying to get back to scantily clad women.

As Bob put it earlier in the other thread, the sexy underwear was a DIVERSION people, The science and story of this Trek was so dumb it cause my brain to melt and it appears Bob would love us to talk about that instead.

Hey Bob, Sorry, but next time please stay out of Trek. Do a Star Wars if you think you so good at writing.

161. William Bradley - June 25, 2013

You’re forgetting the great expense of marketing the film.

It gets to a quarter of a billion dollars very quickly.

>75. Photon70 – June 24, 2013
70. MC1 Doug – June 24, 2013

Maybe I’m stating the obvious but box office gross up to $430m and counting.

STiD’s publically stated production budget was $190m, not $200m to $250m.

162. Hugh Hoyland - June 25, 2013

#159

You for sure have a right to your opinion but as for myself STID ranks as one of the best of the series (if not the overall best) and the numbers show that most people who saw it enjoyed it as well.

And count me in as one who hopes the continuity can continue if not with JJ Abrams than at least with the writers who again IMO have done a fantastic job. Making two of the most enjoyable Trek films to date.

163. Phil - June 25, 2013

@158. The art directors at Bad Robot seem to like shots of Enterprise rising through clouds, out of the sea, and such. There’s something to be said for beauty shots, but like everything else, it can be overused.

164. Hat Rick - June 25, 2013

@Hugh Hoyland (161), I’m with you, brother, on the love for this film. Excellent film and better than anything of its scale I can think of in terms of philosophical integrity and political activism. The only other SF film I can think of in recent years that has approached this level of geopolitical commentary is Watchmen, which I absolutely loved as well for its lambasting of our national security-obsessed state. But Watchmen was not a blockbuster summer action movie the way STID is.

Other actioners — Avengers, Thor, Iron Mans I through III — none of these compare. I don’t care how fun and entertaining they are; they don’t raise important philosophical issues relevant to our time in any of the same ways, or even at all. (Admittedly, I haven’t seen Iron Man III yet.) In fact, I’m perplexed as to why people loved Iron Man II as much as they did; sure it was a fun movie, but … I dunno.

You don’t go to a summer blockbuster tentpole expecting a Merchant Ivory production. You want your SFX and your kewl ‘splosions; I get that. But STID, I though, was a pretty damn good balance of popcorn and pop philosophy, and sometimes even more than that, and I thought it was and is just great.

What more do you want for under twenty bucks a pop?

165. SoonerDave - June 25, 2013

@boborci

Would love to hear about planning/status for next movie.

Any thoughts on performance of STID versus expectations?

Long-time Trek fan here who first saw TOS when about eight or nine years old, as it went into strip syndication on local TV stations in the early 1970′s, and loved it. Loved the reboot, thoroughly enjoyed STID. Not interested in joining in on the bash parade.

My favorite line in the whole flick: From Spock, facing Admiral Pike in response to his “giving him attitude:” “I am exhibiting multiple attitudes simultaneously. To which are you referring?” That’s an AWESOME Spock line and major props to whomever on the team wrote it. Quinto delivered it perfectly.

Any easter eggs that haven’t already been talked about?

Thanks,
SoonerDave

166. THX-1138 - June 25, 2013

I don’t want to get labeled as a hater, so ease up.

I just didn’t find STID compelling. I wasn’t moved by it. I had zero emotional response to the WOK switcheroo ending. Khan was a wasted villain, although Cumberbatch was quite good. It was a good popcorn muncher and that was about it for me.

I really wish that the Nibiru stuff had been fleshed out into a complete movie. That sequence, even with it’s glaring technological mistakes and utter disregard for the Prime Directive felt more like TOS than anything I have seen in this reboot. I saw it once in the theater and that was good enough. I don’t even feel any urgent need or anticipation for the bluray release.

Star Trek has always been better on TV. This is not news. But I’m also of the mind that perhaps, and this is a crazy idea, that since action-oriented movies aren’t getting Trek back on TV, could it hurt to do a serious sci-fi Trek movie? Blomkamp is taking apparent strides in making serious science fiction movies that also entertain. I don’t know.

But for heavens sake, let’s not reboot all Trek into this alternate universe. I, personally, am not interested in seeing it.

167. Disinvited - June 25, 2013

On a lighter note, it appears there is adequate scientific evidence as to why second-in-command, Ficus, was smarter than the the rest of the crew in the sf comedy series, QUARK:

http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2013/0624/Why-plants-are-smarter-than-us

168. Hugh Hoyland - June 25, 2013

#162 Hat Rick

Right on! Thats probably the thing that impressed me the most about STID, its strong commentary on things that are happening in our world at this very moment (not the least the rise of the military industrial complex among other issues). And IMO that is STRAIGHT out of TOS. Thats why I now say STID reminds me the most of TOS because they tackled social issues way back then as well.

And I’m with you on Watchmen as well, and if Im not mistaken Bob had a hand in writing that to? Not sure but I think so.

169. Phil - June 25, 2013

Did anyone ever figure out where Del Trame (British Naval Dude) was mentioned in the movie?

170. Other Guy - June 25, 2013

164. Hat Rick

How old are you?

15?

171. Hat Rick - June 25, 2013

@THX-1138 (164),

I think a great case can be made that a spectacular blockbuster can be based on truly alien worlds built upon a startlingly original vision. Case in point: I give you James Cameron’s Avatar. Stunningly beautiful movie with a big, elephant-sized heart that was half Aliens, half Apocalypse Now / Platoon, half Heavy Metal (have I run out of halves?). Great premise, well executed. It helped that Cameron co-wrote and directed Aliens. Maybe Trek could be some of this in the next movie.

Avatar rocked the box office, by the way, as well as reportedly inducing depression upon those who, in those two hours in darkness, had grown used to its more-colorful-than-life world and found our own lacking by comparison.

172. OneBuckFilms - June 25, 2013

Anyone who places this film as dumb obviously has not recognised the outstanding allegory to contemporary events within the fabric of the movie.

It is not 100% perfect, as Damon Lindelhof’s apology can attest to, but it was very good, IMHO over all.

It seems strange to have people proclaiming that it doesn’t live up to roddenberry’s ideals, and yet in every way measurable, it does.

- Allegory to contemporary events or issues? Yes.

It speaks to unmanned drone attacks, the war on terror and due process.

- Drama based on the Enterprise and it’s mission of exploration? Yes.

The very start of the film establishes the Enterprise on a humanitarian mission to save a species, and the Prime Directive, as welll as the repercussions of breaking it.

There is also considerable drama due to their orders running contrary to the basic explorary nature of the Enterprise’s and Starfleet’s primary mission, to the poin of a character quitting.

This also plays into the allegory, and speaks to the values that are being compromised by Kirk’s assigned missions.

If these elements, at the ver heart of the movie, are not traditional Star Trek, I don’t know what is.

One thing I’d love to see is more of the exploration side of things, and we see something never seen before. A truly strange, new world. And the Klingons could still be involved, perhaps with a Klingon crew and our heroes searching for or fining something? And where they look for it, and what they find could involve a mystery to be solved.

173. Hat Rick - June 25, 2013

@Other Guy (170),

Wouldn’t that be a blast? I’d love to be 15 again. It’s an age you’ll enjoy in a few years.

174. Nony - June 25, 2013

My state a month post-release…I was anticipating being gleefully obsessed with this movie like I was with the last one, but I haven’t even been to see it a second time. I don’t feel like sitting through all the stuff I didn’t care for or didn’t care about just to get to the bits that I liked. Still sad about it. Still looking forward to the next, because I love the cast and I am apparently a masochist.

Related note, I just finished watching a video from a convention Karl Urban did this past weekend. It was quite interesting. He says he would like to get some actual substantial character stuff next time, like DeForest Kelley was able to do, because he thinks there is much more potential in Bones than he has been given to play on screen so far. I concur.

175. Other Guy - June 25, 2013

Hat Rick. Why don’t you tell me WHY you liked this movie.

When it comes to the story, specifically, what did you think was the best part and the worst part presented.

And try not to be coy.

176. James McFadden - June 25, 2013

Maybe we could select Kevin Costner to play Robert April in the future (a guy who would lead Section 31′s R and D team). AND we should also consider selecting Robert Picardo to play the head of the Tal Shiar’s R and D team.

177. Hat Rick - June 25, 2013

@Other Guy,

Too late; your charm has worn off (hard to believe, I know).

Now you’ll just have to wait along with the rest of the class.

Also, not inclined to take orders at the moment. Sorry.

178. BatlethInTheGroin - June 25, 2013

#36: Clones?

Really?

No.

Thankfully, you’re not a screenwriter.

179. Ahmed - June 25, 2013

@ Hat Rick & Other Guy

Hey guys, how about you cool down a little, no need to get personal.

Of course, if you guys want to continue the fight, you are more than welcome to go to the arena to finish it :)

180. Hat Rick - June 25, 2013

@BatlethinTheGroin (178),

At least they’re not attacking anyone. Directly, at least.

And yes — really. If not clones, then why not digitally downloading your consciousness? That’s at least as bizarre. (Google Kurzeil, who’s said something again recently about that.)

Why not clones? Send in the clones; we’re doing that anyway in real life — growing tissues for surgical replacement purposes, etc.

And thus I sayething again: Clones. If you can believe genetic supermen can fly (or exist), then, yes — clones.

So there.

181. Barney Fife - June 25, 2013

boborci:

What’s up? I think most of us are waiting for the cone of silence to be lifted on Star Trek’s future. STID has a 87/92 rating on Rotten Tomatoes…it would be hard to improve on that! I would have preferred more character interaction. Any reason why 10 minutes couldn’t be added to the film for more of that?

182. I'm a trekkie NOT a trekker - June 25, 2013

@42 Red Dead Ryan: “As for LeVar Burton’s comments, while he is entitled to his opinion, he has to remember that Gene Roddenberry has been dead for over twenty years. What he’s approve/disapprove of is now completely irrelevant.”

Bravo!! Good to see an intelligent answer to all the whining about JJverse isn’t GRverse.

Roddenberry started Trek. Great mythos. Loved watching the original runs of my favorite version of Trek. But it’s time to move on. The Sheldons that want to cling to the GR universe can if they want to, but I’m ready for a new take on the series. I’m fine with the JJverse but think somebody else could do an even better job.

183. Hat Rick - June 25, 2013

Thanks Ahmed. :-) Just splashed some cool water on my face, and now I feel much better, probably not unlike a certain starship arising from a certain providentially named planet in a certain lens-flared movie of some note.

Also, correction: My clone did attack. That was the point. We apologize for the error and inconvenience.

As far as being a screenwriter — who knows? Certainly not folks here. In the fullness of time. ;-)

In related news, there are no waiters in Hollywood; only aspiring actors.

184. Other Guy - June 25, 2013

Sure wish LaVar would have used another word besides Rodenberry. It seems like we missed his point completely. I say he was being too vague in his opinion. So for anyone to take sides over it is equally as hard to understand.

Meanwhile. In the Area…

Hat Rick.

I was not trying to get personal, it just sounds like you do not want to take a firm position on what appealed to you about the story.

Your reasons to like this movie should be explained so I can understand what people like about this movie. By the way, and in advance, I would appreciate your opinion and views on ST13.

185. still waiting... - June 25, 2013

Of all the Trek movies, The Motion Picture and Into Darkness are probably the most different, each occupying opposite endpoints of the action/story/continuity spectrum. Somewhere in the middle lies a great Trek movie, maybe next time….:)

186. T'Cal - June 25, 2013

I for one was very happy with this film; happier than I was with the last one that, while fun and interesting, had many holes in its story. STID was tight and I liked how they gave Uhura, Scotty, Chekov, and Sulu important things to do in the film rather than just be there. I didn’t think BC would be Khan but I guessed he would be an Augment. His Harrison/Khan had real motivation unlike Nero whose reasons for wanting to destroy Earth and then the entire Federation made no sense at all. When it was revealed that Harrison was Khan, it made sense that Kirk and friends had no idea who he was at first. And that Kirk figured out that they were being used shows his intellect. I also liked how Khan challenged Spock telling him the several steps each would take and how Khan would win; Khan truly did think far ahead of even the Vulcan. The twist of Kirk dying saving the Enterprise and the use of exact dialog from TWOK came across as a successful homage to that great film, not a rehash; that shows that the calibre of the writing was top notch. I foresaw the resurrection of Kirk using Khan’s blood but it also got me wondering what effect it will have on Kirk – there should be some long-lasting improvements in IQ, strength, endurance, and ego that perhaps a mindmeld with Spock will help Kirk control in future movies. While I lament the passing of Adm. Pike, his emotional death was important for Kirk’s growth and it was handled very, very well.

I’ve seen it three times so far and I hope to see it one more time before it leaves the big screen. This was a solid “A” in my book and it is just behind my two favorites of the Trek films, FC & TWOK. It’s right there with TVH, TUC ST09, but ahead of (in descending order) INS, TSFS, NEM, TMP, GEN, & TFF.

187. Keachick - rose pinenut - June 25, 2013

This was the last post on the other thread that Matt Wright closed – post #2532

“Matt Wright – June 24, 2013
Time to move on to another discussion post. This one is far too big.
Head on over to the new post:
http://trekmovie.com/2013/06/24/sticky-post-release-into-darkness-odds-and-ends-and-general-discussion/

I have just copied and pasted it here. I don’t know why others are not able to see all the posts because I just could and proved it.

The Other Guy – What has age got to do with anything? You don’t have to be 15 or 53 to know what you like and can appreciate in a film.

People just need to watch the film and not expect it to be like something else or not be for that matter. STID went into how and why people behave as they do and, if they have a great deal power like Admiral Marcus and how Marcus’s perceptions and motivations can cause him to (mis)use the enormous power that he had as the head of Starfleet. It was Admiral Marcus allowing his fears, along with his innate greater aggressive tendencies, as opposed to defensive, to take hold. Then he met this “John Harrison/Khan” person who had been genetically manipulated from conception to be a certain kind of being – physically and intellectually immensely strong and capable but pretty much devoid of the softer, gentler, “weaker” capabilities like compassion and empathy. These are, incidentally, the qualities that Lt Uhura showed toward Spock because – did she really need to have reasons? Well, she did, personal and professional, and so did Kirk. And boy, how often have people criticized that three-way conversation had on the shuttlecraft. “Fascinating” as Spock might say…

GR may have talked about a futuristic utopia-like society. This movie tried to show what that actually means and how that can come about – or be undermined, by the perceptions, motivations and actions of various individuals, particularly by those with power and authority.

Did you not see and comprehend these factors when you watched the film? Did not LeVar Burton see these also? …Oh dear me…

188. T'Cal - June 25, 2013

I do look forward to Trek returning to the small screen soon as I prefer an ensemble cast with real character and relationship development that that format allows. While TNG did some of that, DSP did it even better as did BSG. Give us a mini-series that leads us to a new cable/premium channel show. That doesn’t mean I want to see graphic sex or hear F-bombs in my Trek. It means I want a good budget that allows for excellent writing, directing, and acting as well as repeated viewings throughout the season.

189. crazydaystrom - June 25, 2013

Apparently-

I’m the only one who thought the Captain ‘Perfect Hair’ line was a sideways jab at Shatner…

190. Pensive's Wetness - June 25, 2013

does anything think the third film might attempt the fix the timeline and undo the loss of Vulcan?

191. Keachick - rose pinenut - June 25, 2013

#147 Hi Bob

Where are we? Well, I don’t know about others but I, Keachick, am sitting at my keyboard at 9.00am Wednesday, 26 June, typing this. It is grey, wet and cold outside. I have to deal with a government department…oh *joy*, oh *joy*…:( because I misplaced important documents…argh!!! that my son needs). Better half has gone back to bed as the damp, cold weather increases his pain levels, despite taking morphine derivatives for palliative relief, rendering him pretty much non-functional (he being one of the plebes who don’t just get up and walk away no problem after being assaulted). Onward I plod

Hope this doesn’t bore you…sorry – feeling a bit depressed – probably the weather (mid winter here). I don’t get why some of you people upover, presumably experiencing warm summer weather, seem so miserable?

192. Disinvited - June 25, 2013

#180. Hat Rick – June 25, 2013

You mean like Russian tycoons?:

http://host.madison.com/business/russian-tycoon-wants-to-move-mind-to-machine/article_618617a5-c79b-5a10-ad86-e246dbaf3aaa.html

Does TOS’ Sargon and the movies’ katra ring a bell about memories not being tied to something physical in living bodies, i.e. being downloadable and possible to store sans body? How about Janice Lester’s katra swapper?

193. Other Guy - June 25, 2013

187. Keachick

What I saw in this last Trek was a rehash of worn conspiracy theories about how GW was responsible for 9-11. That was the social comment in this Trek, What I saw was that white guys are bad. A theme that is so previlant in today’s movies.

Lord knows it could not have ever been a Indian Sikh warrior! Hell even the Nibiru (a name shamefully co-opted of another popular consiracy theory) savages at the begning were white guys!

Now, if this was a sensible movie, all about the politics of Star Trek as well as a social commentary on todays world, then exactly who is the president of the Earth? Is it the United Federation of Planets? Is there a President of the US still? This movies writing was so bad and amatuerish that these simple question should have been addressed!

Seriously. IS Admiral Marcus the top politician of the Earth? Is there another political party other than a military dictatorship known as Starfleet?

Bob recently commented that he did not even know that Khan was Sikh when he watched Space Seed. Now Keachick, if you are comfortable with someone so unfamiliar with Space Seed, or Wrath of Khan – and it many, many nuances writing for Star Trek, then there is not much more I can say for you to understand how poorly this movie was viewed from the perspective of a fan who really enjoyed the wonder factor of the original series. A simple sci-fi show created by artists, that in every description I read about its making are described as being genius.

I want that level of sophistiation and talent in any BIG BUDGET Star Trek I pay for at the theater. I expect at least that level of writing out of any new Star Trek production. Genius I would love. Plot holes and stupid decisions are completely unaceptable.

And In my opinion, and as a fan of the original, BobOrci, and any others involved, should be a bit ashamed and even embarrased to post here – without participating in a valid discusion for their reasons behind this movie’s story and production.

194. jrq - June 25, 2013

Star Trek need new writers with Star trek logic ,into darkness did things than made no Star Trek sense ,Budget was wasted because of this. There was no need for aTWOK remade,and there are many stories in STOS could have been remade.Even so it was well done and good acting, some interesting parts,and lots of action.

195. Other Guy - June 25, 2013

Keachick, 194. That was NOT me. Just another poster wanting MORE from this lame story.

Just admit it, It sucked. Its OK. They’ll make more. Only, I hope of a much better quality in the wring department.

196. Ted C - June 25, 2013

Here’s a thought, let’s make a pact to no long use the stupid term “JJ-verse”. Who’s with me?

197. SoonerDave - June 25, 2013

@196

I prefer the term “Rebootiverse.” How’s that?

198. Disinvited - June 25, 2013

Airship sensors:

http://www.upi.com/Science_News/Technology/2013/06/25/Laser-can-identify-substances-could-be-military-tool/UPI-70391372184271/

199. Phil - June 25, 2013

@190. No

200. Aurore - June 25, 2013

“Bob recently commented that he did not even know that Khan was Sikh when he watched Space Seed.”
_____________

Where? When?
I believe it is the second time you make this assertion .

The first time was on the previous thread, unless I am mistaken.

Roberto Orci said many things I did not like regarding the Khan question.

However, I don’t remember reading a comment where he said what you seem to attribute to him.

Is there a direct link to this comment?

201. Keachick - rose pinenut - June 25, 2013

#193/195 – I will admit no such thing. What’s more, I do not like the ageist comment at post #170 or the racist overtones in post #193.

“Seriously. IS Admiral Marcus the top politician of the Earth? Is there another political party other than a military dictatorship known as Starfleet?”

Please note – these are the words of poster Other Guy, no one else.

Nobody else has ever said that Admiral Marcus was the top politician of Earth. What’s more, Starfleet is NOT a political party. The word missing is – DELEGATION (of duties and responsibilities). Admiral Marcus had been DELEGATED certain rights, privileges AND responsibilities as head of Starfleet. Those who allowed him to have such a position trusted that he would carry out the mandate of the UFP and Starfleet. In many ways, Admiral Marcus did so, however he also used his position to manipulate people (like the young Captain Kirk) into going against Starfleet regulations re the capture of Khan and being allowed a proper trial. Since Starfleet was also (partially) responsible for the defense of earth and other worlds within the Federation, Marcus had the authority and power to allow such defensive systems to be put in place. He abused that authority by setting up a secret organization, Section 31, and used funds to build his own secret specially weaponized vessel etc. Unfortunately, it does seem that the UFP had become a little too trusting or complacent perhaps and/or they allowed Marcus to play on their own fears (because of the unknown weapon that destroyed Vulcan…) in order for those in charge to let Marcus do pretty much what he wanted.

As I write, I feel like it is deja vu, as in having to explain salient points of a story which were always obvious to me.

202. Keachick - rose pinenut - June 25, 2013

These writers unfamiliar with the Wrath of Khan or Space Seed? I doubt that very much.

I am guessing perhaps one of the reasons that Bob Orci may not wish to answer/comment on some of the stuff written here is because it does not deserve or is worthy of a response.

203. Disinvited - June 25, 2013

#200. Aurore – June 25, 2013

It’s not much. But some evidence the character was committed to page with his original origin in mind as opposed to the one derived from the episode:

http://trekmovie.com/2013/05/15/sticky-star-trek-into-darkness-arrives-in-north-america-and-most-of-the-world-open-thread/#5096366

“Not a coincidence. Inspired by Ericsen. In fact, we shot the movie using the name Ericsenn but decided it would give it away so we cheated the name Harrison into everyone’s mouth!” – Bob Orci

204. ol pointy ears - June 25, 2013

…next time how bought a cliff-hanger ending?!!!

Big obvious story theme with lots of tiny threads building up and not all resolved by the time credits roll.

Enterprise far and away from Earth, but receive slow old message from an admiral about Khan and ilk out = sleep tubes found empty.
Section 31 suspected.

Uhura pics up a fuzzy transmission with a warning tone. Slowly figures out message … from Captain Jon Luc Picard. “…failed to dispatch Enterprise J, time line repair incomplete…”!

Klingons vrs. Gorn, suggestion of Borg arrival soon-all good.

Archer, Spock Prime…all in.

New ships, mirror counterparts sneaking around, Kirk & Spock left on planet while all other cast handle all else.

Movie 3 sets up new TV show story line. Lots of threads, more science fiction elements, story arcs not all connected and not all resolved.

Enterprise 5 yr mission…not same places-planets. Faster bigger ships, farther away, new adventures. Other ships get some of TOS Ent missions.

Goal Plan-
mystery, clues, character development in stories, consistent future science of technology – unless new inventions.

Plot-Journey to Babel starting on Babel. Like a Peace in the Middle East idea. Perhaps Cestus 3 claimed by 4 species at the same time. Or New Vulcan claimed by Andorians and others = conflict.

P.S.-
Bring in some TOS TMP aliens as diplomats…and —
make Mego Doll Neptonian a real alien character. Maybe crash landed on Neptune fleeing Borg and evolved/adapted in secret.

205. Aurore - June 25, 2013

“Bob recently commented that he did not even know that Khan was Sikh when he watched Space Seed.”
___________

When I requested a direct link earlier, I , of course, meant a link to a post other than the following one ( post 1133 ):

“I would take issue with this in that the main point of K’s character is that he was a genetically engineered superman. That was the true essence of the character. Not where he was from or the color of his skin.”

http://trekmovie.com/2013/05/20/sticky-into-darkness-open-week-thread-polls/

206. Aurore - June 25, 2013

“It’s not much. But some evidence the character was committed to page with his original origin in mind as opposed to the one derived from the episode…”
__________

Indeed.

On the thread you linked to, I commented (@ 75) on the post (by Mr. Orci) you just mentioned.

http://trekmovie.com/2013/05/15/sticky-star-trek-into-darkness-arrives-in-north-america-and-most-of-the-world-open-thread/#5096366

207. Weerd1 - June 25, 2013

There’s a very good reason the Enterprise is underwater on Nabiru:
BECAUSE it’s illogical.

I have long considered the Enterprise to be a cast member, a character on Trek. When we find Kirk at the beginning of Into Darkness he IS being reckless, and Pike says riding the wave of his good luck. The Prime Kirk we know is still a bit sublimated by the different upbringing and arrogance inherent in NuKirk. He IS risking his crew and playing god. He IS using his luck as an excuse to think rules don’t apply. He DOES ignore the advice of his engineer and park in the ocean just because he can. It’s the same disregard he shows elsewhere for the other characters. He does it, in short, BECAUSE IT’S COOL! DOesn’t that look awesome?

It’s part of the setup for the rest of the film, where circumstances lead Kirk to recognize how responsible he will have to be as Captain of the Enterprise. He recognizes how each crew member’s strengths MAKE HIM A BETTER CAPTAIN; and that includes character-wise, the Enterprise. Hence we see him apologizing not only to his crew, but to the Enterprise herself by climbing into her heart and literally kickstarting her. And, like the other members of the crew whose abilities come together to save the day for Kirk, the Enterprise steps up and pulls herself together to accomplish the mission.

Just my thought, I bow to @BobOrci of course as writer, but that was what I walked out with. The Enterprise is a character here, and as beat up as any other…but survives and grows.

208. onebuckfilms - June 25, 2013

193 –
“What I saw in this last Trek was a rehash of worn conspiracy theories about how GW was responsible for 9-11. That was the social comment in this Trek, What I saw was that white guys are bad. A theme that is so previlant in today’s movies.”

Erm, I didn’t get that at all. Kirk and McCoy were just as “white” as the villain, so the “white is bad” is bovine excrement of the most fly attracting kind. Any racial perceptions you ascribe are yours alone, I’m afraid.

As for the GW responsible for 9/11 angle, I don’t see that at all. Where/how do you derive that, exactly?

As far as I can see, there was no GW (I assume G W Bush) like character in either role or characterisation that I could see.

If we think of Khan=Bin Laden, then the closest allegory might be the CIA working to provide him with weapons and building him up, unwittingly creating him. (This was WAAAAY before 9/11, so would not be GW related).

And in this story, the nature of how the enemy was created was very different in the details, though thematically similar in a very broad sense.

Actually, if we think of the Klingons as Star Trek’s allegory for the russians, then that broadly fits the narrative of the US (Federation) trying to harness a dangerous individual, Bin Landen (Harrison), via the CIA (Section 31) and unwittingly moulding him and his followers as a dangerous adversary.

Whatever your viewpoint on real world events, it is clear that GW is not alluded to here.

209. Keachick - rose pinenut - June 25, 2013

There is no timeline to repair!!! What makes one universe better than another? NOTHING.

Perhaps another “visitation” from the prime universe to this alternate universe might be possible, could even inadvertently occur, however, if it were to happen, it is more than likely that the visitors would end up living out the rest of their lives in this alternate universe. It might also allow prime Spock to return to his original universe.

Except that the current MWI theory seems not to allow for such eventualities…then again, who says that scientists always get it right?

I really don’t want to see Borg – just more brutal mechanized beings doing horrible things to others…

So many say that they want to see peaceful exploration and yet so many more want to see more aggression, all out war with the Klingons, or the Borg, or both even. They want faster ships – what for? So that the explorers can speed by, miss much that could actually be explored? This does not make much sense to me.

@Damon Lindelof – War with the Klingons had been averted. Ever heard of the expression “Let sleeping dogs lie”. How about it be done here?

210. Phil - June 25, 2013

@201. Like a lot of things in STID, Marcus’s place in the food chain is also a bit ambiguous. He’s someone with enough power and connections to take over a shipyard and marshal the resources to build the big bad boy ship incognito, but apparently not enough to actually command the fleet to do his bidding. Which again speaks volumes to the piss poor level of oversight of Starfleet in this universe, that this much stull could be going on under the noses of those with oversight, and absolutely no one notices.

211. Photon70 - June 25, 2013

@ 116. Other Guy – June 25, 2013

So you forgot the part where Khan said he was found out by Marcus.

Once that happened, as far as he knew, all his friends were killed.

And he struck back the only way he could, ie, blow Section 31 up.

212. Keachick - rose pinenut - June 25, 2013

#210 – What makes you think that somebody did not notice? I doubt that Marcus could have done all that he did alone…(and I am not talking about the help he got from Harrison/Khan).

Unfortunately, people with a warmongering makeup are always with us, which is why diligence/vigilance needs to be exercised as well as other positive attributes.

213. Cap'n Calhoun - June 25, 2013

@boborci

Hey, Bob. Loved the movie, and I think most of the items people are identifying as plot holes has more to deal with them missing lines or not following points to their conclusion, but one thing still bugs me.

Why was the Enterprise underwater? You said previously “Line of sight necessary given unstable and shifting magnetic field of super volcano on alien planet. That’s why no beaming. Gotta physically get back to the ship.” This doesn’t really explain why they don’t just use shuttlecrafts though, especially since no beaming was necessary until Spock’s line broke. Am I missing something?

214. Thomas - June 25, 2013

Aint It Cool News has a story about Nicholas Meyer and his new project about the Space Race:

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/63032

215. OneBuckFilms - June 25, 2013

209 – There’s one thing that makes this universe better than the Prime universe – storytelloing freedom.

Without the constraints of events after 2233.04 being established, virtually anything is possible, and events can be similar, the same, or completely different from the Prime reality.

By removing predictability and making the future unknown, the question of what happens next is a mystery.

To put it simply: In theory, anyone can die. Sticking within the Prime universe continuity, we know everyone lives.

216. OneBuckFilms - June 25, 2013

209 – There’s one thing that makes this universe better than the Prime universe – storytelloing freedom.

Without the constraints of events after 2233.04 being established, virtually anything is possible, and events can be similar, the same, or completely different from the Prime reality.

By removing predictability and making the future unknown, the question of what happens next is a mystery.

To put it simply: In theory, anyone can die. Sticking within the Prime universe continuity, we know everyone lives.

217. OneBuckFilms - June 25, 2013

209 – There’s one thing that makes this universe better than the Prime universe – storytelloing freedom.

Without the constraints of events after 2233.04 being established, virtually anything is possible, and events can be similar, the same, or completely different from the Prime reality.

By removing predictability and making the future unknown, the question of what happens next is a mystery.

To put it simply: In theory, anyone can die. Sticking within the Prime universe continuity, we know everyone lives.

218. Disinvited - June 25, 2013

#206. Aurore – June 25, 2013

Indeed, but Bob is on record saying the script was originally conceived without he who would be named Khan at all, and in what I cited, it was very evident the script was undergoing revision even after filming of several scenes had been completed, identifying the character as Ericssen. Difficult to discern exactly what was known of Khan at the initial blending of him onto the printed pages from the final form of the reveal they settled upon filming and leaving in – things being in flux, as they obviously were, with Bob, himself, saying they could still change things (Which they did.) even after the 9 minute and 20 minute beginning of the movie sneaks.

FWIW, I seem to recall Bob once relating a story of first seeing Khan as a youth and being unaware of several aspects of his character at that time in his childhood. This may be the source of these contentions that he didn’t know Khan was Sikh, and, of course, would have no bearing on what knowledge he accumulated as an adult when he decided to introduce the character into the script.

219. Jeyl - June 25, 2013

This movie does some things right, but for the wrong reasons. After the destruction of Vulcan, Starfleet decides to move towards a more militarized fleet that is ready for war, going so far as to call their first warship the USS Vengeance. That’s interesting and has been done in Star Trek before with good effect. Unfortunately, this whole plot element misses the mark when it’s revealed to be all about waging war against the Klingons.

The Klingons?

I thought the USS Vengeance was made in response the destruction of Vulcan by the Romulans. What did the Klingons ever do except be the generic “bad guy” race in Star Trek? We maybe one of exposition dialogue from Admiral Marcus about how the Klingons have attacked Starfleet ships since we made first contact with them, but the Romulans are the race that we have had an entire war with already (Earth/Romulan war less than a century ago) and, again, they destroyed an entire Federation planet.

It just doesn’t make any sense why the Klingons are all of a sudden the most threatening alien race that we have to deal with. The motivation to wage war against the Romulan Star Empire would not only be a more realistic character motivation for a Starfleet admiral, it would also justify calling the warship the USS Vengeance. Marcus wants revenge against those who attacked and killed billions of innocent lives. The Romulans have waged war against the Federation before with many casualties and we were never on good terms even during Vulcan tragedy. Now that Admiral has seen what the Romulans are capable of doing, he wants to ensure that the Romulans, whether the next attack comes from the Empire or some simple miner, will never pose a threat to the Federation ever again. And the cool part about all of this? If you count the original “Star Trek Countdown” as canon, the reason why Nero wanted to destroy the Federation was because the Federation itself clearly refused to help save his home world. Admiral Marcus is doing the wrong thing but for the right reason. He doesn’t have to fight the Romulans in order to protect the Federation.

This would have been a nice way to continue from the last movie. We could have seen Romulus, and see how much different the Romulans of this time are when compared to Nero and his crew. No tattoos, no bald heads, no disorganized ship designs, no shouting.

But instead of doing that, we just get a dumb action scene on Quo’noS that you and your team graciously misspelled for us because “Klingons are popular”. What a waste.

220. Jeyl - June 25, 2013

217 – “There’s one thing that makes this universe better than the Prime universe – storytelloing freedom. To put it simply: In theory, anyone can die. Sticking within the Prime universe continuity, we know everyone lives.”

Gee, look what we’ve got with “Star Trek Into Darkness”. All of the original characters live. Death was just an inconvenience.

Also, using previously established characters is not my idea of “freedom” in story telling since the whole point in using these characters in the first place is to stay true to their counterparts. In the Prime Universe with a series like Deep Space Nine, things were far more unpredictable. Captain Sisko did things that neither Kirk nor Picard would do, war was waged, aliens joined in the fight and an entire quadrant of the galaxy changed as a result. Best we can get out of these new movies is whether or not we can save Earth from being attacked. How epic.

221. Disinvited - June 25, 2013

#219. Jeyl – June 25, 2013

I recall somewhere in the timeline before the Borg first appeared that it was introduced that the Klingon Empire wasn’t very big on scientific research or invention but very adept at adapting and using that of the cultures they conquered. If that held while they were in possession of the Narada, then altKlingons are, indeed, a force to be reckoned with.

222. Theatre Historian - June 25, 2013

214) becareful thomas you will get the Nick Meyers is to old and out of touch posters to start up again LOL.

That being said He is still one of my favorite film directors and writers I am very excited to see if this goes to series. thanks for sharing the link.

223. Theatre Historian - June 25, 2013

214) becareful thomas you will get the Nick Meyers is to old and out of touch posters to start up again LOL.

That being said He is still one of my favorite film directors and writers I am very excited to see if this goes to series. thanks for sharing the link.

224. Phil - June 25, 2013

@212. Well, I’d like to think someone did notice. The existence of the Vengeance suggests otherwise. If, as advertised, Starfleet is a peacekeeping fleet, it boggles the mind that an admiral could divert resources to have a ship built (ships??) that’s twice the size of your flagship. Are warp drives and anti-matter not controlled devices and substances? We were shown an army of workers building Enterprise. What did Marcus do to all the workers that built Vengeance? Did he kill them? If no one noticed this going on Starfleet, and by extension, the Federation is very badly run in this universe. If someone DID know this was going on, or even worse, approved, then Starfleet and the Federation in this universe is much more evil then in the prime universe.

When it comes to evil people rising to power, rarely does it happen in secret. You can’t point to an authoritarian leader in the last hundred years where neighboring states didn’t know what was happening. The true twist in this alternate universe might be, what if it’s the Federation that’s the authoritarian power in the region (or becomes one, considering Marcus’s tendencies)? Does that make the Klingons the good guys?

All speculation on my part – the SC did mention the bud guys were not who we thought they might be.

225. Photon70 - June 25, 2013

@ 223. Theatre Historian – June 25, 2013

Think of what Nick Meyer could do, as director of ST13, with a $150m budget.

226. Lostrod - June 25, 2013

Having watched Star Trek since its “The following program is brought you in living color” days, I look forward to everything Trek.

However, I am disappointed in how the last two installments have had so many illogical plot devices and a seemingly total disrespect to science.

I guess I’m getting old, but I shouldn’t be totally distracted by scenes that make no sense just because they look cool. And, yes, I admit that these last two films are the best ST has looked. But why couldn’t some more effort be made to have it all make some kind of sense? Just because you CAN do something doesn’t mean you SHOULD.

I mean, I can forgive some of the stuff in Lost in Space – yes I’m a day one fan of that – I guess I expect more from Star Trek.

Regards.

227. onebuckfilms - June 25, 2013

Jeyl,

If we know how the universe turns out, we have no reason to care if everything turns out okay. We know it does.

DS9, at the time it was made, had few, if any, future events established.

For TOS, or virtually ALL Star Trek, had the inherent unpredictability of how things turn out.

If they had simply made a Kirk/Spock/McCoy origin story, it would be fun, but you would have had no real drama about what was happening next.

We’d have the predictability that all 79 episodes occur, how those events unfolder, how the movies turned out, all the way through TNG, DS9, Voyager etc., that Vulcan existed in the 24th Century (Nero’s attacking vulcan would not have you on the edge of your seat, and you’d know it survived, for example).

Also, if the writers wanted to have a big event with repercussions, such as destroying Vulcan, a big red X would be put up, and they would be unable to tell that part of the story. Canon depictions of the future would have provided an incredible amount of restriction on what they could or could not do, and prevent them making changes that would be beneficial to the movies.

Tell me how this is NOT an advantage.

228. Aurore - June 25, 2013

@218
#206. Aurore – June 25, 2013

“Indeed, but Bob is on record saying the script was originally conceived without he who would be named Khan at all etc…etc…etc…”
_________

Yes.
I know all that ; I followed the debates. Just like you (and others) did.

“FWIW, I seem to recall Bob once relating a story of first seeing Khan as a youth and being unaware of several aspects of his character at that time in his childhood. This may be the source etc…”

….I see your point, but, respectfully, you…only… seem to recall…while, unless I misread their comment, a poster has now asserted twice that “Bob recently commented that he did not even know that Khan was Sikh when he watched Space Seed.”

If Mr. Orci did comment *recently* on the matter, I assume this comment of his should not be too difficult to find. I’m interested in reading it, that’s all.

:)

…A direct link to the source is all I am asking for…If possible…

229. Disinvited - June 25, 2013

Heavens to Invisible Man!;

http://www.scienceworldreport.com/articles/7707/20130624/newly-developed-sugar-solution-turns-tissues-transparent-3-days.htm

230. Disinvited - June 25, 2013

#228. Aurore – June 25, 2013

Oh, I thought I was being clear. I believe there is scant evidence to support the contention and doubt any evidence of claims that he recently didn’t know will be produced. So, I suppose I’m saying “Don’t hold you breath.”

231. Other Guy - June 25, 2013

I thought the USS Vengeance was made in response the destruction of Vulcan by the Romulans. What did the Klingons ever do except be the generic “bad guy” race in Star Trek?

Ask Gee-Dub about that one. Why did the US attack Iraq? The Iraqi’s surely were not responsible for 911.

This is another reason why I say ST13 & ST 09 are a close allegory to the Bush admin and 911. Please, How photon torpedoes can make anyone think of the Drones in this debate is beyond me.

Care to explain how this Trek can make anyone think of Drones and present day US politics.

Oh, and Aurore, I said above that these writers were not that familiar enough with Star Trek the Original Series many, many NUANCES. It the subtle plot threads of TOS that make you really wonder as you watched the show. You quoted me a little outta context there. As I did Bob. But then I did not write a feature Trek movie. Bob should be totally appreciate all the original’s details as they relate to this movie, Aka, Space Seed and Wrath of Khan.

232. Jackson Roykirk - June 25, 2013

Advice to the original cast and paramount:

Get original writers such as Fontana, or Spinrad etc. and write some original 5 yr mission episodes S4-5 and have the living cast do the voices before they do go beyond the real final frontier. Because nobody can do their characters like them. Then when the CGI technology can really duplicate real life human expressions -fast approaching: render the scenes. Chris D could voice Scotty and Urban: McCoy?

233. Disinvited - June 25, 2013

#228. Aurore – June 25, 2013

Unless, of course, you are blessed with non-stick myoglobin:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22853482

234. Disinvited - June 25, 2013

I was just mulling the anniversary over and it occurred to me, “Perhaps Paramount views the 50th anniversary as a CBS’ deal and they are deciding to run with the film franchise’s 40th?”

In the interoffice body politik there is bad blood between Paramount and CBS, but in Hollywood: business is business.

Seems rather silly for Paramount not to take advantage of this marketing opportunity and I don’t take the merchandising hoo-ha seriously. However, for those that do, it wouldn’t make sense for a Paramount of that such a mind to want to even bother competing against CBS in 50th anniversary merchandising. Does it?

235. Aurore - June 25, 2013

“Oh, and Aurore, I said above that these writers were not that familiar enough with Star Trek the Original Series many, many NUANCES. It the subtle plot threads of TOS that make you really wonder as you watched the show. You quoted me a little outta context there…”

___________

I don’t think so.

“Bob recently commented that he did not even know that Khan was Sikh when he watched Space Seed.”

This is precisely what you said @ 193, on this thread. This is what I quoted. Word for word.

“Bring back the actual fans of the show who really do care about the characters. This includes Boborci, whorecently said here, that when he watched Space Seed he had no idea Khan was a north Indian Sikh.”

And, this above, is what you said…recently.

(Post 2504) :

http://trekmovie.com/2013/05/28/into-darkness-second-week-polls/#comments

…But, in the interest of harmony, let us both pretend I misread your recent posts…

:)

236. William Bradley - June 25, 2013

That’s a myth.

>208. onebuckfilms – June 25, 2013

If we think of Khan=Bin Laden, then the closest allegory might be the CIA working to provide him with weapons and building him up, unwittingly creating him. (This was WAAAAY before 9/11, so would not be GW related).

237. Other Guy - June 25, 2013

No. You got that quote of mine precisely right. And I stand by it. If I could find his post again I will link it. It was a few threads back. As I recall, BobOrci also said he did not think that was a very important part of Khan’s character.

I know it may be hard to believe. I will find it. I do think it is a striking example, his belief that Khan’s race was inconsequential) of how careless this escapade was conceived and presented. Or an example of how these “writers” were told what to include.

How’s that for a turnabout (intruder)? That’s the real Trek conspiracy at hand. One, which I believe is BobOrci (and supremes) real personal reason for allowing such irregularities in the new movie.

238. Photon70 - June 25, 2013

@ 231. Other Guy – June 25, 2013

Those 72 photon torpedoes were not close range ship to ship torpedoes.

They were designed to allow a ship to sit far away from enemy space, and launch them. By the time the torpedoes hit, the ship would be long gone.

That was the whole point of initial mission parameters Kirk was given by Adm Marcus.

Get to the edge of Klingon space, fire those torpedoes and you haul your backside out of there mister!

This is the drone allegory.

239. Photon70 - June 25, 2013

@ 231. Other Guy – June 25, 2013

And to repeat one of Spock’s lines where he said there is nothing in Federation law that states we can condemn a man to death without trial.

240. William Bradley - June 25, 2013

“Captain, unless we get the power back we will burn up in the atmosphere on re-entry!”

Enterprise powers up about 40,000 feet or what have you above San Francisco …

Yay! No problem!

>226. Lostrod – June 25, 2013
Having watched Star Trek since its “The following program is brought you in living color” days, I look forward to everything Trek.

However, I am disappointed in how the last two installments have had so many illogical plot devices and a seemingly total disrespect to science.

241. Hat Rick - June 25, 2013

@Keachick (212),

I concur about the possibility of others involved in the Marcus plan, which is partly why I wrote the synopsis of Star Trek Restored (2016), found above, to include a vast, ongoing plot that extends much further than one admiral and his cohorts.

There is no way in practice a single individual can, in a democratic society like the Federation, command the resources necessary to build an entirely new starship of a battleship class without the involvement of thousands of others; and unless he has magical powers, Marcus couldn’t have exercised direct power over all the components necessary to make the plan work.

What was involved, as I see it, was Section 31 at a minimum. At certain points, Marcus himself might have been seen as a pawn by Section 31 commanders, although in my story, Marcus is always ultimately the unseen hand. Literally unseen — Marcus isn’t even in the Solar System; only his clone is.

Recall that Marcus’s history of manipulation extends back for decades. He was the one that elevated Pike when Pike was a young officer. Pike himself has a tendency to desire a reinvigoration of Starfleet (from dialogue in ST(2009)). Yet Pike is not unalloyed in his desire for a stronger Starfleet; he is an honorable and capable man of rules, and hence his support of the decision to punish Kirk for disobeying the Prime Directive.

If we are to cast Pike in the mold of the German military during World War II, he would be the professional soldier, upstanding, forthright, and consummately dedicated to the Federation and Starfleet — in that order; and utterly apolitical because he has to be. And yet there is that martial stirring, that little bit of what might be called an authoritarian tendency, that Marcus thought he saw in him.

Don’t get me wrong — Pike was as far from a true fascist as one can get; but he had enough of the inflexible adherence to rule that attracted Marcus. From Marcus’s standpoint, Pike was just a pawn who recruited an inexperienced Starfleet officer to command the Enterprise to serve as lamb for the slaughter. Pike was a tragic hero who died because the monster Marcus had helped create turned on its creator.

The complexity of human relationships demands that Marcus would have had to deal with thousands of peers. His life goes on after the events of STID, not just figuratively, but literally.

And, for that matter, so does Khan’s.

At least, that’s part of what I see in STID.

242. Other Guy - June 25, 2013

Aurore, let’s drag my whole post into this thread and see if you can address any of the other ideas I mentioned…

2504. Other Guy – June 24, 2013

ARRGGHHH!!!

dmduncan, I know I said I would consider seeing Trek again. But, after watching this…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fGyc5tmXRM

I don’t think so. I am filled with so much angst watching how dumb this is.
Kirk kicking the “Warp Core” while hanging like a monkey just look terrible.
I really do not know who conceptualized these shots, but they do look horrible.

And as for the Warp engines to be online so that the E’s thrusters are working? Really? The thrusters are tied to the Warp core?

As I was watching, I was retconning the movie to consider (make excuses really) what the other 400 crew members may have been up to at that point. One of the ideas was that perhaps they were also helping to fix the E as it sped to the Earth. But in this clip it looks like all they needed was an order from Spock to engage the thrusters! Why did they not simply engage the thrusters while the E was halfway to the Earth from the Moon.

And another bitch for me in this scene would be, why when warping toward Earth would you point your Starship DIRECTLY at the Earth in the first place.

I would demote Sulu, as soon as possible, for such an amateur error in judgement.

Not more JJTrek for me. You may have made some good points about Star Trek’s light hearted approach to storytelling, but when they get basic logic screwed up, it really is hard for me to watch.

By the way, Enterprise was so on the mark with that In a Mirror Darkly episode. I’d watch that again before another JJ Trek ANYDAY.

Bring back the actual fans of the show who really do care about the characters. This includes Boborci, who recently said here, that when he watched Space Seed he had no idea Khan was a north Indian Sikh.

Boborci, IMO, is a step above JJ in his love of Trek.

Go ahead. Click it. It’s pathetic.

So, how about those thrusters?

243. William Bradley - June 25, 2013

You know, all this speculation is really just so much fanfic.

There is what happened, in all of two movies, and whether it makes sense from what we know of the established Star Trek universe.

One of the bad conceits derived from ST09 is that you don’t need to know anything to get Star Trek.

Not so.

You don’t need to know anything to enjoy the movie.

These are two very different matters.

244. Hat Rick - June 25, 2013

@Jeyl (219),

In your post, you wrote, “[T]he Romulans are the race that we have had an entire war with already (Earth/Romulan war less than a century ago) and, again, they destroyed an entire Federation planet.”

I would disagree on the question of Vulcan. The Romulans were not responsible for the destruction of Vulcan. Nero and the Romulans stood apart, as Nero himself claimed. The Romulans did not desire the destruction of Vulcan and had no role in causing it. In fact, the Romulans in this universe may have learned through backchannel means (spies, for example) of how Spock Prime and by extension the Federation was actually trying to help Romulus Prime using the Red Matter (ST2009), although he failed. The enmity between the Federation and Romulus may have lain dormant accordingly.

On the other hand, the Klingon Empire had captured Nero (ST2009 backstory graphic novel) and may very well have gained access to the advanced technology that Nero’s ship possessed by virtue of its future origins.

245. Jeyl - June 25, 2013

227. onebuckfilms “Canon depictions of the future would have provided an incredible amount of restriction on what they could or could not do, and prevent them making changes that would be beneficial to the movies.”

While I doubt I’ll ever be convinced that more death destruction is a benefit, I fail to see how whitewashing an iconic character that had ethnicity should be considered a benefit. If this new film series thinks that depicting Uhura as a black woman is important, why doesn’t the same apply to one of the franchise’s most iconic villain? Was it really so hard to find Hispanic actors who could play the part of Khan, let alone indian actors to depict Khan’s proper origin?

I actually find all this “canon is a hinderance” talk to be ridiculous and a bad form of story choice justification. Whenever a story is told, the least you should be expected to do is treat it as something that matters. When it does, you should expect that if any situation should arise in future stories that is related to it that the story should do something that compliments and builds from it. Did the Borg remain a “Monster of the Week” evenmy because nobody wanted to be hindered by the fact that the Borg were used in a previous episode? No. They took that episode and built off of it, using canon as a guide rather than an obstacle. Same goes for Tasha Yar’s storyline, the Dominion, 7 of 9, and most importantly, Khan. You shouldn’t look at canon as though it dictates where things should go, but as a foundation to where things can go.

At least having a story taking place in the prime universe has a better chance at gender equality than JJ’s Star Trek.

246. Aurore - June 25, 2013

“No. You got that quote of mine precisely right.”
_____________

If you say so.

“And I stand by it. If I could find his post again I will link it. It was a few threads back.”

O.K.

“As I recall, BobOrci also said he did not think that was a very important part of Khan’s character.”

On this here thread, I linked to one of his answers on the topic.
If you recall it’s @ 205.

“I know it may be hard to believe. I will find it.”

Thanks in anticipation. As I said ; I was curious about it.

:)

247. William Bradley - June 25, 2013

Appearing, disappearing, appearing, disappearing comments again here.

248. Other Guy - June 25, 2013

237. Photon70

A drone, as I understand it, is a robotic aerial craft sent out and piloted by a human being for the purpose of surveillance as well as destruction.
Your description above only includes one of those.

Simply put. Let try a fast dictionary.com result for “Torpedo”…

“A cigar-shaped, self-propelled underwater projectile launched from a submarine, aircraft, or ship and designed to detonate on contact with or in the vicinity of a target.”

Now lets try a dictionary.com search for “Drone”…

“…any unmanned aircraft or ship that is guided remotely: a radio-controlled drone”

I say you, and others, are reaching in your drone explanations. I say its still closer to GW’b and the 911 conspiracy thing. I guess you can’t see how this movie (and the previous 09 movie too to an extent) could be a comment on 911.

249. William Bradley - June 25, 2013

I also remember Bob Orci, at some point, saying something along the lines that he hadn’t been aware Khan Noonien Singh was an Indian when he watched Space Seed.

The whole question clearly turned on the political correctness of making the “villain,” who is not actually the main villain, a person of color or not.

It was obvious, of course, that the Khan of Space Seed was to be every bit the South Asian warlord that the script held him out to be.

There is no debate on this.

>242. Other Guy – June 25, 2013

250. Disinvited - June 25, 2013

#236. Other Guy – June 25, 2013

I believe you are stretching your interpretation of his message (1128) here:

http://trekmovie.com/2013/05/20/sticky-into-darkness-open-week-thread-polls/#5108481

“and by the way — when I was a Kid and saw WOK, I had NO IDEA the guy was Indian. NONE at all.” – boborci – May 25, 2013

251. William Bradley - June 25, 2013

I gathered that the STID Supreme Court was in self-congratulatory mode for having an allegory about both Obama’s drone strike program and the warmongering of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld.

Whereas in reality the far more deliciously subversive politics are to be found in Iron Man 3.

No surprise to anyone who encountered RDJ when he was making his documentary on the 1992 presidential campaign, The Last Party …

>248. Other Guy – June 25, 2013

252. Keachick - rose pinenut - June 25, 2013

If one watched Space Seed, then we know that this Khan is from North India. As for him being Sikh, that was just infatuated speculation on the part of a young Marla McGivers. TOS Khan used McGivers’ infatuation and speculation for his own ends. Not all North Indians are Sikhs. Northern India is the birth place of Buddhism.
**************************************************************************************
On the other hand, the “weapon” that Nero used, ie red matter, has been destroyed. My post at #201 was assuming that prime Spock had not informed Starfleet of what was used to destroy Vulcan and why. If Spock had, they would have known that this attack on Vulcan had nothing to do with Romulus, either in this alternate universe nor in the prime. I am now assuming that prime Spock had informed Starfleet, with Kirk verifying such from experiencing the mindmeld with the same Spock.

Therefore, Admiral Marcus’s push for militarization was more about making war and getting dominion. Marcus pointed to what he called unprovoked attacks the Klingons had made on other worlds and was using those as an excuse to go to war. He then decided to use Kirk and the Enterprise as sacrificial pawns in order to force SF to take the action he had wanted all along. I wonder what sort of “black gold” Kronos and worlds under their dominion might have – something very good, I suspect – just like what much of the Middle East still has! Of course, if that means destroying those fields of “black gold”, so be it – goes along the lines of “if we can’t have it, then nobody can”.

The problem is that, for me, making a film about this is not really that entertaining. I start yawning and nodding off, because, apart from quite horrific, it is just so BLOODY BORING!

The Starship Enterprise not also a submarine? Why not? The Enterprise can be anything the makers want it to be. This is the 23rd century of an alternate universe. Why not make a space ship also capable of being submersible in an ocean, if only for a short time? Lateral thinking, people…gotta love it.

253. Jeyl - June 25, 2013

241. Hat Rick – “The Romulans were not responsible for the destruction of Vulcan. Nero and the Romulans stood apart, as Nero himself claimed. The Romulans did not desire the destruction of Vulcan and had no role in causing it.”

Do you think that would stop humans in the future from using the ever persistent prejudice of “guilt by association”? Last december a woman murdered a muslim person by pushing him in front of a train for no reason other than the fact that he was muslim. You think someone who found out that Nero was from the future could probably get the idea that if they were to do something about it, they could prevent Nero from ever being born? The simple fact is that it was a Romulan crew on a Romulan ship murdering billions for the sake of the Romulan Empire who have been at war with the Federation before. And wouldn’t it be believable for Romulans to deny their actions and motivations?

254. Photon70 - June 25, 2013

@ 244. Other Guy – June 25, 2013

Precisely! It’s an allegory and one person’s allegory is another person’s what have you being smoking!

If we were being literal about it, these torpedoes would be closer to what a Tomahawk missile is.

Sail up to a coast, fire one of these babies and hit a target 600 miles away.

255. Aurore - June 25, 2013

“Aurore, let’s drag my whole post into this thread and see if you can address any of the other ideas I mentioned…”
_______

Maybe some other time.

You see, all I wanted was to know more about this post you talked about twice.

Now that I know that you will do something about it , I am merely grateful.

Thus, concerning the other ideas you mentioned, I’m sure other fellow fans will be willing to help!

Thanks again!

256. dmduncan - June 25, 2013

231: This is another reason why I say ST13 & ST 09 are a close allegory to the Bush admin and 911. Please, How photon torpedoes can make anyone think of the Drones in this debate is beyond me.

***

Seriously? It’s glaringly obvious.

The Enterprise is ordered to park outside of Klingon space and launch missiles to kill a “terrorist” located in the sovereign territory of an empire we are not at war with. Which is pretty much what we’ve been doing to Pakistan using Predator drones since 2004.

While the torpedoes actually look more like cruise missiles, the difference is immaterial given the fact that they were being used to go after a terrorist based in sovereign territory, and “one of our own” to boot (Anwar Al Awlaki reference?), and one of the most controversial uses of drones has been for the same purpose.

And given that so MANY Americans exist in a purposely induced state of stupefaction, unaware of what the Operation Northwoods proposal was, I don’t see how the conspiracy “theory” this film portrays is worn at all.

It’s not been “worn” enough, if you ask me.

With Marcus being Starfleet’s top military brass, I’d say he resembles General Lyman Lemnizter more than George Bush, though it is sometimes hard to tell the difference between Lemnitzer and Cheney, I’ll admit, and Cheney has been accused of suggesting the same sort of false flag operation that Lemnitzer did, but to start a war with Iran rather than Cuba.

Iran, in fact is an excellent historical case with which to shatter the illusions of all those coincidence theorists who think America is a country of pure and noble intentions that just doesn’t engage in the sorts of deplorable behavior that we who know the truth are disparaged as “conspiracy theorists” for pointing out the reality of. The CIA created the Iranian “problem” that Cheney would LOVE to go to war to “solve.” That’s not conspiracy theory, it’s conspiracy HISTORY. So muhc of what people call “conspiracy theory” is merely conspiracy history that has yet to be acknowledged as such.

And some of it is so dark that they never will acknowledge it so long as so many good and decent people still exist and have the power to turn things around.

Washington DC is probably one of the three biggest centers of authentic and effective conspiracies on the planet. It’s a freakin HATCHERY.

257. Jeyl - June 25, 2013

231 – “Ask Gee-Dub about that one. Why did the US attack Iraq? The Iraqi’s surely were not responsible for 911.”

Here’s the difference though. When Bin Laden was suspected at being in Afghanistan, we attacked freaking Afghanistan. When it came to Iraq, Bush said, and I quote,

“You can’t distinguish between al-Qaeda and Saddam when you talk about the war on terror.”

So if STID wanted to mirror that, Admiral Marcus should have been anti Romulan and Klingon. But instead, it’s just the Klingons while the Romulans are completely forgotten.

258. Hat Rick - June 25, 2013

Generally speaking, I am struck by how one or more posters tend to impose their political preconceptions upon STID by seeing it as an attack on a particular political party or even end of the spectrum. STID is not an attack on any political inclination, but rather a meditation on the role of militarism in a putatively pluralistic society. There is no hint that the use of drone warfare was exclusively limited to a Republican ideal, and in fact the current Administration has made substantial use of drones to achieve its objectives, much to the consternation of many erstwhile supporters. The use of the Reaper, a next-gen Predator with ten times the payload capacity of the original, and designed as an armed drone rather than as a surveillance vehicle, to assassinate enemies of the state is an open secret. The current administration has never hesitated to use the Reaper when the opportunity arose.

And in fact the current Administration openly invaded sovereign territory (Pakistan) when it saw the need so to do in order to assassinate Bin Laden.

STID is not a critique of any one administration, but the ever-present menace of the national security state that crushes opposition using any means necessary, with scant regard for constitutional consequences. The use of a secret court, for example, would be antithetical to the Founders of the United States, and probably to the Federation, except that it does exist (as noted in news reports) in America, and may exist in the Federation in STID. (Would a public court or other tribunal authorized the assassination of Khan?)

If yoone doesn’t see the breadth of this form of critique, I would suggest one is simply oblivious to the realities of the moment, and perhaps blinded by partisanship and the defense of a past made increasingly irrelevant, if only because the present is all the more frightening in the dimensions for which the past was criticized.

259. Vice Admiral O.B. Vious - June 25, 2013

Arguing the logic of a movie that ends creating an instant injectable cure all after having an Admiral dumb enough to blather loudly in an atrium about a top secret “no one should know about this” agency while admiring a model of a top secret super mega death bringing Starship built by said agency seems futile.

But hey, remember that time they talk about remembering that time in the bar? Wasn’t that thing they remembered fun? Don’t you remember liking that? Ok, let’s leave this bar now that we’ve talked about that thing we were remembering from the previous adventure.

260. captain spock - June 25, 2013

http://www.deadline.com/2013/06/fx-acquires-man-of-steel-fast-furious-6-star-trek-into-darkness-the-purge/

if you dont buy the dvd of star trek:intodarkness this year no fret it will be on the f.x. channel in mid to late 2015 along with the other movies in this artical…

261. MC1 Doug - June 25, 2013

re: #132: “Consistant [sic] with past Trek films…there was NOT a good reason that the Enterprise-E was able to be controlled by a PC JOYSTICK that happened to pop out of a slot on the ground…or the fact that that same ship had a dune Buggy with it’s own special shuttlecraft to cart it around….”

Oh, I agree, AND I had those very problems with those two plot elements in “Insurrection” and “Nemesis.”

BUT I have to say those two items are a little more believable than turning the USS Enterprise into USNS Enterprise. –grin–

262. Aurore - June 25, 2013

“I know it may be hard to believe. I will find it.”
________

You won’t need to apparently. I just read it ( if the comment @ 245 is truly what you were referring to) :

“and by the way — when I was a Kid and saw WOK, I had NO IDEA the guy was Indian. NONE at all.” – boborci – May 25, 2013

263. Disinvited - June 25, 2013

#244. Other Guy – June 25, 2013

Your are caught in an etymological CATCH 22 which is quite appropriate given the military aspect of the word.

What Khan’s gizmos are most akin to are buzz bombs which after WWII took on the meaning of “robot bombs”. Trouble is with drones, almost every tech wonk describes them as updates of the buzz bomb. Especially the autonomous drones, which is how we get stuck in a CATCH 22 style loop.

264. Hat Rick - June 25, 2013

@Jeyl (247),

You wrote, “Do you think that would stop humans in the future from using the ever persistent prejudice of “guilt by association”? Last december a woman murdered a muslim person by pushing him in front of a train for no reason other than the fact that he was muslim. You think someone who found out that Nero was from the future could probably get the idea that if they were to do something about it, they could prevent Nero from ever being born?”

What I gather from you is that you believe that despite the fact that the Federation has been at relative peace with the Romulans for nearly a century, it is probably going to be motivated by prejudice against them because one of their own committed genocide. Something about that doesn’t seem logical. Certain nationalities have produced genocidal leaders in our own real history, and yet prejudice rarely causes militarization against them, in the status quo ante bellum, when a more vicious and organized threat appears. Case in point: Once the Germans were defeated, the Soviets were set up in their place, and the Germans became aligned with their conquerors. You can argue in your favor that the Germans were decisively defeated whereas the Romulan War was, at best, a stalemate, but I think that my point still holds because the Romulans no longer seemed interested in conquest.

You may think that the Federation has elements that could be moved toward animus against the Romulans, and I wouldn’t disagree. But as a matter of rational statecraft, I don’t think the Romulans would be officially identified, or even unofficially impugned by, the actions of one man, from a future in a timeline different from the one in question. That would truly be an indictment of irrational state policy, and analogous to preparing for war against Germany had a crazed holdover scientist detonated an atomic bomb in New York City ten years after the VE-Day.

265. richpit - June 25, 2013

I skipped to the end of the posts to write this, so apologies if it’s already been said:

I want to see Transformers as the bad guys in the next Trek film!

Just kidding, of course.

266. William Bradley - June 25, 2013

Okay, I think I’ve read all two or three thousand of these comments now, a few times over …

Naturally, no one is discussing the “news” items.

267. Hat Rick - June 25, 2013

The implications of drone warfare could also be seen in the use of live bodies in the advanced torpedoes themselves. This is a fairly abstruse, if not slightly strained, interpretation, but what struck me is that the 72 torpedoes were not actually torpedoes; they were flying coffins and therefore, on a metaphorical level, the ultimate in inhuman warfare. In other words, the torpedoes were not just in place to kill the target; they were there to kill the occupants of the torpedoes themselves (and therefore get rid of the evidence of conspiracy).

The torpedoes were therefore drones in two senses, not just one.

By using the special torpedoes, Marcus was not merely killing two birds with one stone, but killing one by sacrificing the other.

268. Keachick - rose pinenut - June 25, 2013

#242 – “If this new film series thinks that depicting Uhura as a black woman is important, why doesn’t the same apply to one of the franchise’s most iconic villain? Was it really so hard to find Hispanic actors who could play the part of Khan, let alone indian actors to depict Khan’s proper origin?”

Now what is wrong with what is written in this quote, people?

Why should a slightly darker skinned Hispanic actor be any better at playing a North Indian character called Khan than a white British actor? I guess it must be all about skin pigmentation and nothing more…who knew.

In the absence of a North Indian actor, presumably not only looking like one but also fairly well versed in the language and traditions etc of that region of India, I would select one of my paternal great grandfathers or uncles. You see, even though they were white English, they were actually born in that part of India and grew up there. Of course, they lived apart, for the most part, from ordinary Indians, but they did have servants, males and females, and I can just recall my late great-aunt telling one or two stories about the lives of these people as the Indian maids related bits and pieces to her. My great grand whoever… had to be familiar with the religious, cultural and legalities of India as well as that of British. To be a magistrate, you had to be, as well as being able to understand one or two Hindi dialects and even speak some.

I would say that any of my late paternal family members (despite their fair skin colouring) would be as capable of playing a person from North India as any Hispanic would be – someone who had, quite possibly, never been anywhere near India and perhaps not even had an Indian for a neighbour or local store owner.

I am tired of people not being able to see past a person’s skin colouring.

To put it another way – who could more legitimately play the part of a fair Spanish person (leaving aside obvious acting and other skills) – Chris Pine or me?

As far as I know, Chris Pine has no Spanish as part of his racial heritage, however I do. On the other hand, Chris Pine was born and has lived in a city where, in suburbs close to his own, Silverlake, approx. 40% of the population is Hispanic (ie people of Spanish descent). He learned the Spanish language in school and is a fluent speaker.
I have the Spanish *blood*. He doesn’t. We both have fairish skin (he’s got the freckles, not me) and blue eyes. His hair is naturally darker than mine, but still brown, not black.

269. onebuckfilms - June 25, 2013

242 – All of the factors you mention are simply items you regard as missteps, and do not address my position.

They do not explain how the alternate reality approach taken by the writers to free themselves from the predictability of the future is either good or bad, only point out other decisions you don’t like.

RE: Khan;

Your accusation has no merit, as the writing does not specify his ethnicity.

The actor was cast long after the character was written, and it is a directorial and casting decision, not one made by the writers.

270. Keachick - rose pinenut - June 25, 2013

I think that the name “Khan” signifies a very particular ethnicity and race for many people. They question how such a very white looking guy could have a name like Khan, a name, among many, which traditionally much darker skinned people have given themselves and their descendants.

Given how many people today can have names that do not necessarily relate to how they actually look, it is quite possible that this trend will continue and the names people call themselves will no longer have quite the same meanings they have now or necessarily properly reflect ethnic/racial ancestry. After all, any female from almost any race or culture in the world could be given the name Rosemary…

271. OneBuckFilms - June 25, 2013

Correction: 245, not 242.

Canon WOULD be a jumping off point, and in many ways still is for the new movies.

HOWEVER: It is ALSO a restrictive factor by the simple fact that so much of the future post 2258 has been established.

If you have 150+ years of history after the timeframe you want to play in, it does, in fact, restrict you to adhere to that future history.

To not have to worry about those events, for the most part anyway, means your own imagination can create a greater variety of stories, and more unpredictable stories.

That is an inherent difference between having an established future, and having one that has not been written.

To win your point, you have to prove to me that this is not, in and of itself, the case.

If they had done everything to your liking, while still having created the alternate reality, I suspect you would likely not feel the same way about the necessity or merits of the alternate reality as a writing construct for establishing an unwritten future for Kirk, Spock etc.

272. Ash - June 25, 2013

@Nony-

“Related note, I just finished watching a video from a convention Karl Urban did this past weekend. It was quite interesting. He says he would like to get some actual substantial character stuff next time, like DeForest Kelley was able to do, because he thinks there is much more potential in Bones than he has been given to play on screen so far. I concur.”

Good lord lets hope so. People have begged the writers enough times since ST09, it’s about time they listened. I feel bad for Urban, he was widely regarded as the best of the reboot characters by many both fans and critics, and still they have yet to do the character real justice. Seems like Urban notices too…

There was hardly and interaction of the big three in STID. I’d like to see that fixed. That team was a perfect balance of intelligence, humor, and friendship, as Gene intended it to be. He created the three of them to make the triumvirate that was the heart of the show. They need to start showing more of the iconic teamwork and banter they had. It is sorely missed.

273. Keachick - rose pinenut - June 25, 2013

Why shouldn’t all the main characters continue to live just as they did in the prime universe at this stage in their lives? You should not need to “prove” that this is an alternate universe or that the writers are being creative and not adhering to prime universe canon by killing off a main character or other. Such writing does not really prove anything, other than getting rid of a character. Whoopdeedoo. A good story is where a character may die, just as a planet might be destroyed – or not.

In the prime universe, Kirk motioned to Sulu “thataway”… in this alternate universe, Kirk can motion to Sulu “thisaway”…then let’s see what could be discovered. Well, “suchaway” means the discovery of that *ocean* and small planetary system…

Bob Orci – Hiya – come on – I dare ya! You know it is what Star Trek, and “my captain” need. Khan’s “magic blood” may give Kirk superior stamina and possibly intellect, but at what cost? An alien Menosian may well perceive any imbalance in the young captain and be able to correct…BTW, the nulis do know about the existence of the UFP and Starfleet but have chosen to keep to themselves – so far.

Can someone who has been interfered with at such a radical level as this Harrison/Khan – as in being an embryo in a petri-dish undergoing genetic manipulation (or something like that) – be able to change his nature in the way that many humans can make the transition between being very bad to being not so bad? Or are he, and his kind, stuck? Will even a Menosian be able to help?

And what about those 72 people, all presumably similar to H/K? They can’t be left in cryostasis forever. I guess it is all about making them another generation’s problem.

Perhaps we humans become more like antagonists than protagonists. What/who are these nulis and if only, we could have something of what they have or be able to use them for our own benefit? Nulis and their Menosian friends are free now, but were they always so free? Could they suffer enslavement again?

I am musing here…

274. Keachick - rose pinenut - June 25, 2013

I did my bit in encouraging good three-way Kirk/Spock/McCoy interaction, while they were still in the stage of writing the story outline for this movie. I even wrote a short scene with the three men hanging from vines over rapids, with Kirk in the middle, while Spock and McCoy verbally duked it out either side of him – just like the good ol’ days, well sort of…:)

Epic and scenic in every sense!

Now, Bob, extend my outline and write it…make it happen! “Listen” to the Keachick…:)

275. ST fans are unbelievably dedicated - June 25, 2013

@232 & Guys check this out ST TOS ‘Beyond Antares’ CGI animated episode with original voices.

Read description too: truly Amazing!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQeH2xu5l74

276. sean - June 25, 2013

Jeyl, you seem to forget that in the original timeline during this period a war was building between the Klingons and the Federation (and there’s no reason why that would be different here, since it was all based on ‘disastrous first contact’). And after Nero destroyed 40 some odd Klingon ships in Trek 09, the Klingons likely would have stepped up the war machine to compensate, and Starfleet would be aware of it. Plus, Marcus goal was a militarized Starfleet period, so there’s nothing to suggest he wasn’t worried about the Romulans or any other number of potential threats. The Klingons were simply the most obvious and pressing one (especially given the fact that they had the Narada for 25 years and no doubt studied its tech during that time).

From a storytelling standpoint, I imagine there would have been hesitation to use the Romulans again for the 3rd movie in a row. Why not take on another one of the show’s most iconic races?

Also, they did not misspell Kronos (Q’onoS). Kronos has long been the accepted English version of the word, and was the spelling used in the script (and novel) for Star Trek VI, as well as nearly every other Trek script that referenced it (including DS9 and Enterprise).

277. Phil - June 25, 2013

@252. Here’s the problem, that really wasn’t touched on to much in STID. Yes, Marcus is an admiral in Starfleet (and he can hate the Klingons all he wants) – that does not give him the authority to make foreign policy for, or to wage war on behalf of the Federation. Nothing implied that Marcus was rogue, or that Section 31 was running the Federation, or even that martial law had been declared (maybe I missed that) in the wake of Harrison running amuck (which is the most plausible explanation for Marcus’ actions). The only thing left to consider is that Starfleet command and control is incompetent, or the Federation in this universe is more authoritarian then we have been lead to believe.

278. Ash - June 25, 2013

@274 Keachick

That sounds awesome! I’d kill to see something like that happen in one of these film. An away mission goes wrong, and Spock and Bones bicker about the situation while Kirk waits it out with exhaspiration and fondness.

I have so much love for those three boys. They’re the kind of friends everyone would be lucky to have. It’s about time they started building up the special friendship of those three now that the K/S relationship has been cemented.

Please Bob, make it happen *puppy eyes*

279. boborci - June 25, 2013

148. Harry Ballz – June 25, 2013
@147

We are in Toronto, Bob. Where are you?

========

Home in LA

280. boborci - June 25, 2013

149. Horatio – June 25, 2013
@147
Well, I’ve been pondering who invented liquid soap and why and if the third film will be a big Klingon-bash.

Any news on that front? Paramount happy? What do you think of the US receipts? You know the drill…

=======

Like so many other fans, I’m disappointed that it’s the biggest Star Trek ever;)

281. boborci - June 25, 2013

158. Hugh Hoyland – June 25, 2013
Bob, any word on the sequel as far as you guys writing it goes?

=======

Talking to Paramount about it. Would both love it to work. We’ll see.

282. boborci - June 25, 2013

164. Hat Rick – June 25, 2013

You don’t go to a summer blockbuster tentpole expecting a Merchant Ivory production. You want your SFX and your kewl ‘splosions; I get that. But STID, I though, was a pretty damn good balance of popcorn and pop philosophy, and sometimes even more than that, and I thought it was and is just great.

What more do you want for under twenty bucks a pop?

====

Thanks, pal!

283. boborci - June 25, 2013

165. SoonerDave – June 25, 2013
@boborci

Would love to hear about planning/status for next movie.

Any thoughts on performance of STID versus expectations?

Long-time Trek fan here who first saw TOS when about eight or nine years old, as it went into strip syndication on local TV stations in the early 1970′s, and loved it. Loved the reboot, thoroughly enjoyed STID. Not interested in joining in on the bash parade.

My favorite line in the whole flick: From Spock, facing Admiral Pike in response to his “giving him attitude:” “I am exhibiting multiple attitudes simultaneously. To which are you referring?” That’s an AWESOME Spock line and major props to whomever on the team wrote it. Quinto delivered it perfectly.
Thanks,
SoonerDave

=======

If memory serves, that brilliant line was Damon’s.

284. boborci - June 25, 2013

168. Hugh Hoyland – June 25, 2013
#162 Hat Rick

Right on! Thats probably the thing that impressed me the most about STID, its strong commentary on things that are happening in our world at this very moment (not the least the rise of the military industrial complex among other issues). And IMO that is STRAIGHT out of TOS. Thats why I now say STID reminds me the most of TOS because they tackled social issues way back then as well.

And I’m with you on Watchmen as well, and if Im not mistaken Bob had a hand in writing that to? Not sure but I think so.

====

Yeah, we did a month on Watchmen.

285. boborci - June 25, 2013

181. Barney Fife – June 25, 2013
boborci:

What’s up? I think most of us are waiting for the cone of silence to be lifted on Star Trek’s future. STID has a 87/92 rating on Rotten Tomatoes…it would be hard to improve on that! I would have preferred more character interaction. Any reason why 10 minutes couldn’t be added to the film for more of that?

=======

We hate going much past 2 hours. Old rule of showbiz: always leave them wanting more;)

286. Buzz Cagney - June 25, 2013

We can ask for something new all we want but I don’t think its breaking news to say these guys have nothing meaningfully new to offer.
It’ll be Klingons and/or Borg.

They should go back and see the speech they wrote for Pike- I challenge them to do better.

A big ask, I know.

287. boborci - June 25, 2013

193. Other Guy – June 25, 2013
187. Keachick

“What I saw in this last Trek was a rehash of worn conspiracy theories about how GW was responsible for 9-11. That was the social comment in this Trek, What I saw was that white guys are bad. A theme that is so previlant in today’s movies.”
==================

Yeah, like in Oscar nominated Zero Dark Thirty and Best Picture Argo.

====================

“Lord knows it could not have ever been a Indian Sikh warrior! Hell even the Nibiru (a name shamefully co-opted of another popular consiracy theory) savages at the begning were white guys!”

====================

Most of you who use the word “conspiracy” clearly don’t know what it means. A theoretical crash with an untracked celestial bodym be it a comet or a planetoid, is not a conspiracy theory! A conspiracy is nothing more than more than one individual acting in concert, generally with negative connotations. You should be calling Nibiru the lone planet theory.

========

“Now, if this was a sensible movie, all about the politics of Star Trek as well as a social commentary on todays world, then exactly who is the president of the Earth? Is it the United Federation of Planets? Is there a President of the US still? This movies writing was so bad and amatuerish that these simple question should have been addressed!”

=========

So your first complaint is that the parable in the movie is so obvious as to be mundane, and then, just above here, you’re perplexed by the parable. Pick a lane.

============

“Bob recently commented that he did not even know that Khan was Sikh when he watched Space Seed. Now Keachick, if you are comfortable with someone so unfamiliar with Space Seed, or Wrath of Khan – and it many, many nuances writing for Star Trek, then there is not much more I can say for you to understand how poorly this movie was viewed from the perspective of a fan who really enjoyed the wonder factor of the original series. A simple sci-fi show created by artists, that in every description I read about its making are described as being genius.”

=======

I said I didn’t know K’s origin when I fist saw the episode as A CHILD! So his RACE was not an vivid part of my first impression of him. I certainly knew it later as an adult. Pointless argument above. Pure rhetoric.

===========

“I want that level of sophistiation and talent in any BIG BUDGET Star Trek I pay for at the theater. I expect at least that level of writing out of any new Star Trek production. Genius I would love. Plot holes and stupid decisions are completely unaceptable.”

=======

Boring me now….

====

“And In my opinion, and as a fan of the original, BobOrci, and any others involved, should be a bit ashamed and even embarrased to post here – without participating in a valid discusion for their reasons behind this movie’s story and production.”

========

You are high on crack if you think I’m going to walk around “embarrassed” by the two Treks we just made.

288. Dadio - June 25, 2013

Star Trek’s Galileo restored.

http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/houston/gallery/Star-Trek-s-Galileo-restored-65226/photo-4834555.php

289. boborci - June 25, 2013

213. Cap’n Calhoun – June 25, 2013
@boborci

Hey, Bob. Loved the movie, and I think most of the items people are identifying as plot holes has more to deal with them missing lines or not following points to their conclusion, but one thing still bugs me.

Why was the Enterprise underwater? You said previously “Line of sight necessary given unstable and shifting magnetic field of super volcano on alien planet. That’s why no beaming. Gotta physically get back to the ship.” This doesn’t really explain why they don’t just use shuttlecrafts though, especially since no beaming was necessary until Spock’s line broke. Am I missing something?

——-

Not missing anything. We don’t take time to explain it beyond that. The question then becomes, is there some reality that precludes it being there and can anyone think of a reason for it to be there? If we can, internally, than we go with it.

So though it is not canon, we could’ve easily explained, but clunkily so because real conversations don’t work this way, that they were underwater to use the main dish to try and affect the volcano in such a way as to keep from having to do what spock did.

Or Maybe the planet itself is surrounded by rings of asteroids that make orbit as dangerous, unstable, and potentially visible in the night sky.

Either way, the pace and reality that we like to convey precludes things like, “I can’t believe that we came underwater here to try that technodoohicky deflector dish thing, but when that didn’t work, Spock had to haul ass in a shuttle and now here we are in this mess!”

290. boborci - June 25, 2013

219. Jeyl – June 25, 2013
This movie does some things right, but for the wrong reasons. After the destruction of Vulcan, Starfleet decides to move towards a more militarized fleet that is ready for war, going so far as to call their first warship the USS Vengeance. That’s interesting and has been done in Star Trek before with good effect. Unfortunately, this whole plot element misses the mark when it’s revealed to be all about waging war against the Klingons.

The Klingons?

I thought the USS Vengeance was made in response the destruction of Vulcan by the Romulans. What did the Klingons ever do except be the generic “bad guy” race in Star Trek? We maybe one of exposition dialogue from Admiral Marcus about how the Klingons have attacked Starfleet ships since we made first contact with them, but the Romulans are the race that we have had an entire war with already (Earth/Romulan war less than a century ago) and, again, they destroyed an entire Federation planet

=======

RIght. And Iraq had nothing to do with 911 nor did it have WMD.

291. boborci - June 25, 2013

257. Jeyl – June 25, 2013

enough crack smoking. Say no.

292. Ash - June 25, 2013

“And In my opinion, and as a fan of the original, BobOrci, and any others involved, should be a bit ashamed and even embarrased to post here – without participating in a valid discusion for their reasons behind this movie’s story and production.”

WTF? Harsh dude. Not to mention WRONG. This also coming from a fan of the original. It’s cool to have problems with certain aspect of the movies (lord knows I do) but overall they are pretty damn great films! The very last thing Bob and the others should be is embarrassed.

The reboot Star Trek films are very much a success and have introduced many new fans to the series. It may not be my prefect Trek, but I’ll take it over no Trek at all

293. Other Guy - June 26, 2013

Ash. Do you know Boborci on a first name basis?

Boborci, thanks for validating the Gw’b iraq thing. Couldn’t believe I was seeing that in a Trek film. Now I know.

Also. If you would be so kind to reply. Who came up with that concept?

294. Toonloon - June 26, 2013

I just thought of something (forgive me if someone else thought of this), but I’ve seen someone mention that the beginning was similar to Raiders of the Lost Ark. I wonder if you could add the last scene of Raiders to STID and a have a little arrow pointing to the box with a caption saying “Khan” as the man trundles it into the collection.

I joke, but it did make me wonder where in the STID universe Khan would go. I wouldn’t be surprised if we get a comic where the Federation Council decide to take them out of the freeze and to an uninhabited Ceti Alpha V.

Really looking forward to my Blu-ray set. I ordered the Phaser set. Hope it comes in time for my 40th birthday party in October. I’m having a STAR TREKKIN’ COWBOYS theme.

@boborci – Hi Bob. Hope you are well. Could you please let us know if you know of much material cut from STID? I read a draft of your 2009 movie and there was a lot of cut footage which fortunately ended up on the Blu-ray. Do you know what might be on the new STID set?

And on an unrelated note, you mentioned WMD in Iraq – have you seen our favourite author Vincent Bugliosi’s book “The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder”? I’ve got it on order from amazon.

295. Other Guy - June 26, 2013

One more.

Did you see Iron Man 3 and what did you think of the blood element appearing in both stories?

296. Ash - June 26, 2013

@ Other Guy

Of course I don’t. I have no idea if he’s even read any post I’ve ever made on this site. Why do you ask?

If you’re wondering due to the fact that I mention him by his first name, I suppose I do so because…it’s his name??

297. Hat Rick - June 26, 2013

@boborci (282) –

You’re more than welcome.

And, relative to your comment @ 284 (to Hugh Hoyland) that you were involved in Watchmen, that’s good to know. I really enjoyed Watchmen and thought it properly, yet lovingly, skewered comic book conventions while presenting a unique look at counterfactual history.

@Toonloon (294) –

Vincent Bugliosi is quite a character. His analysis of why a certain former football star / actor was able to escape a murder rap in a certain “trial of the century” was well received.

298. Hat Rick - June 26, 2013

From Star Trek Restored (2016):

Aboard the Enterprise, a council of war convened. Or at least, that’s what it would be, had Starfleet authorized it.

Kirk glared at Spock as the latter finished his statement. “You know none of us would have agreed to this … conspiracy. I don’t care which one of us — not one of us … not one of me … would have agreed to the destruction of Vulcan had we been able to prevent it.”

His friend remained silent, awaiting the inevitable.

“Spock, you’ve let your logic take us where no one should go. I refuse to believe that any version would have –” Words failed him. “You’re accusing me of treason, of genocide, of the unthinkable. That’s crazy talk. That’s not rational. That’s not logical.”

“Captain, the idea that I am both logical and illogical may make sense to you, but it doesn’t particularly do so for me. I’ve laid out my case. And it is a compelling one. The one who is behind this is none other than you; no one else would have the means, the motive, the opportunity to — ”

“But Spock, you’re simply confused. You refer to this, this Nexus, this Guardian of Forever, this Mirror Universe, and now this other version of me who … none of it makes sense. How many are there? It’s too convoluted. It’s just nuts. I refuse to believe that I’m part of this conspiracy, in any timeline. And if you’re right, it’s not just one version of me, it’s … you. It’s everyone in this room. And we don’t know it.”

“And, as far as being confused, count me in,” McCoy interjected. “Spock, what you’re proposing is insane. I refuse to believe it.”

“Disbelief is not factual, Doctor. Facts are factual. Your disbelief is irrelevant. Doctor, I do believe your specialty is medicine. But you’re a physician, not a psychiatrist. And may I say, I’ve thought this through as much as I’ve thought through anything aboard this ship.” Spock turned toward his friend. “Jim, for the timeline to be restored, one of you must die. The only question is, which one, and when.”

299. Disinvited - June 26, 2013

# 269. onebuckfilms – June 25, 2013

” The actor [Benedict Cumberbatch] was cast long after the character was written, and it is a directorial and casting decision, not one made by the writers.” – onebuckfilms

I think your use of the word “long” is a bit of a mischaracterization given that the script was still being rewritten even after photography of several scenes identifying him as Ericssen had been completed.

300. Aurore - June 26, 2013

“I said I didn’t know K’s origin when I fist saw the episode as A CHILD! So his RACE was not an vivid part of my first impression of him. I certainly knew it later as an adult. Pointless argument above. Pure rhetoric.”
_____________

@ 295

See?

What I (re)read, thanks to the comment @ 250 ( formerly 245 ), was that Mr. Orci said he did not know Khan was an Indian when he first saw “WRATH of KHAN” as a child ( which made sense, to me, for many reasons) :

“and by the way — when I was a Kid and saw WOK, I had NO IDEA the guy was Indian. NONE at all.” – boborci – May 25, 2013

(Post 1128):

http://trekmovie.com/2013/05/20/sticky-into-darkness-open-week-thread-polls/#5108481

…There was no mention whatsoever of the Space Seed TV episode in his May post.

But, I agree with the rest of his answer on the Khan question, I quoted above .

:)

301. PaulB - June 26, 2013

You’ve got to love how Bob Orci accuses people of being on crack because they DARE to criticize his writing team or their choices. REALLY professional.

Clearly, we’re seeing the level of intellect and maturity that Orci brings to Trek. (Maybe Lindelof doesn’t deserve all of the blame when things suck.)

Considering Orci’s conspiracy nonsense and the oh-so-brilliant Trek sequel/rehash, I think that accusing people here of being on crack sounds like projection on Orci’s part.

Sad to see such disrespect for the people who paid hard-earned money to make you successful, Bob. Sad to see that Trek is in such immature hands.

302. Thomas Vinelli - June 26, 2013

I agree with Levar and with all the countless Trek novels out there , you would think the writers could ”borrow” from the novels. I agree with Levar, however i think without a total staff change , director etc. The Star Trek we knew is gone. Because its the times we live in. People just don’t want to sit in a theater and listen to techo babble or meaningful dialog . They want action , action and more action and action they will get ,Thats what sells tickets these days.. But you read it here ,the writers have the freedom to do what they like…canon means little. OK guys if you designed your Trek world ,free of canon, why go back to TELLING THE Khan story in a new way.You guys get paid a lot of money to come up with new ideas, so why not do that. In all honesty Trek always worked better on TV and thats where it should go. Star trek never really worked on the big screen, even with the old movies

303. James - June 26, 2013

I loved Star Trek Into Darkness.

Gene would be proud, it dealt with a theme relevant to today and dealt with the prime directive.

If you haven’t already read it, the check out Wil Wheatons review of the movie. Alternatively, you can check out my own take here:

http://ryesofthegeek.wordpress.com/2013/06/18/star-trek-into-darkness-film-review/

In summary then, Star Trek Into Darkness has a pleasingly relevant theme, is visually superb, well acted and has a terrific musical score.

304. James - June 26, 2013

I just forgot to say:

Thankyou Bob Orci and all involved.

I saw Man of Steel the other day, and lets just say how grateful I am that we have JJ and his talented team working on Trek.

http://ryesofthegeek.wordpress.com/2013/06/16/man-of-steel-film-review/

305. Keachick - rose pinenut - June 26, 2013

PaulB – IMO, I do not know why some people think as they do about the Bad Robot version of Star Trek films, however, it does seem that some appear to lack certain basic comprehension skills and are quick to make criticisms of what the writers have done because they do not understand, despite having these aspects of the film explained to them by other film goers who have understood the story.

@ Bob Orci – I don’t know if my interpretation of the story and the characters that I have written about in various posts are as you intended them to be understood, but I don’t seem to have the *problems* that others seem to have with this movie. Does that make me this – someone who does not understand how poorly written this film was?

What’s ironic is that I was one of those original viewers of Star Trek (TOS) when it first screened on TV in the 1960′s. I was eight years old. I “fell in love” with the series and its captain, because of its originality, wonder and promise…

Since STID’s release six/seven weeks ago, the kinds of controversy this latest film has created has been *fascinating* (to quote Spock again) – certainly one word for it, like so many being negatively obsessed about a split second scene of a woman in her underwear while apparently undeterred by the level of physical brutality depicted in the same film – certainly been a sad eye opener for me, for sure – unbelievable.

I have no idea who is using/smoking what, but some things have seemed a little nuts to me at times and not in a nice Pine nutty sort of way either.

306. Disinvited - June 26, 2013

#299. Aurore – June 26, 2013

Well, I suppose you can’t get any more recent than that. :-)

307. star trackie - June 26, 2013

#300 “You’ve got to love how Bob Orci accuses people of being on crack because they DARE to criticize his writing team or their choices”

I know I sure do! I love watching Bob put clueless armchair quarterbacks in their place. lol

308. Keachick - rose pinenut - June 26, 2013

Good review from Wil Wheaton.

I actually enjoyed this film a bit more than the first film. It flowed better. Something that I did not like about the first film was the complete loss of those three years between when Kirk and McCoy first meet as they both become Starfleet cadets and the time when prime Spock comes through the wormhole to be captured by Nero. I needed to see some of those intervening three years shown and explained. It would have been great opportunity for good character development. It never feels like a smooth transition.

STID did not suffer from that leap/loss of time and was all the better for it. Chris Pine as Kirk had some great scenes in STID and the scene where Kirk admits to Spock that he does not know what he is supposed but only knows what he can do was a really good scene. Chris Pine did not disappoint. He was wonderful as the not-so-punk James T Kirk!

309. star trackie - June 26, 2013

…and thanks #288 for the link to the restored Galileo! It’s absolutely beautiful. I can’t wait to trek down to Houston to see it in person when it goes on display Amazing job and hats off to all involved in her restoration, you did the old girl proud.

310. Keachick - rose pinenut - June 26, 2013

#288 – Wow!
I remember seeing pictures of this prop – the Galileo. It was an absolute mess. I doubt anyone thought much could be done. Now it looks fantastic.

Congratulations to those who put in the hard work. Good job! Well done!

311. Bender Bending Rodriguez - June 26, 2013

@ 291 Boborci

I am glad the topic of the message of STID has been raised. I totally got it from the first time I saw it and thought it was a great one.

Ever since 9/12/01 I thought our nation made the wrong decisions regarding what happened on 9-11. I was involved in organizing protests against the then coming war in Afghanistan. Neither I nor anyone else who was against an invasion thought that it would get Osama Bin Laden. Our argument was that it would only kill innocent civilians, create more terrorists and that while it might feel “good” to get revenge, it would only harm us in the long run. The only way to get those responsible for the murders committed on 9/11/01 would be a massive intelligence effort combined with the special forces. In fact, after over a decade of war and trillions of dollars wasted that is what did get Bin Laden.

The hysteria and lust for revenge (as well as racism) following 9-11 was used to manipulate Americans into supporting a war based on a lie – the invasion of Iraq – although I am glad to point out the last poll before the invasion said 45% of us did not support it. There were never any weapons of mass destruction. The UN sanctions had crippled the Iraqi economy and as the US had bombed Iraq almost every day for 8 years during the Clinton Administration in enforcement of the “no fly zones” and the sanctions, Iraq’s infrastructure was destroyed. They had a hard enough time keeping the lights on, fresh water flowing and hospitals open; there’s no way they had the ability to produce weapons of mass destruction. Because of the lust for revenge, and the willingness of those in power to manipulate citizens, the US spent three trillion dollars on a war that never should have happened to find non-existent WMDs, leave thousands of Americans and tens of thousands of Iraqis dead, unknown thousands displaced and Iraq in a state of perpetual civil war.

So in the end, when Kirk gives the speech about revenge, I thought it was spot on. If the US had not given into revenge, if instead it sought justice, our world would be in a much different place.

I hope there are no more 9-11 type events, in the US or anywhere and that one day war and terrorism will come to an end. But if there are anymore tragedies to come, that we base our actions not on revenge, but on a desire for justice and in the long term, peace.

So good job Bob Orci and crew for putting that message of peace and justice where it should have a home – in a Star Trek movie.

312. PaulB - June 26, 2013

#304 – Wow, so anyone who doesn’t like nuTrek is just too dumb to understand it? That’s what you just said (but in far fewer words than you used).

I loved ST09 despite its flaws. I’m a Trekkie from back in the early 1970s, and I LOVE ST09. Loved Spock/Uhura. Loved the new cast. Loved the rebooted universe with endless possibilities…

And then I saw STID, which is a retread of both TWOK and ST09. I UNDERSTAND the story just fine, Keachick, as does anyone with an IQ over 95. It’s not a deep or complicated movie. It’s just stupidly written, which some cannot comprehend “despite having these aspects of the film explained to them by other film goers who have understood the story.” (Yeah, I can use your own words to insult your intelligence, too.)

Just because YOU are incapable of understanding why some people don’t like the new Trek films doesn’t mean they don’t have valid reasons. Your lack of understanding is your own problem.

Understanding STID is easy. Tolerating the multiple layers of plagiarism and stupidity is not–at least, for those of us who think.

313. PaulB - June 26, 2013

#304 – PS: Nothing you or I say about the qualities of STID has any bearing on what I said about Orci’s insulting behavior.

We paid money to see his product. Many of us feel cheated because we’d already seen ST09 and TWOK and all the other stuff they ripped off–sorry, “paid subtle homage to.”

We have a right to complain about that product, just as others have a right to praise it. But Orci’s insults are uncalled for and unjustified. He has a career BECAUSE of the fans he’s insulting with his “Are you drunk?” and “you’re on crack” comments.

It’s a shame he can’t act like a grownup to the people who paid for his lifestyle.

314. LogicalLeopard - June 26, 2013

I know this is wrong, but I’m deriving an inordinate amount of pleasure from seeing Bob Orci accuse people of smoking crack like Morgan Freeman in “Lean on Me.”

“You smoke crack, don’t you Sims?”

*LOL*

Agree or disagree, won’t it be it sort of awesome to be able to sit with friends watching a DVD of STID (because even though people say they hate it, they’ll still buy it *L*) and say, “This point right here________is the dumbest thing ever. I even told the producer/writer that, but he called me a crackhead… “

315. LogicalLeopard - June 26, 2013

Okay, so I didn’t really figure that we’d have the next movie about exploration or anything, because 1) This movie has been huge at the international box office, and you can’t just switch up and say, “Oh, now we’ll do 2 hours of gripping surveys of gaseous anomalies,” and 2) NONE of the Trek movies are about exploration. There’s always a big bad, whether it’s a half brother, a PETA probe, whatever.

So what do we want to see? It may go Klingon wars. I think there’s a good chance, since they hinted about Khan in the last one.

Wait…..

I just thought of something. Can you imagine if they killed David in the next one? Yeah, David. As in, a baby (whether it’s a boy or a girl, whatever), or a pregnant Carol, on an outpost or something. What if Kirk goes full Ahab? We know he can do it, he had some pretty stellar acting chops in this last movie. Can you imagine? What if Kruge is the one that pushes the button?

316. Aurore - June 26, 2013

#299. Aurore – June 26, 2013

“Well, I suppose you can’t get any more recent than that. :-)”
_________

You can’t!

So, I suppose when you told me : “Don’t hold you breath.” , earlier ( @230 ), you were being pessimistic.

I knew I just had to be patient.

:)

…This kind of situation happened before.
Who knows? Maybe it will happen again…

317. DesiluTrek - June 26, 2013

@97 … you make it sound as if that idea was ludicrous when it’s actually a far better concept than STID. Now answer my point and tell me why a “war with the Klingons” movie would be appropriate for the 50th anniversary.

I’m getting sick of the defenses of AbramsTrek that do so by knocking Roddenberry, the freaking creator!!!

318. Toonloon - June 26, 2013

I just had another thought… first of all let me say I’m a fan of STID. Saw it twice in the cinema – is STID the only Trek movie to be marketed with guns in the posters? Just an observation.

There are some people here who are saying it isn’t Trek and some people (me included) who think it is. Regardless of your opinion, if I’m right about the posters, that may be significant or not as the case may be.

319. Jeyl - June 26, 2013

I have a feeling that wasn’t the real Bob Orci. At least I hope it wasn’t. I think he would be a bit clever than that.

320. LogicalLeopard - June 26, 2013

312. PaulB – June 26, 2013
#304 – PS: Nothing you or I say about the qualities of STID has any bearing on what I said about Orci’s insulting behavior.

******************************************

I admit, I find it a bit amusing. I think I’m just hearing it in the tone you would take with a friend, acquaintance, or even fellow bulletin board poster. “Are you high? Battlestar Galactica blows DS9 out of the water!”

But I agree; insults shouldn’t be used on a forum board. Some of the things I’ve seen him post wouldn’t qualify as insults to me, but that doesn’t mean that some wouldn’t take it that way.
**********************************************

We paid money to see his product. Many of us feel cheated because we’d already seen ST09 and TWOK and all the other stuff they ripped off–sorry, “paid subtle homage to.”

***********************************************

Now here’s the problem. You should never feel CHEATED when you pay for a movie. There’s a caveat videor (got an A in latin, but I totally made that up) already implied. We’ve all seen movies. We’ve all paid for movies. We’ve seen good ones, we’ve seen bad ones. We know that before we put our money down, we may not like it. And we have the choice of paying ten bucks now, or a buck later at Redbox, or renting it free from the Library (my fave). Because, what it all boils down to is personal preference. Any movie you hated someone loved. Any movie you loved someone hated. Plan 9 from Outer Space may be considered the worst movie of all time, but guess what? A lot of people LOVE it. Probably because it’s bad. But they still love it.

But worse, with a Star Trek movie, you KNOW going in that this is a reboot. In the same time period as TOS, roughly. So you KNOW there’s a possibility that prior plot points, characters, and “homages” can be used. So the smart thing to do, is to wait until it hits the low cost theaters so you won’t be disappointed, or wait until it hits DVD. So if you feel cheated, you shouldn’t. Not only because it was your choice to see and pay for the movie, but also because the movie didn’t make any promises to you that it didn’t keep. If the movie was advertised as 1 hour and 57 minutes, and it was actually 47 minutes long, you got cheated. But the movie doesn’t MAKE any promises about you enjoying it, you just THINK you will enjoy it. And if you don’t, you don’t. Oh well. It’s a movie.

************************************

We have a right to complain about that product, just as others have a right to praise it. But Orci’s insults are uncalled for and unjustified. He has a career BECAUSE of the fans he’s insulting with his “Are you drunk?” and “you’re on crack” comments.

It’s a shame he can’t act like a grownup to the people who paid for his lifestyle.
***********************************************

Definately! You have the right to complain, and this is the perfect place for it. Just like it’s also the perfect palce for praise. Like I said, insults should never be used. I don’t think “Are you drunk” or “you’re on crack” are necessarily straight insults, but I definately see that they can be offensive.” As for Bob’s obliglation to act like a grownup to the people who paid for his lifestyle, er…..well, let me break that down. We all have obligations to act like grownups, because we are. I paid for two tickets to see ST09, five bucks I think for the DVD around Christmas, one ticket to see STID, and another two tickets at the drive in, but it wasn’t the first movie, so I’m not sure how much money was “made” by STID on those tickets.

I hardly say that qualifies for “paying for Bob Orci’s lifestyle.

I will point out this though: Bob Orci steps into this arena as an equal, more or less. Without prompting or pressure from a studio to do so, apparently. This is not part of a press junket, he’s doing this on his own time. Which is pretty cool. I’m not saying that he doesn’t derive anything business oriented out of this, but he doesn’t HAVE to do it. So, when he comes in here, he’s just like MJ, or CuriousCadet, or Keachick, or any other person, and occasionally, gets snarky with other people like we get snarky with each other. And occasionally, he goes off topic, and starts talking about conspiracy theories like any other crackpot on the internet. Oh, my apologies if anyone thinks that’s offensive. I use the word “crackpot” not to accuse someone of being a crackpot, but to add color to my point. Just like, instead of saying, “Are you high?” instead of”Gee sir, I’m not sure what thought process produced that statement”

321. Yanks - June 26, 2013

“We didn’t just want to do whatever we wanted. We wanted to free ourselves, but take a stab at what might’ve happened in the previous series. Some people have complained, “Well, they’ve freed themselves, so why even do Khan?” For us, the exciting idea was…we’d freed ourselves, so how can we do the things we know but in a new way? ”

So, Star Trek is a place to “play”. Afraid of origional thoughts and ideas.

Seems pretty “safe” to me.

Please let Star Trek come back to TV where it belongs.

322. Keachick - rose pinenut - June 26, 2013

#311 – For a start, STID does not plagiarize anything, not in the strictest sense of the word. These writers are working with Star Trek canon. They are allowed to. Paramount said so.

The writers turned SOME of what took place in the prime universe on its head, because that is what is quite likely to happen in an alternate universe so closely aligned with another very similar universe. That’s my understanding of two universes which are very similar (in some areas, even identical) to each other.

Therefore, what we saw was a time shift (universes at variance), the main villain calling himself Khan, but not looking quite like the other Khan did and ending up in cryostasis again, whereas the other older Khan died (once again universes at variance), Kirk instead of Spock, saving the Enterprise by kicking the warp core to realign itself, so restoring basic power and suffering from radiation poisoning. This was similar to events in prime universe, but it was happening to a different person, different effect of radiation on the body – Kirk became grey/jaundiced/Spock’s skin was seriously burned (once again universes at variance). Outcomes for some characters are different as well. Kirk survives, despite the lethal radiation dosage, however Christopher Pike dies. In the prime universe, Pike lives out his life on Talos IV and is reunited with his love.

This would also segue into the kind of technology shown, similar but not identical to the prime universe. In some areas, this alternate universe seems more advanced, possibly due to Nero and prime Spock’s incursion, but not necessarily.

Starfleet technology in this universe allows for starships to be submersible for a specified length of time, because there is really no reason why the technology would not be there to make a space ship encountering all kinds of powerful spacial anomalies and forces also be able to withstand being in (sea)water for a while. Some designs will look like what could be seen in the prime universe, but there are variations as well, some better (looking) than others. Whether one prefers one look over another is a subjective matter.

#193 – “Bob recently commented that he did not even know that Khan was Sikh when he watched Space Seed. Now Keachick, if you are comfortable with someone so unfamiliar with Space Seed, or Wrath of Khan – and it many, many nuances writing for Star Trek, then there is not much more I can say for you to understand how poorly this movie was viewed from the perspective of a fan who really enjoyed the wonder factor of the original series. A simple sci-fi show created by artists, that in every description I read about its making are described as being genius.”

It would appear that my own understanding was called into question here by another poster, someone who had not properly read or understood what Bob Orci had actually said, re his first viewing of TWOK and Khan. This poster also figured that he had some special capacity because he could view STID from “the perspective of a fan who really enjoyed the wonder factor…” Oh really? His comment above reads like ignorant, dumb snottery.

PaulB – Your comments have not helped make me feel any better.

Perhaps we are being indulged by Bob in the latest slang used against people who annoy or don’t agree with you. At least, it’s not the “F”-bomb or the “MF” word. One should feel grateful for Bob’s tender mercies…:)

BTW, Bob Orci, what’s crack? I can’t remember or be bothered googling it…I mean, you started using the term…gotta love you…:)!

323. section9 - June 26, 2013

@boborci

The great thing about icing up Cumberbatch is that Section31 can always bring him and his gang of Ubermenschen out of deep freeze to wreak havoc on an unsuspecting Federation.

Benedict is a supremely gifted actor. The only thing you would need to do is to explain the difference between him and the “historic” Khan (Section31 surgery, whatever) to answer the “whitewashing” charges and the unwillingness to use Bollywood talent.

Benedict left cinemagoers wanting more Benedict, though. That’s always a win.

324. chrisfawkes.com - June 26, 2013

Having Khan was not a smart idea.

Three Wrath of Khan movies in a row.

Ok I enjoyed the movie bit I wish the story could move on to something else.

The big question is that now TWOK is off the table do these guys have a story they can tell?

325. Keachick - rose pinenut - June 26, 2013

#319 – Well said, LogicalLeopard

A crackpot? Someone who likes crack and pot?

Yes, I wonder – is the real Bob Orci? I hope so. I like it when he gets talkative. What about answering the question about 23rd century warp core radiation and medicine. It’s late and I need an answer. OK – Bob – you have till dawn…

326. Keachick - rose pinenut - June 26, 2013

#322 – Harrison/Khan could be a shapeshifter a la Fringe or spending 200-300 years in cryostasis actually destroys the skin pigmentation, rendering anyone’s skin (irrespective of racial origin) pasty white. How do we know that this may not occur?

Someone on another site, I think, referred to this Khan as being a British albino. Not correct. He is not albino.

327. Aurore - June 26, 2013

@ 305

Regarding your suggestion to me, upthread ( @ 230 ) :

“Oh, I thought I was being clear. I believe there is scant evidence to support the contention and doubt any evidence of claims that he recently didn’t know will be produced. So, I suppose I’m saying ‘Don’t hold you breath.’”
__________

…However, since a fellow poster had made a very specific claim twice on these boards, the second time he did, I asked for a link ; you have to give people the benefit of the doubt. Or at least, I try to.

Besides, that is exactly what I had done the last time a similar situation had occurred.

Luckily, at the time, Mr. Orci had eventually taken the time to comment on what was being said (just like he did…recently, “here”) .

The situation was clarified, and, everybody (me) was happy!

:))

328. Phil - June 26, 2013

Pretty impressed at the number of people who decry the lack of originality from the writing, then in the same breath demand the next movie must have (_____________) insert name of favorite known Trek bad guy here.

Yeah, right……

329. SpockOut - June 26, 2013

For all the JJ Abrams haters…This film made more than the 2009 feature. I think people have already voted with their wallets. Star Trek is actually exciting to watch again, utilizing today’s technology. Reading the responses to these threads is the only negative aspect of the new films. I’m curious if they would be as negative if the original films were being released today. Is it a generational thing – (I’m emo and must hate on anything?) Are there any happy people out there these days? Jeez – this film was eye candy and the story fun IMO.

330. LogicalLeopard - June 26, 2013

324. Keachick – rose pinenut – June 26, 2013
#319 – Well said, LogicalLeopard

A crackpot? Someone who likes crack and pot?

Yes, I wonder – is the real Bob Orci? I hope so. I like it when he gets talkative. What about answering the question about 23rd century warp core radiation and medicine. It’s late and I need an answer. OK – Bob – you have till dawn…

******************************************

Crack and pot? *LOL* I didn’t think of it that way. I think it’s the real Bob Orci, because I’ve seen the mods point out on at least one occasion when it wasnt. But it was obvious that it wasn’t in that case, I believe. However, the fact that it’s actually Orci has been confirmed by Anthony here, and I think I’ve even seen it referred to in other press outside of this website. It’s actually kind of interesting, because people in the film industry don’t exactly come onto forums like this as equals. It’s usually a moderated Q&A of some sort, or some otherwise “pressy” function.

Actually, it’s kind of refreshing to see him accuse people of being drunk and on crack *LOL* The reason why I say that is this: Like PaulB was getting at, that’s not the sort of things a professional says, or a person in the spotlight says to fans. But it IS the sort of thing a bulletin board poster says to another bulletin board poster. So it’s like he doesn’t even acknowledge the fact that he’s a movie professional, he comes across more as a fan and Average Joe. That’s refreshing. Not accusing people of drug abuse *LOL* but the fact that he acts the same way many of us do *L*

There’s a story coming out last night, where New York Yankees player Alex Rodriguez tweets something about being cleared to play games. Rodriguez is not the most liked of players, is making a TON of money, and will probably be soon suspended because of his connections to a steroid lab. It’s no question in anyone’s minds that the Yankees are sick of him, and would like to get rid of him and the bad contract they agreed to with him years back.

But General Manager Brian Cashman hears about his tweet, and tells a reporter,”You know what, when the Yankees want to announce something, [we will], “Alex should just shut the f— up. That’s it. I’m going to call Alex now.”

WILDLY unprofessional, ESPECIALLY considering that this isn’t some front office goon, or someone off the record, this is the GENERAL MANAGER of the team. *LOL* But I bet a lot of people found that refreshing. We know what he must be thinking, but he actually came out and said it. Unbelievable. So, when Bob goes off on people, it’s kind of funny in the same way.

331. LogicalLeopard - June 26, 2013

328. SpockOut – June 26, 2013

Is it a generational thing – (I’m emo and must hate on anything?) Are there any happy people out there these days? Jeez – this film was eye candy and the story fun IMO.

****************************************

*LOL* I think it’s a generational thing, but in a different way. Because it’s not what they’re used to, people aren’t accepting of it. But then again, you know what? I can’t argue with people saying that it’s different. It is a little different. Not just the effects, but the tone is more modern. The humor is more modern. I don’t know why, but all morning I’ve been thinking about the “I just want to rip his bangs off” line, and cracking up to myself. I didn’t think it was as funny the first time I heard it, but it’s grown funnier every time I hear it or think it. *LOL* Never would have worked with Shatner and Nimoy, but it works great with Pine and…..*LOLOL* I’m sorry, I can’t even remember NuSpocks’s name…I’m laughing so hard….I’m starting to tear up. It’s not even all that funny, but it’s hilarious! I’m going to try to use it at LEAST ONCE at work today *LOL*

332. LogicalLeopard - June 26, 2013

Grr……Orci comes around here…..calling people drunkards and crack heads, undermining our rights as fans….I just….I just wanna RIP his bangs off!!!!

*LOLOLOLOLOLOL*

Oh my stars, what’s wrong with me? I LOVE THAT LINE!!! I didn’t think I was going to go see the movie again in the theatres after seeing it twice, but I think I need to go back again. Preferably at the drive in, so my laughter wont disturb everyone else.

333. LogicalLeopard - June 26, 2013

Okay, I just watched it again. Not as funny as it was in my head, but still funny. I’m struck once again by Pine’s tremendous acting. Excellently delivered line, love how you can see on his face that after he calls Spock, “Your boyfriend” that he realizes it’s totally inappropriate. Also love the fact that, he’s still so mad that he confesses to rip the bangs off of his first officer to a junior officer who also happens to be the girlfriend of his first officer *LOL*

I need to stop watching this. It’s getting funnier and funnier as I watch. Eventually it’ll be as funny as it was in my head.

334. the dude - June 26, 2013

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Bg6I4IGK1I8/Ucm6AXuwcVI/AAAAAAAASj0/ys3kDtZRk2c/s1600/Hasbro+Star+Trek+Into+Darkness+Kre-O+USS+Vengeance+box.jpg

anyone besides me want this??

335. Other Guy - June 26, 2013

Hat Rick does!

He’s young enough to appreciate that. : 0 ; p

336. Aurore - June 26, 2013

When I discovered the show ( TOS ), I could see it was not a recent one, and, believed that some of the choices made, castingwise, storywise were bold, really meaningful ones, for the time.

As such, The Original Series seemed truly unique, to me.

What is there left to say for the franchise nowadays, if for fear of demonising some people, a character considered to be iconic by many ; one of its “greatest” villains ( if not the greatest to some ), has to undergo a change in ethnicity in order not to offend audiences?

I wonder what could make the Star Trek franchise stand out, in a relevant way, from other science fiction franchises now, if the powers that be become scared to take risks some of their predecessors in the 1960′s appeared to be willing to take.

In fact, I am curious to see what kind of challenging tales the Star Trek franchise will be able to produce while being able to appeal to audiences around the world (for I want it to remain entertaining, too), in the future…

337. Horatio - June 26, 2013

@316 – If you actually believe Spock assassinating JFK is a better story for a film than STID, then we exist in separate realities.

I believe I made my statement earlier in this thread as to why a Klingon war would be a good film. First, Second and last, ITS NEVER BEEN DONE.

You seem to have given sainthood to GR. It took lots of people, not just GR to bring Star Trek to life. Herb Solow, DC Fontana, Gene Coon just to name a very few, guided GR’s idea in its infancy into the franchise it is today.

IDIC, man. Peace out.

338. steve - June 26, 2013

From the Orci/Kurtzman interview:

“For us, the exciting idea was…we’d freed ourselves, so how can we do the things we know but in a new way?”

That one statement to me epitomizes everything that went wrong with STiD. For the life of me, I can’t understand any logic that starts from a point that says, “we’ve freed ourselves”, and ends up at a point that says let’s do a previous story again (but in a “new way”…)

I’ve read the various interviews given by the creative team, and it seems like this decision was driven less by Orci than by others.

As of Monday, it looks like STiD has topped ST09 by about $12M after adjusting for inflation. We’ll never know exactly how much more or less profitable the new film was over ST09, given that STiD reportedly had a much bigger marketing budget, and studios are loathe to discuss their costs. But now that it looks like the film doesn’t have any major foreign openings remaining, the one thing we can say is that financially STiD will not be the mega-hit that Paramount was hoping for.

I’m not trying to be an STiD basher. I thought ST09 was the best Trek movie ever made, definitely better than WoK. Which is probably the main reason why I thought STiD was such a letdown. I just wanted something new.

339. Other Guy - June 26, 2013

Boborci.

What I really to discuss is how this movie gets a free pass and avoids the bad stigma and media demonization of the whole “911 was an inside job conspiracy.”

340. Tom - June 26, 2013

Glad Bob Orci is back here.

Loaded questions for Mr. Orci

If scheduling is the issue between Paramount and the team, which projects would take precedence over a 50th anniversary Star Trek Movie?

Was there any thought given to blocking out some time knowing that the studio would most likely want a movie out in that time frame?

If you were to get signed on would you consider waxing nostalgic and using the remaining Original Cast in some way?

Hope it all works out and you get the gig Bob! Trek Lives

341. Platitude - June 26, 2013

Micheal Dorn reprising his role as Colonel Worf from STVI in ST3! It came to me in a vision! Or on the toliet, one of the two.

342. Red Dead Ryan - June 26, 2013

I like Boborci’s politically incorrect way of dealing with the idiots on this thread. He tells it like it is!

The Talifans need to get out of their caves and get some fresh air for once!

343. Red Dead Ryan - June 26, 2013

#341.

“Micheal Dorn reprising his role as Colonel Worf from STVI in ST3! It came to me in a vision! Or on the toliet, one of the two.”

Most likely from the toilet. Which is fitting, given your crap idea. I think you breathed in too much of your own fumes!

:-)

344. Hugh Hoyland - June 26, 2013

“281. boborci – June 25, 2013
158. Hugh Hoyland – June 25, 2013
Bob, any word on the sequel as far as you guys writing it goes?

=======

Talking to Paramount about it. Would both love it to work. We’ll see.”

I sure hope so Bob, you guys have done a great job so far IMO. Would hate to see the continuity disrupted by a new writer(s).

345. Yanks - June 26, 2013

It seems we might have the audience of boborci so…

In my opinion you guys are missing the boat.

You played the standard reboot theme of taking literary license with past production to the point of “WTF”.

Spock is still Spock. Nero’s incursion shouldn’t change that. Uhura shouldn’t change that. (Oh, if it’s not painfully obvious now, the Spock/Uhura thing needs to stop.) Spock was completely out of character at the end of the movie (in either timeline).

I understand the need to give Uhura more, but please don’t do it at the expense of McCoy. He’s too important here. He’s much more than a few lines here and there.

Star Trek isn’t Batman, or The Hulk, or Star Wars. It’s not a place to “play”. Star Trek has always been more than those.

And now it’s not – in this incarnation.

Our crew is assembled and they’ve been through hell a couple times. Let’s use our imagination and create something fresh and new, something we can dream about, something positive, an optimistic future for humanity.

Pop-corn block-buster with lots of action – sure. But it also has to be a “Star Trek” movie. Make it “Trek” and you will be heralded. I want to take my kids to the next movie and I want them to learn something about life and humanity without seeing someone squeeze someone’s head until it bursts.

I was ready to put this movie at the top of all Star Trek movies until the ending. We knew Kirk was not going to die, and you tried to capitalize on a relationship that hasn’t matured yet. We all gave you a pass with the first movie. ST09’s story was a 25 year revenge story that didn’t make any sense with “science” that was completely out to lunch (did you even try?); but that was OK because our wonderfully cast crew was now assembled and new adventures lay ahead.

What did we get?… a Khan reveal that was meaningless to the plot or to anyone watching and a rip-off reversal of a classic Trek ending with an out of control Spock in a sparring match needing Uhura to pelt Khan with shot after shot to subdue him. All done on Earth, which our Spock would not have let happen.

I really appreciate what you guys bring to the table and the table is set. Please give us something new.

Thank you.

346. boborci - June 26, 2013

340. Tom

nothing would take precedence ofver Trek coming out on 50th Anniversary!

347. Hugh Hoyland - June 26, 2013

@346 Boborci

Bob another question. If you get the gig do you have any ideas already in place for the sequel? Or would you be starting from scratch?

348. boborci - June 26, 2013

339 otherguy

not my problem.

id rather hear discussion about how the mainstream media could get a free oass for ignoring one of the biggest story of our lifetime and totally give that adminnistration a pass when it didnt tell the truth on almost any issue.

349. Curious Cadet - June 26, 2013

@338. steve,
“We’ll never know exactly how much more or less profitable the new film was over ST09, given that STiD reportedly had a much bigger marketing budget, and studios are loathe to discuss their costs. But now that it looks like the film doesn’t have any major foreign openings remaining, the one thing we can say is that financially STiD will not be the mega-hit that Paramount was hoping for.”

Well, all of this is wrong.

It’s obvious the domestic marketing budget was about the same.
Paramount is on record they spent 35% more internationally, and the box office results have more than justified that.
As for foreign openings it has two major ones left — Spain in July and Japan in August, which could net another $15-25 million alone.
As for the mega-hit they were hoping for … Well it for sure underperformed in the US. But international was a major victory for the franchise, and puts it in the place it needs to be to build on it. Foreign should be at least double domestic (to mirror other tent pole blockbusters), and with the right film and marketing campaign that should be within the realm of possibility. The main thing is they have more than doubled their previous international box office and have laid a solid foundation upon which to build. But I don’t think there is any evidence Paramount thought Star Trek would ever do as well as Iron Man, at this point. Maybe they were hoping for $600 million, but they are more than happy with the current numbers — this film will still earn a tidy profit once all the ancillary income is in.

350. Disinvited - June 26, 2013

#317. Toonloon – June 26, 2013

I think you may find some for NEMESIS in which Shinzon is holding some sort of blade weapon menacingly. I personally haven’t seen any STID posters with guns but if they exist then you would be right.
.
There were large pictures distributed by the series’ backers to promote it very early on in the 60s. I recall NBC/Desilu distributing pictures of Shatner as Kirk holding the Gary-killer rifle in a few different poses; one of which I’d describe as potentially appearing menacing but seemed more defensive to me. But again, you were looking for “guns”, the plural form, and that ain’t it either.

351. Phil - June 26, 2013

Kirk has a phaser in hand in TWOK poster…

352. Phil - June 26, 2013

@349. There was a blurb in the news that Disney has spent $150 MM marketing TLR worldwide, and the commentary there was that that was a high number relative to other movies. Anecdotally, it’s probably safe to assume Paramount was in the 100MM range for STID. Some folks continue to speculate that 400-500MM is the break even point for STID, and I suspect all they are doing is grabbing at random numbers….

353. Other Guy - June 26, 2013

348. boborci – June 26, 2013

“not my problem”

Not your problem? You were never questioned about it!!! And, you never said anything about it, till now!! And I had to pry it out of this board through the gnashing of so many other ZOMBIE-Trekkies here. Not your problem? I think you have avoided mention much of the true intentions of the Story until now. Why? And please answer my question…

Who came up with this story concept for a Star Trek movie?

You tell us that it IS actually an allegory on the Bush administration’s conducting a False Flag operation, and then its never brought up in any of the press junkets? The press and media NEVER made it an issue? They have demonized everyone else who may have had an interest in exploring that Inside Job angle – INCLUDING a certain republican Congressman who recently ran for president – RON PAUL.
You know he was demonized for saying he had doubts of the perpetrators too! And now here we are with our current situation with dumbo.

Status Quo.

Remember, Bob, You, OR SOMEONE, whom you have not revealed, have conspired to bring this all up in the name of a Star Trek movie!

If you guys really had the guts to address the issue honestly and forthright, then the plot of the last movie should have been about going back to 2001, to stop Marcus/Bush or whomever you think was responsible for the deadly deeds that day and to also save all those lives and perhaps prevent another 100 year war.

354. Disinvited - June 26, 2013

#351. Phil – June 26, 2013

Good catch.

355. the dude - June 26, 2013

@ boborci

On a side note from all the hate comments. I LOVED STID SO MUCH. Yes there were some plot points I questioned but I really enjoyed (saw it three times in theaters). I have been a tekkie all 17 years of my life, I was weaned on it. I know alot of people are getting hurt that you ‘got ride of 50 years of cannon’ but really in my opinion you improved. I really enjoy where you are taking the series and I look forward to the next film.
Thanks for bringing trek back!

356. LogicalLeopard - June 26, 2013

338. steve – June 26, 2013
From the Orci/Kurtzman interview:

“For us, the exciting idea was…we’d freed ourselves, so how can we do the things we know but in a new way?”

That one statement to me epitomizes everything that went wrong with STiD. For the life of me, I can’t understand any logic that starts from a point that says, “we’ve freed ourselves”, and ends up at a point that says let’s do a previous story again (but in a “new way”…)
*************************************************************

Really? I totally get it. First of all, if you do a TOS movie that’s a “remake”, you are bound by certain laws. Yes, you can make totally new movies that happen “in between” the original episodes/movies, but those episodes HAVE to happen AS they happened. You can’t do anything different. You can’t even make the ship look any different.

But once you free yourself in the way that they did, now you have an alternate universe, and you’re free. And although “new adventures” may call to you….really, it’s the old ones that call the loudest *L* “Wouldn’t it be cool if Space Seed happened THIS way? Wouldn’t it be cool if Bread and Circuses happened THIS way?” These are the stories you already love, and it’s an irresistable chance to retell them in a different way. The same players from TOS are still out there, Trelane, Apollo, that freaky baby Clint Howard played, etc. I imagine for a writer, it’s sort of irresistable to go through the “toybox” and make some new stories. Just like you do with action figures as a kid.
“Luuuukee…I’m your father. Haha, just kidding! *slash* DIEEEEEE!!!!” And I don’t think it’s really debatable that the best “toy” in the Star Trek toybox is Khan. Who else comes close? Chang? I have a feeling he’s in the next movie.

But you’re right. I think it let down a good number of fans because they wanted something new. I think it put itself in a bad position fanwise, because it’s going to be compared directly to TWOK, and even though it may be BETTER in many respects, no one is going to look at that objectively. Is Benedict Cumberbatch’s ominous, deep voiced Khan than Ricardo Montalban’s Khan? Probably so, but pick any line in STID that was excellently delivered by Cumberbatch, and compare it to “Buried alive….alive….alive.” We grew up with that, we LOVE that. Doesn’t matter if one is technically better, one has had 20 odd years to grow on us.

But I was okay with Khan in this one. I regret not seeing more of him. I’m okay with the parallel scene. Redoing the scene was really where I became emotionally invested in the movie. When Scotty, Kirk, and Chekov are down in Engineering, I was thinking, “Oh man, there’s three of them…it’s happening. Who is it going to be?” Then I see it’s Kirk, and there’s a disbelief. And I see him dying, and on one hand I’m thinking technically: “Well, how are they going to bring him back? There’s no Genesis planet? They seriously aren’t going to kill Kirk of all people, right? He’s contracted” and the other part of me is right there in the moment, thinking: “Oh man….this kid is dying, and he thinks he’s totally worthless and irrelevant as a Captain. And he’s going to die like that. Not thinking he’s a hero, but thinking, ‘Well, crap, I’m useless, so I might as well die for something’ ” So, I’m RIGHT there emotionally. When he says I’m scared, it was just heartbreaking. I started thinking, “Man, if I hear bagpipes, I’m going to start bawling.”

When I think of it, they played that one pretty well. If you soak in the whole movie, and Kirk’s arc, you really feel sorry for him. And you feel especially sorry for him because in one life, he was a hero who accomplished so much throughout a long career. And in the other one, he was a poor shlub who couldn’t keep his mouth shut, his pants shut, and stood on the cusp of greatness but never was able to make it over. Like a lot of people in life. Like that guy from high school that never got his act together. Had scholarships to play ball in college, or even academic scholarships, and wraps his car around a telephone pole drunk one night, or OD’s. The writers deserve kudos for that.

357. Phil - June 26, 2013

@353. Prozac, buddy, and soon. Mr. Orci is nice enough to come here and chat, has shared some insight to his worldview, and there has been spirited debate. I’ve seen posters challenge him, but I don’t recall anyone demanding answers from him. Until now. Lighten up, buddy, this is first and foremost a Trek site, any allegory to current events is open to interpretation. If you can’t accept opinion for what it is, perhaps one of those truther websites would be more to your liking…..

358. LogicalLeopard - June 26, 2013

353. Other Guy – June 26, 2013

Hey, did you have the same problem with STVI when it came out? I mean, that was pretty obviously about the Cold War, but I don’t remember anyone ranting about Gorby and Reagan’s specific policies. It’s an allegory of current events, much like TOS did on a regular basis. It’s not an Oliver Stone movie.

359. Silvereyes - June 26, 2013

@ 353 Other Guy

You need to take a pill and lie down

360. Curious Cadet - June 26, 2013

@351. Phil,
“Kirk has a phaser in hand in TWOK poster…”

FWIW, not in the original theatrical poster. That one depicts David Marcus holding a knife to Kirk’s throat however.

@352. Phil,
“Some folks continue to speculate that 400-500MM is the break even point for STID, and I suspect all they are doing is grabbing at random numbers….”

Obviously that’s based on the well established practice of doubling the box office figures. $380 million (190×2) for the production budget, $120 million (60×2) for the marketing, advertising and distribution — so $500. The wild card here is exactly how much the marketing budget is. It seems like it was probably closer to $100 million, rather than a typical movie’s $60 million, in which case it would have to earn $580 million using the simple 2xBO estimate (which is likewise a pretty rough guess). The reality is Paramount gets to keep the majority of the profits earned on home video, PPV & broadcast licenses. So it will recoup much more quickly after it leaves the box office and be well into profit by the time it hits PPV.

361. Jack - June 26, 2013

STID wasn’t an allegory, it was a series of tweets.

Yes, America went nuts after 9/11. And 13 years later this now gets discussed, a lot. It’s fueled many a movie in the last half-decade. People like Art Spiegelman talked about it when it was fresh — and they were battered by pop culture. Now pop culture loves the “war is bad!” riff again.

But I don’t think Trek 2013 says anything interesting, or new, about any of this. In fact, I’d argue it defends the overreaction (“Wanting revenge is human, folks. And after you get your ass handed to you and countless people killed while trying to get revenge, you’ll see that revenge is wrong! And you’ll get rewarded with a five-year-mission!!”).

This is why I think it’s problematic to work allegories into Trek, or into anything — because, rabid fans’ opinions aside — good allegories are rare. Most of Trek’s were horrid. Instead, allegorical movies and shows usually just reference events (look, it’s Cheney after 9/11, 13 years ago) without saying anything. There’s no debate, there’s no getting the audience thinking. We just get a black and white Captain Planet morality play. The point is obvious from the get-go.

Whether writers do this from laziness, or ineptitude, or both — I’m not sure.

Instead tell a good story, explore ideas if teh caharcetrs are facing them,, and make the characters live and breathe.

The Purge doesn’t really work. But it does bring up some interesting ideas. It doesn’t do enough with them. But it goes beyond referencing current events. It shows the obvious conclusion to some of the craziness in American culture and politics. It does so clumsily. Clunkily. But it has clever moments. It raises far more interesting discussion than STID ever could.

STID told us a lot. But it didn’t show much. And, ultimately, it kind of did suggest that “might is right.”

New writers for the next Trek, please.

362. Vultan - June 26, 2013

#359

“STID wasn’t an allegory, it was a series of tweets.”

Ha, very good, Jack.

363. Curious Cadet - June 26, 2013

MORE^^^^^

So, if it takes $380 to recoup the production costs, STID is already in the black. But it still has to recoup marketing costs of $100 million. So to smplify let’s say the home video will take care of that (ST09 domestic DVD sales are currently $102 million). So everything above $380 at the BO is profit, and everything over $100 million home video is profit — PPV, broadcast, cable, downloads, airlines, etc. So currently STID is sitting at $50 million profit BO, $100 million Home video (assuming international sells domestic equivalent based on similar box office numbers), $54 million broadcast (12% of gross) — that’s already $200 million profit without even counting anything else. So thanks to the huge foreign grosses this time around, even the worst case box office recoupment scenarios put STID well into the black in only 6 months time …

364. HairyTrekker - June 26, 2013

I noticed today is STID’s last day at my local cinema so I thought I’d make a few last comments.

ST2009 was like Batman Begins. It put a new light on an old favourite, audiences loved it. STID was supposed to be Trek’s Dark Knight.

The groundwork was set for Dark Knight by Batman Begins. It gave us Christian Bale and Michael Caine and a Batman closer to the works of Frank Miller and Alan Moore than Bob Kane and Lorenzo Semple Jnr. Clever, witty, intelligent and with an increase in scale and vision that wowed audiences Dark Knight was whole new barra dek schluppen, and that’s what I wanted from STID.

But I didn’t get it.

For me it came down to this.

I sat in the cinema and loved STID, but afterwards little of it made sense or seemed like Trek. It did not bear close examination and sadly, most of Classic Trek does. And that was made on a week in week out basis.

OF STID’s many failings for me the most heinous was finishing a Star Trek movie that I’ve waited four years for with a 20 minute fist fight involving Spock (When does Spock ever have an extended fist fight outside of Pon Farr?).

For me, it shows a complete misunderstanding of the ethos of Trek. The new production team gave us their vision of a big screen Trek for the new millennium and it’s just another popcorn franchise. Unfortunately, that’s the kind of movie they make. They are capable of capturing some of the spirit of the original, but not its intelligence.

I wanted STID to be Dark Knight, instead I got Batman and Robin.

Here’s hoping 2016 will be better.

365. Dswynne - June 26, 2013

@256: the problem with your statement is that you generalize Americans as a monolithic entity. The fact is that Amrricans will always give the leadership of any administration the doubt. It’s why we do not accept the ‘guilty until proven innocent’ notion that the rest of the world embraces. Wr also have a system of government that is self-correcting, which is why those responsible for supporting the Bush 2 Administration are still on the outs with the American. That is what makes the USA exceptional, particularly when compared to most nation states that are either unstable or authoritarian. Besides, the US is only 200+ years old. It is entitled to learn from its mistakes.

366. Vultan - June 26, 2013

I finally got around to watching the Robert Downey Jr. Sherlock Holmes movies recently. Not bad. More brainy than I was expecting. And I was impressed with the sequel’s climax—two men playing chess!

I wonder what a Guy Ritchie Star Trek would look like… though I could do without the slow-mo Matrix stuff. That’s kind of getting old.

367. Phil - June 26, 2013

@364. I’ve mentioned Guy Ritchie and Game of Shadows as possible sources of inspiration for the next installment of Trek to draw on. The movies have been smart action flicks, with interesting and intriguing characters. It can be done for Trek as well….

368. Jeyl - June 26, 2013

287. boborci – “You are high on crack if you think I’m going to walk around “embarrassed” by the two Treks we just made.”

You’ve got to have dignity in order to feel embarrassed, and since you’re working with a team that seems to assume that a woman’s role in Star Trek is 1/3 the importance of a male character’s role, it’s not hard to see why you wouldn’t feel embarrassed over anything.

369. Stephan - June 26, 2013

@boborci:

Hello bob,

we had an interesting discussion about the revenge motive of Spock in the last thread. Now that you are back again and we have a more neatly arranged thread, maybe I can repost my initial question to you:

Hey Bob,

first I have to thank you for this wonderful trek movie. After the trailers I was not expecting a movie with so much “trek – philosophy” in it. I think when it comes to the topic of revenge you made everything right this time what i didn’t like so much in the “almost perfect” trek 09.

I have one question about spock nearly killing khan in the end. Is it right that the only reason he didn’t kill him, was that he knew he could only save his friend if Khan was alife? And was that the only reason the enterprise crew tried to stop him killing khan? I mean, I understand that he was in furious rage about Kirks death but doesn’t that contradict the message of the movie about revenge stated before? Wouldn’t have Spock acted just like Khan who killed Marcus out of revenge? Wouldn’t it have been better if Spock refused to kill Khan because he is better and not because he could save Kirk?

Don’t get me wrong, I love the messages of the movie and this is just a small thing but I am not quite sure how you meant that scene.

Thank you.

My girlfriend said after the movie, that now she knows what I love about trek and that I am not a freak. ;)

370. SpockOut - June 26, 2013

I think Bob Orci has been smoking crack with Oliver Stone…lol.

Regime change in Iraq was part of Mr. Clinton’s foreign policy as well. WND’s was one reason out of many. Their using WND’s on their own people on a large scale did kind of make it hard to believe they had disarmed in that area. It’s easy to call it bunk after the fact :)

The Klingons according to your own story had grown aggressive. Admiral Marcus acting alone doesn’t seem possible. There has to be political and business men behind the scenes to finance those kind of projects. Maybe attacking the Klingons with a pre emptive attack wouldn’t be such a bad thing. Admiral Marcus acting out alone didn’t make sense but it’s a movie so what the hell.

No worries…I liked the movie and hope everyone stays on board for more :-)

371. Keachick - rose pinenut - June 26, 2013

#363 – “The fact is that Americans will always give the leadership of any administration the doubt. It’s why we do not accept the ‘guilty until proven innocent’ notion that the rest of the world embraces.”

I assume you mean “…leadership of any administration THE BENEFIT of the doubt…”?

It’s funny, but for some reason I kept reading the words ‘innocent until proven guilty’ in your post, then realized that it was as you wrote it. Actually some parts of the rest of the world do not embrace the opposite. They also embrace “innocent until proven guilty”, which is one of the reasons why US allies were warning the Bush administration against going into Iraq. There simply was not enough empirical evidence to prove that Iraq/Saddam Hussein did actually have WMDs as US Intelligence Agencies were claiming.

Other Guy – Why should you expect answers from Bob Orci, after you misquoted him and were a bit rude to him (and me)? Get in line – lots of people have questions about the movie – the whys, the wherefores of whatever.

People see what they can, need, want to from any movie.

Jack – “But I don’t think Trek 2013 says anything interesting, or new, about any of this. In fact, I’d argue it defends the overreaction (“Wanting revenge is human, folks. And after you get your ass handed to you and countless people killed while trying to get revenge, you’ll see that revenge is wrong! And you’ll get rewarded with a five-year-mission!!”).”

Huh? You see going on a five year mission of exploration into a (dangerous?) unknown as a reward? I guess that is one way of looking at it. I see it as a sign of a change of heart and direction and the fact that “nature abhors a vacuum”. Venturing into a more peaceful way of conducting oneself/a society requires as much energy – in terms of goodwill, persistence, patience, equanimity, generosity of spirit and time, courage etc – as performing acts of vengeance, if not more.

That’s what the speech Kirk gave at the end of the movie was about and it is fitting that the Kirk character should be the one to say it, along with the TOS mission statement.

Stop comparing STID with Batman/Dark Knight movies and others. It is tiring and stupid.

372. Keachick - rose pinenut - June 26, 2013

#366 – I doubt Bob Orci would dignify that with any comment, but it would be cool if he did.

Jeyl was the person who kept referring to Lt Uhura and the actress who played her, Zoe Saldana, as a whore. Jeyl knows all about *dignity*.

Ewww

373. The Great Bird Lives - June 26, 2013

@Bob, and Alex, I must concur with my fellow posters- including Levar Burton. Let’s be on the level, and all agree that the prime motivator for the franchise has, and always will be ‘money’. Even Gene knew what a gift horse it was, and could be, and even cashed in on it, himself- but Gene would never sacrifice the integrity of the show. That is the difference between J.J.’s re-imagining, and the prime- biblical format- created by Gene.
This is NOT your property, and what you have done, and apparently PLAN on doing, is changing the fundamental structure of what Star Trek really is. Sure- It’s nice to see a shoot’em up once in awhile but you see that in every franchise that’s out there. Star Trek IS, and ever should be different because it represents the scientific, humanitarian, and exploratory aspects of our human nature. It is now become angry, and vengeful, while trying to hang on to the moralistic variable that made it successful. Talk about cashing in….
I hope the leadership at Paramount/CBS puts a stop to this blatant disregard for what the TRUE FORMAT of Star Trek really is.
Great story, awesome effects- but is it Star Trek? Nice try, but no cigar. At least you should be able to afford yourself some nice Cubans with the fat paycheck you got from selling out the fans!

374. Mr Mike - June 26, 2013

Has CBS really been standing in the way of what Paramount and Bad Robot wanted to do with Star Trek?

375. boborci - June 26, 2013

373. if all I wanted was money, I would’ve stayed on the Transformers franchise istead of taking a chance by trying to revive Trek, which most thought was impossible and ill advised. Your basic assumptions are flawed.

376. boborci - June 26, 2013

353. You seem incapable of asking a direct question. You want to me to speculate about why the lame stream media didn’t ask good questions? Is that what you are asking?

I have always said only what is filmed is canon.

377. Barney Fife - June 26, 2013

Bob Orci,
And I thank you and your cohorts for reviving Trek! Keep the movies coming and throw in a live action Star Trek TV series while you’re at it!

378. boborci - June 26, 2013

368. Lame rhetoric.

I get equal blame for elevating Uhura over Bones. And I think you underestimate the importance of the women in this movie in relation to the success of the movie.

379. The Keeper - June 26, 2013

FX-Congratulations on capturing high profile and earning films for your programing.

LeVar Burton : Shut up, who cares what you have to say. Please get a job at a deli or second class restaurant and spend the est of your life spreading spam.

Bryan Burk: Huh? You edit a movie to tell a story that flows regardless if your a fan of Star Trek or not. The best episodes of Star Trek were those that had unique editing styles out side the box of the ho-hum TV production.

Orci and Kurtzman : You understand the characters. You know your Trek histories and how to create twist and clever dialogue between characters,
Unfortunately you guys lack real creative story concepts and ideas, that’s why you convinced yourselves retelling Khan in a new way would be great. It wasn’t. So please step down and have TPTB hire a couple of true known scifi writers.

380. Vultan - June 26, 2013

#378

Yes, women in their underwear can bring in the crowds!
I kid… I kid…

381. ObiWanCon - June 26, 2013

Mr Orci, can you confirm what Chris Pine has said in an interview about him being signed for another two Star Trek movies.

382. boborci - June 26, 2013

381. No. Have not looked at his contract, but I assume he would not lie!

383. Jonboc - June 26, 2013

#373. “This is NOT your property, and what you have done, and apparently PLAN on doing, is changing the fundamental structure of what Star Trek really is. ”

Baloney.
Wow…someone REALLY needs to rewatch the original series ( you know, the series that the new movies are BASED ON)…and it isn’t Bob Orci.

384. Craiger - June 26, 2013

Bob I still your next movie should be rebooting The Final Countdown.

385. Jonboc - June 26, 2013

#353….what the hell are you blathering on about?? On second thought, I really dont want to know. Movng on.

386. Other Guy - June 26, 2013

My simple question was presented in that post @353.

Who came up with this story concept for a Star Trek movie?

387. Other Guy - June 26, 2013

Sorry. Typo.

My simple question was presented in that post @353.

Who came up with this story concept for this latest Star Trek movie?

388. Jonboc - June 26, 2013

#346. “nothing would take precedence ofver Trek coming out on 50th Anniversary!”

I’m grokking that, Bob Orci!!

389. Phil - June 26, 2013

@387. Go look it up.

390. P Technobabble - June 26, 2013

It’s nice to see Mr Orci return here. All of his critics should feel pretty honored that he takes the time to respond to them.
I think it is very easy to criticize because we are (and have been) brought up into a culture that gets off on pointing at things and saying “that sucks.” It implies an attitude of (self-presumed) superiority. Critics always speak from the position that they are right, even when their position may be flawed or completely uninformed. It’s all about being able to say “gotcha!”
In the past many here have told the critics “let’s see your work!” OK, I’m waiting…

391. MJ (The Original). - June 26, 2013

“It’s nice to see Mr Orci return here. All of his critics should feel pretty honored that he takes the time to respond to them.
I think it is very easy to criticize because we are (and have been) brought up into a culture that gets off on pointing at things and saying “that sucks.” It implies an attitude of (self-presumed) superiority. Critics always speak from the position that they are right, even when their position may be flawed or completely uninformed. It’s all about being able to say “gotcha!”
In the past many here have told the critics “let’s see your work!” OK, I’m waiting…”

Well said — outstanding post!!!

392. Bob Mack - June 26, 2013

I also appreciate Bob Orci coming by and spending time here. I’m sure he has plenty of other options to keep him busy.

But … I don’t get all this talk about being “free” from canon. I think much of the “homage” has been handled very well but can we get on with some new material? The Star Trek team literary-ily have the entire universe at their doorsteps and we keep coming back to the same stuff!

393. Hat Rick - June 26, 2013

I respect Mr. Orci as a writer. I feel he has depth and knows his stuff.

I’m amazed that various posters here take offense that either and/or both the current and the previous U.S. Administrations have been criticized by implication by STID in their questionable foreign policies against insurgents.

Frankly, I am very disappointed in the current Administration because I believe it has taken the easy way out. I believe that both Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama have thrown away the opportunity to take the high road relative to the war against terror. Much of the good will engendered by the horrific 9/11 attacks were needlessly squandered by President Bush, and the course of the so-called Global War On Terror (GWOT) has made America a paranoid nation from a foreign policy standpoint. President Obama has failed to reverse a very dangerous course of action and in fact contributed to the overemphasis of statecraft on alleged threats to the United States.

Make no mistake about it: Both Presidents have probably prevented many attacks upon U.S. territory. But the question is the cost. Why must we, as a country, give in to fear of terror, when THAT IS PRECISELY WHAT THE TERRORISTS WANT?

FDR said it best: There is NOTHING to fear, but fear itself.

We cannot afford to continue the course of paranoia that terminates with extreme prejudice, that uses mechanized warfare of dubious constitutional provenance, that makes a sheer MOCKERY of our professed love of liberty.

What the writers of STID have done is to say, expressly, what many of us on the left, right, and center have said: Time to stop being afraid, and start being bold. We must boldly go where no one has gone before — not fearfully destroy lest we be destroyed. The time for the state as a national security penetentiary has long passed. We must challenge our leaders to let the sunlight of transparency pierce the shroud of secrecy that surrounds the apparati of the apparatchik.

STID is a clarion call to America to resume its role as a beacon, lest its light be submerged in the night of terror — a terror playing into its hands of its worst enemies.

394. Dean-O - June 26, 2013

Of course LeVar is right. STID is all action, minus the philosophical aspect of the originals. I’m not sure the current general population wants to see a Star Trek movie with a deep plot. It’s all bells & whistles blaring at break-neck speed today, and that’s all well and fine… but I want more. The new movies are the best, visually speaking — but Why not make a movie that appreciates a well-paced narrative in which suspense can naturally grow, a smart plot that tries to stay within believable bounds regarding the science and has a real heart that “gets” what Star Trek is all about, and introduces some unique ideas with new characters and villains we’ve never heard of before? That and with the same level of visual excitement and energy these new movies have? yeah, that’s be nice. Meh… probably too tall of an order.

395. MJ (The Original). - June 26, 2013

373. The Great Bird Lives – June 26, 2013

Nope. He died years ago. Duh!

396. Vultan - June 26, 2013

#393

Well put. I appreciated the attempt to make STID a social commentary, even though I felt the end result was muddled in pop culture/action film geekery. Not a great film, but not terrible either. At least there was an attempt.

On a side note, it’s too bad FDR couldn’t take his own advice. Japanese-Americans were apparently something his administration feared.

397. Devon - June 26, 2013

“Of course LeVar is right.”

No.

“but Why not make a movie that appreciates a well-paced narrative in which suspense can naturally grow, a smart plot that tries to stay within believable bounds regarding the science and has a real heart that “gets” what Star Trek is all about, ”

So basically, you DON’T want it to be a Star Trek movie?

398. Tom - June 26, 2013

346 boborci

Thanks for the reply Bob. Stoked for 2016 and looking forward to what you(hopefully it works out) come up with.

Any thoughts on the original cast for the 50th? Dont miss the opportunity It would be glorious!!

Liking what I hear about Amazing Spider Man as well!!

399. Devon - June 26, 2013

” Even Gene knew what a gift horse it was, and could be, and even cashed in on it, himself- but Gene would never sacrifice the integrity of the show.”

What “integrity?”

“This is NOT your property, and what you have done, ”

Nor is it YOUR property, or Gene Goddenberry’s. It is CBS’s property.

“PLAN on doing, is changing the fundamental structure of what Star Trek really is.” From the stale dying franchise it became to an enjoyable successful entity that it is now? Blasphemy! Let’s get the pitchforks and chase down those witches!

“Star Trek IS, and ever should be different because it represents the scientific, humanitarian, and exploratory aspects of our human nature. ”
&
“I hope the leadership at Paramount/CBS puts a stop to this blatant disregard for what the TRUE FORMAT of Star Trek really is.”

You really are delusional aren’t you?

400. Hat Rick - June 26, 2013

@Vultan (396),

Thanks for your comments. Much appreciated.

Regarding the internment of Japanese-Americans, it stands as a blot in the history of this great nation.

Somewhat relatedly, the idea that the United States is infallible has never been a salutary one. In most eras, the tragedies committed by various authorities, including the indigenous peoples of America, were never fully recognized until much too late. While it is true, for example, that certain commanders were morally repelled by the acts of the government that resulted in the Trail of Tears, for example, there were enough military men who simply followed orders to relocate the Choctaw, Cherokee, Creek, and Seminole nations from their ancestral lands; these men were moved more by love of order, self, and their own racial identity than the plight of the vulnerable whose fate they irrevocably changed.

Nor were the indigenous peoples simply passive victims; many of them tried to defend their land by attacking American whom they saw as invaders. There is true moral ambiguity here, since many of these attacks were in fact vicious and extreme.

Not until the Civil War was there as much intense savagery on both sides during many of these confrontations.

Yet as a nation, we gloss over these things. We make believe that America has always been simon-pure. We believe that we are the land of destiny and hope and freedom. But in doing so we overlook the injustices of the past — and to what end? So that we can make ourselves feel better? So much more superior to others? Are our egos so weak as that?

It takes intellectual honesty and moral rectitude to confront our past, and to face the future with boldness born out of compassion. It takes strength of spirit to face the past as we travel into the future. Our conjoined future as various peoples forged into one nation demands that we make peace with the past — not ignore it, and not pretend that the voices of the dead are forgotten merely because the majority wants it so.

Star Trek, at its best, has been about empowering the powerless, standing up for what is right, and speaking truth to power. This is a large part of what makes it better than any other science franchise in existence. This, if anything, is perhaps the cardinal feature of Gene Roddenberry’s enterprise. We must first unite and conquer our fears, before we can truly conquer the stars.

For who are we to trek among the stars, if our own home is in such disarray?

401. the dude - June 26, 2013

I honestly would love to know who stoops low enough to insult a movie when the writer is on the message board trying to interact with other trekkies.

If you didnt like the movie because is ‘wasnt star trek’ then you are old and need to go away. Honestly you people must have no imagination in life and it must be so sad that you have to go to bed each night knowing that you will lose sleep because ‘oh no its not the trek I grew up with’ (for the record you are old so of course its not going to be the trek you ‘grew up with’)
Besides I met plenty of elderly gentlemen in the theater who were crazy about Into Darkness and they said it was better then the ‘old trek’
Honestly you guys are like China, who previously didn’t want to accept outside in influences because ‘oh no this will change out way of life’
Please get a life…thank you

402. Jeyl - June 26, 2013

378. boborci – “Lame rhetoric”

You had Kirk give a speech regarding how revenge is not what the Federation stands for, but everything the heroes and villains do when they acted on their revenge ended up getting what they wanted in the end. Khan wanted revenge against Marcus, he ends up safe with all of his followers. Kirk wants to hunt down Khan, winds up successfully bringing him to justice. Spock goes after Khan for killing Kirk, he successfully subdues him in order to save Kirk. I don’t think “giving into revenge” was ever a problem for anyone in this film because there weren’t any moments where a character had to step back and say “Whoa, what have I done?” after doing something out of revenge. When Spock learns that Khan needs to be alive in order to save Kirk, he immediately stops trying to kill him and simply knocks him out.

You may call my rhetorical lame, but the real lame rhetoric is in your own movie.

378. boborci – “And I think you underestimate the importance of the women in this movie in relation to the success of the movie.”

And I think you overestimate your writing skills at portraying women as meaningful and important characters. You can go on about how Uhura and Carol helped make your movie a success, but what was the number one thing that fans, blogs and news sites all talked about when it came to the character of Carol Marucs? I don’t think it was that scene where she tried begging her daddy to stop being mean. No, it was that random gratuitous scene where she stripped down to her underwear for no reason at all. If you want to argue about the “importance of women” in your movies, try writing them in a way that doesn’t cause your writer/producer buddies to come out publicly and reassure everyone that you guys aren’t a bunch of misogynistic dicks.

403. Hat Rick - June 26, 2013

@Jeyl (402).

I think you’re distorting the meaning of elements of the plot.

You wrote, “Kirk wants to hunt down Khan, winds up successfully bringing him to justice. Spock goes after Khan for killing Kirk, he successfully subdues him in order to save Kirk. ”

Kirk initially wanted to kill Khan because that is what he was told to do, but refused to follow the immoral order to do so. Thus, your point is mistaken. Kirk realized that Spock’s analysis was correct — that the order to kill was not to be followed. (An illegal order, or a patently immoral order, is a nullity, not an order.)

I don’t know where you get your conclusion that Kirk “succeeded” in revenge upon Khan. Revenge would have resulted in the death of Khan, since Khan had killed Kirk’s mentor. Had he succeeded, then Khan would have been dead.

Spock did try to kill Khan, but only because there didn’t seem any other way of stopping him, and because he did lose control of his emotions at the loss of his friend Kirk. Yet, even so, he finally did restrain himself, and revenge was averted.

Are you aware of what “giving in to revenge” really means? It means giving in to the bloodlust of an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth. As a civilizatino we are far beyond that. A certain extremely famous religious figure once said that instead of hating our enemies (i.e., instead of seeking revenge), we must love them. While there was no love lost between Kirk and Khan, or Spock and Khan, at least their was not enough hate for either of our heroes to kill Khan. A year later — when the speech was given — Kirk had indubitably reflected on the wisdom of seeking justice instead of revenge and was eminently suited to speak thereupon.

404. TreK_Fan - June 26, 2013

My big problem with the film is that it had a great beginning and then quickly turned into a parody of Wrath of Khan. Dr McCoy my favourite character in TOS had no real dialogue in this feature, and was reduced to poor comic relief with truly horrible one liners. Khan could have been more interesting, if given a better detailed back story and it certainly does not help that he was portrayed by a WASPy thin English actor. Then there are things that make no sense; 2 Federation ships fighting over Earth and Starfleet Command is no where to be found in space??? There are no Federation spacecraft on the Federation space station orbiting the Earth? There are no transporters on Earth? Really, this is what Star Trek has become, mediocre story telling with big effects and no characters to care about? I hope a new writer and director takes over the helm for the next film.

405. Paperback Writer - June 26, 2013

RIP Richard Matheson

http://www.latimes.com/news/obituaries/la-et-mn-richard-matheson-87-master-of-science-fiction-and-horror-20130626,0,2348802.story

http://www.vulture.com/2013/06/richard-matheson-twilight-zone-nightmare-at-20000-feet.html

406. Vultan - June 26, 2013

#400

Beautifully written, Hat Rick. So true. And as someone with Cherokee ancestry, I appreciate the sentiment.

407. Photon70 - June 26, 2013

All I know is whether I enjoyed a film or not:

STTMP – did not enjoy.
STWOK – did enjoy.
STSPS – did enjoy.
STTVH – enjoyed very immensely.
STTFF – did enjoy portions of it, but it missed the mark.
STTUC – did enjoy.
STG – in danger of copying STTMP for yawn factor and Kirk’s death was badly done.
STFC – did enjoy.
STI – could have been much better handled but it missed the mark.
STN – completely missed the mark.
ST09 – did enjoy.
STiD – did enjoy.

ST13 – looking forward to it.

408. Bender Bending Rodriguez - June 26, 2013

You know, there was a time where this site was fun. Sure there were various opinions, but now it’s just nasty.

I am really disappointed on how many haters have taken over. It’s become a drag. Part of me can’t help but wonder if the majority are paid by the other studios to bad mouth STID so a visitor to this site would be discouraged from seeing it and spend their money on another movie.

I am not going to visit this site for awhile. All I can add is that I and everyone I know liked or loved STID, it will go down as the ST movie with the biggest worldwide box office in the history of Trek, and that a major producer and writer – Bob Orci – actually took the time to talk to and listen to ST fans during the making of and after its release, and that is great.

Farewell.

409. the dude - June 26, 2013

@ 406
I could not agree more…its really sad what this place has become, I am sorry you have to read half of this crap Mr. Orci, you did a fantastic job.

410. Hat Rick - June 26, 2013

Thanks, Vultan. I am very happy you liked it. I meant every word.

411. Barney Fife - June 26, 2013

I’m pretty sure Mr. Orci has developed thick skin, so the negatrons shouldn’t bother him too much.

412. Lurker - June 26, 2013

@402:
Jeyl, do you also think Gene Roddenberry is a dick for having a half naked woman in high heels for the last third of TMP, or does he get a pass? There were plenty of ways to rewrite that and have her be fully clothed. And don’t give the fanboy answer about her being a replica probe and had to be naked. They had a beautiful actress with a great body play that part – and took full advantage of it.

413. Rick - June 26, 2013

I freaking LOVE Deforest Kelly. Bones was and remains to this day my favorite Star Trek character. The thought that he isn’t still here to hang out with Shatner and Nimoy as old men breaks my heart.

That being said, there is a small part of me that is glad that he doesn’t have to see how they have diminished the importance of McCoy in these new films. Karl Urban is phenomenal and deserves so much better. I can’t help but think if Deforest was still around, he would be very disappointed. Don’t take away from Uhura, but don’t ignore Bones because we need to see Spock have girlfriend problems.

I see people constantly pleading for more Bones and more of the iconic trio, and I was feeling confident it would be delivered in STID. Then I saw the movie. It was very good, but the requests were ignored.

If there is a third film, I will still go see it, but I’ve given up on the writers or JJ doing justice to Bones or giving him an actual storyline. By now I just expect more silly one liners from him on the ship, while Kirk, Spock and Uhura go on all the away missions. Complete with Spock and Uhura having a couples fight while Kirk sits by and just waits for it to end.

On second thought, maybe I will skip the next one : /

414. Phil - June 26, 2013

Man, not sure what it is that hiding behind a keyboard does to bring out the worse in people, but it does. It’s one thing to disagree or debate, but enough with the name calling and personal attacks….

415. Other Guy - June 26, 2013

Perhaps you all are too put off by simple words.

And simple questions.

416. William Bradley - June 26, 2013

I think Bob Orci is a terrific writer/producer who knows and cares about Star Trek, and I very much like a great many things he’s done, from Alias on.

I’ve made it clear that I have some deep concerns about STID, and have also made it clear that I’m very glad it’s another hit Star Trek movie.

Actually, if you just take one little four-letter word out of the equation — khan, shhh — most of my concern about the movie disappears. And yes I know about the science stuff, etc., but I can suspend my disbelief.

Bob Orci has answered the main questions I had about the movie. Who pushed that the villain be Khan? And why was Khan played by an uber-white guy?

He’s not responsible for it being Khan, and his view that the villain, of whatever name, should not be a person of color for reasons of vilification among impressionable youth is a bit PC for my taste, but I respect it.

Frankly, I love Benedict Cumberbatch. I wanted more Cumberbatch, even more Cumberbatch as Khan, as irritating as I found that conceptually.

The basic story of STID is a good one, and very valid and timely politically.

It’s not about 9/11 because the 9/11 event in this timeline, or universe, has already occurred. That was the incursion of Nero.

In STID, we’re in the aftermath of that. We see that a serious militarist and warmonger has gotten the upper hand and is creating a bogus pretext for a war.

Well, that really happened in recent history.

But I don’t think the film is just doing a commentary on contemporary affairs, it raises very serious questions about the need to question what we are told and to be clear about the motives of those who seek to lead us.

I actually wish that Kirk and, er, grr, Khan had ended up working together against a common antagonist, the admiral who abused his position of trust with the Federation and Starfleet to foment a war, in the process sacrificing the people the two Ks care most about, their respective crews.

But that’s just an idea.

Anyway, I think it’s important to take in lessons from the experience of STID and to begin looking forward to the 50th anniversary of Star Trek.

Bashing Bob Orci with the usual false courage engendered by Internet anonymity doesn’t really do that.

With Abrams out for Star Wars, and things in flux, it’s best to have some continuity on the creative team.

Here you have a guy who does know his Trek and obviously digs it, and is willing to engage in a spirited give and take with fans. That’s a good thing, I think.

417. billhardin22 - June 26, 2013

Hey, boborci:

Long time Trek fan.

Have my issues with JJTrek, but glad to see it back.

Just think you should have done something Khan-less.

Having said that, STID doesn’t seem to be the big hit ST09 was.

Do you think there will be a 50th anniversary Trek? What about beyond?

I do think you are a true Trekker!

Your thoughts?

418. William Bradley - June 26, 2013

413. billhardin22 – June 26, 2013

He may not be around but Paramount would have to be in a state of collective psychosis not to go for the 50th anniversary. STID is a hit and will make money, and the cultural event of the anniversary should make the next one even bigger.

419. Phil - June 26, 2013

@412. Don’t flatter yourself. It’s people like you who give trolls a bad name.

420. Photon70 - June 26, 2013

I’m sure many fans that ended up not going because they heard a few negative comments, will come to regret their decision when they do finally watch STiD on DVD.

Meanwhile, Benedict Cumberbatch will be hard at work in Japan in mid-July to promote the movie at preview screening.

$69m to go to get to $500m.

I think STiD will get agonisingly close.

Paramount have publically stated they expect $490m.

421. Red Dead Ryan - June 26, 2013

Other Guy,

Enough with the trolling. You hate the new movie, we get it. Your political rambling was also uncalled for. If you have nothing nice to say, don’t say anything at all.

ENOUGH!!!!

422. Li'l Shat - June 26, 2013

Well I don’t understand how Khan turned into a pasty white skinny British guy, or where he got his penchant for squeezing heads like melons.

I don’t understand why–if he wanted to keep his family safe above all else–he would hide them in torpedoes.

I don’t understand why Scotty could not only fly into the secret space hangar with the other shuttles, but also gain access to the top secret ship.

I don’t understand why so much was made of a secret saboteur on board the Enterprise only to have the matter dropped so completely, after it served its purpose as a plot device.

I don’t understand Leonard Nimoy’s appearance in this film at all.

There are a million other things in this film I don’t understand. Perhaps that’s the origin of its title?

I don’t mean to blame Bob Orci here, I personally have an aversion to all things Damon Lindelof–given the fact he can’t write and all–and I suspect he’s where most, if not all, of the blame lies for these problems.

423. Phil - June 26, 2013

Good freakin lord….has the whining gotten to a point where all people are doing is copying some synopsis they saw somewhere else? Uncreative whining about someone else actually doing a job they could never hope to do….

It’s not that hard to ask an original question – how about this…..Hey, Bad Robot, I’ve noticed something. In TOS, Starfleet and the Federation didn’t get a lot of fleshing out, but they were portrayed as stable entities. This universe seems to be struggling with that concept. Is this by design, or are you planning to introduce stability in future stories?

There are only two movies/stories in this universe. It’s not that hard to ask questions to advance a concept of what this universe should look like…instead of just bitching about it.

424. Red Dead Ryan - June 26, 2013

Bitching is what many Trekkies do best, unfortunately.

425. William Bradley - June 26, 2013

This site is goofy. Appearing, disappearing, appearing, disappearing, appearing comments.

Where the frak are my 500 words defending Orci??

What is this, a 1999 site?

426. MJ (The Original). - June 26, 2013

Interesting how all of these complainers here have showed up “all of a sudden,” and it’s also interesting that I don’t recognize any of them from posting here ever before.

We can certainly draw our own conclusions from this.

427. William Bradley - June 26, 2013

Yes, the women of TOS in microminiskirt uniforms, like uber-sexy stewardi, the original Orion Slave Girl concept, Mudd’s Women, every hottie alien babe who came on to Kirk, etc, etc, etc …

Persis Khambatta, the former Miss India, gliding about in her state of semi-undress was just the latest manifestation.

>410. Lurker – June 26, 2013
@402:
Jeyl, do you also think Gene Roddenberry is a dick for having a half naked woman in high heels for the last third of TMP, or does he get a pass?

428. Photon70 - June 26, 2013

@ 418. Phil – June 26, 2013

Agreed.

Usually the only time we saw another Starfleet ship was when that ship was 5 seconds away from getting blown up.

Usually the only time we saw a Federation representative was when a whiny or arrogant or self-important character was called for by the script.

Not well fleshed out indeed! By the way, I’m talking about all 79 original episodes and 6 original movies!

Stability is indeed very important for unstable times, be it the 1960s or 2010s.

When we settle into our seats, we need to warm comfy feeling that draws us into the story. We need to know we’ve come home and the house was as we left it.

After two movies, I hope the framework has now been set for the next movie to bring out the best out of not only the characters and this universe we love; but also now give the creative team enough confidence to move bodly forward.

After $815m in combined box office, and counting, I’m sure we have something to look forward to.

429. Phil - June 26, 2013

Well, I’m getting a reminder about why I quit moderating websites. My tolerance level for a**holes went way down. And I’m the first to admit I can be an a**hole myself at times.

How about this – an article about a scientist who actually specializes in FTL theory. Shooting more holes in how a ‘real’ starship should look. Enjoy. I’m going to bed.

http://news.yahoo.com/why-warp-drives-arent-just-science-fiction-150255793.html

430. Photon70 - June 26, 2013

Here’s one on all things Trek that are becoming reality:

http://news.yahoo.com/final-frontier-star-trek-tech-becoming-reality-op-100516931.html

Here’s one on a real life Tricorder project:

http://news.yahoo.com/real-life-star-trek-tricorder-project-raises-1-122122879.html

Here’s one on Gene and Majel Roddenberry, and James Doohan’s ashes planned fo a space launch next year. Blest them all and RIP.

http://news.yahoo.com/star-trek-creator-scotty-bound-space-004443825.html

431. Dadio - June 26, 2013

‘The Real Story: Star Trek’ to Premiere Sunday, June 30 on Smithsonian Channel

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2013/06/24/the-real-story-star-trek-to-premiere-sunday-june-30-on-smithsonian-channel/188607/

432. Theatre Historian - June 27, 2013

Matt if your around,
Any chance we can get a thread dealing with the recently released Star Trek ongoing issue 22?

If not thats cool, just thought I would throw it out there, as it was a pretty good issue.

433. Theatre Historian - June 27, 2013

I am very excited to see where its taken with the next movie, I do think that the 50th anniversary does call for finding a way to bring Takei, Nichols, Koenig and Shat into the picture in some manner, and I know that Orci,and Kurtzman could find a way to do so, be it something as simple as incorperating elements of the Deadly years into the story or something far more complex.

again thats just my personal hope, and I am but one person.

In anycase I am excited to see where the next film leads.

434. Theatre Historian - June 27, 2013

One thing I will say though BobOrci, please find a way to expand Chris Doohan’s part in the next movie, He has proven on STC that he would be great in an expanded role in the next movie.

435. Jeyl - June 27, 2013

403. “Are you aware of what “giving in to revenge” really means? It means giving in to the bloodlust of an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.”

Yep. And the last movie had our characters giving into revenge and being declared heroes for doing so. If giving into revenge is so wrong, was that moment from the last movie where Kirk orders the Enterprise to fire on the Narada when it’s powerless, defenseless and is already cut it in half was the wrong thing to do? Even Spock questions Kirk about his act of mercy, suggesting he would rather kill Nero now for what he did than save Nero in the interest of peace with the Romulans. Regardless, Kirk decides to murder Nero along with the rest of his crew, because obviously if Nero doesn’t want to be saved, he speaks for the rest of his crew who are already fleeing their stations in fear and panic.

Again, where does Kirk get this crap about not giving into revenge when giving into it in this movie and the last one is what made him a hero?

436. P Technobabble - June 27, 2013

Richard Matheson was one of my favorite writers. His name wasn’t as recognizable as, say, Isaac Asimov, but his stories were terrific. My favorite books were Hell House, What Dreams May Come and The Shrinking Man, and then there was his fabulous work on the Twilight Zone and Star Trek. I raise my glass…

437. Hat Rick - June 27, 2013

Jeyl, why are you referencing Star Trek (2009) rather than defending your original comments about the events of STID, which by the way occurred much later?

438. Dovile - June 27, 2013

I personally got enough of Klingons by Undiscovered Country. Romulans were done already a lot too. Aren’t there any other aliens out there? What about Andorians or Orions, for example? We haven’t seen many of them neither in movies nor TV series.

I also hoped for a mention of Gaila in STID, or at least the comics, as I’d like to know if she survived the battle.

439. PaulB - June 27, 2013

#435 – In ST09, Kirk’s actions at the end were both justified and necessary. He offered Nero a chance, but Nero rejected it, and they had no time to sit around debating it. Kirk HAD to act to stop Nero, once and for all, by destroying the Narada. If Kirk didn’t act, there’s a chance that Nero could have slipped through the growing singularity and escaped into another time/reality.

Think about it: Nero came back in time through a black hole created by red matter. At the end of the film, a much larger amount of red matter is released in the midst of Nero’s ship. Even though the ship is being crushed by the singularity, there’s a possibility that it could slip through just like it did before. That’s too big of a risk–letting a planet-killing psycho loose. Kirk had to make sure that didn’t happen.

Kirk was justified in killing Nero, who had just destroyed the ENTIRE PLANET Vulcan. That’s not revenge, but even if it were, it would be well-justified revenge.

Instead of revenge, Kirk’s initial reaction is to offer Nero help. Only when he is left with no alternative does he destroy the Narada.

STID is shot through with revenge, but ST09′s ending doesn’t fit into that complaint.

440. Bassmaster22 - June 27, 2013

You know what’s great about these forums? If you don’t like every last thing about the current state of “Trek,” your comments are not valid.
So basically the only people who should be posting here are the “thank you, may I have another” types.

First of, Abrams has basically brainwashed fans into thinking that any Trek is better than no Trek. WRONG! No Trek is better than bad Trek. What we’ve been subjected to is bad trek. What’s worse, there’s not a shred or hint of science in something that’s supposed to be “science fiction.” I actually knew we were screwed in the previews and online when Into Darkness was the first Trek movie to be classified as “Fantasy” instead of science fiction.

Bryan Burke cannot even form a coherent sentance. Just try getting through the first line of his quote above. These are the people handling Trek these days.

And for those of you who bow to Abrams because you think he “saved” Star Trek, what was there to save? It’s still a multimillion dollar machine for CBS between the new blurays and the constant flow of new collectibles.

This incarnation will do more damage than it prevented. Now you’ve got yet another version for people to try to wrap their heads around. Thankfully this is all “alternate universe” bologna which means they could wipe out the whole crew in the next one and blow up Earth and it wouldn’t matter. That’s why I don’t care about what happens in these movies. It has zero impact.

441. Devon - June 27, 2013

440 – No.

442. Craiger - June 27, 2013

Man this place goes into complete chaos when Anthony’s away.

443. MikeB - June 27, 2013

I kind of figured they would do The Big Klingon War as the third film. I was hoping I was wrong. They did a nice job in STID of building to the 5 Year Mission and THAT is where the third film should go. That is Trek. Even casual fans have seen plenty of the good old Klingons. Do they think that a big Klingon movie in three years will seem fresh and attract a larger audience?

444. Hat Rick - June 27, 2013

@PaulB, thanks for your defense of Kirk’s actions in ST(2009) in regard to Nero; I agree with it. HIs actions were justified as self-defense. However, we do disagree on the issue of revenge in STID for reasons I outlined in my initial response to Jeyl’s comments.

445. Kevin Browning - June 27, 2013

Now that Kirk has “earned” the captains chair. Lets do some exploring. I loved STID, but its time to get back to the final frontier. If you need to attract the audiences who need flashy graphics and action, lets do Star Trek 13 like Indiana Jones (not crystal skull either). You can have exploration on some wild planet with fast paced excitement (Indiana Jones style), the writers can create a moral dilemna, compete with the klingons (Kor or Kang), tone down the phasers a little bit (tricorders perhaps), make this next Star Trek more science fiction than space opera, and boom star trek 13.

Please no more of the following
1) Revenge plots
2) Big Ships
’3) Super Villains (you can have a villain but make him secondary to the story)
4) And no more random one-liners for Bones (make him part of the triad)

446. Other Guy - June 27, 2013

421. Phil.

I am not put off by your simple words, either.

And a certain someone should reply to my simple question.

447. taylor - June 27, 2013

Bob orci i just want to say as a trek fan whos watched ever episode of the original series, ds9, and next generation me and my family loved into darkness. I am very sad to see all the hate comming from fourms like this. Also if you read this i was woundering if your plans for a trek tvs show are still alive?

448. boborci - June 27, 2013

447 Taylor

No worries! Hating is part of the fun. Find it funny when haters are offended when I bite back.

TV show possible. But in the back of our minds right now.

449. Other Guy - June 27, 2013

Not sure if all you peeps that liked Star Trek 09 and Into Darkness realize that you are supporting a movie who was produced by those that believe 911 was conducted by a rogue group in our own government.

Just saying. Some here thought I was being outrageous for calling it out, but how many realize that they are paying to be mocked again.

450. ajdczar - June 27, 2013

As a Trek fan when it went into syndication in the 70′s, I am saddened by it’s current state. I really enjoy JJ’s work, but I don’t believe he captures the heart of Star Trek. Not his fault…he’s a Star Wars fan. And Star Trek, as a character-driven episodic show requires weekly stories. It never translated very well to the big screen except when referring to characters already fleshed out in the show, like Kahn, Klingons and the Borg.

Please bring Trek back to the small screen where it belongs. And give it to someone who has appreciated it like Whedon.

I went to Into Darkness hoping to love it…and I left feeling like I just watched Luke Skywalker (Kirk), Han Solo (Young Spock) Princess Leia (Lt Uhura), Obi Wan (Old Spock), C3PO (Mr. Scott) and R2D2 (Chekov).

451. Other Guy - June 27, 2013

And if I might continue, I also believe that 911 was conducted by a rogue group in our own government. At least I am NOT afraid to openly admit that. And I do agree with boborci in some (not all) of his sentiments about prosecuting those actually responsible for that day as well as the resulting wars and war crimes.

I just want to make sure people here understand what they are really supporting. That what I was trying to highlight. I was Not trying to be rude.

I was just saying that this Trek and the last was wrapped in a 911 false flag terror covert message. One that I detest to see in a simple Star Trek movie. An oasis of fantasy and sci-fi that I was hoping to get lost in for a few hours.

452. Other Guy - June 27, 2013

Bob, if you bit anywhere on this board, I missed it.

453. boborci - June 27, 2013

451. Otherguy

Good for you “openly” admitting it, Mr OtherGuy

You are clearly confused. Your a I’ve statement at is a heap of confusion. Nice chatting with you anyway

454. boborci - June 27, 2013

452. Boring me now.

455. Robman007 - June 27, 2013

“if all I wanted was money, I would’ve stayed on the Transformers franchise istead of taking a chance by trying to revive Trek, which most thought was impossible and ill advised. Your basic assumptions are flawed.”

Tons of truth in that statement..not to mention dealing with the headache of spoiled assed, basement dwelling uberfans who will bitch and complain no matter what product you give them.

boborci…I enjoy the films. Thanks to you and the crew for brining us some more adventures of the Enterprise.

Some of these turds seem to forget that you and your staff have to make films that appeal to everyone (because the last trek series failed to do that..and failed in general) and you’ve only been doing Trek stories for 4 years where the last regime had the franchise for a long, long time. So, kudos to you and ignore the haters.

456. Other Guy - June 27, 2013

I just want to make sure people here understand what they are really supporting. That what I was trying to highlight. I was Not trying to be rude.

457. Other Guy - June 27, 2013

455. Robman007

Most importantly, Boborci and Paramount wanted to make sure you knew 911 was an inside job. Happy with that? Gooood.

458. boborci - June 27, 2013

457. U know nothing.

You claim to know what the movie is a a about. You claim to believe that what the movie is about, according to you, is true. But you hate the movie for covering what you consider to be true? You are confused.

459. JRQ - June 27, 2013

Trekmovie.com I didi not know some star trek fans were insane.

460. Robman007 - June 27, 2013

@457..seriously? Trek 09 was a movie about a pissed off Romulan who changed history and was stopped by Kirk. Into Darkness was about a pissed off superman who lashed out at being used by a corrupt admiral, who were all stopped by the crew…quit looking for hidden meanings. It’s a fictional movie. If it alluded to certain “things” then it did..the original series spent alot of time on the Vietnam issue and what not..so…who cares!!

If anything these films are about pissed of baddies.

And who CARES that this film was labled as fantasy. Star Trek needed a bit of the fantasy injection. Part of the reason Trek had a hard time finding an audience and ultimatly died out again was because it took itself too serious trying to be “real”…it drove new comers away and eventually the fans as well. Just chill out already.

461. Strat - June 27, 2013

@boborci

Ever see the animated episode “Beyond the Farthest Star”? The derelict living ship from that episode would be visually awesome in the next movie. The whole energy entity thing is a bit silly, but having the Enterprise encounter a giant ancient derelict living ship like that in deep space would be a great way to start off the story and create a real sense of wonder and exploration.

462. Lens Flares Suck - June 27, 2013

I had no problems with 09 Trek. It had huge gaping plot holes and I hated the brewery, but what the heck.

STID, on the other hand, was an abomination. Nick Meyer should sue.

I doubt we’ll see another Trek movie. You just can’t get BIGGER AND BIGGER AND BIGGER with each movie. It’s boring and pointless.

THEY NEED BETTER WRITERS.

463. jerr - June 27, 2013

this has been better then the movie ;-)

464. other Guy - June 27, 2013

Sorry, Boborci. Seriously. I am.

I do not hate the movie, don’t hate the message. I don’t hate anything really, except abuse of power, on any level.

Bob I have asked you many times. I saw it, but what was this movie about? 911 and post wars? Who conceptualized a 911 false flag terror plot (and wars) as good fodder for a Star Trek movie? The “truther” message has been despised in the media as being promoted only by crazy people! That’s what is sooo amazing to me here, that I am now being demonized by another “truther” (you) who is trying to promote that same message.

What I did not like about the movie was its utter lack of Science and logic. Almost every scene was directed to a dumb conclusion.

A ‘few’ examples of dumb?

The volcano scene – great until it came to a “Cold-fusion bomb?”

Marcus creating a Star Fleet flagship without anyone asking questions as to its eventual use. Why a huge ship like that would only need a minimal people to operate? And then there is no one on that ship when it is taken by Marcus himself? NO asked anything about it?

The utter lack of any political coverage about the state of the world, Star Fleet or any executive control as to explain how Marcus could do what he did. Look I wasn’t looking for much, just a nod to show that the president of the world and his cabinet may have been caught off guard.

Khan. Everything about the character!!! Khan is now a white british guy? And I was accused of being racist cause I called that out! When it was you that said you liked Khan as a white guy – a direct denial of who Khan was supposed to be in Trek history. Why?” You tell me, and try not to bring up racism.

Kirk dying. A poor conclusion to this characters story arc, when I saw that I took it for what it was a death scene, then Kirks alive ten minutes later after a labouros and impractical chase and fight scene by Spock. Seriously that was as bad as the Anakin / Obiwan fight in that lava planet in Star Wars III.

More? Sooo much more I could bitch about. But you know what Bob? I was entertained by the AWESOME music, the AWESOME special effects and the AWSOME acting! But when it came to the story it seems tome that you were a bit distracted.

Probably because you were trying too hard to make this Trek into a moral message about 911 and the bush crew and it was really getting in the way. You say you did not support Khan in this movie. Exactly what was the point of the movie before Khan’s character arrived in the story? Who’s message was first being presented?

Actually, this debate is just like the whole “truth movement.” I do not know what to believe (about your latest Treks and 911) because it’s just not being approached openly, without egos, or fear of prosecution.

One last time. Here goes.

Who came up with this 911 (and post wars) storyline concept for these latest Star Trek movies?

465. Elias Javalis - June 27, 2013

281,

Bob, i i think it would be unwise to cut budget.. I dont have the slightest idea how studios perceive these kind of things,, but if talks are progressing for a third installment…for less money, i could kinda disappointing…Heck, i havent seen into Darkness yet!!

466. Barney Fife - June 27, 2013

@ 461 Lens Flares Suck:
STID has an 87/92% rating on Rotten Tomotoes. STID was profitable. You are nuts to think there won’t be another movie in 2016.

467. boborci - June 27, 2013

There is a “written by” credit for a reason. The writers came up with the story and wrote the script. Pretty simple. You get the answer you needed now, Perry Mason? You’ve uncovered the truth that the credited writers of the movie wrote the movie. Congrats!

468. William Shatspeare - June 27, 2013

Roberto O: St is Shakespeare in space.

I didn’t mind the whole false flag element of the story but it was poorly executed. To paraphrase Pike: there is greatness in you and you are a good man, but you are capable of so much more. How do I tell a writer who I like, that his writing/story was very disappointing without insulting him or being called a hater?

Analyze what makes the best of Trek as H Bennett did for TWOK, not just mimicking scenes and apply. Action is the icing not the cake. Brush up on the classics. In TWOK the words flow, many of the lines are memorable for their lyrical prose.

And last bit of advice, read the negative reviews, yes there are some that are mean etc., but learn from the ones that actually give constructive criticism. STID should’ve done much better and listening to the brown nosers wil only make you repeat the same mistakes.

Many of the problems in the world today are a result of corruption and greed. The majority of people in the world are treated as dumb sheep by various control mechanisms by the few. Most are struggling just to survive. And yet what is the solution for these negative and frightening issues along with dwindling resources, pollution, economic collapse etc: a totalitarian state? -No. The optimism and intelligence of great ideas and love which can be used in ST but be also entertaining as well and thoughtful without being hit over the head with a hammer.

All the Best

469. Strat - June 27, 2013

@boborci

Have you ever seen the animated episode “Beyond the Farthest Star”? The derelict living ship from that episode would be visually awesome in the next movie. The whole energy entity thing is a bit silly, but having the Enterprise encounter a giant ancient derelict living ship like that in deep space would be a great way to start off the story and create a real sense of wonder and exploration.

470. Bamasi - June 27, 2013

466. I love you Bob!

And by the way, I was named after Perry Mason. It was either that or Gilligan, so I feel quite fortunate. Loved STID!

471. jerr - June 27, 2013

464.. TWOK had a much smaller budget then TMP. The audio commentary on TWOK stated it best by Mr. Meyer and this is a paraphrase “the best way to solve a problem… is not to throw money at it”.

472. Robman007 - June 27, 2013

@461…why should Nick Meyer sue? It had ONE scene that was similar to Wrath of Khan. One scene. The rest of the film was not done by Nick Meyer.

Unless I watched the wrong version of Khan…I swear he didn’t fight Klingons or crash the Reliant into San Francisco or that was he was used by a corrupt admiral or the Enterprise starting off under water or Kirk/Spock in a fist fight with Khan at the end..or Khan LIVING at the end or Pike dying or Kirk getting demoted and promoted or Wrath ending on a five year mission. They took one scene, swapped the characters, used mostly new lines and made it a scene that was a foundation point for the formation of a friendship.

Refer to Wil Wheaton’s review of STID when he hints about why you can’t do old school Trek stories anymore in a film if you want to make money. You HAVE to make films that appeal to the masses. They HAVE to be bigger and bolder. We as Trek fans already proved to the suits that old Trek does not work. We stopped watching Enterprise, stopped watching Voyager and bought tickets for Lord of the Rings instead of the final TNG movie. We voted on how we want Trek when we did all those things..

Want better writers…write the f*cker yourself. I for one would not want to touch Trek with a 20 foot pole. No wonder JJ went to Star Wars. Those fans had a right to bitch about the prequel films and direction that franchise went. THAT was justified. Trek fans are just obnoxious trolls who hate anything that goes against their narrow tunnel vision based on exaggerated memories of what past Trek was about….minus the Original Series and DS9, past Trek was an obnoxious, PC mess that tried to cram political messages down our throats on a nightly basis..mixed in with lazy ass writing that always had the crew saving the day by using technology they tried to pass off as “realistic”…it got boring.

Seriously..how is it a hard concept for some to understand that OLD Trek will NEVER, EVER come back. That format worked against the franchise when trying to expand to a new audience…and even if you get it back on TV it will be Trek-lite. A series with alot of action and exploration, but NOTHING like the lazy PC crap we got for over a decade.

473. Other Guy - June 27, 2013

So it took three of you guys to come up with 911 false flag terror wrapped in Star Trek as a good motivation for the crew and the viewers.

Thanks, boborci. That what I was after! happy to hear that. and You should not be mad at me for calling it out. So many others should have. A few did and appreciate their words.

Enjoy everyone! If you can. You all get what you got because you never questioned anything.

Never forget 911? My a$$.

474. Robman007 - June 27, 2013

@463..in regards to the whole “hidden message” of STID and 09…go watch South Park: Season 10 episode “Mystery of the Urinal Deuce”…the conculsion pretty much sums things up…

475. Other Guy - June 27, 2013

471. Robman007

Thank you for ‘elevating’ the discussion. Brilliant.

476. Kevin - June 27, 2013

Other Guy, seriously your tone and line of attacks towards Bob Orci are uncalled for.
Whether you liked the movie or not, you shouldn’t relentlessly attack someone just cause you do not like elements of their movie.

wasn’t the whole point of the new thread to start fresh, but you sir brought down this thread to new lows (even for this sites forums) within days.

Move on man, move on.

477. Phil - June 27, 2013

@448…TV show possible. But in the back of our minds right now.

You are being a tease, Bob. There could be a breakfast burrito on the back of your mind right now, too. It’s great that a show is possible, this site is littered with stories about others who share the same thought. What’s newsworthy is that a network or some other venue has asked for a treatment of some sort, or at least shown some interest in actually developing it?

I know you guys play your cards close to the vest, a simple yes or no is sufficient…

478. Robman007 - June 27, 2013

@474….

TV show won’t happen unless CBS and Bad Robot all the sudden start to get along. THAT won’t happen. CBS is more or less content with milking TOS to death..they won’t bother with a new TV show.

MIght sound odd..but damn I wish Disney would buy out Star Trek. THEN you’d see it treated the way it should be. They have done wonders with the Marvel franchise and will do the same with Star Wars. Trek will be buried and killed again once the Wars franchise starts back up..especially with Bad Robot taking their “Trek” plan to “Wars”..which CBS graciously killed

479. Robman007 - June 27, 2013

Back in the day when the toy line, TV show talk, novel series, merchandise and model kits were all cancelled abruptly it made little sense. Now with the CBS/Bad Robot issues coming to light..makes perfect sense….you’ll get one more film if that and that will be all. Hate to say it, but the writing is on the wall.

480. Bamasi - June 27, 2013

475.

Or history may just repeat itself. CBS may sit back and watch what Disney does with Star Wars and say, “Hey, don’t we still own that Trek property? Why don’t we do something like that?”

It may just be worth the wait. Until then, I’m looking forward to the next Trek movie in 2016.

481. Bill Peters - June 27, 2013

@BobOrci

I love to see what you have in store for the next movie, I like if you Can build more on Friendships of the Main Characters more, that was really one Powerful part of this film.

482. boborci - June 27, 2013

470 Boy are you confused! Almost amusing.

Yes, it took all three of us to generate the most successful Star Trek ever. Nothing goes my way.

I’ve been called out by a few reviews with just as little evidence as you, so you might wanna hold off patting yourself on the back, Sherlock.

In short:

You’ve uncovered the writers of the movie!! If you’d sat through the first 7 seconds of the credits, you would’ve saved yourself so much time.

483. boborci - June 27, 2013

478. Bill Peters – June 27, 2013
@BobOrci

I love to see what you have in store for the next movie, I like if you Can build more on Friendships of the Main Characters more, that was really one Powerful part of this film.

—-

That’s the goal!

484. Other Guy - June 27, 2013

473. Kevin

Your a new low Kevin.

I get accused of being racist and a crackhead for asking questions that desrve an answer.

I think you can see why I wanted a straight answer. And I got it, and I am fine with that now. But please stay out of my way. You should be as concerned with your Trek and your country.

485. Kevin - June 27, 2013

I have to admit I find it funny how the very people for years complained about Wil Wheaton are now APPLAUDING his words, when it comes to something THEY agree with.

But respectfully Will is wrong.
You can do old school trek and make money.
With the right script and story, you can do old school Trek and have it be financially sucessful.
Your examples of Voyager,and Nemesis are not Old school Trek at its best. I assure you. All you have to do is find this generations, Matheson or even a Bradbury or Serling to create a story and screenplay that balances thought and adventure and you could very much have a sucess both creatively and sucessfully.
And trust me they are out there.

469. Robman007 – June 27, 2013
Refer to Wil Wheaton’s review of STID when he hints about why you can’t do old school Trek stories anymore in a film if you want to make money. You HAVE to make films that appeal to the masses. They HAVE to be bigger and bolder. We as Trek fans already proved to the suits that old Trek does not work. We stopped watching Enterprise, stopped watching Voyager and bought tickets for Lord of the Rings instead of the final TNG movie. We voted on how we want Trek when we did all those things..

486. Horatio - June 27, 2013

@475

The LAST thing I ever want to see is Star Trek controlled by Disney.

Yeesh.

487. Kevin - June 27, 2013

Kevin, you might want answers but relentlessly attacking the guy who wrote the movie is just poor sport man.
Bob doesn’t have to post here for us but he does, you know if the site was being properly moderated your posts would not even have gotten half as far as they did.

And your childish last post just goes to show how lost in your own self you are.
bye bye

481. Other Guy – June 27, 2013
473. Kevin

Your a new low Kevin.

I get accused of being racist and a crackhead for asking questions that desrve an answer.

I think you can see why I wanted a straight answer. And I got it, and I am fine with that now. But please stay out of my way. You should be as concerned with your Trek and your country.

488. Bamasi - June 27, 2013

Heaven forbid I try and change the subject, but has anyone seen the new Hallmark ornaments? They have one of the Kelvin.

Also the new app called Trek Rivals is a pretty fun CCG, if you’re into that sort of thing.

489. Robman007 - June 27, 2013

@472…you’re welcome. And thank you for taking these boards to an all new low. It was gettin bad enough with all the get a life, crying, sobbing, hurt feelings, mock outrage, “not my trek” antics, politically correct sob fests over a certain scene, “gene would hate this” bull crap, arm chair QB “get new writers”, “where is the realism in my fiction” dead horse, DRAMA QUEEN garbage…we needed that level of paranoid conspiracy theory antics and discussion about a couple of fantasy sci-fi filmswhich resulted in a sad pissing contest with the lead writer of said films.

Awesome job. As the great Bill Shatner once said..get a life.

490. Phil - June 27, 2013

Still a few people pointlessly complaining, time for a new Trek question:

In this universe, what would the five year mission actually look like? Some parameters:

– No war with Klingons, or anyone else. It’s doubtful that Starfleet/Federation would actually divert resources in the face of hostilities.
– If Enterprise is indeed on an extended mission, her refit would make her look even more industrial. If you are away from fleet logistics for an extended period of time, that means you need to carry more provisions, and expand your ability to repair your own. More storage tanks, machine shop, and recycling. State of the art sensors and space mapping, more probes then photon torpedo’s on this mission, kiddos.
– Federation is stable. To send your people out, you need a stable political base at home. If you do come across hostiles, they need to be able to react accordingly.

It’s the five year mission that makes Kirk a hero within the Federation – how do we make this Kirk the hero and break him out of the mold he’s been cast in so far?

491. Robman007 - June 27, 2013

@482…some of us may believe that you CAN do old Trek and make it work, but you have to understand the mentality of the studio suits. We proved to them that it won’t work when we failed to show up to Nemesis or watch Voyager/Enterprise and even DS9. They don’t think the way we do.

I’m pretty sure you can do old TOS in a film. It was not a tough formula to follow and the new films have done that in a lite way. But the suits don’t care. That is the travisty of the direction in hollywood.

Regarding Wil Wheaton…I may not have liked his character, but I’ve always liked the actor. He’s a fan and a nerd like most of us and in regards to his review of STID, he was spot on. For someone who is associated with the franchise, it was nice to see that level of honesty regarding the film instead of displaying hate based on covered up jealously over not being involved (which seems to come mainly from production staff)

492. Robman007 - June 27, 2013

@ 483. Horatio…why not?

They have done nothing but good with the Marvel movies..and the comic fanboys are far worse then us Trek variety. They are going to turn Wars into something special. Why not buy out Trek? Paramount has done good with 2 films in regards to budget. Don’t get me started on the half ass job they along with CBS have done with the merchandise aspect.

Disney would make a great warden of the Trek name.

493. Robman007 - June 27, 2013

@485…that ornament looks awesome.

Not to mention the amazing 1/350 scaled TOS Enterprise model and the new 1/500 scale Into Darkness Enterprise. Good stuff in the world of Star Trek..although it could be better

494. Other Guy - June 27, 2013

boborci. You just don’t get MY motivation either do you?

Oh, but it OK to call me names. A Racist? A Crack Head? An Attacker?

Sorry! Not. But I care about those the innocent victims that died on 911 and thereafter, and when I call out those profiteering for those deadly deeds I get passionate.

By the way I, and others, thought it was real cheap to offer that tagline at the end of the ID. It seemed to me like you were just covering your butts in case there was a rise in anti-Trek, anit-studio sentiments arising from the truther message. But what you did do that was real clever, was to wrap it in a geeky Star Trek movie so that no one would ever suspect your story’s true intention.

So my big question to everyone here is; “if you are a fan of Star Trek Into Darkness,” are you the kind of person that would be open to, or even ENJOY, a 911 thuther message in your Star Trek? DID YOU EVEN KNOW IT’S THERE?!

Me? It just pissed me off.

Please do not do this ever again! Let alone in the third Star Trek movie!

Other Guy…. OUT.

495. Mathias - June 27, 2013

@BobOrci

Are there any more deleted scenes besides the Khan shower scene? What was the hardest scene to cut?

Tnx!! Awesome movie btw!

496. Phil - June 27, 2013

@491. Other Guy…. OUT.

Promise?

497. Other Guy - June 27, 2013

No Phil. I do not promise.

And why don’t you just leave instead?

498. Charles Trotter - June 27, 2013

457. Other Guy

“Most importantly, Boborci and Paramount wanted to make sure you knew 911 was an inside job. Happy with that? Gooood.”

I’m probably asking for trouble by getting into this, but…

Since the acts of terrorism in the film were committed by a man of his own accord, how exactly is STID alluding to 9/11 being an inside job? Khan/al-Qaeda attacked Starfleet/America in response to a perceived wrong which Starfleet/America had done to him/them. The attacks on Starfleet/America, therefore, were not part of a grand scheme by Admiral Marcus/President Bush to invade Klingon space/Iraq, it just opened the door for him to do so (or so he thought, anyway).

Or are you suggesting that Khan attacked Starfleet under Marcus’ orders? I hope not because that would be ridiculous and would make absolutely no sense in the context of the events in the film.

499. Phil - June 27, 2013

Well, I see more dates filling in during the summer of 2016. I am hoping we get an announcement soon…

500. Curious Cadet - June 27, 2013

@489. Robman007,
“They have done nothing but good with the Marvel movies..and the comic fanboys are far worse then us Trek variety. They are going to turn Wars into something special.”

That statement seems a bit pre-mature. The last films Disney attempted on this scale was John Carter, Oz, and Tron. None of which were critical or box office successes.

The fact is, Disney had very little to do with Avengers, and it’s unclear what their exact involvement was with Iron Man 3 outside of distribution, which is the continuation of a successful franchise that pre-dates Disney anyway. We’ve seen absolutely nothing else from Marvel since Disney took the reins.

As for Star Wars, we have no idea what Disney is planning for that franchise, it could end up worse than Lucas’ last three efforts which increasingly aimed to service the merchandising channels.

Based on Disney’s past history with sci-fi/fantasy franchises, and with their emphasis on merchandising, until we see what they do with these franchises, I wouldn’t be so eager to turn over the keys.

501. Praetor Tal - June 27, 2013

This was just posted on CNN, about scientists working on real-life deflectors:

http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/27/world/europe/star-trek-shield/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

502. Charles - June 27, 2013

It would be nice to see an ORIGINAL movie idea.

Not the on going ripping off of Star Trek II, III, Indiana Jones, Star Wars Episode 2, Captain America.

Sorry but SOMETHING ORIGINAL.

The Khan thing and ripping off of Star Trek II was the WORST!! No real Trek fan would find this interesting.

What is next Rob? Sybok is now a “black woman”, instead of whales it is Panda’s, and instead of General Chang we get Captain Wong?

I could write a better trek film and I am not a writer.

503. Other Guy - June 27, 2013

495. Charles Trotter – June 27, 2013

You should ask Bob and co that one. I cant get a straight answer. I am sure he wants to answer that one. Looks like it to me.

504. NuFan - June 27, 2013

484

Please pay attention to which one of your many identities your using.

505. Charles Trotter - June 27, 2013

@boborci

I’ve been meaning to ask this for a while, and my apologies if you’ve already answered this question, but…

Why would the ‘Enterprise’ need to unleash its entire payload of **72** torpedoes against one man? After my initial viewings, I thought Marcus put all 72 on board with the intention that one or two be used on Harrison/Khan and the remaining torpedoes destroyed when the ‘Enterprise’ gets attacked by Klingons. But during a third viewing, I realized ‘Enterprise’ was loading *all* of the torpedoes and that Sulu said they would “unleash the entire payload” on Harrison.

Why would they need to fire 72 torpedoes at one man? Spock was able to pinpoint his exact location from the shuttle, so not knowing where he was can’t be the reason.

What gives here, Bob? :)

506. DarExc - June 27, 2013

@BobOrci
Thanks for your part in making that great film! My long time Trek friends and I all really enjoyed it. I loved the references to previous non-TOS Trek (NX-01, Section 31 etc etc) so that made me quite happy, just need some Château Picard wine in there ;) Looking forward to the next one.

507. Charles Trotter - June 27, 2013

499. Other Guy

“You should ask Bob and co that one. I cant get a straight answer. I am sure he wants to answer that one. Looks like it to me.”

Wait… what? You were the one who said the movie alludes to 9/11 being an inside job. I just said the movie makes no such allusion.

By saying such an allusion exists, however, you seemed to be suggesting that Khan was under Marcus’ orders when he attacked Starfleet. The movie makes it clear that this is not the case, but I wanted to know if that’s what you meant.

Now you’re telling me to ask Bob? I am confuzzled. What am I missing here?

508. Curious Cadet - June 27, 2013

@495. Charles Trotter,
“Or are you suggesting that Khan attacked Starfleet under Marcus’ orders? I hope not because that would be ridiculous and would make absolutely no sense in the context of the events in the film.”

I don’t think that’s true. The idea that Marcus orchestrated all of Harrison’s actions and set him up has been proposed here early on by others. And it helps explain a few things.

Marcus orders Harrison to destroy Section 31, perhaps to cover his own tracks, and gives him the way to do it, i.e. Harewood’s daughter. Then orders Harrison to attack the meeting, after which he can beam him directly to Kronos (with a much more powerful device, or even from an orbiting ship) where he is to await further instructions. Only when Harrison hears about the 72 torpedoes does he realize he’s been had. Harrison could easily have lied about why he blew up the archives and attacked the meeting to elicit more sympathy — which resonates more, revenge over grief, or following orders?

Either way, I don’t think you can dismiss it as a probability. For one thing, Marcus should have held that meeting in a bunker knowing who he was dealing with (contrary to protocol), and if Harrison really wanted Marcus dead, he would have been the first one taken out considering the level of surprise he had, not to mention the amount of time he had to target him before he opened fire while everyone stood their slack-jawed. Marcus may have even ordered Pike to be the primary target of that attack.

Regardless, how one interprets such actions with respect to modern politics is irrelevant. Stories like this have been told since well before 9/11.

509. Factchecker - June 27, 2013

The movie was well done, but the script didn’t appeal to me. It came off as derivative with so many so-called “homages”. Whether that is attributable to the writing staff or it was a studio mandate…who knows.

I’m sure I’ll now be labeled / libeled as a crack user.

510. Craiger - June 27, 2013

Bob, is it up to CBS to see how all three films do before thinking about a new series? Some thought maybe CBS wanted to wait and see how the first and second one does at the box office before going ahead with a new series.

Also I assume it would be set in the Alternate Universe and not the Prime Universe?

511. Other Guy - June 27, 2013

Sorry, Charles. I just spent the last month trying to get boborci to explain who or where that reasoning came from myself.

It’s no secret now that the writers were thinking 911 and the Wars on Terror when making these last set of movies.

Certainly Marcus was in the command of Khan, to a degree, just as Bin Laden (Tim Osmond) was in the “control of the US for a time. That’s the irony here and why I am dismayed that they thought this nonsense was good story material.

512. boborci - June 27, 2013

501. destroy all evidence. take no chances. and the order is a little weird anyway, which adds to the suspicion and ultimately disobeying of the orders

513. Phil - June 27, 2013

Disney has pretty much allowed Pixar and Marvel to do their thing. Lucasfilm is a bird of a different color, though, because Lucas seemed content to repackage existing content, as opposed to creating new material, so I suspect that Disney will be active in prodding that brand along.

514. Other Guy - June 27, 2013

508. boborci – June 27, 2013

501. destroy all evidence. take no chances. and the order is a little weird anyway, which adds to the suspicion and ultimately disobeying of the orders

boborci. Is that supposed to be this movie’s Building 7?

515. Phil - June 27, 2013

@501. Reading between Bob’s lines here (and taking what was on screen at face value), I suspect Marcus also knew he was about to be exposed. As Bob mentioned, this destroys the evidence. It also launches a war with the Klingons, as it’s unlikely the Empire would have let Enterprise escape without blowing her from the sky. Marcus blames a rogue Kirk for the incident, and Marcus evildoing gets buried in a Federation-Klingon war. If he plays his cards right, he may end up being the hero if his preparations for war end up winning it for the Federation….

All speculation, of course.

516. boborci - June 27, 2013

492. other guy

this is culture war, my friend, and I get passionate too, and I don’t take prisoners.

you are experiencing cognitive dissonance, it seems, truly.

if you are going to rant about war profiteering on the back of a national tragedy, why are you attacking a movie that is pointing out that particular aspect of reality and not of fox news, msnbc, ge, nbc, haliburton, and the long litany of people who used tragedy to advance horrible agendas?

i must say, though, i enjoy your portrait of me as an dvil genius, tricking hundreds of millions out of a corporation and the efforts of clueless actors and directors to advance my secret theory of the world and indoctrinate precious young minds! Mwahahahaha!

517. Charles Trotter - June 27, 2013

504. Curious Cadet

“Only when Harrison hears about the 72 torpedoes does he realize he’s been had.”

Ah… well, if Marcus is the one who put Khan’s crew inside the torpedoes, that would certainly explain how Marcus intended to kill them if Khan did not follow orders. Hmm…

“Harrison could easily have lied about why he blew up the archives and attacked the meeting to elicit more sympathy — which resonates more, revenge over grief, or following orders?”

So why tell Kirk that *he* was the one who put his crew into the torpedoes? Why invent some cockamamie story about trying to smuggle them out in torpedoes in the first place? To gain sympathy? I’m not sure I buy that, but I guess anything is possible.

“Either way, I don’t think you can dismiss it as a probability. For one thing, Marcus should have held that meeting in a bunker knowing who he was dealing with (contrary to protocol), and if Harrison really wanted Marcus dead, he would have been the first one taken out considering the level of surprise he had, not to mention the amount of time he had to target him before he opened fire while everyone stood their slack-jawed.”

Hmm… that is a good point. There is a moment during the attack, however, where Marcus is running across the room and Khan trails him with gunfire, and almost hits him. That could have been for show, I guess.

You’ve given me much to think about. Thanks. :)

518. Other Guy - June 27, 2013

512. boborci – June 27, 2013

Like I said above, No dissonance here. I AGREE WITH MOST OF WHAT YOU BELIEVE about 911 and false flags. And it makes me mad.

Which is why I did not enjoy it in my great escape to the movie. That’s supposed to be a safe place where I can forget about the world fro a while. Not have to re-live all that tragedy in the name of good entertainment.

That’s why I had fault with your “true message”. It just DID NOT belong in a Star Trek movie. Even the final credits tagline was ridiculous. It had so many scratching their heads one last time as they left the theatre. WHY?

Indeed, WHY?

519. Other Guy - June 27, 2013

Ah… well, if Marcus is the one who put Khan’s crew inside the torpedoes, that would certainly explain how Marcus intended to kill them if Khan did not follow orders. Hmm

Does’nt that make you think a bit how dumb this idea was?

Putting Khan’s people in torpedoes? Seriously?

520. Ahmed - June 27, 2013

@Bob,

What can you tell us about the 3rd movie ? Any progress with Paramount ?

521. Charles Trotter - June 27, 2013

508. boborci

“destroy all evidence. take no chances. and the order is a little weird anyway, which adds to the suspicion and ultimately disobeying of the orders”

Ah, I see. Well, Marcus should have known the order would be considered suspicious. Seriously, 72 torpedoes to take out one man? That’s gonna raise some eyebrows, and he should have realized that.

Issuing such a strange order is kind of taking a chance in itself, no? I think it would make more sense to order the firing of only one or two torpedoes and let the Klingons take care of the rest when they attack (and destroy) the sabotaged, stranded ‘Enterprise.’

Then again, Marcus was hardly a sensible admiral, was he? :)

522. Hugh Hoyland - June 27, 2013

If anyone hasnt noticed that TOS made allegories to war, racism ect.. ,issues important at that time and now, in many episodes just didnt watch the series, STID does the same thing.

Also keep ST6 TUC in mind because its plot was taken straight out of the headlines of the day.

523. boborci - June 27, 2013

514. other guy

so you hated the cold war in TOS. just say, ” who wants to think about that when the Russians have nukes!? and whats a black woman doing in the show? i dont wanna think about the horrible civil rights struggle we are facing! and get that Kennedy stand in, kirk, off my screen! i dont wanna think about the death of JFK, MLK, and RFK!

i wanna eat my popcorn and drink my soda! waaa! waaa!

and by te way, your story is about nothing deep. waa! waa!”

fun!

even if the movie was about what you claim, who the hell are you to say the movie shouldn’t have relevance just because you think you already know everything about the world that others don’t? because if you actually believe what you say, you have not done a good job of having those “nutty” beliefs of yours represented in the mainstream media or in political circles.

524. Charles Trotter - June 27, 2013

515. Other Guy

“Does’nt that make you think a bit how dumb this idea was? Putting Khan’s people in torpedoes? Seriously?”

The idea of putting people inside torpedoes *is* pretty dumb, until you look at the reasons for doing so.

If Marcus did it, it’s because it was the only way to kill Khan’s crew if he needed to do so without anyone else knowing what he had done (remember, the torpedoes were shielded). If Khan did it, it was an act of both desperation and logic (who would suspect that he would put his own crew inside explosives?).

In both cases, it’s done because no one would suspect either party would put Khan’s people inside live torpedoes. It’s one of those “It’s so dumb, it’s brilliant” scenarios. :)

525. Other Guy - June 27, 2013

The difference, boborci, is that in TOS they were not covertly trying to put their message out to the viewer. It was in your face!

Not like your writing, where half the audience does not even know what you are referring to in the story when it comes to Marcus and Khan. In fact, I am still confused about Khan’s character.

Your Khan was a white guy? And he’s the terrorist? And you think that’s good Trek. Huh.

EVERYONE! Who know these treks were about false flag terrorism?
Or in other words, WHO KNEW THIS LAST TREK WAS ABOUT YOUR GOVERNMENT TRYING TO KILL YOU?!

Anyone brave enough to comment?

526. Spock's Bangs - June 27, 2013

491 “Other Guy…. OUT.”

…promises, promises.

527. Other Guy - June 27, 2013

I will try and disregard your insinuation that I might be racist… again.

528. steve - June 27, 2013

349 Curious Cadet: if you followed the movie business at all, you’d know that it is almost impossible to get real numbers on a movie’s profitability (I’m talking PROFITS, not REVENUE…) There is no regulatory requirement for companies to release those numbers below top-division levels. So studios will sometimes show that a movie that appeared to make huge profits actually lost money. We all know that’s incomplete accounting.

Do you know what the total marketing budget for STiD was? Does anyone outside of the top ranks at the studio? No. So you should not contend that you do.

529. Ahmed - June 27, 2013

@Matt Wright,

Are we talking with the real Bob ?

Bob usually don’t act this way:

“even if the movie was about what you claim, who the hell are you to say the movie shouldn’t have relevance just because you think you already know everything about the world that others don’t? “

530. Curious Cadet - June 27, 2013

@513 Charles Trotter,

There’s a lot left to speculation in this movie. And I suspect we will have to wait for the home video in order to attempt to reconcile the most logical backstory for many of these events.

Certainly Harrison could have just been telling the truth. However, I did think about the problem with the 72 torpedoes. No Harrison had to do that, for many reasons. My theory in order to make this work is that Harrison did design and put his people in the torpedoes — don’t ask me how he managed to locate them in the first place and smuggle them out of whatever hole Marcus buried them away in for safe keeping. Since I suspect it was no easy feat to remove and transport 72 stasis pods without anyone noticing, my guess is Marcus found out before Harrison had an opportunity to remove them all, or before he was able to enact his plan to move the torpedoes to safety. I mean think about it, that’s a pretty ambitious plan!

So Marcus discovered he could no longer trust Harrison and decided to pull the plug on the whole thing since he essentially had everything he needed from him at that point. It also gave him time to formulate a plan, while sending Harrison out on various errands thus keeping him away from the torpedoes. And, the answer to his plan was presented to him just before the attacks began — Kirk: the perfect scapegoat. Marcus gets rid of Harrison, covers his tracks with section 31, destroys the 72 torpedoes, gets the unpredictable Kirk out of his hair, and gets his war with the Klingons.

Orci’s response re: firing all 72 torpedoes also lends some credence to this idea … Marcus wants to destroy all evidence and take no chances. So either Marcus is really dumb, or he’s incredibly smart when it comes to Khan, and Orci is seemingly telling us he’s very smart.

531. Other Guy - June 27, 2013

Big difference between the cold war and false flags, boborci.

The latter is a double edged sword. The general public has no Idea that you are actually saying that your government hates you! Using this as a backstory is your own secretive way of getting back at the man while at the same making a good buck off of the hapless victims (your viewers).

Not much better than Alex if you ask me.

532. Elias Javalis - June 27, 2013

468,

Man, i dont know…With all the big budget Movie Monsters around trek would look poor, as i indicated i havent seen it yet but i hear its balanced..VFX vs Story/character-Development..

533. steve - June 27, 2013

447 Taylor: “hate”???? You know, people do have a right to have varying opinions. It’s a little something called “diversity”. I’d always thought that scifi fans were supposed to be the people that actually VALUED diversity. Especially Star Trek fans, since Trek as a franchise has probably been the most pro-diversity property out there since 1966.

It’s just disappointing that Trek fans can’t seem to have an actual debate on merits, without spewing out terms like “haters” on those they disagree with.

534. Curious Cadet - June 27, 2013

@520 Charles Trotter,
“It’s so dumb, it’s brilliant”

Yes. That’s a good point. Think about this. If the Enterprise is disabled in Klingon space, whether they follow orders and fire all 72 torpedoes or not to take out Harrison, they will most likely use them to defend themselves against the Klingons, or ultimately get destroyed along with the Enterprise — which was the ultimate plan anyway.

Using the modern drone analogy, do the “pilots” of those drones question orders? No, they fly those drones into whatever they are ordered to. “Fly 6 drones into that compound when one should logically do it? No problem, the reason is above my pay grade.” Fire 72 untraceable torpedoes and not only will you ensure Harrison has been taken out, but the Klingons are sure to be distracted with essentially an atomic blast in their backyard as you make your escape.

535. steve - June 27, 2013

@448 boborci: you talk about “biting back” at the haters. I believe I’ve read every post you’ve made here since the movie opened, and my impression is that the criticisms of the film you’ve addressed are mostly those around Trek-related plot points: enterprise underwater, components of ship design, whether an Indian actor should’ve been cast as Khan, etc.

It doesn’t seem that you’ve addressed many of the criticisms around the film-making process itself: choice of story, balance of characters, dialogue, potential plot holes, pacing, etc. Didn’t I see a post about a month ago where you’d said you would be addressing all that in one big post?

536. Other Guy - June 27, 2013

Yeah. Choice of Story! I like that question.

537. Curious Cadet - June 27, 2013

@524. steve,
“Do you know what the total marketing budget for STiD was? Does anyone outside of the top ranks at the studio? No. So you should not contend that you do.”

Well I do follow the movie business and everything I’ve stated is in line with what has been stated publicly by Paramount, and estimated by experts in the business. I’m not making stuff up in a vacuum. The reality is that even if a studio doesn’t owe anything to governmental regulation, they do owe something to their shareholders, and profit participants, any of whom can order an audit of the books of an individual production at any time, just as Art Buckwald did for Coming To America — so they cant just publish blatant lies that might be challeneged in court later. Considering STID upped the budget over ST09 and the films are doing relatively similar business, it’s a fair bet that STID is going to be similarly profitable. I seriously doubt anyone at Paramount is upset with the overall performance.

538. T'Cal - June 27, 2013

Very good movie! Can’t wait for the next one!

Isn’t that why we’re here??

539. boborci - June 27, 2013

521 so you object to the blatant message that pissed in your popcorn because it was too subtle and opaque and confused?!

cognitive dissonance

540. Khan 2.0 - June 27, 2013

Bob Orci,

Thanks for the great film! I watched it four times! I cant wait to see what you do next. Since the Enterprise is now on her five year voyage, I am fully confident you will take Star Trek to the final frontier in 2016.

Grateful Fan

541. draderman - June 27, 2013

Please Bob Orci – explain “Aft Nacelle”.
Anything you tell me about it will stay between us ;)

542. Mad Mann - June 27, 2013

OK, thinking too much about a movie now, but oh well.

I wonder if there was ever a time when the Wrath of Khan homage/parody at the end of Into Darkness was questioned by the film-makers as too much. Really, the Khan yell? Really? I totally cringed. And it was illogical.

The fans of Wrath of Khan would be the ones that would be aware of it, and most of those fans did NOT like the character swap of that famous scene nor the Khan yell by Spock.
Non-fans would not get the references.

So, why even bother to do it? It goes to show how little the film-makers understand their fan base.

543. boborci - June 27, 2013

530. steve

yeah, schedule took over. you are right.

so you start it up again! what can i discuss for u in trrms of holes, etc…?

544. Robman007 - June 27, 2013

@533…sadly, no. Folks have to look for hidden meanings and call out slights about the lack of reality in a fictional film

545. Other Guy - June 27, 2013

Dude.

It’s not Cognitive Disonance. Not here. Not woith me, sorry boborci, I know its a word you’ve been wanting to use. The only dissonance I get is when I try to club everyone over the head trying to get them to see all the BS conspiracies happening all around them! Trying to get them out of their dissonance

I just did not want the Bush bs in a Star Trek movie, or anywhere else in my life.

Including here!

Including YOU!

So tell me WHO CAME UP WITH THE IDEA FOR THIS BACKSTORY?
This knowledge would go a long way in helping me

546. Robman007 - June 27, 2013

@ 536…wrath of khan was my favorite trek film, yet the character swap scene did not bother me. The Spock yell..yeah, that was kinda silly. I kinda cringe on that one.

547. Other Guy - June 27, 2013

…understand your motives.

548. steve - June 27, 2013

532 Curious Cadet: In 2009, LucasFilm claimed that Return of the Jedi had never turned a profit, despite grossing almost $600M by that time. You see those kinds of claims from studios all the time. If you think that US corporate execs are answerable in any serious way to shareholders, you haven’t experienced much of US corporate culture… Shareholders can’t even get board members dumped, even with near 100% voting in favor.

As for Paramount, even Entertainment Weekly’s main film reporter stated on their Sirius radio show a few weeks ago that Paramount has to be very disappointed with STiD’s performance. It appears they were expecting a much higher take, as evidenced by the $100M+ opening weekend reports that were coming out in the weeks prior to the US release.

549. rtrj - June 27, 2013

536. Mad Mann – June 27, 2013

… I wonder if there was ever a time when the Wrath of Khan homage/parody at the end of Into Darkness was questioned by the film-makers as too much. Really, the Khan yell? Really? I totally cringed. And it was illogical…

I’ve been watching since Sept 1966, I loved WOK and I think this film was a blast. The homage reminds me not to take things too seriously, this is entertainment not gospel. I’ve seen Into Darkness four times and I enjoy it more with each viewing. I really don’t feel “used” by any hidden back story or conspiracy theory. Thanks Bob, please bring us more.

rtrj

550. Phil - June 27, 2013

@521. One little problem with that theory. No bodies.

Was it trying, or succeeding? No one has tried to kill me. Or my neighbors. Haven’t noticed piles of corpses in beautiful Riverside….except for the occasional drunk driver, of course.

Let me guess, my gov’t is trying to kill me, and I’m alive only because of the valiant efforts of underground patriots who are standing in the gap, foiling their every move. Obviously, because they are still wanted by the government they survive as soldiers of fortune. In my darkest hour, if no one else can help, and if I can find them….maybe I can hire…. “The A-Team.”

I feel so much better now. Thanks.

551. Robman007 - June 27, 2013

@542…agreed.

It will be a LONG LONG while before we hear word on a sequel. Despite the high critic ratings and money the film made, it underperformed for what the “all knowing” suits in Paramount wanted.

That can be placed with…

1. The 4 year wait. Should have been NO MORE then 2. Star Trek is not Iron Man or Star Wars or Batman. 2 Years for the 2nd film SHOULD have been the target. If that worked, THEN you can wait 3 years. 4 years killed momentum that Trek 09 built up. Many thought the film was in development hell.

2. One sided marketing. The US marketing sucked. In this day an age, you should be able to successfully market a film in both markets, not just one. We got all the crappy trailers and next to NOTHING in merchandise while the foreign market got the great trailers, tons of publicity and even better merchandise (look no further then the Revell Model kit). We didn’t even have a name of the damn villain or a teaser trailer until 5 months before release. What kinda marketing plan is that?

3. The fallout between Bad Robot and Paramount/CBS. That will have an effect on a future sequel, especially if the new Wars franchise is a massive hit.

4. Once again…4 years to wait for a filim that, while good, felt very rushed in the last act.

You want to blame folks on that…blame Paramount and CBS. They should have promoted the shit out of this franchise after 2009 film. There should have been toys, models, books, video games, a TV series…they wanted to milk TOS and thumb their nose at Bad Robot’s ideas, so NOTHING happened. All the merchandise except for the idiotically priced $7,000 MODEL were canned (cancelled books, cancelled Round 2 model…cancelled plans for TV show spins offs, etc)..

It should not be this hard to work with a franchise like Star Trek, especially when they just turned out two films that made the most money of any and brought in the most exposure…one of the reasons I wish someone else would buy out the Trek license. Paramount dropped the ball too many times

552. OneBuckFilms - June 27, 2013

Whoa, lots of black helicopter like talk here. :)

I don’t think I want to get involved in all that kind of whackyness.

@boborci -

Thanks for coming here and being so actively engaged. It is something I appreciate greatly.

I greatly enjoyed the 2009 movie, place it among my top Star Trek films (and top films, for that matter), and enjoyed Into Darkness even more.

RE: Khan’s ethnicity.

This is something that doesn’t matter to me (especially give Cumberbatch’s awesome performance), but I’m not sure whether it was established on screen precisely where he was from.

553. Phil - June 27, 2013

@542. Yep, performance and expectations are two entirely different subjects. Box Office Mojo pegged the movie at about 450MM worldwide when it ends it’s run, and after broadcast rights and Blue-Ray sales are figured in I don’t doubt it will turn a profit. Expectations are another matter. There was so much chatter here and elsewhere that Bad Robot was hoping to duplicate TDK’s performance compared to Batman Begins that the bar was set pretty high, as evidenced by the studio moving the opening date up because of expected demand. Business pages like Forbes and Variety are still speaking like they expect Trek 13 to get made, but they are now framing those observations on the expectations that the studio needs to iron out the wrinkles first.

I’m not under any illusion that the studio cares if they have a movie ready for Trek’s 50th anniversary or not.

554. Robman007 - June 27, 2013

on a side note…don’t get me started on the idiotically priced QMx “artisan” replica models…$7,000 for a refit model and JJ Prise? WTF!

I built a 1/350 TOS Enterprise..fully lit, perfectly painted WITH shuttlebay and it cost me no more then $500 after parts….I’m currently working on a 1/350 scale Refit AND the Revell Into Darkness kit..both with Pearlescent paint schemes and those won’t come close to 7,000.

Buy one of those and you need your head examined..unless you are a millionare. Then kudos.

555. Robman007 - June 27, 2013

@547…They could have had those numbers with a 2 year wait. That 4 year wait hurt this franchise a ton.

Not meaning to put down those involved with the film, but based on the news or lack of news alone, coupled with the 4 year wait, gave you the impression that, perhaps after the bad robot/cbs fall out, took too many side projects and didn’t give STID the time it needed to meet expectations…

again, just a thought.

556. Robman007 - June 27, 2013

Not to mention that the QMx Enterprise D is $10,000!! Give me a f**kin break!

557. Kevin Browning - June 27, 2013

Dear Bob,

Thanks for the great film! I can’t wait to see what you do next! You have exceeded my expectations! You have written a great story with great characters and most importantly, took a snapshot of our time period and reflected it into the film! Thanks! I hope to see the third one in 2016 (and maybe a series or animated series)

Grateful Fan!

558. steve - June 27, 2013

537 boborci: appreciate the opportunity. I’ll summarize the issues I had:

1. Choice of Khan: this one has been hashed to death on this forum, and I’ve read interviews you’ve given about your discussions with Lindelof about this. I just don’t see how the Khan argument won the day. After being freed from 50 years of Trek canon, I just can’t understand why the desire to tell a completely new story didn’t win out.

2. Cumberbatch: he was great with what he was given. But after seeing the film twice, it still doesn’t seem to me like he had enough to do. Roger Ebert always said that a movie can only be as good as it’s villain. But clearly Marcus was the real villain of the film. Khan barely had any dialogue up until the last third of the movie, and after showing his conflicted motivations, he really only turned “evil” at the very end. If this was going to be an “homage” to the Khan storyline, it needed way more Khan.

3. Homage to what? It wasn’t really as much an homage to WoK, as it was to The Undiscovered Country. Which is an even more perplexing creative decision, as while that film was decent, it surely wasn’t material worthy enough for a huge-budget JJ film.

4. A serious lack of Kirk/Spock/McCoy moments. One brilliance of the first film was that it gave all 7 major characters their moments (Takei must’ve really been bummed to see John Cho given such a chance to shine in the last movie…) But we all know that the core of Trek is the relationship between the big 3. I’m all for exploring the Spock/Uhura romance, which I thought was a fantastic idea. But in this movie, it seemed to crowd out the opportunities for the top 3. Leading to problem 5…

5. A SERIOUS Karl Urban deficiency!!! Every critic in the world raved about Urban’s performance in the last movie, deservedly so. He was just brilliant as a young McCoy. He was so underutilized in this film. Criminally so.

6. Trading Pike for Carol Marcus. Bruce Greenwood just absolutely nailed the Pike role in both movies. I know it would’ve been tough to continue finding a role for him in the new movies, but losing him is just too big a loss. Especially when it appears that Carol Marcus may become a regular character. Her storyline in this movie was really weak, seemingly only there to pull McCoy out of a jam and slap her dad when needed. She seriously didn’t have enough to do.

6. The comedic aspects: I’m one of the ones who’s completely OKAY with going dark in Trek. It’s why DS9 is my favorite Trek series. But the film still could’ve had a few more laughs here and there (accomplished beautifully in ST09…). Personally I only really laughed at one line in the new film (“Never trust a Vulcan”…). I realize humor is very subjective, and tried to give it a fair shot in the second viewing, but it just wasn’t there.

8. The 3D. One word: ouch. OK, seems like maybe you guys figured out the brightness problem; the 3D here didn’t look nearly as dark as most recent 3D movies. But the flicker problem was just massive. The 3D looked great, until either the camera panned or an actor moved. And when it got to the big action scenes, it felt like we were seeing a film shot at 16fps, with about a third of the frames missing. I know most people can’t see the flicker effect in today’s 3D, but for those of us who can, it’s pretty bad.

9. Kirk’s “death” scene: Once you realized the film was going to repeat the WoK ending, with Spock and Kirk reversing roles, you had to evaluate it based on whether it was a successful homage to WoK, or just redundant screenwriting. For me, it was the latter. My reaction to each sequence and each line of dialogue at that point became, yep, they used that line from WoK, and that line, and that line… (Granted it may play better for people who haven’t seen WoK twenty or so times like I have…) It just had zero emotional impact compared to the original, when we didn’t know for sure whether the filmmakers were really going to kill off Spock. But this time, we all knew that they weren’t really going to kill off Kirk, knowing that all the actors are already signed for the third film. So just no emotional resonance at all.

10. The need for a “bridge” story from ST09?: I understand the you all may have felt like you needed to deal with the issues of the last movie, mainly how Kirk develops from being thrust into command so soon, to how he matures into the guy who can lead the “5-year mission” into the unknown. Personally, I would’ve been fine with that whole arc being left alone, and having a time jump before this movie, and we just open with the new crew being ready to go out and face an original story. I just don’t think it was necessary for the mainstream audience for this film to deal with those issues.

Those are my top 10. None of them relate to the shape of the nacelles or the concept of trans-warp beaming.

559. boborci - June 27, 2013

521. Other Guy – June 27, 2013
The difference, boborci, is that in TOS they were not covertly trying to put their message out to the viewer. It was in your face!

Not like your writing, where half the audience does not even know what you are referring to in the story when it comes to Marcus and Khan. In fact, I am still confused about Khan’s character.

Your Khan was a white guy? And he’s the terrorist? And you think that’s good Trek. Huh.

EVERYONE! Who know these treks were about false flag terrorism?
Or in other words, WHO KNEW THIS LAST TREK WAS ABOUT YOUR GOVERNMENT TRYING TO KILL YOU?!

Anyone brave enough to comment?
—————————–

So you are confused but know wxactly what the message is. got it.

Incidently, Spock, Kirk, and the entire crew of the Enterprise, are part of that “government.” Right?

560. Phil - June 27, 2013

Hey, it’s JJ’s birthday. Happy Birthday!

561. Other Guy - June 27, 2013

Dude, you tell me. I was thinking Kirk and company would have remained in this story to stop the insanity of Marcus / Khan. To be liberty’s beacon.

No. I am not confused. But if you look at all the people above who thought this was a simple statement on the recent Drone policies (It was not), you will see some really confused Star Trek fans. .

So, Mr. Orci, it was not me that misunderstood the message. It was almost everyone else who saw it! But I am the one who’s confused? Please. The only thing I am Khanfused about is how Khan became a white guy? How was it that you share credits for story writing and yet you do not know who included the scene about Kirk and Spock talking about how to prosecute Khan (on Mudd’s shuttle)

Black helicopters? Please.

Cognitive dissonance? Please.

Who else here really knows what that means? And you say I am confused? You are off your mark

562. Russell Meyers - June 27, 2013

Boborci, i have to agree, the role reversal TWOK didn’t work for me either. As a lifelong fan of 44 years. Subjective, but for this fan, it was painful.

It seemed to play well at the NY press screening I attended, and it played well with the younger fans in the second screening, but there was laughter and ‘ohhhhhhs’ heard from older fans, and not in a good way.

Even doing Khan, what was the thought process to lifting SO much from TOWK, and not just a subtle nod?

563. Moputo Jones - June 27, 2013

What whiny crybabies we Trekkers are. I’m sure that if there were a WWW back in 1982, you would have found tons of comments about how unTrek-like all of the violence and death in TWoK was. Now, of course, it’s considered to be the greatest Trek ever. We should all be happy that people like boborci are out there creating high-quality Trek. Do you want to go back to the days of Insurrection and Nemesis?

564. WriterJWA - June 27, 2013

I love it that boborci is on here lighting blowhards on fire. Totally made my day!

Only real request I have, should there be a 13 and 14, is that we get to see Kirk in the center seat actually fighting in a space battle that he has a chance at winning WITH his ship. The USS Vengence felt TOO much, and the Enterprise had no chance with or without Kirk in command. We’ve yet to see the Enterprise dish out as much as she can take. Give her a chance to shine a little, good man!

Otherwise… LOVED STID!

565. The Great Bird Lives - June 27, 2013

@Bob,

I stated previously that in a sense ‘you cared more about the money than anything’ in so many words, and I would like to apologize for the unwarranted outburst. I believe you did try to be as conscientious as you could while crafting the story, and furthermore- I believe you work very hard to earn your paycheck.
As a long-time fan of the franchise, and a admirer of Gene Roddenberry, I feel that ‘his’ vision was one that portrayed mankind as having overcome war, and disease, and that- as a species- we had left those things behind, and were truly spreading peace, and democracy throughout the galaxy. Gene wanted to use ‘our’ past as a springboard to our future, and during the days of Kirk, and Spock, our past was clearly ‘the past’, and we were free to explore the wonders of the galaxy.
So why are we stuck in this vengeful, violent, mode, where we are likely to see even more vengeance, and violence in the future- unnamed- installment? THIS is what Levar, and many other Roddenberry constituents are asking. Alternate universe? Yes, I understand that this is NOT the Roddenberryverse, but If your going to use the name Star Trek, then you must- beyond any contractual agreement- honor the vision, and biblical format that was set forth by It’s creator.
Did the movie make a lot of money? Yes
Was the story good? Sure
Did you guys really bring Star Trek out of the grave? Never! You can’t give life to something that will NEVER die.
I agree that you have nursed it’s health to some extent, but I fear you may have commercialized it to the point where the integrity of the vision may have been compromised, itself.
It’s anyone guess as to weather the ‘Wagon-train to the stars’ has stalled indefinitely, or until the leadership changes, but this much is certain: This fan will continue to stand up for Roddenberry’s vision until the day I leave this earth.

566. Ensign Ricky - June 27, 2013

@boborci, The only thing wrong with STID was that Pine did not yell “I’m Captain Kirk!!” Other than that, it was a fine movie.

567. Khan 2.0 - June 27, 2013

Some quick STID questions for boborci :

-Was there any discussion/attempt etc at a shatner cameo scene this time?

-Was there any discussion about showing the Botany Bay? (Maybe at in the warehouse at the Raiders style end when we see all the pods being locked away? )

-are the Eugenic Wars still supposed to happen in the 1990s? (im guessing they are but no time specific so as not to confuse everyone).

-Was there any discussion of perhaps doing some kind of flashback scene involving Khan and the EWs? (like Spock Primes flash back/forward scene in ST09)

-was any explanation considered as to why khan looked different (ok I know he would always look different as someone else plays him -same with kirk etc ) but im wondering if Marcus could have ordered Khan have his facial appearance altered while still asleep so he would be untraceable to facial recognition? (like the villain in Die Another Day) which in turn could explain why he didn’t look like Ricardo.

-talking of Richardo was there ever any discussion/intention of perhaps giving the original khan some kind of cameo (I.e. if above scenario then either in a photo or CG augmented footage of 1967 Ricardo when Kirk Spock discover who he really is -similar to when they discover Khans identity in Space Seed )

-was Harrison always meant to be khan? I was thinking right up until the end that he might turn out to be one of khans henchmen (Joachim or Joaquin) posing as khan (like Ras Al Gould in Batman Begins – especially when considering the Nolan batman influence in nuTrek) with Khan still in a pod in a secret location – leading to a CG 1967 Space Seed Khan vs Spock fight (like Arnie v Bale in Terminator 4 :)

Btw – absolute loved every minute of STID! :)

568. Other Guy - June 27, 2013

And I will stand there as well, 559 TGBL.

Long live Rodenberry’s vision.

And god Bless this Republic.

But still, mostly, Long live Rodenberry’s vision.

But, in closing, God Bless the Republic.

Stay Classy!

569. Other Guy - June 27, 2013

-talking of Richardo was there ever any discussion/intention of perhaps giving the original khan some kind of cameo (I.e. if above scenario then either in a photo or CG augmented footage of 1967 Ricardo when Kirk Spock discover who he really is -similar to when they discover Khans identity in Space Seed )

was there EVER any talk about using this guy?…

http://www.ur.umich.edu/0809/Apr20_09/31.php

A no brainer. Someone get STC to call this guy!!!

570. Robman007 - June 27, 2013

“Only real request I have, should there be a 13 and 14, is that we get to see Kirk in the center seat actually fighting in a space battle that he has a chance at winning WITH his ship.”

PERFECT!

Captain Kirk, while being great with his judo chops, was a brilliant starship tactician and commander. I would love to see some scenes with Kirk using his brain to fight a starship battle in which the Enterprise does not get it’s butt kicked from one end of the screen to the next.

I am quite tired of seeing the good ship Enterprise get whupped in film. I know it’s an alternate reality, but in the days of the TOS Enterprise, it was the most powerful vessel in space. You had ships, but then you had STARSHIPS, which were so powerful they could level an entire planet. I miss that with the Enterprise.

571. Robman007 - June 27, 2013

It just seems that after Trek 2, nobody can come up with a scenario unless the Enterpries gets it’s ass kicked. The only time since Trek 2 that the Enterprise felt like THE ENTERPRISE was Trek 3 (granted it was destroyed, but for a second, it gave that BoP a whupping..too bad the computer fried out) and First Contact (the Enterprise E was BAD to the BONE!…stood up to the Borg cube without flinching..badazz).

TNG (the Enterprise D was pansy wimp)
Trek 5 (one shot, then it was “surrender or else”)
Trek 6
Trek 7
Insurrection
Nemesis
Into Darkness (the WORSE offender..at least the Enterprise D fought back..the new 1701 just took the ass kicking without a single shot)..

572. Spock's Bangs - June 27, 2013

#559 “Alternate universe? Yes, I understand that this is NOT the Roddenberryverse, but If your going to use the name Star Trek, then you must- beyond any contractual agreement- honor the vision, and biblical format that was set forth by It’s creator.”

Why? Gene didn’t. He created TNG and it wasn’t anything like Star Trek as we knew it.

573. Charles Trotter - June 27, 2013

“Do you know what the total marketing budget for STiD was? Does anyone outside of the top ranks at the studio? No. So you should not contend that you do.”

It’s currently estimated to come to around $180 million. Studios pay for marketing in quarterly, sometimes yearly amounts, so it’s difficult to pinpoint the exact cost.

The marketing/distribution budget for summer blockbusters like this is typically close to but less than the film’s production budget. The film’s production budget was around $185 million.

574. JTK2099 - June 27, 2013

I hope the negotiations between Orci and Kurtzman and Paramount fail. I don’t want any more of your pseudo-Trek.

575. Charles Trotter - June 27, 2013

That comment was for steve @ 524, by the way.

576. Other Guy - June 27, 2013

Yeah. Bob for one, fails to understand the true scope of Trek or it’s many nuances.

577. Ryan Allen Carrillo - June 27, 2013

I wish there was a “like” button on all of @boborci comments! I feel like we would get along! LOL

Loved the new Trek! Better than the first! Great cast, great message, completely entertaining!

578. Phil - June 27, 2013

Well, Star Trek: The Exhibition is coming back to southern California. At the LA County Fair, Aug/Sept 2013.

579. boborci - June 27, 2013

555. Other guy

Oh chirst. You are saying you hate the movie cuz of it’s obvious message that is also somehow a secret.

Balatant but confused.

Obvious but unclear.

You’ve said this a half dozen times in a half dozen ways.

I have not chategorized my opinion of the clarity or message of this movie.

Congitave dissonance.

580. Bill Peters - June 27, 2013

@BobOrci,

Could you make it so someone like Carghtwright from Star Trek 6 is a good guy in this Universe you have started, Also could we see some Andorrans?

@OtherGuy, I think Bob knows what he is doing, he has to Balance out the needs of a General Movie going Audance and needs of Trek Fans. Trek has to make more money for there to be more Trek, I don’t get why Fans of Trek Really Can’t live by IDIC with the new JJ Verse? Also @Bob Orci, are you going to talk to Levar Burton soon and find out if he has any input for the next film?

581. Ahmed - June 27, 2013

@Bob,

Any update regarding the Mummy reboot ?

582. Roddenberry Serling - June 27, 2013

Bob Orci check it out: Submitted for your approval

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTqPfp36Xwg

583. boborci - June 27, 2013

552. Steve

1.) I’ve talked a bit about this before. Essentially, the story works, in my opinion, no matter what his names is. The story is about a unique individual who was blackmailed and used by an Admiral whose fear lead him to make plans for preemptive war against possible threats. The unique individual rebels, and targets the folk and the organization who has tried to use him.

Notice I didn’t use any names above. Also, it is not the story of Space Seed, and it is not the story of WOK.

It was always our intention to harmonize with canon. For example, though we freed ourselves from canon the minute Nero showed up, we still depicted the Kobayashi Maru test, and did so in a way that in our minds, could’ve happened the same in both universes. In the case of this movie, the details of K’s life seemed to add to the richness of the story we generated without him. The genetic engineering, being from a less utopian time,72 crew members which happens to be the number of virgins waiting for certain folk in the afterlife…

If you don’t know K, it doesn’t matter at all. If you do, you get to see a different take. That was our thinking on point 1

584. boborci - June 27, 2013

552 Steve

2.) You are pointing out one of the differences between our movie and previous material with K.

And that is exactly the point. You are right that the true villain is Marcus. In fact, K doesn’t even turn on Kirk until Kirk betrays him first. The ambiguity of his villainy is exactly the point. And that point is highlighted precisely because it is K. You sudden;y are forced to say to yourself, as you just did, “I’m not sure K was truly the villain!” Exactly.

585. Killamarshtrek - June 27, 2013

Can I ask Bob,

You said you considered a rogue April as the villain (presumably why he was in the comic prequel), how recently did it change to ‘Khan’? Is this the reason why there was the ‘April Giant Gun’ production art & sound effect?
(you really had me with that one!)

Thanks

586. boborci - June 27, 2013

steve

3. Not sure I understand your point here. Hard to argue ST6 is bad inspiration now that STID is biggest Trek ever.

587. Other Guy - June 27, 2013

Speak english!!!!

Easy english!!!!

Look. I do not hate your movie. I said above I thought the acting was awesome, effects were perfect, music was awesome, but the writing, the writing boborci was poorly drafted.

Look thats just my opinion. Sorry, boborci. But making Khan a white british guy is absurd. Putting the E underwater – Absurd. Kirk monkeying around in Engineering kicking warp cores – Absurd, Spock’s Khan yell – Absurd, Spocks superhuman aerial fight scene with Khan – Absurd. Spock mind-melding with Pike for unknown reasons – Absurd, The E crashing toward Earth at 200,000 kilometers and hour and not exploding and fizzling out in a puff of smoke, Asbsurd, Marcus making his own super enterprise for Khan – Absurd. More? I can go, on and on.

Look all the absurdities above looked greaaaaat! OK? But the motivation and reasoning behind any one of your plot ploints was directed to a dumb conclusion in an effort to support a plot about Marcus trying to star a war with the Klingons? I reall still do not know why he even wanted to do that in the first place. It was inevitable? War with the Klingons? But a war with the Romulans was not even mentioned???!! ABSURD!!!

588. boborci - June 27, 2013

Steve

4 and 5

Wish we could have more with all. Can’t win them all. Few movies are expected to service so many hero characters.

589. boborci - June 27, 2013

Steve

6. agree wish we had more for her. Would you like less McCoy then to service her;)?

Also, Pike’s death and her role are unrelated. Pike dying is just effective drama. It motivates the audience to believe Kirk may actually betray his principles and execute a criminal without trial.

590. boborci - June 27, 2013

steve

7. I think Bones and Scotty are consistently hilarious. Spock and Pike were funny to me in first scene. But agree, humor is subjective.

591. Keachick - rose pinenut - June 27, 2013

#440 – “First of, Abrams has basically brainwashed fans into thinking that any Trek is better than no Trek.”

No. Many fans wanted more Star Trek which is why Paramount saw the possibility of making another movie and needed a film production company to bring this about. They chose JJ Abrams and his Bad Robot production company to make it happen. Bad Robot has done so twice – so far.

Secondly, more importantly, NOBODY brainwashes me. Anyone who knows me (been posting here for three years now) will confirm that I speak the truth as I know and understand it and posters like MJ, Phil, Red Dead Ryan and others will attest to that. Not even Bob Orci or Chris Pine (ref. part of my pseudonym rose pinenut – get it?) get a “brainwashed person’s” free pass, if or when…

I love STID, despite some aspects, mainly the sometimes overly lengthy scenes of violence…

Jeyl and others – Showing women in a partially dressed state does NOT signify misogyny any more than showing men in the same state signifies misandry. Enough of that crap!

592. boborci - June 27, 2013

Steve

8. Can’t speak to 3d in that the quality of individual theaters in that quality varies. This 3d was very consciously and responsibly dne.

593. William Kirk - June 27, 2013

boborci

I have to say I didn´t like the first movie, but I really love and enjoyed “Into Darkness”. I think you made a great job on in :-)

594. Keachick - rose pinenut - June 27, 2013

Bob Orci – My suggestion is to write good dialogue and scenes for the “awesome foursome”. Challenging but doable!

595. boborci - June 27, 2013

Steve

9. It was partly homage, but I agree it had to work on its own. In our minds, WOK was about a long standing friendship ending, and the scene was a celebration of that firendship.

In ours the scenario, in reverse, was about the friendship BEGINNING. Worked for us. And it may be why it worked more most who were not aware of WOK.

596. boborci - June 27, 2013

Steve

10. Fair enough. We felt it was still interesting to see their growth. They are still younger than the characters we met, but someone else may have pursued your instincts with equal success.

Thanks for reasoned commentary!

597. Stargazer54 - June 27, 2013

@BobOrci,

Sorry you’re taking a beating in here, but I would like to echo others who appreciate your involvement. You’re a bigger man than most.

As to the GR worship, (I am guilty as well), I must relay a story . . .

In the 70′s Gene came to my university to speak. One of the things I have always remembered is that he said he never believed that there was a straight line from where we were to the utopian society he (and the other writers) had created. He imagined that the human race would face untold horrible things before we ever got there, if ever.

And after all that, here was his real message:

” To be different is not necessarily to be ugly. To have a different idea is not necessarily to be wrong. . . .

For if we do not learn to appreciate the small variations between our own kind on Earth, then God help us if we get out into space and meet the variations that almost certainly out there.”

Long story short, those are the themes I would like to see in the next film. That’s what Star Trek is about to me and countless others who have stayed with the franchise all these years.

I did enjoy STID. But there is unfinished business.

Just my $0.02 . Luck to ya buddy.

598. Disinvited - June 27, 2013

#439. PaulB – June 27, 2013

My trouble with what you assert is you have young Kirk playing the God card, i.e. Nero has to be stopped because Kirk, who barely grasps what caused him and his universe to spring into being – regarding Prime Spock as some sort of “cheat” – thinks Nero has the potential to do the same or worse in another universe. And yet Prime Spock demonstrated that knowing where and when Nero would pop out is not a given. Nero, could exit into a future where he, his concerns, and the Narada are as insignificant as a gnat. Or where the civilization is capable of curing his mental illness. Point is in TOS Kirk runs around telling everyone that he is not a God and challenges those that lay claim to the title, but altKirk appears to accept the mantle, and I find that troubling.

Also, in the film franchise Prime Kirk is famous for pretending to give his adversaries exactly what they ask for and then NOT delivering. In this way, blowing the Narada away because Nero would rather die than accept Kirk’s help is out of character.

599. Captain Slow - June 27, 2013

Hey boborci! I managed to avoid almost all of the spoilers even though where I live the movie came out nearly a month later and for me this enhanced the experience. For instance, I knew that Joseph Gatt was going to play some sort of cyborg but I hadn’t noticed him on the bridge. Then I saw this large techy-looking cube shaped object near Jupiter and I thought that it was a Borg cube. And then BC said that he was Khan and my jaw literally dropped. Then Spock Prime appeared and my jaw dropped again.

So my question is, since there will almost certainly be a new director for the next movie, will the secrecy be maintained?

600. boborci - June 27, 2013

577. Killamarshtrek

My intital idea, when discussing possibility of K, was to first call him April as a mislead, instead of Harrison. I was talked out of using that name.

601. Trek in a Cafe - June 27, 2013

HI Bob,

I am a political documentary filmmaker and an avid reader of you on these boards. Much has been said above between you and others relating to your political beliefs and how they influenced the script. As creatives it’s our ambition that messages will be seen and understood by the widest possible audience.

I didn’t write this, but obviously some people are provoked by the set up:
http://blogs.indiewire.com/anthony/abrams-new-star-trek-loaded-with-political-parallels-kirk-as-obama

So — my question is: to what extent in your conversations with JJ or the advertising and promotions team, did anyone suggest the idea of selling STID as a political film? Did that ever come up? Was it ever debated within the team, with friends, or a test audience? Were the decisions about all those other aspects made before they could be smoothed out or improved in the edit room to more clearly reflect (your) (the team’s) specific political metaphors or analogies? Will we hear about such discussions on the Blue Ray?

Matt

602. Keachick - rose pinenut - June 27, 2013

#471/472 – I shall further ‘elevate’ the discussion by saying that you are rather dumb and even a bit paranoid in that you accused Bob Orci of ‘demonizing’ you…Holy moly

603. boborci - June 27, 2013

573. I filmed a nice little shout out to Levar Burton at the London premiere for a documentary about him, praising his various accomplishments. I expect that to be the extent of our collaboration.

604. boborci - June 27, 2013

574. Ahmed

Not yet!

605. boborci - June 27, 2013

561 K2.0

– Thought about Shatner for a bit, but did not go as far as writing a scene as in 09.

– did discuss showing botany bay. Even talked about ending 09 movie with it being found.

– obviously, only what is filmed is canon, but if I were to imagine a way to keep the Eugenics wars consistent with canon and reality, I would say that those wars were secret wars, like the cold war, and that the true nature of these clandestine conflicts was not revealed until 2025

606. boborci - June 27, 2013

561 K2.0

Jumping to your last question:

yes, he was always meant to be K

607. Captain Slow - June 27, 2013

I always thought that the eugenics wars should have been changed into WWIII and be set in the 2050s. Although you could say that because Khan and his followers were genetically engineered they were actually a hundred years old in the 21st century but they looked young and it would be consistent with McCoy’s statement about their ages.

608. Killamarshtrek - June 27, 2013

@boborci

If you’re looking for suggestions for the next movie I think (now you’ve set it up) it HAS to focus on the Klingon war but there also has to be some ‘exploring strange new worlds’, (this is Star TREK).

I’d also like to see another ‘no win scenario’ but not another ‘sacrifice yourself in a radioactive chamber one’. How about a ‘City on the Edge’ type – allow someone you love to die for the greater good, or even better – be forced to kill someone you love to stop interplanetary war! That’s the kind of drama i’d lke to see. (I do have a particular one in mind)

609. boborci - June 27, 2013

559. The Great Bird Lives

I understand your point of view. I was heartened, however, when Rod Roddenberry called to tell me that he felt his dad would’ve loved STID and that it honored his father.

Utopia is desirable, but not very dramatic, and nonetheless, there is precedence for this type of story in Trek.

610. There's a Place for This - June 27, 2013

HI Bob,

Hope you can respond to this…

Much has been said above between you and others relating to your political beliefs and how they influenced the script. My question is: did anyone suggest the idea of selling STID as a political film? Did that ever come up? Was it ever debated within the team, with friends, or a test audience? Were the decisions about all those other aspects made before they could be smoothed out or improved in the edit room to more clearly reflect (your) (the team’s) specific political metaphors or analogies? Will we hear about such discussions on the Blue Ray?

Matt

611. boborci - June 27, 2013

558. WriterJWA – June 27, 2013
Noted. If I end up continuing to serve, will do my best to make it happen since I would love to see that, too.

612. Disinvited - June 27, 2013

#557. Moputo Jones – June 27, 2013

But by 1985, we had THE WELL and well worth digging around for the Trek discussions of then.

613. Keachick - rose pinenut - June 27, 2013

#512/519 – Yes indeed and LOL

Clueless actors? If my reading of an online Details magazine article about Chris Pine around late 2009 is correct, Chris Pine was quoted as saying that he went off to a little cabin in Mexico somewhere for a holiday and took with him books from the American Empire collection which were about US modern history, background and involvement in wars since WW2, politics, social legislation etc – a whole collection of various books dealing with such topics, some of them quite controversial, written by many, varied authors – just for “light reading”…Clueless indeed.

http://us.macmillan.com/series/AmericanEmpireProject

#593 – “So tell me WHO CAME UP WITH THE IDEA FOR THIS BACKSTORY? This knowledge would go a long way in helping me”

Why? How will this knowledge help you at this stage? What are you going to do about it? Help you make even less sense that you are already?

People see what they want or need to see in a movie. In actual reality, I heard no mention whatsoever of George Bush Jnr, 9/11 terrorist attacks, destruction of New York’s Twin Towers, drones, Iraq, Afghanistan, Osama Bin Laden…none whatsoever. I’m a literal kinda gal, you see. What the hell are you talking and why should we care?

Oh please, on second thoughts, don’t answer that…sigh…

614. rtrj - June 27, 2013

603. Keachick – rose pinenut – June 27, 2013 …
Oh please, on second thoughts, don’t answer that…sigh…

Thank you, that was well said!

rtrj

615. Andrew - June 27, 2013

boborci,

I’m not complaining like some people here, but just a question, out of curiosity, do you conceive of the known galaxy being a smaller place than previously imagined, or do you perhaps conceive of warp drive being a more potent thing than in the original timeline (because of Nero?)

It seems like it doesn’t take very long to get places now. At the end of TMP, Scotty said something to Spock about getting him back to Vulcan in a few days, yet in ST09 it seemed to take a few minutes. In STID, the Enterprise went from the edge of Klingon space almost back to Earth in a few minutes.

Or is this simply a case of the needs of the story causing a bit of an overlook or stretching of canon?

Thank you for your work on Star Trek and I hope you continue to be involved.

616. William Bradley - June 27, 2013

Meanwhile, Paramount announces TERMINATOR reboot.

June 26, 2015 is the scheduled opening in theaters.

http://www.deadline.com/2013/06/paramount-sets-terminator-relaunch-for-june-26-2015/

Paramount has confirmed the long in the works deal to cofinance and distribute the reboot of James Cameron’s Terminator franchise creation. Highbrow picture maker Megan Ellison spent over $20 million for the rights in 2011, and the project didn’t go very far. Things finally started percolating when Megan Ellison and her Annapurna Pictures joined forces with brother David Ellison, whose Skydance Productions has a deal with Paramount and makes popcorn movies. Avatar’s Laeta Kalogridis and Patrick Lussier have been working on the script for months. Arnold Schwarzenegger returns as the title character and the hope is to get at least two movies done before North American copyright reverts back to Cameron, who might want a fortune or might want to retire the franchise. Here’s the announcement:

Skydance Productions, Annapurna Pictures and Paramount Pictures have jointly announced they will partner on a rebooted “TERMINATOR” movie, to be released by Paramount Pictures on June 26, 2015.

The first in a stand-alone trilogy, “TERMINATOR” will be produced by Megan Ellison of Annapurna and David Ellison of Skydance. Dana Goldberg and Paul Schwake of Skydance will serve as executive producers. Laeta Kalorgridis (“Avatar,” “Shutter Island”) and Patrick Lussier (“Drive Angry”) are attached to write the screenplay.

Launched in 1984 with star Arnold Schwarzenegger as the title character, “TERMINATOR” spanned 3 subsequent films, which have earned over $1 billion at the worldwide box office.

David Ellison most recently executive produced, along with his partners at Paramount, “World War Z,” “Star Trek Into Darkness,” “G.I. Joe: Retaliation” and “Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol”. A 5th installment of in the “Mission: Impossible” franchise is in active development, along with a 3rd film in the “G.I. Joe” franchise, among other films.

Megan Ellison most recently produced the Academy Award®-nominated “Zero Dark Thirty,” “The Master” and executive produced “Spring Breakers” via her Annapurna Pictures banner and has David O. Russell’s “American Hustle,” Spike Jonze’s “Her,” and Bennett Miller’s “Foxcatcher” set for release later this year

617. Bill Peters - June 27, 2013

@BobOrci,

I Love that Rod Roddenberry Called you to say his Father would have loved STID :) I hope he loves what comes next too, Will Rod be working with you i the future?

618. Keachick - rose pinenut - June 27, 2013

#555 – “So, Mr. Orci, it was not me that misunderstood the message. It was almost everyone else who saw it! But I am the one who’s confused? Please. The only thing I am Khanfused about is how Khan became a white guy?”

I got messages from the film, ie got my interpretation of what I saw, as did others – or not. Whether my interpretation is as Bob Orci intended, I am not sure. Does it matter? I suspect that my understanding is fairly close to what he (and the other writers) most likely wanted to convey.

You are confused and angry because, well, because you are being contrary. You need to see a certain allegory played out and then get angry because the writer confirms the allegory, saying that you did not want your peace of mind to be disturbed?

Star Trek, taking place in the 23rd century (prime and alternate universes), already goes where we are not…sometimes it uses known scientific principles to extrapolate what development of known technologies could produce and other times it uses, what many consider, fantastical notions to allow for people to be able to do things which, at this point, we cannot see how to bring about.

AFAIK, in the real world, no one has been thawed out from any form of cryostasis (simply because such technology is very recent) to know what the long term affects might be on the person left in such a state. We have no idea what the outcome for a person left in cryostasis for almost 300 years could be and if survival for that length of time is even possible.

Harrison/Khan has black hair not unlike someone coming from a darker skinned race of humans. However, his skin is very white. Whether his full skin colour returns, well, we won’t know, if indeed, this character is of North Indian racial descent. In one of the scenes, we were given a glimpse of one of the other of ‘Khan’s’ crew, who had not been taken out of cryostasis and his hair was longish and black but his skin was very white as well.

Pay attention, people…that quick shot may give you a clue as to what might have happened to this Harrison/Khan…

Bob? – or am I making it too ‘easy’ for you?…;)

619. Basement Blogger - June 27, 2013

Last Saturday, I saw Star Trek Into Darkness with my ill brother and sister. For me, it was my third time seeing the film. We saw it in 2D. i saw the film previously in IMAX, 3D and regular 3D.

Now I consider my brother a regular Trekker and my sister, a casual Trekker. They both loved Star Trek Into Darkness. And the controversies? Both thought that Alice Eve’s underwear was a mountain out of a mole hill. They were not upset with the copying of the engine room scene from The Wrath of Khan. I view it as part of the parallel universe theory and perhaps it’s the timeline trying to correct itself. Hey, I’m a blogger not a physicist. They did think the Leonard Nimoy scene was cheesy. I was okay with it.

On a personal note, it was a good day. I got to talk with my brother and sister about a movie. Spending time with the family was very nice. No fighting. Just an enjoyable conversation. it was a pleasant memory. Thank you, Bob Orci.

620. Keachick - rose pinenut - June 27, 2013

Please, Bob Orci – I am not trying to be a smartass, just writing as I think about the story and the characters…

621. Phil - June 27, 2013

@608. Hey, Rose, a few people here have come to the conclusion that Other Guys oars may not all be pulling the same direction. Just saying, engage him at your own peril. As he’s labeled everyone either a lackey or a Bad Robot lapdog I doubt he’d have any issues going international…

Oh, and 300 year old freezer burn to explain Khans pasty whiteness is as plausible an explanation for his appearance as any of the other theories I’ve heard.

622. Mad Mann - June 27, 2013

So it’s JJ Abrams birthday today. He tweeted a handwritten thanks to all the well-wishers.

Anyway: question for Bob Orci:

Which character do you believe the better treatment between the 2009 Trek and STiD?

For me it was Scotty. His role was greatly expanded, he was truly more like the Scotty that we know: true to his word, smart, a drinker, strong convictions, and a real miracle-worker.

623. Photon70 - June 27, 2013

http://meetinthelobby.com/the-mitl-mother-in-law-film-review-star-trek-into-darkness.html

A review of STiD from a 66 year old ‘original’ female fan.

624. Hugh Hoyland - June 27, 2013

Happy birthday JJ! Many more bro!

625. jas_montreal - June 27, 2013

Dear boborci,

I’ve had a hard time appreciating your trek films, but surprisingly my sister loved Into Darkness way more than Trek 09. She appreciated the older Trek more than the new, but actually liked this new one. I on the other hand, did not like it as much and felt divided. In my opinion, I think the reason as to why certain people (like me), whom are “big” trek fans, dislike the new trek is because of the style, rather than the story. I looked at the raw story from a static point of view and found it quite good, although a lot of elements were reused from previous films in the franchise, but that’s OK, since Star Trek 2 was inspired from novels such as Moby Dick or A Tale of Two Cities. I think a lot of fans have a hard time with the style. The flashiness and all extreme camera swings kinda turn me off. I think Gene Roddenberry always wanted Star Trek to have a “warm” feeling and never give a “cold” feel, in terms of style. Thats why he wanted TNG to feel like a Hyatt Hotel (based on what i heard from the extra features on dvd). I don’t know if this is constructive criticism or just destructive criticism, but I hope at least this sorta helps you somehow with the next Trek. I know Into Darkness was a massive hit with my sister, who questioned Trek 09, so your obviously doing something right, but there are subtle things in terms of direction that do bother me a bit. Anyways, Hope you read this and at least consider it as constructive criticism. I just want whats best for trek.

Take Care

626. Therer4lights - June 27, 2013

JJ Abrams had “klingons” in this last flick. When that “klingon” took off his helmet he looked almost nothing like a klingon. I was surprised they even spoke klingon. It’s time to move on from JJ and writing crew. The script of Star Trek Into Darkness sucked. Sure it looked pretty but the writing…editing…directing was lacking for a true trek movie.

It’s time to move on.

627. Lostrod - June 27, 2013

#553 boborci:
EVERYONE! Who know these treks were about false flag terrorism?
Or in other words, WHO KNEW THIS LAST TREK WAS ABOUT YOUR GOVERNMENT TRYING TO KILL YOU?!”

Ok, this may be painful typing on a &@$?!! iPad, but …

I guess I may be part of your problem. I’ve spent the last 25 years in the military. National Guard. Citizen soldier. The tenth of eleven kids. One of which works for Haliburton. My daddy and all but two of my siblings served in the military.

I didn’t join the military until age 34 (when the max age to join was 35). Before that I was a long haired liberal. I grew up.

I served two tours in Iraq. One in Bosnia. I was supposed to retire due to max age last November but I was extended two years. And I WELCOMED the chance to serve my country a bit longer. I don’t look at my country as my enemy. The failure to believe in the government is the true enemy.

Instead, I don’t have a lot of love for folks who take everything for granted. If you had walked the streets of Sarajevo and saw every &$@;!! Building riddled with bullet holes, or delivered medicine to a village in near Tallil, Iraq – you would appreciate how blessed we are to live where and when we do.

Yes, I have issues with my country but I don’t trash it.

I liked both your movies. My only real complaint was the serious lapses in logic …

I detect a different tone from you now. More touchy.

I only ask two things from you:

Consider adapting David Gerrold’s “The Man Who Folded Himself” a potentially the greates time travel story yet.

If you ever do a series about conspiracies, for God’s sake use John Lennon’s “Gimme Some Truth” as the damn theme song.

Lets continue to talk, but not insult here, folks. Life is just too &$@?!! Short.

Regards.

628. Theatre Historian - June 27, 2013

576 Bob Orci,
So then that leads to my question had Kirk not had Scotty Stun Khan.
Would Khan have not gone on to take it out of Kirk and the rest of the Enterprise or would his actions have stayed the same anyway.

By the way just have to say it really sucks that this was the first Trek movie since The Voyage home to not have played atleast once on the big screen of the GraumansChinese. Would have really loved to have seen it on our screen but alas our renovations started just prior to the premiere.

629. boborci - June 27, 2013

617 theater h

Good question! Who knows!

630. boborci - June 27, 2013

Lostrod

First thanks for serving. Truly.

STID is about not letting one bad leader tarnish the whole organization. Kirk is willing to die to uphold ideals of fed even when some within it fail. He is the ultimate patriot

631. Tom - June 27, 2013

# 596 boborci

Respect your decision not to go with Shatner for Into Darkness

Do you foresee Shatner being in the conversation for the next movie given the 50th anniversary and all?

For the record I am believe the 09 scene was well written and would have worked well

632. boborci - June 27, 2013

Photon 70

Thanks for cool review!

633. steve - June 27, 2013

BobOrci, thanks for taking the time to consider my points and for giving us your thoughts. You’re a class act.

634. boborci - June 27, 2013

Stargazer54

Wow. Thanks for sharing that!

635. Phil - June 27, 2013

@616. Well said. And you are not part of the problem.

636. the dude - June 27, 2013

@ boborci

So since Khan is alive, could he come back in a later film, maybe even redeem himself? Also will we ever get to see his ‘trial’?

637. boborci - June 27, 2013

625. the dude

uhm…. could be;)

638. Andy - June 27, 2013

@boborci

Just wanted to tell you that my parents, who raised me on Trek and have seen all the movies and nearly every episode of the shows, called me after they saw the movie opening weekend and raved about it saying it was the best one out of all of them. And I agreed with them! Hopefully the comments in this thread don’t make you think that all trekkies hated the movie, because that certainly isn’t the case! Amazing film. Kudos to you guys and J.J.!

639. the dude - June 27, 2013

…I look forward to the next film then

ST 2009 was by far my all time favorite movie and STID surpassed that in my mind. Thank you for making such a great film with what was in my mind an phenomenal story. I have been a trekkie all 17 years of my life and this is by are they best of the movies. I loved the twists and turns and khan was great! I would send you a review I wrote for my school newspaper but alas I dont know how
thanks again!

640. Andrew - June 27, 2013

boborci,

Don’t leave me hanging, man! Scroll back to 605 for a solid question!

641. Gorns and Organians - June 27, 2013

Hi Bob,

Just wondering if anyone ever considered marketing STID as a political film?

M

642. boborci - June 27, 2013

605 andrew

Ah yes, distances.

In the 09 movie, when Kirk passes out with big hands, he wakes up with Bones having changed, indicating a passage of time. We did not hang a lantern on it precisely because we wanted the movie to feel very real time, but wanted to also leave room for idea that things are far away. Same with STID.

However , you are right in that we like to think if federation space and known alien space is close together, based on the canon notion that only one quadrant of the galaxy has been explored. Truly unknown stuff will be further away!

643. KenT - June 27, 2013

Bob,

Thanks for all the illumination. I am hopeful the franchise will stay alive and the joy it brings to so many will continue. I feel it is the best movie of the summer and tops in the franchise.

Take care

644. Theatre Historian - June 27, 2013

Thanks Bob, Its an interesting possibilty, that I didn’t even consider to you mentioned/reminded that Khan didn’t even attack kirk till kirl betrayed him.

definately adds a new dimension to Harrison/Khan.

645. Brett L. - June 27, 2013

Bob Orci,

It’s apparent a lot of heart and work went into writing the film. The movie is entertaining while dipping into some very Trek-like social commentary. The finale’s TWOK homage was very risky, but as written and performed, it actually worked remarkably well. Yet to be completely candid, with all the possibilities open to you, I was just hoping for a bit more plot creativity.

Virtually all blockbusters these days use some combination of: (vengeful villain + severe injury to hero and/or severe damage to hero’s property + destruction of major landmarks, city, and/or planet). Yet, there must be other interesting ways to ramp up the drama and get the audience invested. For example, only 2 of the 6 TOS films directly placed Earth in jeopardy, and ironically, those films lacked a traditional villain. In TVH, so little time was spent on the alien probe, it actually helped add to its mysterious nature. It also proved you could have a creative and adventurous Trek film without rampant destruction.

As the Bond folks learned after Die Another Day, you can only go so big, so fast, and so loud for so long before action scenes and property damage simply get mind numbing. While that didn’t happen with Into Darkness, it would be wonderful to see you and your team go in some different directions next time around. Thanks…

646. Mad Mann - June 27, 2013

Bob Orci: what do you know about the lack of merchandising for STID? I heard about a feud between JJ and CBS.

Personally, I think this sucks, big time. There could have been some sweet models and action figures from STID

647. Mad Mann - June 27, 2013

Btw: any thoughts on that AICN “science of” article? So you really are not “butthurt fanboy?”

If you are looking for a science consultant, I know a guy

648. Mad Mann - June 27, 2013

Another question: what photo would have shown of the production before those leaked pics came out? You said back then you had to ask JJ, but then the leaks squished any chance he’d be cool with it

649. boborci - June 27, 2013

634 Mad Mann

ha! I have never posted online as anything other than myself.

had a previous “debate” with the author of that article in which, I think, i successfully proved he did not know as much as I did about quantum mechanics, and in particular the most favored interpretation of the most successful theory in science, the many world’s interpretation of QM. I thought his article was a joke, And boring. If he is truly scientist, it helps explain why we, as a country, are falling behind in science. the article was so clearly unscientific that I was embarrassed for the guy and did NOT even bother to comment.

The fact this “scientists” actually thought he was talking to me speaks volumes about his scientific method. Boring waste of time. IMHO

650. boborci - June 27, 2013

633. Mad Mann – June 27, 2013

Can’t comment on ins and outs. All I can tell you is that JJ cared only about making the movies work, as he should.

651. dmduncan - June 27, 2013

Hey! Fun to see Bob going all James T. Kirk up in here!

652. The Great Bird Lives - June 27, 2013

@Bob
It’s not Utopia that’s missing, Sir, It’s the discovery, and exploration factors. I’m glad that Rod Jr. endorsed the film, but I never said Gene would have disliked it. I think he would have liked it as much as ‘The Wrath of Khan’ but keep in mind, he (Gene) is quoted as stating that he was against the extreme violence in some of the scenes. (At least it was considered extreme for the time.) It’s one thing to have a Star Trek story ‘include’ violent action sequences, but to have it be non-stop sequences of violence should exact the same scrutiny that Gene applied to TWOK, albeit he lost that argument… It wasn’t because he was wrong, however, like in ‘Into Darkness’, I believe he was overruled.
I think the next story should use the Klingon war as an afterthought, of sorts. The Enterprise should be on the frontier of unexplored space making first-contact with some awesome alien race- maybe a mystery of sorts. Then at the end of the movie they receive a transmission from earth that was sent weeks prior, (due to the extreme distance), that war has broken out with the Klingon empire, and the Enterprise has to race home. A set-up for the final installment.
I thank you in advance for reading my- slightly- winded posts, and for what consideration you give to what I have to say.

653. Marja - June 27, 2013

@boborci, I hope that the next film will continue the great character writing you and A.Kurtzman do so well, because you two know and love the characters, and it really shows.

I also hope that there’ll be less violence (the bone-crunching and brutal kick-beatings just really hurt my little Trekker heart – is the violence meant to appeal more to the international market?).

Hoping for more Bones, and convos of the “triumvarate” or better yet, the “fab four,” on the Bridge, and that Uhura and Spock continue as a couple. Some folks complain about S/U, but their couplehood is truly a wonderful aspect of AUTrek. (And the complainers are a small but very vocal minority.)

Thanks for the great job with writing a wonderful cast of characters.

654. MC1 Doug - June 27, 2013

re: #407

since we are rating films….

STTMP – A+ (yes, it has four scenes that need trimmed)
STWOK – B- (I want to like this film more, but just cannot, introduced us to those gawd awful uniforms!)
STSPS – A-
STTVH – A-
STTFF – C+ (great character moments, but a few scenes are just too juvenile)
STTUC – A (humor is a misfire)
STG – B (ah, the Enterprise D should not have gone into the night, not just yet)
STFC – A
STI – A+ (finally, not since STTMP has there been a tale about something moral)
STN – C+ (everyone thought getting John Logan to script the film would be a big kudo, I yawned too many times…. a dune buggy? for real?)
ST09 – C- (I wanted to like this film more, but it just has too many flaws)
STiD – A (with BIG reservations)

655. boborci - June 27, 2013

591 captain slow

Interesting question. That would be one if the things I would want to talk to folks about before agreeing to next film. In general, I agree with keeping a lid on things.

656. Boy - June 27, 2013

Did someone here just compare ST09 to Batman and Robin????

HELL TO THE NO.

Please guys, I know most of you hate JJ but that is going way too far.

657. Admiral Archer's Prize Beagle - June 27, 2013

What is going on with Trekmovie.com?

We’ve only had 2 articles in the past month on this site?

Where is Anthony? Nothing from him now in 6 weeks and counting?

Trekweb has has over 30 articles during this same period.

I’m very disappointed in this site. Anthony bold proclaims at the top of each page of this site:

“THE source for everything new in Trek”

This site is no longer being provided in accordance with Anthony’s bold proclamation here.

658. Admiral Archer's Prize Beagle - June 27, 2013

@641 “STiD – A (with BIG reservations)”

I believe that would be called a “B” then. LOL

659. ilker - June 27, 2013

just a kind reminder, if paramount wants to release a 3rd installment, they should start just now.

660. Red Shirt Diaries - June 27, 2013

Love the KGB-style censorship here.

661. Marsh21 - June 27, 2013

“Some folks complain about S/U, but their couplehood is truly a wonderful aspect of AUTrek. (And the complainers are a small but very vocal minority.)”

In your opinion they add something, but to many others its just silly. I am not a fan of the relationship at all, but I wouldn’t go around saying some of the horrible things others have said about it or Uhura.

Also, it’s really not that small a minority. I’d say if anything it’s kinda split down the middle. From what I’ve seen on this board, it’s an extreme topic that can go on for ages, but I’ve seen 3 or 4 dedicated people on here trying to convince us it’s great, while others can just be a-holes about their dislike.

I would like to see it end, personally. However it goes though, I’m hoping the nastiness on boards like this end. Or worse, when idiots bring up..shipping *shudders*

662. Captain Slow - June 27, 2013

Thanks for answering!
Now though, to the last, I grovel before thee! Please make a series featuring this cast! I would trade the next movie for a good series. Pay the cast whatever they want, even if it means that the bridge will have to be replaced with a cardboard box and engineering be made out of Budweiser cans.

663. USS Enterprise B - June 28, 2013

Hey Bob, which film do you like better of the two Treks you made, and why? I’m very curious :)

664. Nemesis4909 - June 28, 2013

@BobOrci

Hi Bob,

A few weeks ago I asked a number of questions and you said you’d get back to me with answers a week from then. Did you respond? If so, where?

Thanks

665. boborci - June 28, 2013

647. Nemesis

Refresh my memory

666. boborci - June 28, 2013

646. USS Enterprise B – June 28, 2013
Hey Bob, which film do you like better of the two Treks you made, and why? I’m very curious :)

—-

Don’t make me choose between my kids! Not fair!

Once I am out of Trek, I will answer truthfully, but not now.

667. USS Enterprise B - June 28, 2013

Ok Bob fair enough. :) I think they were both fantastic films. In regards to a trilogy, I don’t recall hearing about the third film being officially greenlit yet, but it’s got an IMDB page and Lindelof said “you can never see enough Klingons” in regards to a villain for the next film (if I recall correctly…), what are your thoughts on a third film? Will it most likely happen? And do you have an ideas for it yet?

668. boborci - June 28, 2013

650 usseb

Who knows what will happen?!

669. Mitchell - June 28, 2013

Levar is being far too kind. Horrifyingly awful doesn’t even begin to describe how insulting that thing was. We need new terms/words to describe it and It’s not just Roddenberry that was missing, EVERY THING about Star Trek was, even the Enterprise looked like crap. but given their track record no one should have expected much from these guys.

2009 was a flash in the pan that itself is even damaged by how bad the last one was.

670. boborci - June 28, 2013

652 you are excused from watching the third one. Bye!

671. kirkisalive - June 28, 2013

I had this crazy idea that if you really wanted to bring back Shatner, make him the old evil Kirk in the Mirror Universe, or old Kirk in the new alternate universe, as opposed to old dead Kirk from the Prime Universe. My family and I are hardcore Trekkies and we would love to see the Shat come back, even if it was just a cameo! Bob have you seen this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJHANrzMSlk

672. Mitchell - June 28, 2013

@489. Robman007: What?! No no no sir, they have butchered the source material and insulted their fans, only trouble is the Marvel fanbase will support ANYTHING put out with Marvel’s name on it. Avengers and the last 2 Iron Man films prove that.

What you have is a drone like accepting fan base turning out cash for horrible takes on their beloved characters, all Disney has done is help it make money hand over fist with it’s business model etc…

Trek fans would not be anywhere near as forgiving if what has been done to Marvel was done to Trek.

673. Mitchell - June 28, 2013

@653. boborci – June 28, 2013
what third one? you never made a 2nd ;)

674. P Technobabble - June 28, 2013

I find it so annoying to read posters who continually complain about this new Star Trek, yet none of their comments seem to be based on having any credentials (other than “fan”). I say “Put up or shut up.”

Y’know, if Stephen King came in here and posted his grievances about the movie (if he had any), I’d show him due respect because he – obviously – deserves to be respected. He didn’t get to be one of America’s most selling authors just because. But I haven’t seen Mr. King in here tryin to beat Bob Orci over the head with a bunch of whiney, sarcastic remarks. I see a lot of what appears to be nose-in-the-air fanboys who think only THEY know what Star Trek is, what it’s supposed to be about and all the ways the new Star Trek has failed.
Pretty successful failures, eh?

So fanboys: how about posting some links to YOUR screenplays, films, tv shows… something…

675. lennart - June 28, 2013

st 3 should concentrate on dialogue. there where fine, quotable libes in st:id, the film showed so much potential for dialogues – and all the actors are well worth a fine, dialogue-driven third edition of new trek.
so: why not a new rendering of the idea of tmp? exploration – wonders – the evolution of mankind. we saw a great benedict cumberbatch as a villain. that was good entertainment.
the next movie can afford to have no big villain – lets move on with the five year mission and the threats and challenges of open space.

676. Son of Jello - June 28, 2013

This is what I walked away with after seeing Star Trek into Darkness (last week)

Abrams St Khan http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qd3kfQrkXXc

rodenberrys Khan ST http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ue5jyj_nos

677. Son of Jello - June 28, 2013

my post in 657 may not link so http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ue5jyj_nosc

678. PaulB - June 28, 2013

#656 “I find it so annoying to read posters who continually complain about this new Star Trek, yet none of their comments seem to be based on having any credentials (other than “fan”).”
********************

THAT is an insanely stupid post! Just because someone doesn’t have professional credentials doesn’t mean they don’t have legitimate complaints. You don’t have to be a gourmet chef to say, “Hey, this food you just served me is tasteless and cold!” But by YOUR logic, only someone like Wolfgang Puck has the right to complain about bad food.

We are customers who paid money for a product. Those who liked that product have the right to praise it, and those who didn’t like it have the right to complain.

You’re “you’ve gotta be a pro to complain” nonsense is just that–nonsense.

679. Elias Javalis - June 28, 2013

I, on the other hand, Mr Orci I am grateful for your expansive universe..There’s no denying that you and your team accompliced the impossible…and that comes from a fan with decates of trekexperience under his belt…Trully thanks..Looking forward for into darkness in a couple of weeks.

680. PaulB - June 28, 2013

#643 “Did someone here just compare ST09 to Batman and Robin????
“HELL TO THE NO.
“Please guys, I know most of you hate JJ but that is going way too far.”
**********
Agreed! STID may be derivative and less-than-genius, but it’s a freaking masterpiece next to Batman and Robin. B&R doesn’t work on any level for most people, and it actively pissed on the Batman franchise. STID DOES work on a lot of levels for a lot of people, and although many of us do not like the direction it took Trek, it has kept the franchise alive and kicking.

Comparing STID to Prometheus makes more sense–two financially successful films that disappointed the more intellectually capable audience members.

681. Colinar - June 28, 2013

Well said Elias, Greece is left waiting for STID, I keep counting the days…

Mr Orci and co, thank you for having given your best to this franchise. Live Long and Prosper.

682. Jeyl - June 28, 2013

655. Mitchell – “what third one? you never made a 2nd ;)”

And you’re not far from the truth either. When fans were criticizing STID for ripping off The Wrath of Khan, I was there thinking that this film was just a rehash of the last movie. It even ends in the exact same way as the last movie did with the “Space, the final frontier” voice over and all the characters at their stations ready to head on out into deep space. Since nobody died in this film and that these movies are being written in such a fashion that the previous movies shouldn’t matter at all, I have a hunch that you could actually watch Trek09, skip STID and go right into the third film without consequence. Sure you might ask “Who is Carol Marcus?” (if Bob and crew bother to bring her back.), but that could easily belong in the same category of questions such as “Why are Spock and Uhura all of a sudden a couple?”, “Who is that bald, android guy on the bridge?”, “Why is Chekov the Chief Engineer?” or “Mudd incident? WHAT MUDD INCIDENT??”.

683. Elias Javalis - June 28, 2013

@662,

Ευχαριστώ ρε πατρίδα!!

684. Other Guy - June 28, 2013

649. boborci – June 28, 2013

“Once I am out of Trek, I will answer truthfully, but not now.”

That is a day I am waiting for. Perhaps then you’ll loosen up and quit being so defensive.

685. P Technobabble - June 28, 2013

659. PaulB
Easy, boy. I didn’t mean if someone didn’t like the movie they had no right to say they didn’t like it. I guess I didn’t make myself clear enough. If I don’t like the meal can I say “This guy is a lousy chef,” even if I don’t know the first thing about cooking? This is the kind of thing I am pointing to and I’m sorry that my wording didn’t convey that. That is the kind of complaining I was referring to. I don’t bash anyone if I don’t have a clue as to how they do what they do. That’s just being civil.
PS: don’t use words like “stupid” because it makes you sound arrogant and just looking for conflict.

686. Michael - June 28, 2013

When it comes to fan criticisms, one thing I think we have to remember is that we are comparing these new movies and in particular Star Trek Into Darkness with films that we have had 10, 15, 20 and 30 years in some cases to digest and enjoy with repeat viewing. I have found that the second time I watched Into Darkness, I enjoyed it a great deal more than I did the first time, because I stopped trying to deconstruct every scene and just enjoyed it as a movie.
Thanks for the work you all do Bob, it’s great to see Star Trek in the headlines again and to have it be a topic of conversation with friends who may not be die hard fans but enjoy fun and exciting movies!

687. P Technobabble - June 28, 2013

667 Michael
I agree completely. Many people who don’t enjoy the new movies just can’t let go of the past. Personally, I think the past is to be remembered but not clung to. I love Star Trek period. Bring it on. All of it!

688. DarExc - June 28, 2013

@665 by then though, you’ll be all grown up and not care about it anymore :(

689. Toonloon - June 28, 2013

@ boborci

Sorry to be a nuisance but I see idiots like otherguy wasting our time with you in the community when we have a wonderful opportunity to talk directly to the source of Trek’s revival. Again, I am sorry for bumping my own post but I would love to hear if you guys wrote anything and it was cut or even if it was shot then cut.

I know everyone is entitled to an opinion and it’s often fun to trade barbed witticisms but I feel like as a fansite an awful lot of us are wasting an opportunity to talk Trek with one of the holders of the flame.

It still amazes me that Bob comes here to talk with us. And it even amazes me further the lack of respect some people afford him here.

I love what the new films have done with Trek. The comics and video games are great too. And even if they weren’t, we still have 79 episodes.

Give the man the respect he’s due, even if you think you could do thing differently or better.

690. SoonerDave - June 28, 2013

It is galling to see the posts here that try to assert their own opinion of Trek as the only “right” opinion, and that anyone else who disagrees is presumably stupid or intellectually lacking. Seriously? It’s like walking into a kindergarten classroom and refereeing an argument over whose lunchbox is coolest.

Guys, its a movie. It’s a *movie*. Neither liking nor disliking a movie is indicative of either intellectual ability or moral defect. It’s a *movie*. I’ve seen STID three times, there are things I love about it, some I don’t, but guess what? At the end of the day, its a movie, and real life needs to come back into play eventually.

I may disagree with boborci on political issues, but the treatment he is being given here by some posters is absolutely and unequivocally embarrassing. There are many pop entertainment franchises whose fan bases would love to have access to a key element of the production team, and we’ve got it, yet some see fit to take that as license to just hurl mud. That’s ridiculous.

Its one thing to disagree or even dislike some aspects of what that creative team has done, but the vitriol in some of these posts here borders on the absurd. You may not realize it, but much of what’s gone on here is *precisely* why so many others not in the Trek mainstream stay far, far away from it. No matter how hard you try to make it, Trek isn’t a religion.

You don’t like STID? That’s fine. That’s your choice. You like it? That’s fine, too. Neither is an excuse to treat a guest with anything less than basic courtesy. Such is the Internet generation, I suppose.

I’m just one grain of sand on the beach, boborci, but FWIW, I don’t hesitate as a long-time ST fan to say I enjoyed STID, and appreciate very much the fun of seeing Trek on the big screen in such a big way. To some that makes me stupid, I guess, but as we say on Earth, “c’est la vie.”

691. Patrice J Tremblay - June 28, 2013

I enjoyed both new Treks. But I feel there is something missing. It feels like synthehol, the kick is present, but … not the essence.

I like JJ Abrams. He is a good technician. His film are well package, but it seems that his speciality is to reengineer other peoples work – Mission Impossible, Godzilla, E.T., Trek and Star Wars …

It is clear that the writers are equally talented, Bob Orci and Alex Kurtzman will become the writers of a generation. But like good wines, their future is much much more than what their doing right now.

692. P Technobabble - June 28, 2013

670 Toonloon

I agree, I think it is so cool that Bob Orci comes to this site. It would be an even greater pleasure if we could just talk shop and not see his breath wasted on the attention seekers. I’m interested in filmmaking and star trek so that’s what I’d like to discuss.

693. Silvereyes - June 28, 2013

All these negative, insulting, self-righteous posts. The fact remains, STID made a lot of money so far and it’s not over. It’s a good movie for what it’s supposed to be; a fun Summer blockbuster. To some it may not be the Trek they’re looking for, but to the overwhelming majority, it is.

If you wonder why the term Trekkie has acquired a derogatory meaning, (as opposed to Trekker), just read some of the posts here…

Bob Orci, you did good. Don’t let the bastards wear you down. But don’t call them bastards, they’ll just b*tch and whine…

694. P Technobabble - June 28, 2013

671 SoonerDave

I’m with you. Bulls eye!

695. Chain of Command - June 28, 2013

At the end of the day, it’s just a film and films are made to entertain. If you found it entertaining; great. If not, well, there are hundreds of hours of “Star Trek” still out there and other forms of entertainment to make you happy.

Life goes on.

696. Aurore - June 28, 2013

Speaking for myself, my “complaints” never were about what some fans view as a rip-off of The Wrath of Khan or/and a rehash of other Star Trek movies ( although they are most certainly entitled to their opinion ).

The Wrath of Khan is not my favourite Star Trek movie.

Besides, by the time I saw it, I already knew there had been other movies with the entire cast . Therefore, the famous reactor scene did not move me the way it probably did people who had no idea whether or not Spock would be back when they first watched the film, for instance.

(Realising that Kirk had a son he had never heard about before, however, was a shock.)

Space Seed never stood out as an outstanding episode for me.

As I stated before, as far as I was/am concerned, Khan always was a villain amongst others in the Star Trek universe.

Which is why I would have preferred to see a villain other than Khan. Preferably, of course, a new villain to the canon.

And, naturally, casting wise, I’ve already explained what my issues were (and still are) on previous threads…

697. PaulB - June 28, 2013

#685 – If someone has eaten only one meal from a chef, then you are right, they can’t really judge that chef as a whole, only that meal. But that’s not the case here. We’ve had two meals of Trek with Orci & co., plus the Transformers movies, and Cowboys & Aliens, and the Lindelof-tainted Prometheus, and…

If I have eaten 6 or 7 meals from a chef, and every meal has been a similar mix of blandness and borrowings from other chefs’ work, then I have every right to judge that chef’s work as a whole.

We’ve seen these writers in action time and time again, so we’ve got enough experience with their writing to judge both it and them as writers.

Some people go too far (such as Orci’s insults to multiple fans) but most people here are complaining based on ample knowledge and experience with movies, Star Trek, and the written word.

If you insist, we can all list our credentials for commenting on writing. I’d be happy to list mine, but it’s really not needed since I’m a paying customer with complaints about the product I received. “Paying customer” is the only credential needed.

698. toonloon - June 28, 2013

@ 690 & 692 Well said (again)

@697 “Get a life!”

699. toonloon - June 28, 2013

@ 697 – Mr Credential. If you are a writer, maybe you should work on your analogies. 6 or 7 meals indeed. LOL

700. PaulB - June 28, 2013

#698 – “Get a life!”

That’s so original! You should join Orci’s writing team.

701. Robman007 - June 28, 2013

@boborci

There was a neat little trilogy of novels that dealt with Khan and the Eugenics Wars. If I remember right, the media and world governments covered up the fact that we were fighting these Genetic tyrants (and that they existed) with false stories of some of the conflicts we were engaged in.

Have you thought about putting Khan’s backstory into a comic series, much like you guys did with Nero in the “Nero” series? That would be a great time to show how Admiral Marcus may or may not have changed Khan’s overall appearance so that he could operate in the open without anyone recognizing one of histories most hated individuals. Also could show his mission to Praxis and how he destroyed the Klingon moon.

702. P Technobabble - June 28, 2013

697 PaulB
Okay, I get where you’re coming from but what it comes down to is you just don’t like their work, in spite of the fact that these guys have had (and are having) quite a bit of success. I’ve been through this whole “just because a million people like something doesn’t make it good,” but those million people ARE what makes it good. So when a few people come along and say stuff like “these guys ruined this and that and…” my immediate reaction is “so what have you done?” Or as Pike said”I dare you to do better.” I’m not trying to be confrontational but, for me, if I criticize a movie maker AND I have a list of hit movies in my pocket, I think my criticism would be taken more seriously. So apart from the fact that I enjoy what Orci et al have done, I have never sold a screenplay so I really don’t feel I am qualified to knock them for what they do for a living.

703. jerr - June 28, 2013

@654
since we are rating films….

STTMP – A+ (yes, it has four scenes that need trimmed)
STWOK – B- (I want to like this film more, but just cannot, introduced us to those gawd awful uniforms!)
STSPS – A-
STTVH – A-
STTFF – C+ (great character moments, but a few scenes are just too juvenile)
STTUC – A (humor is a misfire)
STG – B (ah, the Enterprise D should not have gone into the night, not just yet)
STFC – A
STI – A+ (finally, not since STTMP has there been a tale about something moral)
STN – C+ (everyone thought getting John Logan to script the film would be a big kudo, I yawned too many times…. a dune buggy? for real?)
ST09 – C- (I wanted to like this film more, but it just has too many flaws)
STiD – A (with BIG reservations)
——-

that’s got to be one of the most wacked out ratings of Trek films I’ve ever seen. I can’t image a critic or trekie coming up with that. You think Into Darkness is better…. way better then 09 or TWOK. I can see your points with TMP, and maybe Insurrection, but how is Into Darkness better then 09 or TOK?

To me, ID was two hours of people punching each other in the face and making terrible decisions.

704. Robman007 - June 28, 2013

@boborci…

..granted you never know if individuals will be alive or not for the 50th, but there is a great way to get Shatner in the new film…..the nexus was never fully explained. It was mentioned that a part of an individual always stays in the nexus…you could explain that the part of the individual can “jump” into any reality he wishes, but only once. Instant Shatner/Stewart to join the cast for the 50th (since Picard is in the same nexus)..not practical, I understand, but a way to exploit the weakness of the nexus plot to begin with…

…in regards to the new movie…do some brainstorming on the First Federation, the Preservers and the Old Ones (which was Robert Bloch’s attempt to put the Cthulhu mythos into Trek)…those were never fully explored topics in TOS and would make for a wonderful film about discovery and a race against a Klingon crew ala the Indiana Jones films with Dr Jones and the Nazi’s.

Begin the film with the Enterprise battling the Doomsday Machine. In this reality, the Enterprise gets to the Constellation before it’s crew is killed, yet not quick enough to save the ship, which Kirk and Decker are working on using as a weapon against the Planet killer. Spock is using the Enterprise as a distraction so Decker/Kirk can rig the ship to blow..transporter problems happen, but both are saved.

There you get several items out of the way…you re-do a TOS episode, you bring back a TOS character in Decker AND you have your big black giant space ship that the Enterprise encounters..all done and over with before the opening credits…and the Doomsday Machine would look awesome on screen…

705. Jeyl - June 28, 2013

372: “Jeyl was the person who kept referring to Lt Uhura and the actress who played her, Zoe Saldana, as a whore. Jeyl knows all about *dignity*.”

I did no such thing. I would never call Uhura or Zoe Saldana a whore. Was I disappointed in how Uhura was handled in the last movie? Heck yes. But that does not mean I’m calling her a whole, nor does it have anything to do with the actress playing her.

Heck, when Zoe was announced to play Gamora in “Guardians of the Galaxy”, there were people here saying that she was too old for the part, to which I said,

“Yeah, because nobody can be heroes when they’re 35 or older. How old was everyone in the Star Trek movies again?”

Don’t you dare paint me as someone who would call a person a whore when all my criticisms are directed towards the writers, who I barely even call names yet they’re not afraid to pass me off as a crack head.

706. Yanks - June 28, 2013

@ Bob

A question about our 72 torpedoes.

Were the cyro tubes put in the weapons orginally by Harrison in an attempt to save them from ADM Marcus, or were they put there by ADM Marcus (possibly by Carol) after Harrison attacked them in an effort to cover up what they have been doing?

I’m hoping the latter as that would give a valid reason for Carol to want to be aboard Enteprise.

Thanks

707. Robman007 - June 28, 2013

STFF: C-: Bad visuals and some lame humor. Felt the most like a TOS episode. Great character moments with the big 3.

STUC: B+: Great ending to the TOS saga. Good story, great battle, good emotion.

STG: D+: Good music…felt like a TV movie. Kirk dying should never happened. Horribly executed. Enterprise D continued to be a wimp in battles.

STFC: A: Great action flick. Good character development for Picard/Data. Great action scenes. Enterprise E was awesome in battle.

STIN: D-: Boring. TV Movie syndrome. Enterprise E was a wimp against the beauty salon ships. Horrible plot. Wasted chance to do Dominon Wars flick. Stupid waste of a film. Dumb jokes. Dumb flick.

STN: D-: Trying to be like Attack of the Clones (same here, same core subject), bad plot. Picard acting out of character to justify Data sacrafice. Wasted chance for epic sized fleet battle. Stupid B4 plot. Stupid film. TV Movie visuals. TV Movie Quality.

ST09: B: Solid first entry. Had issues with plot, etc, but a great way to bring Trek back and make it appeal to not just Trek fans. Did not feel like a TV movie (unlike 3 TNG Films)

STID: B: Good 2nd entry. Some silly moments (enterprise underwater, Enterprise with Ludicrous Speed), Khan needed a fleshed out backstory/more screen time. Very emotional. Great character moments. Semi rushed feeling to the final act. Amazing visuals. Great TOS style opening (except Enterprise under water…would have done that with Enterprise in Oribit, but needed to decend into Orbit to get a direct LOS with Spock for transport, all while taking shield hits from lava. Would have same effect on indigenous life.) Could have worked with Villain being just a genetically enhanced and experimented Section 31 agent who was turned and was driven mad by his enhanced ambition)..good set up point for 5 year mission flick and exploration/adventure style film. Better then 3/4 of TNG Films.

708. Andrew - June 28, 2013

boborci, courtesy of post 642:

Okay, I’ll buy that.

Thanks for answering my post. I have been reading your comments on here for years and it’s fun to be a small part of the process. :)

709. Elias Javalis - June 28, 2013

@683

ooups sorry, i gave thanks to an other poster..!

@681

Colinar, Thanks buddy!! :):):):):

710. Robman007 - June 28, 2013

Forgot my first part of the ranking…

STTMP (Original): D-: Bad pace. Bad editing. Boring. Motionless. Great Enterprise scenes.

STTMP (Directors): C: Good edit job. Much needed. Still a bad flick.

STWoK (Original): A: Great Trek flick. Even greater movie. Very emotional.

STWoK (Directors): A-: Nicely added scenes, although sound quality was bad. Some added scenes did not need added.

STSFS: B: Solid sequel and 2nd part of trilogy. Very emotional. Took a dark turn for Trek. Good action, great music, great direction. Stealing the Enterprise is one of Treks best scenes. Enterprise went down like a champ, saving the crew when she had nothing else left to give.

STVH: B+: Good humor. Light movie with great character moments. Enterprise A reveal was excellent way to end a trilogy. Didn’t do a good job of displaying some grief that Kirk should have been going through (death of his son, death of his ship)

711. Robman007 - June 28, 2013

@706. Yanks …I believe they were put in the tubes by Khan as a way to attempt to smuggle them out of Section 31, yet Marcus found out and Khan went on the lamb, assuming that Marcus killed his crew. Carol only knew about the experimental torpedoes and his super ship (which she FAILED to inform Kirk about until it was too late)….when you think about it, she was kinda pointless except to set her up as a crew member in the end.

712. PaulB - June 28, 2013

#702 – “So apart from the fact that I enjoy what Orci et al have done, I have never sold a screenplay so I really don’t feel I am qualified to knock them for what they do for a living.”
**********
I disagree, but so what? That’s the fun of life!

Let ask you this: How can you feel qualified praising their work if you aren’t qualified to knock it? Seems a bit odd to allow good comments without credentials but not bad ones. Shouldn’t both be equally invalid in your way of thinking?

I agree with your earlier post about Richard Matheson. What a mind that man had!

(P.S. About these writers having a great deal of success: So have the Fast/Furious movies, Twilight, Michael Bay, and M. Night Shyamalan. Lost of financial success, but that’s no indicator of quality. One of the greatest SF films, Blade Runner, bombed in the theater–not a success by these current standards, but a far better film. Just a little food for though about the much-vaunted “success” of Orci & co.)

713. Robman007 - June 28, 2013

One of the greatest Sci-fi/horror films bombed horribly in theaters…

..John Carpenters “The Thing”….

714. Curious Cadet - June 28, 2013

@702. P Technobabble,
“if I criticize a movie maker AND I have a list of hit movies in my pocket, I think my criticism would be taken more seriously. So apart from the fact that I enjoy what Orci et al have done, I have never sold a screenplay so I really don’t feel I am qualified to knock them for what they do for a living.”

Let’s put this into a slightly different context.

You vote for or against a president and you pay your taxes. The argument you are making is that because you have never been the president, you have no business criticizing his governance, despite the fact your taxes pay his salary.

715. dmduncan - June 28, 2013

705. Jeyl – June 28, 2013

“…all my criticisms are directed towards the writers, who I barely even call names yet they’re not afraid to pass me off as a crack head.”

Barely even? Jeyl, I’ve been reading your posts for 4 years. 4 years of you saying or implying in various ways how much you think they suck.

Even St. Francis of Assisi by now would slap you and scream “Basta!”

716. rtrj - June 28, 2013

If you don’t like ’09 & STID you can always watch the fan productions. If you want to see Trek on the big screen, it is going to have to make money. A
recreation production that was true to canon would flop because only “We” would watch it. No studio would invest in “Our” Treker requirements.

rtrj

717. Curious Cadet - June 28, 2013

@701. Robman007,
“boborci Have you thought about putting Khan’s backstory into a comic series, much like you guys did with Nero in the “Nero” series? That would be a great time to show how Admiral Marcus may or may not have changed Khan’s overall appearance so that he could operate in the open without anyone recognizing one of histories most hated individuals.”

A couple of points here.

Based on Orci’s comments, I am 99.9% sure Orci will not pursue any story that seeks to explain Khan’s change of appearance. I rarely commit to a position such as this because there’s always a chance, but in this case Orci has made it abundantly clear that Khan’s appearance is 100% irrelevant to the story, and to acknowledge it in canon would be admitting otherwise.

Second, there is no evidence in this film that ANYBODY even remembers Khan much less reviles him as “one of histories most hated individuals”. In fact, I doubt anyone in the 23rd century has ever seen a picture of Khan. This is even more clear in Space Seed. And unlike in Space Seed, NuKirk and Spock seem to have skipped late 20th Century History altogether in their rush to get through the Academy in 3 years.

718. Mel - June 28, 2013

German viewer numbers:

9. – 12. May: 446.915
16. – 19. May: 246.776
23. – 26. May: 131.582
30. May – 2. June: 106.513
6. – 9. June: 34.986
13. – 16. June: 23.462
20. – 23. June: 11.390

Until the 23. June Star Trek was seen by 1.476.605 viewers in Germany.

719. P Technobabble - June 28, 2013

712. Paul
Perhaps I’m trying to say too much and not being clear. I don’t necessarily equate being able to enjoy a film with appreciating the technical abilities of a writer or filmmaker. I thoroughly enjoyed STID, for example, so I can say that. But what I know about screenwriting doesn’t really make me qualified to comment on the technical ability of Bob Orci. Maybe I’m not clear on this… but it truly bothers me when people come in here and say stuff like “these guys cant write,” or other vicious, derogatory remarks. I’m saying that Mr Orci has achieved a measure of success in the movie industry and I don’t think that happened because he didn’t know how to write.
But you know what? My original point was about people being disrespectful. Probably most people here feel its quite a treat being able to talk to a guy who’s bringing star trek to life and not just wishing he could. So he’s got a lot to share about making star trek, writing, filmmaking… all the nitty gritty. Like the movie or not there’s no way he deserves some of the crap being thrown at him and he’s been nothing but patient. I think most people here feel this way. So my response to the critics is “you shouldn’t criticize someone if you can’t walk in his shoes cos you don’t know anything about being in those shoes. Otherwise show us your body of work and let’s see how it fares.” Maybe that’s the wrong response but it is genuine.
And sorry Bob Orci for talkin about you like you’re not in the room…

720. jeyl - June 28, 2013

715. dmduncan – “4 years of you saying or implying in various ways how much you think they suck.”

I fail to see how having an opinion regarding a person’s work is on the same level as randomly telling someone that they should stop using narcotics.

721. P Technobabble - June 28, 2013

714 Curious Cadet

I understand. However, consider the fact that all those taxes are just taken from us anyway. Its not like the American people are giving it to them happily. I start screaming like John the Baptist in the desert every time Congress gives themselves a raise. At least with a movie you can choose to not go, or if you are really dissatisfied you might be able to get your money back.

722. mike callos - June 28, 2013

Boborci, I was wondering if you could recommend any 911 truth videos for me to watch so as to be educated on the inside job conspiracies that were referred to in this thread.

I’ve heard of Loose Change. Is that one a good video to watch? Are there any others that you think would be better for me to watch to get the big picture?

Anyone else’s recommendation would be appreciated as well.

723. Curious Cadet - June 28, 2013

@721. P Technobabble,
“At least with a movie you can choose to not go”

In this analogy, you are free to move to another country (or alternatively conduct your business elsewhere). You presumably chose to live and/or conduct business in your country and pay the taxes required for admission, just like you chose to patronize Star Trek, or watch another film instead.

Am I to assume you do not criticize your president then since you lack the same on the job experience?

724. Ahmed - June 28, 2013

@ 713. Robman007 – June 28, 2013

“One of the greatest Sci-fi/horror films bombed horribly in theaters…

..John Carpenters “The Thing”…”

Wait, are you actually implying that STID is as good as “The Thing” ? Or did I miss your point here ?

It is really funny when I see most of the fans here don’t want anyone to criticize STID or Bob at all, that we should be all thankful that at least we have a Star Trek movie in the theaters !!!

There is nothing perfect in this world, and everyone is entitled to like to dislike the movie. You can respond to the criticism but you can NOT deny anyone the right to criticize something.

725. secret vulcan - June 28, 2013

Amen Ahmed.

726. Will - June 28, 2013

Spock yelling “KAHHHNNNNNN” = Vader yelling “NOOOOOOOOOOOOO”

Cheeseball and unwarranted, borrowing the gravity of the Kirk/Spock relationship from the prime Trek universe while having not really established anything between the two beyond an acquaintanceship in order to carry the weight of Spock reaching that emotional point.

727. Robman007 - June 28, 2013

724. Ahmed – June 28, 2013

Missed my point. There was talk about great sci-fi movies of the past that stunk in theaters, yet are considered some of the all time great films. The Thing is one of those examples.

As much as I like STID, I put “The Thing” above it on my top list of films. As much as I like STID, it does not make my top 10.

728. P Technobabble - June 28, 2013

723. Curious

I think choosing to NOT live in this country is far more complicated than choosing not to go to a particular movie. And the country takes a lot more taxes than it costs to see a movie. As for criticizing the president… I’m sure I know a lot more about movies than I do about behind- closed- door politics. I’d like to see a world of peace and love but I don’t see ANY politicians making that happen anytime soon.

729. Spock's Bangs - June 28, 2013

#719. ” but it truly bothers me when people come in here and say stuff like “these guys cant write”

Same here. I usually don’t give those types of critiques much more thought beyond the initial effort to read it. Armchair quarterbacks. I’m delighted Bob Orci gives them just the amount of attention they deserve!

730. Random Cool stuff - June 28, 2013

@boborci

I REALLY HOPE YOU SEE THIS!

Question: do you think in next film (or a later film if there are any) there good be a good sized land battle. Most paser fights are short and so fasted paced that you cant fully see it all. I think it would be really cool to have a starfleet ‘army’ fight the klingons (if they are the villains) in the streets of San Fransisco kind of like the scene in dark knight rises. And it would be incredible to see khan and all 72 of his buddies fighting the klingons in a full scale battle.

Also what are the odds of the excelsior coming back?

731. KenT - June 28, 2013

@722 My apologies for intercepting your question to Bob Orci but…

On 9/11 we were attacked by radical militant islamists who slaughtered 2,900+ innocent civilians. That is the truth. Just like Pearl Harbor; we were unprepared and we paid a terrible price. That is the truth.

You see what is happening with the NSA: this nation cannot keep secrets.

There is real evil in this world and you can see it everytday as suicide bombers continue to kill innocent people throughout the Middle East and recently Boston.

Question anything and everything but the truth is this act was not internal and while this country gets is wrong; Iraq etc…to suggest otherwise after all this time and reporting is insulting to those of us who lost friends and went on to fight because of it. Please keep this thread on Star Trek. There are plenty of websites for truthers to play in.

732. fidelio1985 - June 28, 2013

@boborci:
I have to say, that I have the biggest respect for you coming down here, taking your time reading all this stuff and answering so thoroughly. I takes a lot of patience and caring. Now, though I don´t always agree with you, on many points (STID or Conspiracy Theories) – i think your commitment is remarkable!

Greetings from Germany

733. Sheik Yerbouti - June 28, 2013

someone tell me the difference between a ‘fan’ and a ‘fanboy’??? Seems folks like to toss out a derrogatory ‘fanboy’ label when someone doesn’t agree with them. Am i wrong?

As far as the film. Did i enjoy it? yes

Am i satisfied. not really.

to each his/ her own. still haven’t decided if i want to give NuTrek the “Battlestar Galactica 1980″ treatment yet or not…

734. Marja - June 28, 2013

This thing about criticism: Criticism is valid, if it’s done in a constructive way. Taking the example of the chef creating meals, you might productively say, “Chef, this meal was satisfactory, but you applied the salt rather too heavily for my taste.” Or, “I didn’t care for your inclusion of broccoli in such-and-such dish.”

Criticism is IMHO invalid when it consists of, “Your restaurant SUCKS! I’m never coming here again!” and then the critic walks in the very next day to shout “Your restaurant SUCKS!” or “Why don’t you cook the food exactly like they used to cook it 20 years ago!?” It’s kind of silly and insults the diners who have taken the trouble to offer constructive criticism for what the restaurant is now, and continue to patronize the establishment because in general, they love the food.
————–
Keachick, I really agree with your stance on the violence in NuTrek and your assessment of the characters and their relationships. However, I feel I must point out that Kirk did indeed involve Gaila in his cheating scheme; he says to her (in the final edit), “Open that email exactly at 3:00, okay?” That was the email that enabled the software disruption that enabled Kirk to beat the KM test.

Phil, I’m with you on the Enterprise Rising thing. It is a beautiful image, but should not be overused, and I’m afraid it’s getting to that point …. another repeated image was when the couple entered the club where Scotty and Keenser were drinking. A variation, but the same kind of tracking shot.
—————-
661, Marsh21, “…it’s not that small a minority. The split is 50/50″ … uh, maybe *on this board* but the relationship is not so unpopular among general moviegoers. And the poll conducted showed about 70% liked or didn’t mind it. I think a lot of the people that dislike it want their Trek EXACTLY like TOS, and some of them continue to think that NimoySpock was completely emotionless, to which I say Whut?

662 Captain Slow, I agree! I’d gladly give up another movie if we got THIS CAST for a TV series presentation!

675, lennart, I agree SO MUCH! It was great wasn’t it? (Except maybe that Khannnn! scream). Alas, I think “summer blockbusters” must prioritize *relentless action* at the cost of such. I hope thely won’t have to do this in the next movie; in fact I wish, wish, wish they could expand the dialogue/philosophical scenes by about 10-15 minutes for the US release and chop that out for the non-English-speaking countries *where the fans want action above all* .
@ boborci, O please say it could be done! I too would welcome a departure from the old “big villain” theme.
674, PTech, Yep, and I’ve seen some authors of books write fabulous screenplays from their books. Not so sure I’d want James Cameron to comment, though. While he makes beautiful looking films, and I liked much of Avatar’s societal ideals, I didn’t like the plot being so derivative of films like “Dances with Wolves” where the outsider American guy leads the indigenous people to victory or “a better way of life.”

676, Jello, Haha, “this video does not exist” for TOS Khan LOL! (I liked this version of yr post much better) [Grin]
In 677, what is the punk woman singing besides the word “I-i-i-i-identiTY”? I might “get” your second post better if I knew, but I must say 676 cracked me up. I *love* Peter Gabriel’s “Big Time,” one of the greatest send-ups of American attitudes I’ve ever heard :)

717, Curious, er, Spock was not a student rushing through the Academy in three years; while I imagine he got through quite quickly with his, uh, superior intellect, he was not a student during Kirk’s time there; he was an instructor and presumably had graduated at least three years before Kirk’s hearing … *and* was already a Commander, quite a leap from Ensign. I suspect you just had a slip there ….

735. Mitchell - June 28, 2013

304. James-

Twice as much relief from DC fans they are not destroying Superman. What’s ironic about your comment is that Zach Snyder, David Goyer and Chris Nolan are cleaning up multiple huge messes left by “talent” similar to abrams and his bad robot gang.

Which is exactly what someone will get tons of flak for when they go away from abrams trek and try to restore it closer to what it’s roots are.

We could only dream of a team like Man Of Steel’s building a Star Trek with as much respect and reverence to it’s history as MOS was to Superman.

is that your own review of MOS?

736. Phil - June 28, 2013

@733. Lets see…

Fan: I enjoy Star Trek, I find their characters interesting and the shows vision for the future empowering.

Fanboy: Godd**n it, 4:37 seconds into act three, where Scotty it trying to restart the engines, Scotty should have the matter/anti-matter ratio at 1/2374.3 units, and the movie clearly shows it at 1/2375 units! That COMPLETELY took me out of the movie, and ruined my life FOREVER! Motherf**king production team, I could do a better job in my sleep. A roomful of monkeys with typewriters could have written a better story! Whoever the bastard was that hired these idiots needs to be taken out and shot.

Think I’m kidding? Look over these threads….

737. Keachick - rose pinenut - June 28, 2013

#705 – Ah, but you did call the character and actress a whore. If memory also serves, you even commented that Zoe Saldana quite likely got the part of Uhura by sleeping with the director, JJ Abrams.

Now cut out the crack…oops, I mean crap, whichever…

You see, Jeyl, I was greeted with those comments about Uhura/Saldana with your name attached when I first came to this site. They are etched into my memory like a foul stain that can’t be removed. I have not the desire, energy or will to go back two-three years through the thousands of posts to prove it, but I do recall you writing such and not just once either. I also recall calling you out for the comments.

So Bob Orci made a crack comment in response to you…not necessarily totally undeserved in your case, from where I stand, frankly.

(There was another poster saying similar around that time as well. I cannot remember their name but I believe it was another females. Females can be such bitches…argh!)

738. Dave H - June 28, 2013

@707 “STFC: A: Great action flick. Good character development for Picard/Data. Great action scenes. Enterprise E was awesome in battle.”

Have you watched it lately? It is looking badly dated now. The sensor dish battle at the end looks so cheesy and fakey now. It never looked that good anyway, but now it is laughable. Others science fiction movies from that timeframe hold up a lot better, so their is no excuse for how bad that looks.

739. Dave H - June 28, 2013

@657 “What is going on with Trekmovie.com? We’ve only had 2 articles in the past month on this site? Where is Anthony? Nothing from him now in 6 weeks and counting? Trekweb has has over 30 articles during this same period. I’m very disappointed in this site. Anthony bold proclaims at the top of each page of this site: “THE source for everything new in Trek.” This site is no longer being provided in accordance with Anthony’s bold proclamation here.”

I agree completely. Obviously this site is no longer “the source for everything new in Trek.” Anthony, if he no longer wants to maintain his own mission statement here, could save himself a lot of grief from fans by simply removing this statement from the top of his web page. This statement creates confusion, because it implies a very active Trek movie site, with a mission of providing all the new information about what is going on with the Trek movies. Obviously, this is no longer the case. If this banner was removed, then it would remove the perception of hypocrisy from that bold proclamation that I see every time I log into this site and see that hardly any new info is provided, once again.

740. Phil - June 28, 2013

@735. Weird, considering that your MOS production dream team is catching a ton of flack for screwing up the Superman mythos…

741. Keachick - rose pinenut - June 28, 2013

#734 – Marja – Thank you.

“However, I feel I must point out that Kirk did indeed involve Gaila in his cheating scheme; he says to her (in the final edit), “Open that email exactly at 3:00, okay?” That was the email that enabled the software disruption that enabled Kirk to beat the KM test.”

Marja, you are confusing what was shown in the final cut of the movie and what was shown in the Deleted Scenes section of the DVDs. In the final cut of the movie shown in cinemas and on the DVD do NOT contain the scene you quoted above. The entire uncut/unedited scenes showing Kirk involving Gaila in the cheat are part of the DELETED scene section of what is on the second disc on my two-disc set. In the absence of anything definitive from the writing team, Bad Robot or Paramount, I see any deleted scenes as NOT being canon. Presumably scenes are deleted for good reasons, some of which may not always seem obvious or necessary to some audience members. It just makes more sense and is easier to regard such deleted scenes in this way, from my perspective at least.

The actual movie shows Kirk asking McCoy to be there when he takes the test for a third; next Kirk is with Gaila attempting to do one of the things that Kirk does best and they are interrupted by the early arrival of Uhura; Kirk hears about the transmissions and Klingon ships being destroyed; Uhura identifies “mouth breather” and boots him out of the room; next we are shown Kirk doing the test for the third time and “beating it”.

Gaila is not seen or heard anywhere else, within the context of the KM scene, except on the bed kissing Kirk and telling him that she loves him just as Uhura unexpectedly returns early – nothing else. Nor is any other green Orion woman seen.

742. Other Guy - June 28, 2013

731. KenT

What an example you are making of yourself.

You might be surprised to learn the boborci – one of the Writers of the new Trek – wanted YOU to know that 911 was an inside job created by operatives in the Bush administration. Not the laughable excuse given hat Osama ben Laden did this all from a cave. boborci, the Supremes, JJ and Paramount ALL thought that this would make a great back story for the new Star Trek movies you recently ingested. As evidenced in boborci’s post @ 523 as well as the tagline at the end of the movie.

See, boborci wanted you to buy popcorn and enjoy his message that some of your representatives in Washington wanted you dead that day (if you happened to be in NY on 911).

But hey. That’s just how they wanted this Trek to go. It’s OK now. Enjoy the sequel. Perhaps he will have a comment on the Boston tragedy by then that he will want money for as well.

And you might just want to Google some of the 911 videos that are online. You just might learn something. But then again, there has never been a valid investigation into 911 that we can all be assured of, making all these conspiracy theories that much more fun to debate.

But its OK. Just so you have a firm belief about how your government is handling your safety and your children’s safety. Oh, Wait. Sounds like you don’t have any, or you would be more concerned.

743. Mitchell - June 28, 2013

@739. Phil – June 28, 2013
i clearly stated what you obviously missed: THE BIGGEST POINT ALL TOGETHER about the heat they are taking because of the hacks who ruined Superman years before MOS set it straight again. seriously how did you miss that in my first two paragraphs?

744. P Technobabble - June 28, 2013

734 Marja

“Criticism is valid, if it’s done in a constructive way. Taking the example of the chef creating meals, you might productively say, “Chef, this meal was satisfactory, but you applied the salt rather too heavily for my taste.” Or, “I didn’t care for your inclusion of broccoli in such-and-such dish.”

I completely agree with this sentiment and the fact that you included “…for my taste…” is the best way of pointing out that you are speaking for yourself and not the entire population of the planet. I might say that what you suggest is not entirely a piece of criticism, but an observation based on your personal preference and by letting the chef know this might give him something to think about. Bob O indicated there were numerous comments made following Trek09 that were taken to heart by the members of our Supreme Court. I’m sure those comments were the ones that had some real thought put into them.

When I read some of the more antagonistic posts (not counting the ones that are just ridiculous), it seems that some people want to put Mr. Orci in the position of “student,” as if they were in a position to teach him anything. This is certainly not “constructive” criticism of any kind. Is it common to go into a classroom and belittle the teacher, saying s/he ruined the subject of geography?
I’m the kind of person who just loves to learn about things. If Bob and Alex ever conducted a writing workshop in my neighborhood I’d be the first one in line, because I’d want to learn something. Some great guru once said, “You can’t teach it if you can’t do it.” Like em or not, Bob and his cohorts ARE doing it. So I thnk we could learn a lot from them. All you need is ears.

745. Disinvited - June 28, 2013

#670. boborci – June 28, 2013

Sounds like you’ve already got a lock on the 3rd one’s outline?

Dang, and I was hoping to get out my wish, before the Gatsby glow fades, that you all would consider a light-hearted dramedy showing the need for the Prime Directive through what the altIotians do with a piece of the Narada the Klingons broke off and let fly their way. ;-)

#682. Jeyl – June 28, 2013

“Since nobody died in this film [STID] …”

I think Pike’s dead body and Khan, himself, would quibble with your assessment of his marksmanship. Admiral Marcus wouldn’t be too taken with your assessment of him as a nobody, either – if he were alive.

746. Quatlo - June 28, 2013

Pike’s death scene… angle and pose looks a lot like the JFK on the autopsy table photo with the open eyed gaze and open mouth.

Kirk’s death scene… similar framing to Shat/Kirk’s last scene in GENERATIONS.

Or, like Nixon said, “Am I wrong?”

747. Keachick - rose pinenut - June 28, 2013

#741 – You are just plain weird.

Bob Orci and co wrote a fictional story which dealt with the possible ramifications when one or two powerful individuals become corrupt because of fear and belief that aggressive tactics were the only way to combat any threats, whether real or otherwise. It dealt with a particular kind of mindset, one that has been around for quite a while in many parts of the earth, at various times in earth’s history.

Hitler’s problem was paranoia, fear and delusion, and seeing and using aggression and cruelty as ways of overcoming the “enemy within our midst”, something he could easily infect a poor, downtrodden German people with. He did so – all too successfully, and that was/is the scariest part of all…

748. Keachick - rose pinenut - June 28, 2013

#745 – Pike looked like how people who have died look like…Honestly, what is with all these silly comparisons with other films and scenes, when what is often depicted are states that occur naturally to LOTS of different people.

Often the mouths and eyes need to be shut by someone alive because that is how a person DIES, as they look out and take their last breath.

749. Other Guy - June 28, 2013

746. Keachick

Your wrong, if you think you have to defend boborci.

Boborci has already made his intentions clear about the latest Treks.
They are an allegory to 911 and the War on Terror.

If you can’t see this then you have more problems than you think I have.
But don’t worry, I won’t be calling you any names.

750. Mitchell - June 28, 2013

@745. Quatlo – June 28, 2013
@747. Keachick – rose pinenut – June 28, 2013

It’s not silly, Pike (Bruce Greenwood) played John F. Kennedy, in a much better movie, hence probably the resemblance Quatlo see’s to JFK :)

751. Other Guy - June 28, 2013

Meant to say, “Why do you think you have to defend boborci?”

752. Other Guy - June 28, 2013

749. Mitchell

Goog point. Very amusing, too. : )

753. Mitchell - June 28, 2013

@740. Keachick – rose pinenut – June 28, 2013

you are still arguing for a Loss. the commentary has them admit themselves why they took those things out and it’s not encouraging. Nor was their reasoning for another scene i forgave initially.
and this is how bad into dumbness is, they seem to have given us many of their original very bad ideas they had in mind and it makes you go back and hate the first film, especially all the things you forgave.

Because even without the Gaila scene they still went on to make the Kobayashi Maru a joke with Kirk being an idiot, a very very stupid Starfleet Academy and a clueless Spock.
Uhura’s reaction in that scene sums up the entire abramsverse.

These guys are apt at trolling fan bases into seats but not much else. They may be giving it their all but they’re up creek with out a paddle.
and i think that line Pike gave to Kirk about “blind luck” justifying their actions etc… is really about them. As filmmakers, as writers I truly felt they wrote that for themselves.

754. Mitchell - June 28, 2013

@733. Sheik Yerbouti:
Shaq is a fan of Superman. he seems to love everything associated with Superman. Kevin Smith is a fanboy, he’s an avid comic book reader and gets anal whenever things stray too far from the source material.

There are pro’s, con’s and flaws with both. and of course the opinions of either are usually just that.

@682. Jeyl – June 28, 2013
yes, it’s like they didn’t even remember where they left the characters off from the first film. and the Countdown novel makes it 10 times worse and was a far cry from the brilliance of the first Countdown comics/graphic novel

755. Red Dead Ryan - June 28, 2013

#738.

Well, I gotta agree with Robman on FC. I think it holds up pretty well, considering that it cost a lot less than “Independence Day” which came out several months earlier in that year. But I agree the deflector dish scene is tedious. The space battle with the Starfleet ships against the Borg cube was well done, but a bit too short.

“Nemesis” and “Insurrection” are more dated by a wide margin.

#736.

You nailed it, Phil. There seems to be a lot of haters out there with too much time on their hands, and too much passion in their hearts…….

756. Other Guy - June 28, 2013

boborci?

question.

Are there any special questions that you had in mind that you think we should be asking?

I promise to tell you a secret if you can name one.

757. Other Guy - June 28, 2013

A secret you will find amusing.

758. Red Dead Ryan - June 28, 2013

And oh, yeah, Other Guy,

Please knock it off with your politicking/truther nonsense. It’s not what this thread is about. And another thing, we get that you hate the new movie. Just because you keep going on about it doesn’t change the fact that you are wrong.

“Star Trek Into Darkness” is a great movie. It’s also the most successful one.

759. P Technobabble - June 28, 2013

I’d like ask Bob who are your writing heroes and have you ever had the chance to sit and chat with them?

760. Mitchell - June 28, 2013

@753. Red Dead Ryan:

similar to what i noticed with Man of Steel and Skyfall it’s all about the format you are watching in.

Blu ray with my Playstation and HDMI cables in Full def, all the classic movies hold up extremely well. the newer ones not so much, they are hit or miss.
There’s something to be said about the time and effort put into the old effects and model making.

761. Marja - June 28, 2013

740, Kea, My god, have seventeen viewings taught me nothing!? Those words about “open the email” *were* indeed among the deleted scenes, and made Kirk look like a total cad, and I’m glad they cut it out, out, out. BTW the *only thing* I thought that made it into the final cut was him saying that to Gaila; I knew all the other stuff was cut (thank god). I can’t say enough how much I hated that scene of him talking to the redheaded Orion woman in the corridor – mistaking her for Gaila, honestly, how awful.

I saw that movie 15 times in the theatre and have watched my DVD twice or three times (and just looked at that scene again, only to find you were right!) … ecchhh, I guess my memory is not so reliable. May I never get called as a witness in court.

Thank goodness for Pine – great comic timing and good acting from the start as Kirk; truly wonderful acting in STiD … now I really genuinely like Kirk.

(In TOS, after the first season and much of the second, I found Kirk not so likeable but mainly it was because the character was poorly written much of the time. Shatner did a great job when he had great material, but later Kirk became a caricature. I except TWOK from this. He gave a very good performance in that film.)

762. Other Guy - June 28, 2013

Great? Don’t think so. Horrrible? Not.

Just can’t see past seeing them make a buck off of that day. Not like that. Let alone in my Star Trek, which is what this thread is all about, you know.

But, I get your point, Red Dead. I’ve been told many, many times to shut up about remembering that day, or, to keep quiet about the many, many questions that arose that just did not make sense in those following months. I won’t go into them here, but, instead of allowing people to question the details, or discuss, what went wrong, I was told to shut up. But you know what Red Dead? I will never shut up. I will never forget, and I will question relentlessly when something looks to be incriminating. I am sure that could be the lesson from this movie. Question, or things will get real bad.

Sorry if it makes it uncomfortable for you, Red Dead, here at TrekMovie, but now you know how I feel when I go the theater to watch Star Trek these days.

So, step out of my way, mister. Or, get on board to help figure out what happened, on that day, 911 and with this movie!.

763. Marja - June 28, 2013

Folks, you might enjoy this send-up of the Alice Eve’s Undies controversy, LOL

http://www.youtube.com/user/BiteTv?v=iBRB9L8yOLc

Maybe 72 of them end up on the Bridge? :)

764. Keachick - June 28, 2013

#748 – Did I actually say that STID is not/could not be an allegory for the war on terror or 9/11 tragedy? Ever?

I am well aware of Bob Orci’s views and suspicions and he is not alone in his views.

I look at the motivations that drive people to do what they do, whether it be Osama Bin Laden and his supporters, or George Bush and US military, or a fictional Admiral Marcus and most of the time what drives all these people is FEAR – that they might lose dominion/power or that their cherished beliefs, religious, political, other, will be deemed to be wanting, fear that they may be seen as weak and ineffectual by supporters and enemies alike if they do not behave in a certain way…

“So, step out of my way, mister. Or, get on board to help figure out what happened, on that day, 911 and with this movie!.”

WTF? You sound demented.

This is a Star Trek Into Darkness movie thread. It is not about discussion about the events on 9/11/01, the lead up to such or the consequences. The fact that the movie may use such an event as an allegory is just that. Please do not confuse past factual events with a futuristic fictional event, no matter how much they appear to have in common.

#752 – “Because even without the Gaila scene they still went on to make the Kobayashi Maru a joke with Kirk being an idiot, a very very stupid Starfleet Academy and a clueless Spock.”

That is a matter of opinion. The Kobiyashi Maru simulation test was already a joke, a bad, sad one and all Kirk did was to call it out for what it was. He cheated on a cheat. Kirk was not an idiot but Spock, along with Starfleet Academy did appear clueless, but it seems that they are not the only ones…

I actually think Captain Pike promoted Kirk to first officer because he called out the test, not in spite of it. Pike was desperately waiting for someone to do something like what Kirk did and possibly felt quietly pleased that it was the young James T Kirk to do so.

I am not sure what “into dumbness” you are referring to…sigh

765. Daoud - June 28, 2013

Somebody pass the Doritos!

766. Other Guy - June 28, 2013

boborci!

Transformers is awesome!
It’s on TBS now. Really digg’in it. Sitting through commercials, too.
Thanks!

762. Keachick
The name calling is in bad taste.

767. Phil - June 28, 2013

@762. Told you so. The guys off his meds….

768. Phil - June 28, 2013

@761. Yeah, that was funny…

769. Marja - June 28, 2013

Phil, it was time for a little fun on this thread!

Keachick, I love what you had to say about FEAR. In some spheres they use the four letters as an acronym for “False Evidence Appearing Real.”

And no, I’m not talking about opinions or truth about 9/11 (your opinions and truths are your own and appropriate for another discussion board). I’m talking about a general way of viewing life.

I’d much rather view it the Enterprise way than the Vengeance way ….

770. boborci - June 28, 2013

706 yanks

Harrison states in the movie that he used torpedoes he was forced to develop to try and smuggle his crew out.

771. Hat Rick - June 28, 2013

BTW, I still think that the villain in STID is Gary Mitchell.

;-)

Anyone remember that debate? It lasted for ages. Well, it’s settled by the movie itself. (It’s Gary Mitchell!)

Gary Mitchell disguised himself as a superbeing named Khan, but not the real Khan, who resembles the late Earth actor, Ricardo Montalban. He hypnotically changed his look to that of the Earth actor, Benedict Cumberbatch, the better to achieve his own nefarious purposes.

The real Khan is still in the Botany Bay, and the events of STID to the extent that Kirk believe he was dealing with the real Khan are all a ruse by Mitchell, under the guidance of the original Admiral Marcus (by the way, not his clone, who died aboard the USS Vengeance).

See? It all works out.

;-)

772. Navy - June 28, 2013

@ bob orci

I just wanted to mention that while I don’t agree with many things with new star trek, it is nice to know that rich people like you are just as nerdy as the rest of us. You obviously have a life, but you still choose to spend some of your time with us. I will continue bashing your trek, but respecting you sir.

773. Mitchell - June 28, 2013

762. Keachick – June 28, 2013

“I am not sure what “into dumbness” you are referring to…sigh”

a trifle barely swede film quality. before released it was confused with Star Trek.
—-
What you stated is opinion. What i am citing is in the film. and with guys like orci who seem to have a fair grasp on all the flaws of modern or historical society you’d think they could play the scene more along the lines of what you are describing, but that’s not in the film. it’s a jump you yourself are making on your own.

Kirk is chewing on an apple like a dolt while so obviously making it crystal clear to every one he’s hacked the system. telling uhura to prepare medical before the test even really begins, his attitude of ‘klingons no big deal’, ‘don’t worry about it’ ‘fire back? nah’, ‘one photon each, don’t wanna wast them’ insert overly crass bites of his apple between all that. then practically dancing a pro football end zone celebration bragging toward the window how he beat the test.

and Spock watching all of this is completely stumped. **FACEPALM**

your thoughts on Pike again are you making connections the film doesn’t. and again they themselves have stated at how flimsy the bringing together of all the characters and Kirk as the Captain at the end etc…etc… Listen to the commentary for yourself.

774. Phil - June 28, 2013

@769. Nonsense! It’s as plain as the nose on your face! Through clever genetic sequencing, and abundant depilation, the Mugato have made their move. It’s obvious they plan to use their particular brand of venom to conquer the universe, by infiltration of the Federations embassies, conveniently located at Starbucks throughout the galaxy…

Yes, Nokeia and Starbucks will rule the universe.

775. K-7 - June 28, 2013

@772. What is a Nokeia?

776. K-7 - June 28, 2013

@770. And I will keep disrespecting you.

777. boborci - June 28, 2013

770. Navy – June 28, 2013
@ bob orci

I just wanted to mention that while I don’t agree with many things with new star trek, it is nice to know that rich people like you are just as nerdy as the rest of us. You obviously have a life, but you still choose to spend some of your time with us. I will continue bashing your trek, but respecting you sir.

——

Ha! fair enough!

778. Mr Mike - June 28, 2013

As I read TrekMovie over the years before STID, I desperately wanted it NOT to be Khan. But after seeing the movie, and during the experience of seeing the movie, it was thrilling that it was Khan. I loved that he and Kirk worked together and felt sympathy for Khan as well as gratitude that he understood Kirk and took his side for a time. It was when Spock Prime showed up and said what he said that I realized Khan’s ambitions would not allow him to settle for helping Kirk save the day. But, then, I wonder what might have happened had Kirk had a little more respect for Khan, and not had Scotty shoot him on the bridge of the Vengeance.

In any case, the movie would not have been as good if it wasn’t Khan, because, for me, as a Star Trek fan it added an entirely new dimension to an already interesting movie. I always watch through the lens of the prime universe, and it makes these movies even better, remembering them as victims of Nero’s intrusion, unconsciously struggling to set things right, in a Quantum Leap kind of way.

Can’t wait for the next one, but wish there was a TV show, and continually disturbed that Les Moonves is holding Star Trek back. Sumner Redstone needs to take it out of his hands and give it to Paramount in full.

779. Ahmed - June 28, 2013

@Bob,

Have you thought of adapting a sci-fi novel to a screenplay ?

There are lot of great sci-fi books out there that could be turn into successful movie franchise such as “Revelation Space” books by Alastair Reynolds or “Commonwealth Saga” by Peter F Hamilton & many other books like these two.

780. Mr Mike - June 28, 2013

775. Ahmed, you just reminded me of the rumors a few years ago that a story using the Guardian or Forever had been developed for Star Trek 09 and that Harlan Ellison was prepared to fight to either prevent or profit from any use of “City on the Edge of Forever” characters or plot devices.

I like the idea of something more sci-fi-ey however and less action.

781. Charles Trotter - June 28, 2013

@boborci

So did Khan *really* escape from Admiral Marcus and attack Starfleet to avenge his crew? Or did Marcus order Khan to attack Starfleet and Khan just lied to Kirk to gain his sympathy?

You probably won’t answer that, will you? :)

782. boborci - June 28, 2013

775 Ahmed

Ender’s Game. November 1st.

783. Keachick - rose pinenut - June 28, 2013

#771 -

Keachick – “I am not sure what “into dumbness” you are referring to…sigh”

Mitchell’s response – “a trifle barely swede film quality. before released it was confused with Star Trek.” What are you talking about?

“What you stated is opinion. What i am citing is in the film…. Kirk is chewing on an apple like a dolt while so obviously making it crystal clear to every one he’s hacked the system. telling uhura to prepare medical before the test even really begins, his attitude of ‘klingons no big deal’, ‘don’t worry about it’ ‘fire back? nah’, ‘one photon each, don’t wanna wast them’ insert overly crass bites of his apple between all that. then practically dancing a pro football end zone celebration bragging toward the window how he beat the test.”

You are criticizing Kirk’s method of calling out the KM simulation test and calling him a “dolt” which is your opinion and clearly not valid because we know that Kirk is intelligent and has done well in tests evaluating various aptitudes and has done well at Starfleet Academy until he challenged the KM test makers. Then you write “practically dancing a pro football end zone celebration bragging…” – yet another opinion/interpretation and not what was actually shown in that particular scene. I did not see Kirk dance. He just took bites from the apple, stood up, held his hands out and looked up to where the instructors were standing.

While you may have disliked how the scene was handled and how Kirk was shown to behave, other people have a different take on that scene. Many have actually commented, (here and other sites), that they found the scene very amusing and indeed liked how Chris Pine seemed quite Shat-like in that scene especially.

Different strokes for different folks is what it’s called – I think.

784. Marsh21 - June 28, 2013

@770

Hahaha! One of the best things I’ve read on this site. I have enough problems with reboot Trek to write a book about it, but Bob Orci still comes around to interact with us even though we’re kinda @ssholes to him.

That’s cool as hell, and I give him mad props.

Some of the things said here are downright nasty, and if I were him I would have left this site a long time ago. I guess you can take a few criticisms from nerds on a comments board when you’re making BANK in real life from the very movie we complain about.

As you said, we don’t have to like the writing to respect the dude :)

785. MC1 Doug - June 29, 2013

re #658: “I believe that would be called a “B” then. LOL”

No, it is an A.

I liked just about everything about STiD except for turning the Enterprise into a submarine. Dumbest thing I have seen short of “Scotty knowing this ship like the back of his hand.”

and

A transporter that can beam someone from Earth to Qo’nos! If you have that, you have no need for the Enterprise and other spacefaring warp vessels.

I like the many Easter Eggs laced throughout the film. I liked Kirk’s moment with Spock and Pike. Yes, that scene (no spoilers)! Kirk never seemed more a man to me than it that simple moment. Not since David died, anyway…. Liked McCoy this time much more.. still think his role needs to be elevated over Uhura’s, though.

re #703: “that’s got to be one of the most wacked out ratings of Trek films I’ve ever seen. I can’t image a critic or trekie coming up with that. You think Into Darkness is better…. way better then 09 or TWOK. I can see your points with TMP, and maybe Insurrection, but how is Into Darkness better then 09 or TOK?

To me, ID was two hours of people punching each other in the face and making terrible decisions.”

You’re certainly entitled to your opinion. I think TWOK (I assume that is what TOK is) is dated… and while it is a good movie, it set the stage for the villain of the month TREK.

I wanted to like 09, but seriously, there are so many plot holes in it that disturbed me. Which ones?

1) Throwing Kirk off the ship. Why? When there was a fully accessible brig?
2) Delta Vega, so close to Vulcan to see its destruction. TOS clearly established that Delta Vega was near the outer rim of our galaxy.
3) Red matter? Baaaaaaaaaaad bad science
4) long range transporter? No
5) Enteprise built on Earth. Again, no
5) Warp drive that seems more like Star Wars than TREK
6) Kirk goes from cadet to Captain? Please…

BTW, I think you meant “trekkie.” Get it right! (though I prefer to be called a “Trekker”)

As to my grade for ST09: I meant B- … darned typos

786. Anthony Ruiz - June 29, 2013

I loved this movie. I have never had that much fun with a “Star Trek” movie since “Star Trek IV.” The genius of this movie and the writing that went into it is that while the humor and fun in “Voyage Home” came from “fish out of water” situations, “Into Darkness” (horrible name for a movie that actually is very fun) delivers all the same fun from situations built inside the Trek universe.

All things considered the movie struck me as a lite version of a TOS episode in that it entertained and made me laugh but didn’t strike me with an intellectual concept. This gets two out of the three things Roddenberry said he wanted to do with “Star Trek.” In the Motion Picture soundtrack, Roddenberry says “Star Trek” and science fiction in general was designed to “entertain” the audience “maybe make [them] laugh a couple of times and when [their] guard is down slip in a heavy idea or two.” The only problem with “Into Darkness” is that there was no heavy idea, not in the well developed, thematic sense.

They had a golden opportunity with the destruction of Vulcan (which the writers have called a “9/11″ of the new Star Trek universe) to draw parallels to the war on terror.

So suppose they stuck with Harrison as Harrison, a member of Section 31 who goes against Starfleet for reasons he finds immoral. As he gets captured on Kronos on his way to defect to the Klingons (and is captured by force, the whole concept of villains voluntarily surrendering is kind of old and annoying, but to the writers’ credit it worked with the story as it was because of the whole torpedoes, Khan’s crew and his whole “family” thing) Harrison gives Kirk coordinates to a Section 31 black site paralleling modern day CIA rendition sites. You could even give a nod to “Balance of Terror” by having them concealed in asteroids like the “Earth Outposts” in that classic episode. The inmates of the black sites are Klingons living in Federation space, and humans suspected to be Klingon operatives (surgically altered to look human, another nod to classic Trek).

The crew spends an acceptable (not too long because mainstream audiences have a short attention span) amount of time debating the issue with Spock justifying the sites stating that “the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few” and how the Klingons want war to expand their empire. The black sites, while morally objectionable, serves the greater good in keeping Klingon aggression at bay. McCoy, always the humanitarian chastises Spock, makes a few quips about him being Vulcan and inhuman, classic banter ensues.

The crew resolves that the Federation council should know about it and tries to go back to Earth but before they do they are intercepted by the USS Vengeance, a top secret Section 31 battle cruiser armed with Klingon weapons with orders “from above” to destroy the Enterprise. Due to the fact that the Vengeance is a top secret vessel that only Section 31 knows about, if the Enterprise is destroyed on the Federation side of the Neutral Zone, it will look like a Klingon ship destroyed the Enterprise giving the Federation justification for entering a war with the Klingons.

A spectacular battle ensues, Kirk and Harrison go over to the other ship during battle, either by space jumping or using the point and click transporter gadget that they teased in the video game where they beam onto the outer hull of the ship and fight their way in (referencing “First Contact” instead of “Nemesis,” which is a definite upgrade). They sabotage the reactor, but Harrison is fatally wounded in the process. The Vengeance is immobilized but not before the crew abandons ship and sets it for self destruct. The blast of the Vengeance will destroy the Enterprise in the process and to make things interesting Kirk can’t be beamed out due to radiation from the reactor scattering the beam.

Kirk, realizing that ordering the Enterprise to save him would be a death sentence to them all, orders Scotty to get the ship capable for warp speed and leave the system. Before Spock gives the order, Dr. Marcus comes up with a way to have the Enterprise survive the blast by riding the tidal forces of the explosion. Realizing that he has time to save Kirk, Spock leaps over to save Kirk with a beacon which Scotty can lock on with the transporter. It all works out in the nick of time, Kirk and Spock beam aboard only a few seconds before the Vengeance blows up. Dr. Marcus’ theory works and the Enterprise rides the shockwave out to safety. Spock stresses that saving Kirk was “only logical” but McCoy says there’s hope for Spock’s human side. Kirk and Dr. Marcus flirt during this time to tease a future romance.

When the Federation council learns about the black sites, Section 31 is exposed, legislative oversight is put into place and as a consequence, all deep space missions (including the five year mission mentioned earlier) are suspended indefinitely (until after the third movie with the T.V. show they’re teasing about). The logic behind this is the exposing of these secret prisons heightens tensions between the Federation and the Klingon Empire and Starfleet needs every starship to ensure the protection of Federation space.

Cut to post credit scene: Admiral Marcus (who in this version is not a villain) orders the search for a derelict vessel fabled from the late 20th century (or to make all the dates add up, make it mid-21st century). Marcus stresses that not much is known about the vessel but it was crewed by “some of the most dangerous people in the human history” who “almost ended all life on Earth two hundred years ago in a destructive war.” Marcus orders that because of this, the members are not to be revived but rather their DNA is to be harvested as templates for new Section 31 agents. (Instead of traditional “Human Intelligence” the program can be called “Augmented Intelligence”).

This gives the premise to the third movie (which was going to happen before “Into Darkness” even came out) a Klingon War with a Khan clone embracing the “superior ambition” that the original Khan had but on a much bigger scale. “It is not the world to win… it is the universe.”

787. Mitchell - June 29, 2013

@779. Keachick: “what are you talking about”
;) very very veiled language.

——
The Wrath Of Khan and Kirk in it describe exactly what the Kobiyashi Maru is and anyone looking at Star Trek seriously would take it serious. but in this universe it’s a gag. because….Nero???

You don’t know he’s “done well” at the Academy only on the tests as Pike states but Performing on tests off the charts BEFORE ENTERING THE ACADEMY is no indication of stellar intelligence. Only entry level qualifications for the Fleet Academy, plus since Nero has changed his life drastically it’s actually completely up to the story to SHOW YOU EXACTLY WHO HE IS NOW (and oh boy in two films do we see how painfully inept he’s written)…so then as the scene plays in the movie you’d have to be a bumbling idiot to act as he did and not expect to be caught, which by how he responds to being summoned down to talk with Spock and Tyler Perry there is a 99% communication to the audience that Kirk wasn’t expecting what takes place in that scene.
and seriously you are holding on by shoe strings here, i used a sports term that doesn’t literally mean dancing ha ha, you’ve never seen a player arrogantly cross a football goal line casually and hold his arms out like Kirk did, staring down an opponents fans in the crowd?

Pine was parody-like not shat-like. It’s an insult to William Shatner’s work and the character of Captain Kirk to be as such while also expecting to be taken seriously. That’s why i like Trek ’09 but just don’t take it seriously, it’s too much of a contradiction to be both. And that’s why i initially gave it a pass along with things like Eric Bana saying he took the Nero role because the script was hilarious and reminded him of the Naked Gun films, seriously get with it Trek fans all this stuff is on the DVD straight from everyone’s mouths. Simon Pegg and John Cho are members of the main crew for God’s Sake!!!
So then when into dumbness comes around and they try to tackle Khan, the films putrid sorry attempt at a story leads no where except poorly remade scenes of some of the greatest Trek material of all time. And now these actors characters who were barely competent in the first film as supposed reach a development end they never set off on, they’re just thrown into it and we’re supposed to just accept it as is. It doesn’t work and it’s insulting.

Pure love of Star Trek is exactly why i won’t blindly love something just because you slap the Trek label on it and tell me it’s Captain Kirk and the Enterprise.

Batman Forever is a better comparison to Trek ’09: Major departure from where the film franchise begin but because of that both films’ glaring faults and altering of established source material can be ignored for the sake of entertainment.
STID however is worse than Batman & Robin. Miles worse. It’s like after Batman Forever’s tone shift, they used the cast and production of Batman & Robin to make The Dark Knight’s script.

It’s a “are you really expecting me to take this serious” moment and retroactively it damages the first film.

788. Tompkins - June 29, 2013

Give the Franchise to someone who actually cares about it enough to devote fulltime effort to it.
That’s how Trek works the best, Roddenberry, then Bennett, then Berman- find a real caretaker who does nothing but Star Trek

789. Mitchell - June 29, 2013

@783. Tompkins – June 29, 2013
that’s what Star Trek is starving for. Who knows maybe bad robot will serve as the perfect production house and bring just enough clout as “creative consultant’s” to convince Paramount to hand Trek over to more competent writers/directors whose talents are fresh and hungry to take on this Franchise and all it’s weight.

The current team was afraid to tackle it head on so they cleverly slipped around it only to wind up with themselves back at square one after only one film lol, Star Trek desperately needs “young minds” with truly “fresh ideas”

790. Captain Slow - June 29, 2013

@783
Yes, we all want someone like Berman working on Star Trek again. We don’t want Hollywood’s top writers and directors.

791. Mitchell - June 29, 2013

@785. Captain Slow: “Yes, we all want someone like Berman working on Star Trek again. We don’t want Hollywood’s top writers and directors.”

That’s not what he said..

792. Nemesis4909 - June 29, 2013

@BobOrci, I’ve pasted it below:

@boborci Thank you for visiting this site and dealing with people’s questions. If you wouldn’t mind, could you answer a couple of mine?

1) You said on this thread that you worked on the story without Khan in mind and thn integrated him later. Why? Why did this story need Khan? There’s power in a disgruntled Starfleet officer attacking the system. Would have been a great parallel where Kirk learns how to follow the rules in taking down someone who is the personification of disobedience

2) You also said that this film and Wrath of Khan are not the same film, I agree but the ending is almost the same (by ending I mean Kirk’s “sacrifice” to save the ship). If you watch the sequence in Wrath of Khan, the sequence in your film is nearly identical, apart from Kirk and Spock’s roles reversed. Also your version looked a lot more expensive…I’m of the opinion that special effects don’t denote quality (see the Transformers movies for clear examples). Also Kirk and Spock weren’t at the point in their friendship where that carries so much weight, in Wrath of Khan it was essentially the end of a profound friendship. I realise that this hasn’t yet been a question so my question is this. What was your reason for using that moment along with the KHAAAAAAAAAAAN! scream?

That’s the end of my questions but I have to say I felt a bit let down by the film, all it did was remind me of a film that I’d rather be watching, you did so well by creating this alternate reality full of limitless possibilities and then immediately rehashed an old story that didn’t need rehashing. I hope you’re not planning to do the Borg next film, that would be unfortunate.

There were other issues I had, transwarp beaming, distance between Earth and Qo’nos etc but that would be nerdy nitpicking.

In the interest of completeness, I’ll tell you what I liked. I really liked the idea of Kirk being reckless and punished for his recklessness (even though it didn’t play out as well as it could have). My favourite scene was when Spock explained why he chose not to feel, there was great weight to that scene and it was very Star Trek. I also liked Uhura appealing to Kirk to let her try to talk their way out of the situation with the Klingons, again, very Star Trek. Scotty quitting on moral grounds was great too. There was little gems throughout the film that could have been focussed on more.

I know this may seem like I’m complaining a lot Bob and maybe I am but I really do think you’re a talented writer and I know you can do better than this, I held this film to a high standard because I hold you to a high standard and you just didn’t meet that in my opinion. I hope you give more care and attention to “The Amazing Spider-Man 2″ as Spider-Man is another thing that’s near and dear to my heart.

I’m trying to break into screenwriting myself so I suppose my final question is, have you any advice on how to do that?

I would be honoured if you’d respond to this Bob, thanks in advance for your time.

Craig McKenzie

793. PaulB - June 29, 2013

#787 “…I felt a bit let down by the film, all it did was remind me of a film that I’d rather be watching…”
****
Well said! Actually, STID reminded me of two films I’d rather be watching: TWOK and ST09, which I frakkin’ love!

If STID hadn’t been such a retread/repeat of ST09, I think the TWOK “homage” might not have annoyed me so much.

794. Captain Slow - June 29, 2013

@ 786
I know, but Roddenberry, Bennett and Berman, while good when they started working on Star Trek, all seemed to go downhill when they had been doing only Star Trek for a long time. I would prefer to have them work on other projects (as long as it doesn’t delay Trek) and meet other talented people who could then help out on the next movie. And also, as someone with film making ambitions, I can tell you that I wouldn’t want to limit myself to just making Star trek, I would want to work on lots of other projects as well.

795. PC3 - June 29, 2013

Actors – 10

Special Effects – 10

Script/Storyline – 3

Harrison/Khan – really, seriously??? This was a chep way out for JJ who is only looking forward to doing episode 7-9.. STID got put on the back burner in terms of interest and as a result got a thrid rate treatment for a script that was suppossed to be overcome by the cast and sfx.

796. Paulb - June 29, 2013

#793 is a reply to 792, not to 787. The messages shifted on us again!

797. Kayla Iacovino - June 29, 2013

Sorry for the message shiftiness! This happens when the comment mods fall asleep at the switch…

798. Fubamushu - June 29, 2013

Using Into Darkness as the template, I am sure the next Star Trek movie from these bozos will be a poorly thought out rehash blending of “Errand of Mercy” and “The Undiscovered Country” with perhaps some of the Klingon elements of “The Search for Spock” thrown in for good measure.

799. Barney Fife - June 29, 2013

Here’s my take on this Trek debate. I’ve been watching Star Trek since 9/8/1966. I got all the movies and 700+ hours of TV shows on DVD/BR. I’m not a Trek fundamentalist…just a fan. I could care less if you call me a Trekkie or Trekker. It was sad for me to see the franchise slowly decay its last few years. Berman-Trek got to be so boring by the end – and let’s be honest, today’s worldwide audience no longer likes to watch shows that are full of technobabble, the same bland music and talking heads.
So we either have new Trek with a new way of story-telling or just our 700+ hours of old Trek to keep us satisfied for the rest of our lives. While I would prefer a bit less action for some character development with NuTrek, I am 100% onboard with this new vision. I think it’s terrific. STID has finally taken over the #1 slot from TWOK in my list of Star Trek films. They need to keep on making these types of theatrical movies – it’s a formula that needs a bit of tweaking but is mostly on track for a successful tent pole franchise. And I would love to see Bob Orci & Friends or Ron Moore & Friends produce the next Trek TV series. Trek belongs back home on TV. Paramount & CBS better get their act together and make it happen.

800. Kayla Iacovino - June 29, 2013

PS – I’m looking into adding a sorely needed feature to the site: nested comments… wish me luck.

801. PaulB - June 29, 2013

#797/800 – No worries. And thank you for looking into nested comments. May the Great Bird of the Galaxy smile upon you!

802. MC1 Doug - June 29, 2013

Kayla: it would be cool if there was a function that permits us to give a thumbs up/thumbs down on user comments.

803. An Old Codger - June 29, 2013

799 Barney Fife.

Me too; what you said. The exception being that I still prefer TWOK to STID, but that is secondary to everything else you said.

804. IDIC Lives! - June 29, 2013

#799 Barney Fife,
You said it so well, I am 100% with you and with STID and all the new Treks which are gleam in the creators’ eyes at this moment.

I too have been with Trek since the beginning, campaigning to get a space shuttle named Enterprise, campaigned for what became ST:TMP and then stood in line for ST:TMP premiere is my command gold uniform (yes, ha ha ha).

I write science speculation, have made my living as a writer for over 30 years, was a teacher before that–and my life is so much better and richer because of Trek. A part of me lives in Trek’s universe and I am eternally grateful for that.

Sure a little tweeking– but viva new Trek and all that is to come!

805. Captain Slow - June 29, 2013

@803
“and then stood in line for ST:TMP premiere is my command gold uniform”
I went to see this movie and the last one in a blue science uniform. I got a double take from one guy and fits of laughter from others. It was awesome.

806. Jeyl - June 29, 2013

737. Keachick – rose pinenut

You’re a liar. The fact that you won’t look it up just emphaises that you’re not interested in finding proof, because there are none. You believe you can just make these accusations and hope that people will believe you so that you can hurt my presence here. Well here’s something that you and everyone else should know. You think Anthony or anyone else who runs this website would tolerate such outlandish remarks? They wouldn’t. I, like many people here, are just fans with opinions. You are not.

807. Curious Cadet - June 29, 2013

@804. IDIC Lives!,
“then stood in line for ST:TMP premiere is my command gold uniform (yes, ha ha ha).”

I think that’s great!

But tell me, were you the least bit self-conscious when you were leaving the movie after they had completely eviscerated the red, blue, gold uniform designations?

I was too young to remember much about what I knew from promos going into it, but I do remember during the movie being shocked and disappointed that they changed the uniforms so drastically, as if I had not been aware they had done this. I’m not sure how I would have felt walking out of the movie had I been wearing last years fashions … Haha

808. Curious Cadet - June 29, 2013

In fact here is that trailer …

http://youtu.be/ZLlV_JVtO5c

No wonder the movie was the highest grossing Star Trek film ever until STID … This trailer makes TMP look like he most exciting scifi film yet then made.

809. Red Dead Ryan - June 29, 2013

#787.

“Batman Forever is a better comparison to Trek ’09: Major departure from where the film franchise begin but because of that both films’ glaring faults and altering of established source material can be ignored for the sake of entertainment.
STID however is worse than Batman & Robin. Miles worse. It’s like after Batman Forever’s tone shift, they used the cast and production of Batman & Robin to make The Dark Knight’s script.”

What??? Are you frakkin’ kiddin’ me? Bitchell, what the hell are you smokin’ (or snortin’ or injectin’ into your butt) that leads you to consider the two reboot movies to be on par with or below Joel Schumacher’s craptastic “Batman” movies? Honestly, you just blew any credibility you had with that asinine comment. Talk about someone high on crack, or more likely LSD or crystal meth, seeing as how you consider the neon-centric, brightly crazed crap Schumacher flicks as being better movies, LOL. :-)

810. Red Dead Ryan - June 29, 2013

#798.

“Using Into Darkness as the template, I am sure the next Star Trek movie from these bozos will be a poorly thought out rehash blending of “Errand of Mercy” and “The Undiscovered Country” with perhaps some of the Klingon elements of “The Search for Spock” thrown in for good measure.”

Using Fubamushu’s newest post as a template, I am sure the next post from this clown will be yet another poorly thought out rehash of his previous rants, blending elements of posts by Mitchell, Jeyl, and other goofs. :-)

811. Jonboc - June 29, 2013

804-”Sure a little tweeking– but viva new Trek and all that is to come!”P
mm
Well said. I was there to petition NASA to name the shuttle Enterprise as well. Was brought into the fold with the syndication phenomenom of the 70′s. How wonderful it was to dive head first into these adventures 5 days a week right before supper…buying models, toys, comics, discussing with friends the particulars of the day’s episode….all the time oblivious to the fact that this exact same scenario was being played out all across the country…creating a fannbase that exists to this day. Enduring the dry spell…the longing for the return of our favorite show was tough. Not so tough, enjoying the euphoria when news spread Trek was returning as, first a TV movie…then that was changed to a TV series…then, changed again into a big budget film…which resulted in 6 movies over the next 12 years, each one a special event.

Then, for me, the dry spell began again with TNG…a show Trek in the title, but not in execution or spirit. A VERY different animal. I didn’t grok it. My Trekkie friends didn’t grok it. A real head-scratcher. For us, the next 17 years, or so, were very derivative and uninspired.

We watched all the spin-offs, all the movies…but never felt the excitement of the early years…that is, until JJ’s Trek hit the screen. It was literally a sip from the fountain of youth! What’s old was new again. Trek was familiar, but fresh!! It was exciting! It had action! It was dramatic and it was funny! My God, I could hardly believe it, they had done the impossible and recast the original cast to perfection! Star Trek was fun again!! Into Darkness was more of the same. I love these guys, I love this crew and I can’t wait to see more of this amazing universe.

A huge “thanks” to Bob Orcin and JJ and the rest for making it happen. Sure there are haters, a small minority of loud squeaky wheels…but make no mistake…there are fans who will lap this bowl of goodness up as fast as you can pour it out. Viva New Trek indeed!!

812. IDIC Lives! - June 29, 2013

#807 Curious Cadet – I didn’t even give a thought to the fact we were dressed in last year’s tunics because my friend (who happened to feel right in Science Blue) and I, hid in the bathroom of the theater and then watched it a second time. By the time we emerged the second time, we were too worn out to realize we had the old uniforms.

Today, she and I are still closest friends, we are and always will be, and we email back and forth about quantum evolution and going to the stars and STID too.

#811 Jonboc – I too never got into TNG. TOS was/is Trek (to me). As far as I was/am concerned, they should have named the other series (all of them) something else entirely. This despite the fact my then teenage daughter was chosen by Bill Theiss to be in the “atmosphere” of the pilot and first episode of TNG, he saw her at a Trek convention.

My passion, my heart, soul and, yes, my mind, lie in the TOS universe and to have it come alive again is wondrous beyond words.

I liked Chris Pine in the first one but this time, he graduated. Shatner will always be Kirk but now Pine is too; truly a parallel universe. This is true of the whole cast, I just happen to be a Kirk expert.

Sure I’d like more personal moments, more characterization, less “noise” and frenzy but Trek has to be viable in today’s world and somehow it works. It is what it is: Star Trek! It’s a tribute to Trek that it is capable of evolving so well and completely. And to those now creating it, of course.

813. Disinvited - June 29, 2013

boborci,

You mention the Khan character’s alias evolution from April->Ericssen->Harrison. You also mention conceiving of the script sans Khan but as the writing evolved you had this character that just screamed Khan and so became him. Did that character have an even different name before the aliases you ran through for Khan? Just out of idle curiosity how committed was the writing team that the character would be Khan with each of the names identified with the character? Was it something akin to:

x – 0%
April – 60%
Ericssen – 75%
Harrison – 100%

?

814. Phil - June 29, 2013

These things are crawling out of the woodwork. Spot on observations, though.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1M3lcHv4dI8

Oh, and the fanboy meme at about 7:10 is a hoot….

815. Disinvited - June 29, 2013

I wonder if the last minute Ericsen name change messed with some of the planned merchandize releases?

816. boborci - June 29, 2013

781. Charles Trotter

Sure, I’ll answer.

STID is not about Marcus ordering K to attack him as cover. Attack is genuine.

Read the official Star Fleet report. It’s all in there;)

817. Elias Javalis - June 29, 2013

Bob, Countdown to Darkness was excellent! Good Scripted!! I am sure i ll enjoy Star Trek ID too. Thanks!!

818. Stephan - June 29, 2013

@boborci

I recently saw people like us. I really liked it very much. I really like it when writers who tend to make bigger budget movies are able to write movies with smaller scale. That shows that they don’t need big budgets to tell a story. And I like it when writers are not limited to one specific genre.

So I am looking forward for new films from you and of course your next trek script. ;)

819. MJ (The Original) - June 29, 2013

Fubamushu or should I say Kevin aka William Bradley
Quit bullying people into your thought process

820. Ahmed - June 29, 2013

@ 782. boborci – June 28, 2013

“775 Ahmed
Ender’s Game. November 1st.”

oh I know about Ender’s Game. I can’t wait to see it, specially that Harrison Ford is in the movie.

I hope that if you guys are writing the next Trek movie, that we will have a more epic story for 2016 release. Something that acknowledge the history of previous Trek series.

821. Scott McC - June 29, 2013

boborci

Bob thanks for a brilliant Star Trek. I’ve now seen the film 4 times and as a 50 year old who has seen all Trek series and movies it’s great to see these characters being introduced to a younger audience. I was particularly impressed with the opening sequence (Nibiru) and wondered if future movies would adopt this structure in which we (the audience) come in at the tail end of a high stakes mission. Best regards and thanks again for a brilliant movie.

822. Dave H. - June 29, 2013

@657 “What is going on with Trek-movie.com? We’ve only had 2 articles in the past month on this site? Where is Anthonie? Nothing from him now in 6 weeks and counting? Trek-web has has over 30 articles during this same period.
I’m very disappointed in this site. Anthonie boldly proclaims at the top of each page of this site: “THE source for everything new in Trek.” This site is no longer being provided in accordance with Anthonie’s bold proclamation here.”

Well said. I could not agree more.

2 articles a month is not consistent with bodlyt proclaiming to the entire internet public that you are going to provide new on everything new in Trek and to be “THE” dominant source for this news.

I would encourage Trek-movie.com to simply remove this bold proclamation from this web page. That would be a simply way to just move on from this topic, as fans will no longer hold A-P accountable for meeting that bold proclamation, which can obviously no longer be met here.

823. ricardocube - June 29, 2013

LeVar Burton has a bit of a nerve. He was in Nemesis. I saw nothing or Gene in that.

Into Darkness is much more closer to TOS than Nemesis surely?

824. WyoTrek - June 29, 2013

Well the movie is now in a “second-run theatre.” Therefore, I saw it for a fourth time ($2.50 is tough to beat!). Here are my overall comments…

OVERALL

The film was solid. The opening scene on Nibiru is great. Yes, the Enterprise underwater probably doesn’t make much sense, but the planet is definitely a “strange, new world” that fits into the ST mold. The demotion of Kirk does make amends for his rapid ascent. The acts of terrorism did feel real wrt 9/11 and Boston. The Kronos scenes were very good. It was nice to officially see the Klingons again! The reveal of Khan and his troops was unnecessary. It damaged the writers’ credibility to have a brand-new universe/timeline/reality with rehashing the same stuff over again. The space battle was fair, but I would’ve preferred the Enterprise to return fire instead of just taking a beating. The space jump was visually pleasing, but a bit tedious too. The warp core scene was bad. I didn’t feel the emotional connection between Kirk and Spock. The San Fran chase scene was a bit too long. The speech at the end was ok, but too politically correct.

ACTING

The acting was solid overall. They really do work alright together as an ensemble. However, I wouldn’t rush to see them in their separate projects based upon their names being on the marquee. Pegg stole the show IMHO with Urban a close second. Yelchin is very 1D as Chekov. Peter Weller didn’t work for me as Adm. Marcus. I would’ve preferred another ST alum, Kurtwood Smith. He did a great job as the complicated villain Annorax on VOY. Leonary Nimoy’s cameo felt unnecessary here. In the first film, he added legitimacy. Here, not so much. Also, why not have a limbo/purgatory death scene where Pine-Kirk meets Shatner-Kirk? It would’ve fulfilled a Shatner cameo and would’ve been a neat little experience. Lastly, why all the profanity? I’ve always viewed the characters in ST as being far superior to myself and the time I live in. Unless they’re time-traveling to the past, the cursing makes no sense.

TECHNICAL ISSUES

The transporters are dreadful, to be polite about it. The transwarp beaming is just plain wrong. I realize a version of it was used by the ‘brain aliens’ in The Gamesters of Triskelion and was used by Bok and the Dominion in the 24th Century. However, it really doesn’t belong in any ST universe in the 23rd Century being used by StarFleet. Perhaps some dialogue could’ve been inserted about “pattern degradation” to imply that there’s great risk by transwarp beaming. Otherwise, why use starships to cover distances of lightyears? Further, while beaming across lightyears is ok, beaming a moving person is just about impossible (Spock and Khan’s fight)?

The warp drive is way too fast. You reach the destination before having an adult beverage on the ship! Inserting a captain’s log segment would’ve helped provide some sense of how long it took to get to Kronos. There’s no comprehension of warp factors, including (sadly) Kirk. The line Kirk spoke to Carol about being at warp and that they can’t catch us was bad.

CONTINUITY

Something that’s bugged me with both movies… the use of the StarFleet logo/delta by everybody. In the regular universe, it was only used by the USS Enterprise on TOS. Then, it was incorporated throughout StarFleet. The Klingons should not have ridges now. Perhaps the Klingon dude is a member of a house with status and could afford cosmetic surgery, but he should’ve kept his helmet on.

When the Enterprise was within spitting distance of Kronos, why didn’t the Klingons send some ships over to take a look? Also

Political Correctness

Yes, it was noticeable. Scotty’s line about not being the military. Well, StarFleet is the military. Yes, they ferry diplomats, supplies, and fix broken down ships/bases/planets. However, there is a clear chain of command. They use sidearms and the ships are armed. I doubt that the Klingons would have mercy on Scotty or (from the 24th Century) the Jem Hadar. I can see where both political sides view it as commentary on rushing to war in the name of terrorism or the use of drones to take out a bad guy w/out due process. In retrospect from the movie, perhaps nuking Khan with torpedoes might’ve been better. The weapons were supposed to be undetectable. Surely the Klingons are fully aware of StarFleet violating their sovereign territory to extract Khan. Also, in order to launch 23rd Century WMDs at the Federation’s mortal enemy of the time, why was there no authorization from the Federation President/Council?

I’d also didn’t care for the constant reminders of the “stun” setting. When they stunned the bad guys on the enemy ship, there wasn’t too much compassion on display when the ship was eventually destroyed by torpedoes and the crash landing. So I guess the bad guys were unconscious when they died? How compassionate!

WHAT WERE THEY AIMING FOR

If the writers/producers/director/studio execs were aiming to turn Star Trek into The Dark Knight trilogy, they failed. If it’s to make a generic comic book franchise, they’ve achieved mixed success. If it’s to do Star Wars, they’ve failed. If it’s to do an action movie, they’ve failed. If it’s to do a comedy movie, they’ve failed. They just didn’t quite get the full grasp of what they wanted and what they were doing.

WRAP IT UP

Both movies are very solid. They’re fun and exciting. It’s certainly nice to see ST in the mainstream. I’ve grown up my whole life with some iteration of it on TV. After Enterprise, those were dark days when the future was quite dim for ST. So, I’m thankful that there is a brand new product with large budgets and a fresh cast. That being said, ST is a TV show at it’s core. Action and effects serve as accompaniments to the good writing/acting, not the other way around. My ideal hope is that Paramount and CBS will hash out contractual differences in order to get a new show out, ideally in 2016. This show should be on HBO/Showtime in the 12-13 episode format where there is free reign to do anything (even in spite of what I said earlier about cursing). In a perfect world, it’d be great if these actors would sign on to do it. But I know that it’s probably a pipe dream. Thanks for letting me rant.

825. Mitchell - June 29, 2013

793. PaulB – June 29, 2013
agree with both of you completely.

826. Mitchell - June 29, 2013

809. Red Dead Ryan – June 29, 2013

i was comparing the tonal shifts from where the Franchises begin. Tim Burton’s ’89 Batman to mid 90′s Forever. Very similar to the Star Trek shift from Wise & Meyer to abrams and his team.

but i stand by my comment Batman & Robin >>>>WAY OVER into dumbness. i will never watch that thing again and am relieved i didn’t contribute one cent to it.
While at least Batman & Robin has some precedence with the Batman’s history of cult success with Adam West etc..etc.. It’s a film so bad it’s amusing to speed through and shake your head at, can’t even say that about abrams last product.

827. Curious Cadet - June 29, 2013

Well, STID dropped over 500 screens today and brought in only $500K on Friday night. That puts it closer to ST09′s 64th day rather than STIDs current 44th. See it while you can. With another set of big movies set to open next weekend, STID won’t likely be in the theaters much longer.

At this point it will be lucky to hit $230 million domestically. So it’s entirely dependent on foreign now to get it to $500 million. Still two big markets in which to open in July & August. This Sunday’s international figures will be interesting for sure. Will this be the first Trek where foreign grosses surpass domestic? Yet another milestone to be broken …

828. K-7 - June 29, 2013

@810 “Using Fubamushu’s newest post as a template, I am sure the next post from this clown will be yet another poorly thought out rehash of his previous rants, blending elements of posts by Mitchell, Jeyl, and other goofs. :-) ”

Exactly!! LOL

829. William Bradley - June 29, 2013

Star Trek needs a Kevin Feige.

He is the producer at Marvel who oversees all the Marvel Cinematic Universe properties. That includes working with a panoply of directors and writers.

They also have Joss Whedon, who directs the main Avengers movies, serving as creative consultant on all the movies to make sure the disparate elements all fit together, while retaining their own unique characteristics.

830. Marie Previti - June 29, 2013

I loved both new ST movies. Brilliant writing to change the timeline and open up new stories. I thought the new film did a fun take off of Khan. The role-reversal from TWOK was great! And Spock yelling, “Khan!” Thats how to remake a classic. Fresh and reminiscent. I loved that Uraha’s character is elevated and I’d like to see more with McCoy. I think Rodenberry gave us a vision of the future in which humanity has grown beyond racism, hunger and diesese, but the struggles of humanity remain. Exploration of the universe was a front for exploring humanities flaws and strengths. If we can learn something about ourselves while watching a fiction story-that is superior writing. To quote one of the best sci-fi writers, “Individual science fiction stories may seem trivial…but the core, it’s essence has become crucial for our salvation, if we are to be saved at all.”-Isaac Asimov. -No pressure though!

831. Mitchell - June 29, 2013

@819. ricardocube:
Nemesis was almost as bad a rip off of The Balance of Terror and The Wrath of Khan as into dumbness was to Space Seed and The Wrath of Khan, but the difference being the parts then left for the film to try an be original were at least an attempt to touch on “Roddenberry” themes. stid used that space between rehashing to basically rehash some more, almost pulling exact scenes from it’s previous movie in ’09.

832. Ahmed - June 29, 2013

@ 824. William Bradley – June 29, 2013

‘Star Trek needs a Kevin Feige.
He is the producer at Marvel who oversees all the Marvel Cinematic Universe properties. That includes working with a panoply of directors and writers.”

Agree, I think they should bring in Ron Moore to oversee future Star Trek movies or series.

It is too bad that Christopher Nolan is not available, he is one of the few directors in Hollywood with a vision & would have brought a much needed fresh perspective to Star Trek.

833. Devon - June 29, 2013

“but the difference being the parts then left for the film to try an be original were at least an attempt to touch on “Roddenberry” themes.”

Like cheating on your wife and ripping people off? Yeah I remember that.

834. William Bradley - June 29, 2013

There needs to be someone who is always thinking about Star Trek. Ron Moore did a great job with Battlestar Galactica. I wasn’t especially fond of the ending, but all these shows with complex mythologies run into trouble in the end, as we saw with X-Files and so on.

Moore also really brought the Klingons to life in Trek for TNG, which continued in DS9..

But it could be someone who doesn’t really have a big name. Feige I think began as the assistant to the woman who produced the X-Men from the beginning whose name embarrassingly escapes me at the moment.

I also think Bob Orci shows a very strong understanding of and passion for Star Trek.

I hate the whole Khan thing in STID, but having heard his explanations am satisfied, at least as far as his involvement goes. I disagree with insisting on having the villain be a white guy to avoid any possibility of demonizing a person of color, but the fact is that most people are not white and they are hardly all angels. Plus anybody named Khan Noonien Singh sure don’t look and act like Benedict Cumberbath. Who of course I think is absolutely fabulous as a super-villain named John Harrison.

But I think Orci is sincere in his beliefs on that, so I respect it.

I think continuity is important and ST09 was a triumph and STID was, er, an incomplete triumph, so it would be best if he played a key role going forward, especially given his obvious passion for Trek.

Caring is the most important thing here. If somebody really cares about Trek and is smart and talented, good things are likely to happen.

835. Devon - June 29, 2013

626 – “JJ Abrams had “klingons” in this last flick. When that “klingon” took off his helmet he looked almost nothing like a klingon. I was surprised they even spoke klingon.”

Completely moronic statement. Considering the only thing different was this guy didn’t have a goatee… you’re saying that ALL Klingons look alike? Do ALL humans look a like?

“It’s time to move on from JJ and writing crew. The script of Star Trek Into Darkness sucked. Sure it looked pretty but the writing…editing…directing was lacking for a true trek movie.

It’s time to move on.”

The only thing you could think of kid was that the Klingon didn’t have a goatee. Some of you guys have literally hit the lowest of the low.

836. Curious Cadet - June 29, 2013

I was just thinking about a boisterous statement that has been made lately about how STID is the most successful movie in the franchise, and I wanted to see how accurate that was.

While it is no doubt the most profitable, and for sure it is the most successful international Trek ever, it is not the most successful domestic Trek. Nevertheless, the aggregate total gives the impression it is the most successful, until you take into account the budget (and reviews). And STID is the most expensive movie in the franchise. Once the adjusted budget is deducted from the box office receipts, STID drops to 3rd place, currently about $20 million behind ST09. Now I fully expect STID to make at least $20 million more before its all over which puts it squarely in 2nd place. But it has a ways to go to be as profitable as TMP:

(Adjusted gross after deducting adj. budget)
TMP $328,952,000
ST09 $261,403,995
STID $242,398,000
WOK $229,044,800
TVH $227,701,000
FC $186,160,000
TSFS $163,047,000
GEN $155,554,000
TUC $132,320,700
TFF $80,400,000
INS $79,491,400
NEM $9,879,628

But even if TMP is closer than assumed (as the budget for TMP varies from source to source), will STID end up being the most successful of the franchise, at least when all things are considered? At a minimum, shouldn’t the most successful movie in the franchise embody a majority of the following traits (assuming equal weight):

1) the highest grossing
2) most profitable
3) highest grossing domestic
4) highest grossing foreign
5) best reviewed

STID currently is at 2 out of 5. It will likely end 3 out of 5. That may well put it as the top contender, but not yet.

This is all just for fun. But I do think it’s interesting that the title was claimed on gross box office receipts alone.

837. Ahmed - June 29, 2013

@829. William Bradley

“I also think Bob Orci shows a very strong understanding of and passion for Star Trek.”

Bob Orci is also a good choice to oversee Star Trek. He cares about Star Trek & the fans, he is the ONLY one who actually interact with the fans here & on other sites. As long as they keep Lindelof away, I’m happy with either choices.

Of course, this is all speculations. Paramount might simply reboot Star Trek after the next one & get an entire new team!

838. K7. - June 29, 2013

@823 @831. There you go again. In terms of worldwide box office, including international and domestics, this is the most successful Trek movie ever.

I am really getting sick of your weekly “doom and gloom” posts that focus primarily on the domestic box office for STID. Enough already!!

839. Kev - June 29, 2013

With LeVar Burton, can anyone elaborate on what he means? I dont really get what he means by that.

840. CecilofRil - June 29, 2013

@787-MC1 Doug says:

The Wrath Of Khan and Kirk in it describe exactly what the Kobiyashi Maru is and anyone looking at Star Trek seriously would take it serious. but in this universe it’s a gag. because….Nero???

(Point One: At that point, Kirk had mellowed because he was an Admiral. He explains it to Saavik what the actual test is about. It’s a test of character. Both Saavik and Kirk (both in TWOK and 09 movies) that the tests weren’t “fair assessments of their command abilities.” We GET to see Kirk’s character, as we see his life before. He grew up a delinquent and is very cocky. Remember that he took on 4 guys in the ’09 movie that were larger that him. And, I don’t think it’s a gag, because it totally fits within the character that they showed from the bar scene and the previous scenes.)

————————————————————————————————–

You don’t know he’s “done well” at the Academy only on the tests as Pike states but Performing on tests off the charts BEFORE ENTERING THE ACADEMY is no indication of stellar intelligence. Only entry level qualifications for the Fleet Academy, plus since Nero has changed his life drastically it’s actually completely up to the story to SHOW YOU EXACTLY WHO HE IS NOW (and oh boy in two films do we see how painfully inept he’s written)…so then as the scene plays in the movie you’d have to be a bumbling idiot to act as he did and not expect to be caught, which by how he responds to being summoned down to talk with Spock and Tyler Perry there is a 99% communication to the audience that Kirk wasn’t expecting what takes place in that scene.
and seriously you are holding on by shoe strings here, i used a sports term that doesn’t literally mean dancing ha ha, you’ve never seen a player arrogantly cross a football goal line casually and hold his arms out like Kirk did, staring down an opponents fans in the crowd?

(I guess you don’t have much intelligence, or you would have seen that he was “the only genius-level repeat offender in the midwest.” GENIUS LEVEL. I guess [in your book] that means he’s stupid? But, you obviously don’t understand what “aptitude” is. “Painfully inept he’s written?” You think you could have done better? You obviously don’t write screenplays. Because characterization is hard. You are making conjecture based on your own narrow, limited vision and you can’t see two feet in front of you.)

———————————————————————————————–

Pine was parody-like not shat-like. It’s an insult to William Shatner’s work and the character of Captain Kirk to be as such while also expecting to be taken seriously. That’s why i like Trek ’09 but just don’t take it seriously, it’s too much of a contradiction to be both. And that’s why i initially gave it a pass along with things like Eric Bana saying he took the Nero role because the script was hilarious and reminded him of the Naked Gun films, seriously get with it Trek fans all this stuff is on the DVD straight from everyone’s mouths. Simon Pegg and John Cho are members of the main crew for God’s Sake!!!
So then when into dumbness comes around and they try to tackle Khan, the films putrid sorry attempt at a story leads no where except poorly remade scenes of some of the greatest Trek material of all time. And now these actors characters who were barely competent in the first film as supposed reach a development end they never set off on, they’re just thrown into it and we’re supposed to just accept it as is. It doesn’t work and it’s insulting.

(Pine [and JJ] didn’t want a “carbon copy” of the original Kirk. Ergo, he’s going to be different. So, you don’t like that particular incarnation, and that’s your opinion. But, you don’t have to brow beat everyone here about your views. Also, Into Darkness was a GREAT film. Very entertaining. Yes, it reused scenes from a beloved film, but it switched enough of the characters and plot to keep it fresh. Again, no one forced you to see the movie, so keep your opinions to yourself. Let me ask you something: Are you boborci? Alex? JJ? Rod Roddenberry? No? Then shut up. You will do everyone a favor by doing so.)

—————————————————————————————————

Pure love of Star Trek is exactly why i won’t blindly love something just because you slap the Trek label on it and tell me it’s Captain Kirk and the Enterprise.

(Again, you are entitled to this opinion. Many Trek fans love it just because it pays homage to the original series with which they are familiar. If you don’t like this, then don’t watch it. Stay with the original material.)

—————————————————————————————————

Batman Forever is a better comparison to Trek ’09: Major departure from where the film franchise begin but because of that both films’ glaring faults and altering of established source material can be ignored for the sake of entertainment.
STID however is worse than Batman & Robin. Miles worse. It’s like after Batman Forever’s tone shift, they used the cast and production of Batman & Robin to make The Dark Knight’s script

(I think you are confusing the issue. You don’t get that after Nemesis [which many fans consider to be worse that 5], Trek NEEDED a reboot. I would liken 09 to Batman Begins. A great reboot of a great franchise. Star Trek Into Darkness [to me] is like Skyfall. A great followup to a wonderful movie. Oh, and you must like Bat-nips and emo-angtsy teens. In fact, you must get off on it to like that particular movie. Batman Forever was Joel Schumacher’s take on the franchise. He tried to lighten the tone some, because he felt that the first two Batman films were two dark. He decided to take it further after Batman Forever, and went back to the camp of the 1960′s TV series. Batman & Robin is the worst film I have ever seen, and I write movie reviews. I don’t own it, I never want to see it again. If I want to laugh at it, I will watch the Nostalgia Critic. But, this is a Star Trek thread, and not about movies in general. Ergo, Star Trek Into Darkness is nowhere NEAR as bad as you are making it out to be. You just want to rant, and you have that entitlement. I am just here to shut you down and tell you the facts.)

—————————————————————————————————
It’s a “are you really expecting me to take this serious” moment and retroactively it damages the first film.

(I don’t think you understand what you are talking about, as you don’t understand that film is just for entertainment purposes. What part of Star Trek am I supposed to “take seriously?” The part where people are firing “ray guns,” or the part where Khan is a “genetic super soldier” who has superior intellect and strength? I mean, it’s a science fiction movie, not “science fact.” Again, the movie is there for entertainment, and fan service. You are clearly not a fan, as evidenced by your stupidly inane comments about a fictional universe that will never [in all probability] exist. A true fan would just watch the movie, enjoy it, and tell boborci that he did a wonderful job with the movie. You are clearly a troll, of the 12 year old age group, who doesn’t know what Trek actually is and just hated the movie you wished you could have input into. If you want boborci to listen to you, you should be nicer to him, and tell him your ideas. They do listen on here, but not to haters like you. Wake up and smell the coffee. People don’t like your views on here, and don’t want you to post here anymore. So, do us all a favor and stop. Thank you for your time.)

841. Curious Cadet - June 29, 2013

@820 Wyo Trek,
“Something that’s bugged me with both movies… the use of the StarFleet logo/delta by everybody. In the regular universe, it was only used by the USS Enterprise on TOS. Then, it was incorporated throughout StarFleet. The Klingons should not have ridges now.”

You seem to understand that this is an alternate universe, so I’m not sure why this is a problem. The likely canon answer is very simple — the destruction of the Kelvin unified Starfleet in a way it was not in the Prime universe. The Kelvin that originally had the delta shield, was then adopted by everyone as a tribute and show of solidarity. There’s an even nerdier explanation, but I’ll skip it for now …

Besides, I’m happy to see the unified assignment badges. They were always a mess in TOS. The delta was the best looking of them, and some of them were just dumb looking. It was a good idea in theory, but practice was something else entirely … It was clearly enough of an issue that they simply avoided creating a new patch for the Defiant and went to great pains to avoid showing one. Why anyone would want to go back to that is beyond me.

As for the Klingons … Well this is where a complete reboot would have been preferable to what they did. The entire ridge/no-ridge thing needs to go away. We all need to agree that DS9 screwed up by even acknowledging it, and Enterprise screwed up by turning it into a bloody three episode story arc!

Frankly, I would just as soon agree that each new filmmaker can choose to make the Klingons look any way they want within the broadly defined parameters approved by Roddenbery. i.e. swarthy, facial hair, ridges, or any combination thereof (and Abrams’ Klingons do this very nicely). The same goes for Romulans, because frankly the TNG era brow ridges are just ridiculous — I mean they are relatives of the Vulcans, so was that an evolutionary development brought on by their penchant for head butting each other? It’s all right up there with limiting the current starship interiors to the practical technology seen in those earlier series.

842. BALLZURK - June 29, 2013

I’ve been saying it for years now: WE NEED KOR, KANG, AND KOLATH vs. KIRK! No remake, no rehash, no redo of something that was done 20 years ago, and way better. We want Klingons getting nasty and brutal and lots of phasers and torpedoes and Bat’leths. JUST GIVE US WHAT WE WANT!

843. Charles Trotter - June 29, 2013

816. boborci

Okay, thanks! That’s what I thought. :) So that means Khan beamed to Qo’noS because he figured Starfleet could not reach him there, correct? Possibly to map out his next plan of attack?

One more question, and I think this goes in line with what Disinvited asked in 813 above: who was the attacker before Damon convinced you to make him Khan/John Harrison? Was it April or an entirely new character? If the latter, can you tell us his (or her) name?

Thanks! :)

844. Phil - June 29, 2013

@835. Speak for yourself. It’s obvious to a lot of people that a Trek version of a big screen rendering of Modern Warfare is a disaster in the making, and I would hope the producers don’t need to be told this more then once.

845. dmduncan - June 29, 2013

The big problem with TNG’s Klingons was that they were too monolithic in appearance, language, and character for a STAR EMPIRE.

846. Baxter - June 29, 2013

@boborci and @alltheotherdudes here –

Hey guys, be thankful, these movies (ST09 and STID) rocked, and we finally get more Trek!!

847. Bob Tompkins - June 29, 2013

Here is a little factoid:
Without counting foreign grosses, Star Trek Into Darkness is a flop, underperforming 2009s Star Trek by about $50m…….
The foreign market saved the project by grossing almost as much as the $218m domestic market and when the dust clears the foreign sales might be higher than domestic, a first for Trek. This assumes Paramount gets 50% of gross ticket sales overseas as well, which might not be the case.
Throw in the estimated $60m advertising budget, and it’s a loser for Paramount, which will only see a profit after DVD sales and network sales crank up.
Give Star Trek to someone who cares about Star Trek 24/7. I’d much rather see a $75m budget movie that does $150m box office and is a thoughtful movie, not a carnival ride.

848. Buzz Cagney - June 29, 2013

#835 speak for yourself. Klingons have been done to death.
They’ve done the obvious and revisited Khan (and not very well at that and really not worthy of the character) so lets see if they have imagination enough to give us something new.

849. Buzz Cagney - June 29, 2013

#784 No, but it would certainly help if we liked the writing!
Sorry, but these guys are just rip off merchants with nothing new to say of their own. I hate to say it because, given that they had 4 years to make something memorable and original, they failed on both counts.
Oh sure, they made money. But, somehow, that just adds insult to injury.

850. Red Dead Ryan - June 29, 2013

I’m sick of the Klingons. I’d love to see the Tholians in the next movie, and possibly the Talosians.

But I have to agree with MJ, I think we’re going to get the Borg.

851. Mitchell - June 29, 2013

@839. Bob Tompkins:
Bravo to your last paragraph sir, bravo.

but yeah That’s also the dirty little secret for iron man 3.

what makes things even worse for both films is that each studio had to go into over drive trying to fan up hype for them to open as big over seas etc..etc.. Paramount execs are all over the net saying their goal is to reject what made Trek, “Trek” and do so for more box office appeal.

Iron Man 3 still takes the cake of shamelessness however, releasing completely different versions of the film to please certain markets.

That’s why i shudder when people suggest Disney would take care of Trek. HA! We are having enough problems around here trying to stay connected to the characters and stories we became fans for.

852. Mitchell - June 29, 2013

841. Buzz Cagney – June 29, 2013
They are apt money makers but not very good artistic filmmakers. Everything done well in their films are usually lifted from somewhere else or someone else, even the “are you out of your vulcan mind” was used in that exact pitch and delivery by Jim Carrey on In Living Color.

Anything of their own they contribute is just mind numbing bad.
Me and my brother seriously burst out laughing at the dialogue in into dumbness. It was like they didn’t care anymore and just wrote it like it took place today with technological jumps made by our current society. Pike says “epic beat down” really?
but Peter Weller had us laughing the most, “speak up son tomorrow is too late” lol where was the rest of the football coach terminology or motivational speaker cliches?
by the time he was saying things like “oh sh*t, well sh*t” or my personal favorite “HE’S.PLAYING.YOU.SON!” my brother and i were just like oh f**k sake just have him repeat lines from Robocop already! At least that would induce laughter in a good way.

‘dead or alive Khan is coming with me’
‘you’re move Kirk’

853. Kev - June 29, 2013

For boborci if your doing Klingons for the next movie my suggestion is to make them like the samurai and the like in Imperial Japan like they did in TOS somewhat

with different lords and the like with there own house symbols on the ships, even having some variation like what was done with Miranda and Nebula class of ship, custom external and internal parts based on the warriors preference

and if you guys decided to make another class of ship to go along with the enterprise could you guys try to make something along the lines of the miranda or the Akira?

ones where the saucer is about as wide as the space between the nacelles to give it a perfectly balanced look.

as that’s what made the Miranda, Akira, and Excelsior look much more advanced that the refit constitution class and your current ship

Plus I think that was the reason why they wanted to get rid of the galaxy class and replaced it with the Sovereign for the TNG films

as the saucer section was HUGE on that thing, giving it an unbalanced and front heavy look, like on your redesigned ship.

and that is what people were angry about with the redesign you guys did

as the refit had the pylons far too back on the ship

http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100422033049/memoryalpha/en/images/0/0f/EnterpriseBirdofPreyShowdown.jpg

and the saucer a touch too wide for the ship along with being a touch too thin in the first 6 films to give it just the right balance

http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100518022539/memoryalpha/en/images/d/df/USS_Enterprise-A_quarter.jpg

but it was pretty close nonetheless, just kinda needed some tweaking to bring it up to the excelsiors level in balance and pose

and I get the feeling people were hoping you guys would basically fix the revised phase 2 enterprise

of which of note they used for the shield graphic in ST2 by accident by the way

http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20130129140832/memoryalpha/en/images/f/fa/Ship%27s_operations_graphics_bridge_computer_console_read-out_in_the_Mark_IV_bridge_simulator.jpg

and make it look like the TOS one in balance

http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20091209211406/memoryalpha/en/images/5/54/USS_Enterprise%2C_The_Cage_%28remastered%29.jpg

and give it an ambassador like neck which you kind of did.

instead you guys made the saucer section look super big and made the connecting parts look too small.

hence the reaction everyone had back then, also I see you made the engines much smaller on the new one at the end there

that’s not where the problem was lol

and also you can see how with the newer ships the saucers got super big

http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20090726142221/memoryalpha/en/images/8/8b/Starship_chronology_classroom_chart.jpg

and I kinda think people wanted you guys to so to speak go back to basics in that regard.

As a final thing if you want a return of Khan why not do it with all 72 Supermen and women wreaking havoc all over the alpha quadrant?

actually that was one of the things SFdebris was hoping you guys would have done with the concept:

http://blip.tv/sf-debris-opinionated-reviews/star-trek-into-darkness-mini-review-6600041

and I agree, you guys should have done that and done a full Search For Khan for the next film but on the other hand you guys didnt want to tie the new directors hands for the next one.

854. Charles Trotter - June 29, 2013

839. Bob Tompkins

Your “factoid” is incorrect. First:

“Without counting foreign grosses, Star Trek Into Darkness is a flop, underperforming 2009s Star Trek by about $50m…….”

Actually, ‘Star Trek Into Darkness’ is only trailing 2009′s ‘Trek’ by about $19 million at the same day of release.

Cumulative gross for ST09 by Day 44: 238 million USD
Cumulative gross for STID by Day 44: 219 million USD

‘Star Trek Into Darkness’ will close at approx. 238m USD, or 20m USD short of Trek 2009′s cumulative gross. The outstanding international gross more than makes up for that, though.

(For the record, I’m using USD instead of dollar signs to avoid the wrath of the spam filter.)

There is no discounting foreign grosses. Paramount focused more on international markets this time around, and that’s where they did their big business. Things went better than expected overseas, not quite as good as expected domestically, so it kinda all evens out.

“Throw in the estimated USD60m advertising budget, and it’s a loser for Paramount, which will only see a profit after DVD sales and network sales crank up.”

The advertising/distribution will be quite a bit higher than that, but since that is paid in quarterly or yearly amounts, it doesn’t really figure into things at the moment.

“This assumes Paramount gets 50 percent of gross ticket sales overseas as well, which might not be the case.”

That’s about how much they get, yes, plus about 60-70 percent of the domestic gross, depending on whatever deals they’ve made.

STID is hardly a “loser” for Paramount. Believe it or not, it has already turned a profit for them. So far, they’ll get back about 249m USD on a 185m USD budget (remember, marketing and distribution costs are paid over time). That’s a current profit of 64m USD so far. It’s still earning money here, it still has to open in a few more countries and then there’s DVD/Blu-ray/VOD/TV sales, so… yeah, I think Paramount is pretty happy with it.

855. Charles Trotter - June 29, 2013

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is what happens when you spend years studying and analyzing box office grosses and movie budgets. You ramble on and on about… well, box office grosses and movie budgets.

Let me know if you would like me to do some more rambling or just stop now. :-P

856. Captain Slow - June 30, 2013

@842 Red Dead Ryan
I would love to have the Tholians! They are one of the most alien aliens in ST and would look amazing with a movie budget. But I doubt we’ll get them because it would probably be assumed that audiences couldn’t sympathize with them.

857. Mitchell - June 30, 2013

842. Red Dead Ryan – June 29, 2013
i am saying right! ha ha ha. but seriously in all the vastness of space and the richness of Star Trek’s history genuinely new and original territory shouldn’t be that difficult.

858. Mitchell - June 30, 2013

@846. Captain Slow: “I would love to have the Tholians! They are one of the most alien aliens in ST and would look amazing with a movie budget. But I doubt we’ll get them because it would probably be assumed that audiences couldn’t sympathize with them.”

and this was my point about fresh blood doing for Star Trek what Chris Nolan, David Goyer and Zach Snyder have done for DC. The reverence they showed for Batman & Superman is desperately needed in producing the Trek universe.

Both not being afraid to use “2nd level” or “hard to relate to” characters and doing so very cleverly. Ras and Talia Al Ghul, The Scarecrow and Faora are classic characters revered by the fans. They were used extremely well and treated with respect. Trek’s universe has tons more to offer! The Tholians, Charlie Evans, Guardian of Forever or even a Lazarus would own if given the same care.

there are young and extremely skilled filmmakers out there who could be Paramount’s Nolan and Goyer. it’s just a matter of finding the ones with the passion and respect for Star Trek.

people pan on Zach Snyder’s Sucker Punch and other filmmakers with a similar style but imagine those visuals for the Talosians with their reality altering abilities. It would be amazing to see young directors skilled with effects and given a modern budget tell stories that draw from what was established in The Cage or The Menagerie.

Maybe it’s a Duncan Jones or a Bryan Singer with his career back on track after X-Men is released but i just hope we get a Batman Begins, Man of Steel treatment of Star Trek.
Star Trek deserves people who have all the tools of true A-List quality, give them the chance with all the current resources and budgets.

859. c - June 30, 2013

When I first saw the movie, the first day it came out for the US I was not happy but because it was a rollercoaster ride and I hate movies like that. Then after a while I liked it, came to that conclusion after the movie had been out about 3 weeks, now this is a movie that can last the test of time, will be awesome to see it in several years, again its not Star Trek but Star Trek ish and that’s OK with this Trekkie.

860. grover sald - June 30, 2013

Just saw STID in Prague, Czech Republic, with my son. Not a completely full theater, but a pretty good turnout. Seemed like an appreciative audience. It was my 2nd viewing and I liked it better this time… some things that seemed inconsistent/unclear the first time made more sense this time around; there’s so much going on that I missed a few key lines of dialogue here and there the first time.

I’m happy to see the movie doing well and wish every success to this new incarnation of ST and its creative team.

I enjoy the callbacks to earlier Trek but do wonder if ST is becoming a tad too self-referential. Consider:

ST2:TWOK references to the “classics”: Tale of Two Cities, Moby Dick, maybe a touch of Paradise Lost.
STID references to the “classics”: ST2:TWOK, TOS: Space Seed & Tribbles, DS9/Enterprise (Section 31).

Bob Orci, if you’re out there, congratulations on this latest success, and as I noted above, I wish you and the rest of the team all the best… but do you think there’s still room in ST for creative inspiration from outside previous incarnations of ST? Are there any works of classic lit that might inspire ST13? War and Peace, perhaps? :-)

861. Captain Slow - June 30, 2013

@848
Well I wouldn’t know about the examples you cite because I have no interest in super hero movies, but since there will be a new director next time, we may get something like the Tholians or Talosians. Although I don’t want some mind-bending Talosian story as I think that would be a bit dull for a movie. Tholians would be awesome though.

862. Captain Slow - June 30, 2013

One thing though, I don’t think Lazarus is that revered a character among fans.

863. Mitchell - June 30, 2013

@849. Captain Slow – June 30, 2013
but i’m sure you’re aware of the examples, even a modest amount of quick google search would show you guys like Nolan and Snyder had some well regarded and interesting films before launching into “the big time” with the super hero genre etc…

There have to be people out there now paying their dues with quality work who are enthusiasts about Star Trek. and a chance to work on Trek could not only be their big break it could be very good for Star Trek

@850. Captain Slow – June 30, 2013
hence why i said “Even” Lazarus lol!

864. Phil - June 30, 2013

Well, I see the bitching continues. Trek is in good hands with Bad Robot, and Paramount understands that.

865. Captain Slow - June 30, 2013

I’m absolutely aware of them. But I have less than no interest in seeing any of their movies.

On the subject of people who are enthusiastic about Trek and could make old concepts interesting, I wrote my own JJverse script this year which I should publish on the internet someday. Weirdly, even though I kept myself completely ignorant of almost all spoilers, some details ended up being quite close to the events of the movie, just with Tholians and Andorians in place of Khan and Marcus.
I had a scene where they’ve captured a Tholian and while interrogating him, they discover that a Federation scientist is actually evil. Then there was a part where Spock talks about the emotions he felt when Vulcan was destroyed. And then I ended it with an act of self-sacrifice from Kirk.

So if they ever need new writers, I’ll do it for them :)

866. Phil - June 30, 2013

@848. Not sure how you seem to interpret that Zach, Chris, et al, has such reverence for DC, when just about everything I’ve read about MOS indicates that while they may have saved the franchise, they destroyed the character. You are entitled to your opinion, but it seems that, according to your viewpoint, Abrams did to Trek what Nolan did to Superman. How that makes one preferable to another really defies logic…

867. Disinvited - June 30, 2013

819. ricardocube – June 29, 2013

Levar was in TNG. While Gene was clearly looking to catch lightning in a TV bottle yet again, his many other attempts to so do on TV were not reboots of the original Trek series. PHASE II, GENESIS II, PLANET EARTH, THE QUESTOR TAPES, SPECTRE, TNG etc. are definitely not TOS and yet their distance from it in no way invalidates them as indicators of his intentions.

Your mention of Levar being in NEMESIS and it being farther from TOS than another movie, is a non sequitur.

868. Disinvited - June 30, 2013

#867.

The great number shuffle says the reply should now be to msg #823

869. dmduncan - June 30, 2013

No, the Klingon Empire should be made up of all kinds of new alien races, just like the Federation is. The Klingons ought to be the ruling class, but they too should show a variety of races, like earthlings do.

They should spend time and money developing several key looks. If they do Klingons fast and cheap, they will just fall back to what’s been done before, and we’ll end up back in the cheeseball factory.

So the question of whether Klingons have ridges is irrelevant. Some do, some don’t. Making THAT the subject of an either-or question is unimaginative; that’s like asking if humans have light skin or dark skin.

The one thing that we should come awy with from a movie about Klingons is MYSTERY. We should have the feel of having gotten a peek inside a secret Empire whose makeup, customs, languages, etc. are all NEW and mysterious to us. We should have the experience of realizing that what we’ve see of them so far has been an extremely narrow segment of the Empire’s overall constitution, and after we see inside we should have more questions than answers.

870. Curious Cadet - June 30, 2013

@864. Phil,
“Trek is in good hands with Bad Robot, and Paramount understands that.”

Is this facetious?

Without debating quality, sure Bad Robot did exactly what Paramount wanted and took a dying franchise and turned it into a money maker.

However, with STID running almost $35 million (adjusted) behind ST09 (not accounting for 3D premiums) and currently playing in 1000 fewer theaters in the US, combined with the fact that it took Abrams four years to deliver STID, due mainly to his other projects, and is about to move to London as a director AND producer, and visionary of the reboot of the biggest scifi franchise in history, not to mention it being a direct competitor to Star Trek, I don’t see how anybody could think their franchise is in good hands with Bad Robot.

Seriously. How could any studio think this scenario is best for their investment? Abrams would be producing in absentia. Assuming he could keep up with the demanding schedule of two major sci-fi movies at the same time, why would anyone take the risk they had the best efforts such a person could offer? The obvious loser here is Paramount. Star Wars by necessity takes top priority. Abrams has already produced two Trek movies. Which project is he likely to “phone it in” on? Paramount needs a producer who is going to make Trek a priority. With Abrams’ second effort performing considerably worse than the first, both critically and domestic box office, the next movie needs to be a home run. And with Abrams necessarily focused on Star Wars, it’s unclear to me how he will be able to focus on making the third Star Trek a winner, when he had four years to make the second an unqualified hit with arguably less distractions than Disney, Lucas and Kennedy.

Paramount hopefully realizes this and will take the outstanding groundwork Abrams has established and give it to another production team to build upon, who will make Trek their top, and only priority.

871. Red Dead Ryan - June 30, 2013

#869.

I like your ideas on how the Klingons should be portrayed, even though at the moment, I’m kind of sick of them. :-)

The Dominion from “Deep Space Nine” was a huge galactic power. It had a number of species serving different roles. The Changlings were the Founders/rulers, the Vorta were a race of clones who were the politicians/salesmen, and the Jem’ Hadar were the enforcers/security forces/soldiers. Then there were the Karemma, who were traders with some amount of freedom, but had to pay a huge portion of their profits to the Dominion. The Dominion was in control of hundreds of worlds in the Gamma Quadrant, and we did see some races fleeing from the brutal fascist regime, like the Skrreea (sp.?) and another race that was dying from a virus inflicted upon them by the Jem’ Hadar as punishment for an attempted uprising.

Not to mention the Dominion, for a brief time, allied themselves with the Cardassians and the Breen in a failed attempt to take over the Alpha Quadrant.

872. Curious Cadet - June 30, 2013

@854. Charles Trotter,

Thanks for your detailed analysis. Not sure what Tomkins is in about, but thanks for setting him straight. I do have a few points to discuss with you however given your estimable background.

————-
“Actually, ‘Star Trek Into Darkness’ is only trailing 2009′s ‘Trek’ by about $19 million at the same day of release.”

Adjusted for inflation that’s a difference of almost $35 million, and is does not take into account the substantial difference the 3D premium should have made to the domestic grosses.

————–
“‘Star Trek Into Darkness’ will close at approx. 238m USD”

Given that STID is now playing in 1000 fewer theaters than ST09 at the same period, and will be playing in many fewer by next weekend, I think earning another 18 million is fairly ambitious. It’s likely earning about a million a week, and won’t be in the theaters at that rate for 18 more weeks. Again, the inflation adjusted number is 274 million USD domestically, so even if STID hits 238, that will be more like 35 million under, which is not great considering the movie should have made more simply because two-thirds of the screenings were in 3D.

———-
“There is no discounting foreign grosses. Paramount focused more on international markets this time around, and that’s where they did their big business.”

Paramount did what they should have done for ST09. As far as I’m concerned this is the minimum Star Trek should have earned for ST09. The fact is, foreign should be earning twice as much as the domestic box office when compared to other major blockbusters. So, Paramount either managed to squeeze out all of the Star Trek audience they are going to get, or they laid some excellent groundwork to potentially double their audience share for the next sequel. So while I commend Paramount for finally engaging the international community, this is a wash as far as the movie is concerned. ST09 would have done this well or better had Paramount put the same effort behind it. I would be curious how much of the foreign grosses come from 3D. My assumption is that there would be significantly fewer 3D theaters than in the US, but I know absolutely nothing about it. One would think there would be fewer cell phones than land lines in developing nations, but that would be a false assumption as well.

—————
“The advertising/distribution will be quite a bit higher than that”

This was my favorite argument of Tompkins. ST09 made over 100 million in DVD sales domestically alone. Probably double the same internationally. STID will likely make more. Even if STID only breaks even at the box office, those home video sales are pure profit, and will easily recoup whatever their marketing budget was for the film, without ever touching broadcast, pay-cable, PPV, airline and downloads.

————
“That’s about how much they get, yes, plus about 60-70 percent of the domestic gross, depending on whatever deals they’ve made.”

I’d love some clarification here. Everything I’ve read indicates foreign receipts are often weighted more toward the exhibitor, so the studio makes much less than 50 percent on foreign. Other factors such as third party distribution companies and local government regulation come into play as well. Also, my understanding was that the 60-70 percent earned domestically is only during the first couple of weeks of domestic exhibition after which the take is weighted significantly toward the exhibitor, working out to be an average more like 50-50 over the entire run. Love some sources to clarify how box office take should be correctly estimated.

————
“I think Paramount is pretty happy with it.”

I agree Paramount is pretty happy with the net financial result — its at least as good as STID, which made the studio excstatic. But I don’t think the ‘failures’ of this film are being glossed over either — I’m certain the studio is dissapointed that this film won’t end closer to 600-700 million despite their understated public expectations. That doesn’t mean that there won’t be another film, instead it practically gurantees it — this is obviously a very profitable franchise with considerable potential if managed correctly.

873. Yanks - June 30, 2013

@ 770. boborci – June 28, 2013

706 yanks

Harrison states in the movie that he used torpedoes he was forced to develop to try and smuggle his crew out.
—————————————————————————————————-
Makes one wonder how ADM Marcus knew about them and why Carol was aboard Enterprise?

Thanks for answering.

874. Curious Cadet - June 30, 2013

@871. Red Dead Ryan,
“I like your ideas on how the Klingons should be portrayed, even though at the moment, I’m kind of sick of them.”

What’s interesting about your comment is that we only actually saw one Klingon briefly in the movie. And there was no real interaction with them, besides Uhura pleading with them, then only to be wiped out by Harrison.

Klingons have not been on the movie screen since what, TUC (not counting Worf)? And the last one seen on TV was 2005 — over 10 years by the time the next movie comes out. So it’s not like fans, nor general audiences have been over saturated with them.

TOS Klingons were interesting to me. I can’t say the same for the TNG era. Maybe it was the mystery of the TOS Klingons that intrigued me. The more I learned about them in TNG and their pseudo Viking mythology the less they appealed to me. Either way rebooting them shouldn’t be a problem for anyone.

Nevertheless, Star Trek has a rich history of aliens as you point out. And I loved how Enterprise went back to the aliens that TOS created and really explored them. I felt as the Berman era drug on that aliens were even more of a compromise between time and budget than they had ever been in TOS — a new alien every week turned them all into humanoids with some kind of brow ridge or deviated nostril. And sadly, many of the TNG era aliens suffer from this unoriginal treatment, no matter how interesting their history otherwise.

If it’s all the same, I would just as soon the current movies stick with the classic aliens known to TOS. The envelope is getting pushed all over the place so, unless they are going wholly original, why introduce us to aliens that did not appear until later series with so many truly original and unique ones woefully unexploited from TOS?

875. William Bradley - June 30, 2013

So STID is at $220.5 million domestic box office coming out of this weekend. That’s over $20 million behind the pace of ST09. Which doesn’t take into account the inflation factor which the Bureau of Labor Statistics has at 8.4% or the widespread 3D and IMAX premium ticket pricing.

STID is shedding screens much more rapidly than did ST09.

It’s moved up to $438.1 million in worldwide box office, but the pace has slowed noticeably.

http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=intl&id=startrek12.htm

876. Dswynne - June 30, 2013

@847: your definition of what constitutes a ‘flop’ is skewed. A film is profitable after it doubles its return, regardless of source (which is why most films are opening overseas first). And that doesn’t include the profit STiD will make from cable and DVD revenue. That is why there will be a sequel, in spite of your whining. So, did STiD underperformed? Yes. Does that make the film a flop? No. Besides, you want a flop, as well as the reason why Paramount rebooted the franchise in the first place? See: ‘Star Trek Nemesis’.

877. Stephan - June 30, 2013

874. William Bradley

Yes, this is very bad. I think, no trek movie should be made again. I mean no one watches it. And a series isn’t necessary as well. In a few years everybody will have forgotten that something like trek existed. 47 years are way too short for a franchise to be remembered.

878. William Bradley - June 30, 2013

876. Stephan – June 30, 2013

I report, you — what is it that you’re doing? — it doesn’t rise even to the level of rationalization.

879. Curious Cadet - June 30, 2013

International box office is only up by 4 million this week (217,600,000), so it looks like that’s now slowing to a crawl until Spain opens in July and Japan in August. International probably won’t surpass domestic until the remaining countries open in August, but considering how slow the US box office is getting its almost certain to happen.

So I’m predicting 230 million domestic, and 240 international, to close at 470 million worldwide — within a stones throw of Paramount’s estimates. It could eek out another 20 million, but doesn’t seem likely at this point.

880. Stephan - June 30, 2013

877. William Bradley

I just agree with you. And I think what I said, is the only conclusion of your post because what else should happen after such a disastrous outcome for trek.

881. William Bradley - June 30, 2013

879. Stephan – June 30, 2013

I don’t think it’s a disaster at all. Even though this is far short of Paramount’s expectations.

It’s what I said from the moment the movie opened — a hit. But it’s below the reasonable expectations for a studio that spent more than a quarter of billion dollars in making and marketing in search of a big profit, not an eked-out profit.

Capital has a real opportunity cost.

STID also has conceptual issues — “Khan,” too many cute callbacks to Trek lore that insult too many who need to be big repeat viewers, and so on.

It has clearly done well enough for another, especially with the 50th anniversary of Trek in three years.

882. Stephan - June 30, 2013

880. William Bradley

I think I reacted the way I did because your posts sound like the trek franchise would be in some really big trouble which seems a bit ironic for the most successful trek movie ever.

I don’t believe, trek has conceptual issues. The viewers unfamiliar with trek didn’t know Khan and didn’t recognize callbacks. Maybe it doesn’t have enough naked women and cars in it to make the big money. But I think Trek shouldn’t be targeting that viewers.
I like trek to be some sort of successful niche movies. I don’t want it to be transformers. And half a billion dollars is successful enough for a niche movie.
That doesn’t mean marketing couldn’t be better. But at least here in Germany trek had lots of more viewers than man of steel.

883. Curious Cadet - June 30, 2013

You know I’m curious (hence the name). The first film cost 150 million, which built all the sets, costumes, and props we saw reused in ST09. Yet STID still cost 40 million more. So they actually spent even more on the new film than merely the 40 million more we know about. Does that $190 million include the storage fees for the original sets, or do those come out of the first film? Is there a rental fee for use of the original sets in the new movie?

That also makes an excellent point about arguably the best and most profitable film in the franchise, TWOK. In adjusted dollars, TWOK cost the least of any Star Trek movie to produce and made back over eight times it’s budget, more than any other film in the franchise. But in reading about it, they reused virtually all of the sets and uniforms already paid for by TMP. Interesting then to compare the most expensive film, to the least expensive film, both of which followed on the heels of the first new film of a series.

884. Charles Trotter - June 30, 2013

“Yes, this is very bad. I think, no trek movie should be made again. I mean no one watches it. And a series isn’t necessary as well. In a few years everybody will have forgotten that something like trek existed. 47 years are way too short for a franchise to be remembered.”

Yes, no one watches it, which would explain why it’s grossed $438 million worldwide, has turned a $60m+ profit so far (and that doesn’t even include the money they made from selling the cable TV rights to FX) and is the third most successful film in the franchise after inflation.

If that’s what it means for no one to be watching a movie, M. Night Shyamalan must be wishing *fewer* people watched ‘After Earth!’

“In a few years everybody will have forgotten that something like trek existed.”

What an incredibly stupid statement. Well, your entire comment is pretty stupid, but that part… wow.

I really hope your entire comment is meant to be sarcastic. Re-reading it, I’m thinking it might be and hoping it is. If it isn’t, you may want to avoid posting more comments in the foreseeable future.

885. Red Dead Ryan - June 30, 2013

Curious Cadet,

I see your point, but Klingons have been done so many times in all the series, and in TMP, TSFS, TFF, TUC, GEN., not including Worf (TNG), of course.

I like the Borg, but again, they have been done quite a bit. I’m more in favor of taking a little used race from TOS, like the Tholians, Talosians, or Gorn, and developing a plot around them.

In particular, with both the Talosians phychic abilities, and the Tholians access to interdimensional rifts, I could see a really cool mind-mending “Twilight Zone”/”Inception”/”Mirror, Mirror”-style Trek movie happening. It would be something different.

886. Stephan - June 30, 2013

883. Charles Trotter

Sorry, I forgot my “sarcasm” sign. ;-)

Of course it was meant completely sarcastic because I was reacting to the posts which say the movie isn’t a hit and I can’t stand the complaining any more.

887. Stephan - June 30, 2013

883. Charles Trotter

Actually I am glad that the trek franchise is in such a healthy condition, even overseas.

888. Red Dead Ryan - June 30, 2013

We have also seen a Klingon/Federation war during “Deep Space NIne”, and conflicts between the two powers on “Enterprise” and “The Original Series”, as well as the TOS films. So I’m not sure we really need to revisit/redo/rehash all that in the next movie.

889. Charles Trotter - June 30, 2013

885. Stephan

HA! Okay, my apologies then. I kinda thought you were being sarcastic, but felt the need to respond anyway, just in case. :)

I agree, everyone complaining about the movie’s “disappointing” box office need to just stop. It’s only “disappointing” when you compare its domestic take to that of Trek ’09, but it is not the big disappointment some people seem to think it is. The fact is, it’s a hit, just not as big a hit as Paramount were hoping.

890. Star Trek: Nemesis blows, is the point - June 30, 2013

So let’s do a Romulan War or the Borg? Or maybe a Xindi War II?

A Klingon war is appropriate for this era.

891. Stephan - June 30, 2013

889. Charles Trotter

It’s okay. :) Maybe it could have been better domestic but the next trek movie will certainly be. ;) I also think this trek had very much competition. I remember when there was ONE summer blockbuster.

892. Craiger - June 30, 2013

What about doing a big screen adaptation of Errand of Mercy?

893. P Technobabble - June 30, 2013

I don’t think Star Trek is in any trouble now or in the future. It has been around since ’66 and here we are nearly 50 years later still watching Star Trek (in one form or other).
Over the years, Star Trek has certainly had its share of “bombs.” It managed to live through all of those. So, even if you consider the new Star Trek to be a “bomb,” what makes you think this will kill it for good?
Just because STID didn’t rake in a billion dollars does not make it a failure. A billion dollar grossing movie is the exception, not the rule. If Paramount is making a profit it’s all good. Star Trek is a product that has had its ups and downs, but, overall, it has been a long-term success. I don’t see it coming to an end any time soon.

894. Tom - June 30, 2013

Orci: Well, we wrote a scene for him in the first one and I got outvoted in terms of where it ended up. I’ll write another one and we’ll see what happens.

From November 2009

Didn’t happen for Into Darkness. How about 2016?

895. Craiger - June 30, 2013

I wonder if now CBS will wait and not do a TV series until the trilogy is over and they and Paramount will get together and see where the franchise goes after the third movie is out and how well that does?

896. William Bradley - June 30, 2013

Yeah, you’re totally missing what I say. Start to finish.

Thanks for the whatever.

>882. Stephan – June 30, 2013
880. William Bradley

I think I reacted the way I did because your posts sound like the trek franchise would be in some really big trouble which seems a bit ironic for the most successful trek movie ever.

897. Keachick - rose pinenut - June 30, 2013

#787 Mitchell – I am afraid that you, like many others, just don’t get it re Kirk (in both universes) calling out the KM simulation test for the rubbish that it was. Incidentally, prime Kirk was rather blase about what he did re the test in TWOK as well and so was Dr McCoy – the person who told Saavik that Jim Kirk was the only one to “beat” the test. The older Kirk seemed to be as “arrogant”, as “punkish” then as the younger one in this alternate universe appeared to be. BIG difference was that this prime Kirk had not lost anyone close to him at this point, unlike this alternate Kirk whose father was murdered, as he saved him and his mother, on the day of his birth…

Of course, nuKirk expected to be reprimanded, asked to explain his actions, but he did not expect to be hauled up before the entire Academy. That is what surprised/astonished him. Nor did he expect the test’s programmer to make nasty personal comments concerning his deceased father. Spock, in both universes, could be a complete a**hole at times.

I think the fact that the only reason that Kirk was not assigned to a ship was because he was put on academic suspension speaks for itself as to how well he did at the Academy. He was ready to go out there after three years at the Academy, not four or more years like the other cadets near graduation. He expected an assignment, as did Dr McCoy. The clues were there in the film.

“you’ve never seen a player arrogantly cross a football goal line casually and hold his arms out like Kirk did”
No, I have not. This is a site on the worldwide web. Please do not assume that everyone here knows what you are referring to on your local level.

What’s more, in this Star Trek iteration (and perhaps others as well?), if one wants to seek for a someone with a penchant for rule breaking, cherchez les bones!

#785 – “I liked just about everything about STiD except for turning the Enterprise into a submarine. Dumbest thing I have seen short of “Scotty knowing this ship like the back of his hand.”
and
A transporter that can beam someone from Earth to Qo’nos! If you have that, you have no need for the Enterprise and other spacefaring warp vessels.”

Not nearly as dumb as the above words that I quoted, re the Enterprise being submersible for a limited time period and even dumber the notion that because (portable) transwarp beaming is possible means that other means of transportation would not be also necessary. I have read this intellectually vacant and silly argument before and reading it again does not make it less so – anything but.

#806 Jeyl – The only reason you can call me liar is because you know I cannot go through thousands and thousands of posts going back three years to find your odious ones.

“You believe you can just make these accusations and hope that people will believe you so that you can hurt my presence here.”
Why should I want to do that? You are not making sense.

“I, like many people here, are just fans with opinions. You are not.”
Really? Duh

898. Devon - June 30, 2013

#848 – “#835 speak for yourself. Klingons have been done to death.”

Which, of course, has nothing to do with anything. The poster indicated that the Klingons did not look like “klingons” and therefore this was the entire basis of why they wanted Star Trek to be handed over to someone else.

“@835. Speak for yourself. It’s obvious to a lot of people that a Trek version of a big screen rendering of Modern Warfare is a disaster in the making,”

Who exactly is “a lot people?” A dozen guys sitting at home with their Gene Roddenberry posters and acne medication proclaiming what is and what isn’t Star Trek on an internet forum? No thank you.

899. William Bradley - June 30, 2013

BTW, in 2013 dollars, ST09 would be at $261 million at this point, to STID’s $220.5 million.

900. Photon70 - June 30, 2013

The soft box office figures in North America will be a cause for concern to Paramount.

Make no mistake, the movie will be profitable but as you all know, I think Paramount was expected to break the $300m barrier in N.A.

I trust they will lay some of the blame on themselves. Screwing around with the opening date meant that $10m that was taken on the 1st Thursday did NOT go towards the 1st weekend count.

Instead of a $70m 3 day opening, STiD would have had an $80m 3 day opening.

You cannot discount the effect a healthy first weekend has on the overall box office legs of a movie.

901. Lemingsworth Bint - June 30, 2013

“and the mighty Star Trek Into Darkness continues to show its legs, dropping just 36% to remain in the top 10 in its 7th week, despite losing more than a third of its screens. Though it opened in the most formidable summer in recent memory, it’s now the most successful entry in the venerable franchise, and Paramount has to be wondering whether a clearer field might have shot this little powerhouse straight to 300M domestic.”

But, please, feel free to keep “adjusting”.

902. Photon70 - June 30, 2013

@ 901. Lemingsworth Bint – June 30, 2013

At this stage, anything north of $230m in North America will be excellent.

STiD joins the small group of films that have taken over $200m both in North America and International Markets, with the final International tally likely ot be just over $250m.

I think the franchise is healthy. The question is, wehre to from here.

A bit like how the Bond franchise was, after Quantum of Solace.

QoS had a budget of $200m, and took $586m.

Casino Royale had a budget of $150m, and took $599m.

Kindly note, QoS only made $165m in North America so didn’t even recoup it’s production budget.

TPTB took some time, looked at what made Bond work, and what didn’t work.

The result of course was Skyfall.

Also note, the team was 100% solely and wholely focussed on Bond, not spending time on creative sabaticals.

I trust Paramount will do the right thing by this Golden Goose of theirs.

903. Bill Peters - June 30, 2013

#902 the problem with your Idea is we had 20ish years of people who where devoted solely to Trek and they Drove themselves into the ground doing it, I think JJ and CO are going about this right, no actor,Writer or Director wants to get Typecast to one Series or one kind of Movie or TV show, I think they are doing this right so that Trek can be the best it can be.

Secondarly, I think that Trek Fans have to Embrace the Idea of IDIC with the JJ Verse, Bad Robot is making Trek Movies and they have to make money for there to be more so they must Balance the needs of General Aduances with what Trek fans like.

904. Curious Cadet - June 30, 2013

@902. Photon70,
“I trust Paramount will do the right thing by this Golden Goose of theirs”

People keep citing competition as STID’s biggest problem, yet competition didn’t seem to affect IM3, MoS, or FF6, all of which hit 220 million domestically in their first three weeks if not sooner, even Monsters University is likely going to do that as well. Perhaps less competition would have put a few more butts in seats, but the real problem it seems is Paramount failed to get returning audiences excited about it.

Part of that is marketing, advertising and merchandising, but a four year delay was absolutely unacceptable. It can’t happen again, which is why Paramount will hopefully thank Mr. Abrams and bid he and Bad Robot adieu — likewise to Orci and Kurtzman if they fail to clear their schedule for the next team to target a 2016 release. At this point 2015 would be preferred, preferably before Star Wars hits the big screen — I mean seriously, if Abrams can produce a brand new Star Wars movie from scratch by 2015, Paramount can’t get a sequel to Trek made in the same amount of time?

905. Photon70 - June 30, 2013

@ 903. Bill Peters – June 30, 2013
@ 904. Curious Cadet – June 30, 2013

All good points and agreed.

The reasons are varied and many; and similarly the solutions cannot be boxed into just a few narrow ‘fix-it’ points.

In the middle of a crowded and solid summer, for a Star Trek movie to get close to $230m is just great.

I remember a time not too long ago when it felt like NO Trek movie would ever again get to a $100m.

I think most fans would agree that ST13 should not be delayed for the sake of 1 or a few people’s schedules.

906. Ahmed - June 30, 2013

@904. Curious Cadet
“At this point 2015 would be preferred, preferably before Star Wars hits the big screen — I mean seriously, if Abrams can produce a brand new Star Wars movie from scratch by 2015, Paramount can’t get a sequel to Trek made in the same amount of time?”

It is going to be interesting to see if Abrams will actually manage to get Star Wars out in 2015.

As for Star Trek, I think 2016 is the best choice. If they are going to bring in new people, they will need time to work on the script & other production details.

I’d love to Star Trek sooner but also want to see a decent Trek movie for a change.

And since it is hard to come up with new ideas or new interesting aliens. I’d rather see the Borg again than the Klingons.

907. Supermankills - June 30, 2013

@866. You should stop reading fanboy b–ching, nothing in MOS “destroys” the character of Superman, cripes none of it is even new stuff for Superman. The biggest complaint I have seen is about how Superman defeats Zod, but despite a difference in specific method, it is the same end result as how Superman took him out in Superman II, the first time Zod was a villain in a Superman movie.

The other major complaint is the whole “bearded drifter” part of the story, which is just like what was done with Superman’s origin when DC rebooted their comic book universe in 1985.

The red trunks-less costume complaint is not valid either since that is the same costume he wears in the current comics.

Don’t fall for the misinformation.

908. Keachick - rose pinenut - June 30, 2013

No Borg. It’s bad enough we got Khan again – sort of. The Klingons belong in this time. If there is to be some war with the Klingons, make it so the Enterprise is unable to offer assistance because it is needed in the quadrant it finds itself in – as in “the only ship in the quadrant”.

It does seem that people sense (perhaps even want) an all out war coming, whether it is on this earth now, or in this Star Trek. All I can say, “Be careful what you wish for…”

909. Devon - June 30, 2013

#904 – “to affect IM3, MoS, or FF6, ” That’s because they WERE the competition.

910. Marja - June 30, 2013

General Note @ Everybody: It might be helpful to everyone reading your comments and referring back to who you replied to, if you not only put the number, but the person’s name, because the numbers usually seem to shift by 2 – 3 places every day.
—————–
872 Curious Cadet “I’m certain the studio is dissapointed that this film won’t end closer to 600-700 million despite their understated public expectations.”
Yeah, well. They would have done a *hella* lot better if they’d released this puppy in March or April instead of May. Bad, BAD timing.

Curious again: “Perhaps less competition would have put a few more butts in seats, but the real problem it seems is Paramount failed to get returning audiences excited about it. … Part of that is marketing, advertising and merchandising, but a four year delay was absolutely unacceptable.”

Agreed. I still can’t get over the terrible in-theatre marketing c/w ST2009′s. It seemed as if they were skulking around, not wanting to shout “Star Trek” b/c they wanted people to think it was some doom/gloom thriller like TDKR, which, screw that.
——————————————–

I don’t want to see Borg, I’m sick to death of them. *And* the Klingons. But [sigh] did they listen to us about f*kin’ Khan? NO-o-o-o-O-O-o-o-o they did not.

I’m sick of “villains” period. PLEASE, writers, come up with something different from *that* tired old trope.

911. Ahmed - June 30, 2013

@907. Keachick – rose pinenut

I don’t mind seeing the Klingons war if it is done well. Paramount should bring in Ron Moore, the best Trek writer when it come to the Klingons to co-writer the 3rd one if it is going to be about the war with the Klingons Empire.

“It does seem that people sense (perhaps even want) an all out war coming, whether it is on this earth now, or in this Star Trek.”

What war ?

912. Disinvited - June 30, 2013

#900. Photon70 – June 30, 2013

I don’t have a problem with people pointing out a Trek film did well enough for Paramount to consider making a sequel.

My problem is the constant moving of the bar to make it appear that either of the last two Trek films were biggest blockbuster of their year.

Back in 2009, when the domestic was doing well, some pointed out the lousy international haul would deny it as a blockbuster in the current definition of what it takes to be one. People in these parts were quick to make claims that domestic takes were all that mattered because Trek never did well in the foreign markets and it doesn’t matter that films like ANGELS & DEMONS bested it worldwide because to the studio domestic numbers are everything.

Now, in four short years, a complete flip-flop. Domestic numbers are down not only in adjusted for inflation numbers but in absolute numbers as well, and people here discount domestic numbers like they were yesterday’s fish, and international is everything.

FWIW, good reliable sources of the era say TMP took in $175 million worldwide. Nimoy in the 1980s said it took in $90 million domestic which means it did $85 million international.

My point is just that Trek for Paramount has always been just a nice dependable revenue generator, and to the current team helming its credit it continues to be.

913. Curious Cadet - June 30, 2013

@908. Devon,
“That’s because they WERE the competition.”

After the stellar performance of ST09, the question is why wasn’t STID their competition? And that’s the root of the whole problem. Competition is but a minor contributor to STID’s domestic box office problem.

@910. Ahmed,
“Paramount should bring in Ron Moore, the best Trek writer when it come to the Klingons”

Not unless Moore is willing to re-imagine the Klingons TOS style. I like to think those 100 years contributed to a major change between the TOS Klingons and TNG Klingons. I don’t think the general audiences Paramount is trying to woo will respond as well to the TNG era Klingons, and on a personal note, I don’t really want to see that either.

914. Photon70 - June 30, 2013

@ 909. Marja – June 30, 2013

I’m sick of “villains” period. PLEASE, writers, come up with something different from *that* tired old trope.

__________

Much as I enjoyed both ST09 and STiD, it has now been 3 movies where the Enterprise has had to deal with a bad guy with a large black ship, including Shinzon’s ship in Nemesis.

No matter how big, and how bad the bad guy’s ship is, there is just no suspense.

You know the Enterprise and her crew will win.

On the other hand, having the Enterprise loose to a smaller adversary sucks. Twice, the Enterprise has fallen victim to a much smaller singular Klingon Bird of Prey.

Heck, the Kilngon BoP would have the best batting average versus the USS Enterprise.

So, to summarise, the ideal balance would be a fleet action with the Enterprise as flagship, something we saw, albeit too breifly in STFC.

915. Charles Trotter - June 30, 2013

No Borg.

Thanks in advance.

916. Fubamushu - June 30, 2013

@810. Nice personal attack. So anyone who does not like this movie is a clown or a goof? Nice tolerant viewpoint you have there.

@819 I am bullying people into my thought process? What does that even mean let alone how am I bullying anyone?

917. Ahmed - June 30, 2013

@ 912. Curious Cadet – June 30, 2013

“@. Ahmed,
“Paramount should bring in Ron Moore, the best Trek writer when it come to the Klingons”

Not unless Moore is willing to re-imagine the Klingons TOS style.”

Well, we are talking here about Ron Moore, the guy who re-imagined BSG. I think that alone, speak volumes about his ability to make an old worn subject, fresh & interesting.

And it looks like some people don’t like to see the Borg in the next movie, which means that we ARE going to see the Borg, given past experience with the writers :)

918. Marja - June 30, 2013

916, Ahmed, “And it looks like some people don’t like to see the Borg in the next movie, which means that we ARE going to see the Borg, given past experience with the writers :)”

In keeping with your theory let’s all say “Hey writers, we don’t want to see a movie involving science or exploration or philosophy and please, we want relentless action with a minute here & there for character development and Klingons and Borg and a big threatening black ship” ;)

Let us all now roll our eyes

And hope.

The question about Ron Moore is, can he re-imagine his own vision of the Klingons as an honorable warrior race into a race more like the Klingons we saw in TOS ..?

My understanding, however, is that he’s busy developing or running a new show… earlier referenced on this board when we were talking about what direction we hope Star Trek would take … he said he’d love to be involved BUT.

919. Devon - June 30, 2013

#911 – Disinvited – “Now, in four short years, a complete flip-flop. Domestic numbers are down not only in adjusted for inflation numbers but in absolute numbers as well, and people here discount domestic numbers like they were yesterday’s fish, and international is everything.”

No one is discounting the domestic box office, but all eyes were on the international box office this time. It was clear from the get go that Paramount wanted to focus on the international side of things for this film, and most people realize that the domestic take is just fine.

920. shamelord - July 1, 2013

#909 – I’m sick of “villains” period. PLEASE, writers, come up with something different from *that* tired old trope.

Agreed. What made people reject The Motion Picture or embrace The Voyage Home has nothing to do with the fact that there was no villain per se. It could even be argued that the revelation regarding V’ger is one of the strong points of the first movie.

I enjoyed all the latest productions but like you I’m sick of punk baddies.

921. Classy M - July 1, 2013

Apparently vending machines in Tokyo’s railway stations have been given a Star Trek theme. Complete with a picture of Benedict Cumberbatch in John Harrison mode, the ad copy on the drinks’ machines says, “Is there anything you wouldn’t do for your thirst?”

Benedict’ is also scheduled to visit Tokyo on the 16th of this month for a Star Trek into Darkness launch. It sounds like he’ll be going alone this time.

922. Curious Cadet - July 1, 2013

@921 Classy,
“Is there anything you wouldn’t do for your thirst?”

LOL, wow way to distort the message of this movie!

But July 16th is an entire month ahead of the movie release in Japan. Is it a premeire type event? This is Paramount’s last major chance to squeeze a big box office take out of international so hopefully they are ramping up the PR machine for an entire month ahead of the release.

923. Phil - July 1, 2013

The Borg would be an even worst choice the resurrecting Khan again. I can see the trailer now ‘An unstoppable evil threatens the galaxy”….then, guess what? They’re stopped! Gee, what did you think would happen, the Borg would actually take over the Federation?

Sorry, but the underlying theme of TOS was that, while prepared for war, the Federation knew it was a no win situation for both sides, and it was much better to avoid one. For all you guys wanting to see the Federation and Klingons/Romulans/Gorn/Cardassians/Etc,etc, go toe to toe, there are a couple of franchises out there just for you.

Star Wars or Starship Troopers. Enjoy.

924. Classy M - July 1, 2013

@922 Curious Cadet – Yes, it’s a strange advertising campaign; I wonder if Paramount is even aware of it. On the other hand, additional adverstising for the film can only help put bums on seats.

As to Benedict’s visit to Tokyo, I saw a post on Tumblr today that the event is to be live-streamed (with geo-restrictions outside of Japan) so I’m guessing this is the launch of a publicity drive for the film. BC is hugely popular in Japan so it’s not surprising he’s been sent to get the ball rolling. I don’t think this is part of a premiere though; Paramount would hardly have just one cast member handle that alone. Besides, as you say, there’s another month till the film is due to be released.

925. Mel - July 1, 2013

@ 872. Curious Cadet – June 30, 2013

“Paramount did what they should have done for ST09. As far as I’m concerned this is the minimum Star Trek should have earned for ST09. The fact is, foreign should be earning twice as much as the domestic box office when compared to other major blockbusters. So, Paramount either managed to squeeze out all of the Star Trek audience they are going to get, or they laid some excellent groundwork to potentially double their audience share for the next sequel. So while I commend Paramount for finally engaging the international community, this is a wash as far as the movie is concerned. ST09 would have done this well or better had Paramount put the same effort behind it. I would be curious how much of the foreign grosses come from 3D. My assumption is that there would be significantly fewer 3D theaters than in the US, but I know absolutely nothing about it. One would think there would be fewer cell phones than land lines in developing nations, but that would be a false assumption as well.”

You are right. Normally big blockbuster movies make clearly more of their gross internationally than in the USA. Star Trek’s current 50% isn’t anything special. To others, just click on the last few years:

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/yearly/?view2=worldwide&view=releasedate&p=.htm

I can’t speak about other countries, but at least in Germany it is really no problem to find a movie shown in 3D. It is even sometimes so, that if you don’t want to travel to another city, you are forced to watch a movie in 3D or not at all, because they often don’t show movies in 2D.

I am living in a city with about 180 thousands inhabitants, which has one cinema with 7 halls. It showed Star Trek on its opening evening, when I went seeing it, only in 3D. Although Man of Steel is currently already in its 2nd week, they haven’t even shown it once in 2D. World War Z is also only shown in 3D. I bet if they will shown them in 2D at all, then at best in their 4th week or later, when they need the 3D halls for newer 3D movies.

And the increased 3D prizes (and inflation) have a huge impact. I already wrote a comment about this a months ago:

http://trekmovie.com/2013/05/28/into-darkness-second-week-polls/#5118124

837. Mel – June 3, 2013

Higher ticket prizes and inflation have a huge influence on the box office numbers. Just look at those German numbers from the last three movies:

Nemesis
total gross: $8,284,148
viewers: 1.274.837

Star Trek 2009
total gross: $12,798,139
viewers: 1.272.813

Star Trek Into Darkness (until 26th May)
total gross: $16,148,035
viewers: 1.176.491

So on the 26th May Into Darkness had about 100.000 viewers less than the previous two movies in their whole run. Nevertheless it had already doubled the gross of Nemesis and also made a few millions more than Star Trek 2009.

926. The Sinfonian - July 1, 2013

Klingons? Again? Sure, but I ask only one thing of the scriptwriter(s):
.
Watch TOS “Day of the Dove”.
.
Notice how superior it is once Kirk and Kang work together. *THAT* is how Klingons should come into the threequel, where the Enterprise must work together with a Klingon captain and crew to match up to a common, shared, threat. Some would suggest the Borg. I might go with the Breen, only in that they have sort of a Dr. Who Cybermen feel to them if done that way.

927. Phil - July 1, 2013

Interesting read. I’m not expecting a suit at Paramount to slap his head and exclaim “oh my god, we need to get Trek 13 on the schedule”, but the trend toward nailing down a time does suggest that no announcement from the studio regarding Trek, when they have made announcements about Terminator and WWZ, that they are taking a harder look at the direction of the franchise.

http://movies.yahoo.com/news/why-hollywood-setting-movie-release-dates-5-years-131732408.html

928. Curious Cadet - July 1, 2013

@927. Phil,
“they are taking a harder look at the direction of the franchise.”

Yup and it has nothing to do with box office receipts.

@923 Phil,
“For all you guys wanting to see the Federation and Klingons/Romulans/Gorn/Cardassians/Etc,etc, go toe to toe, there are a couple of franchises out there just for you.”

Yup, and Damon Lindeloff intends to make Star Trek one of them.

929. Bill Peters - July 1, 2013

I also think they will want a Flim by 2016 for the 50th. Parmount is happy with the Returns it is getting Internationally, it has doubled it take in non-Traditional Trek Markets.

930. lurkercowboy - July 1, 2013

The next Trek needs to be set far enough away so the crew cannot fly home in a matter of minutes or hours, also far enough away so that they cannot make a quick cell phone call to Earth or New Vulcan. STID lacked a sense of scale. It was like a cop movie that took place in a single city. Everything was a short car ride away.

931. Curious Cadet - July 1, 2013

@903. Bill Peters,
“we had 20ish years of people who where devoted solely to Trek and they Drove themselves into the ground doing it, I think JJ and CO are going about this right”

There’s a big difference between putting somebody in charge of a franchise for 20 years, and asking the person producing your current movie to make it his only priority. Even Eon fell into a rut with Bond, but unlike Berman, learned from their mistakes, got some new blood going and turned the franchise around. Berman just kept pushing out any new talent like Ron Moore, and making the same mistakes and expecting different results.

Abrams and Bad Robot will be consumed cranking out three Star Wars films over the next 7 years. Most likely Abrams will direct all three ‘episodes’ while simultaneously producing the ‘stand-alone’ episodes which are scheduled to be released in 2016 and 2017, in between the main features.

So I ask again, Really!? You really want Abrams, who will be living in London for the next 7 years and charged with rebooting the most successful scifi franchise in history for the next two years, while directing two and producing three new films in that rebooted franchise during the space of producing the next Star Trek film?

Abrams and Bad Robot are responsible for the four year gap when other franchises cranked out two or three films in that time, all of which did incredibly well, because of other ‘commitments’. And you want to leave them in charge? Besides at the rate Abrams is going, 5 films WILL take 20 years. And make no mistake about it … If CBS had been more cooperative allowing Abrams to produce and exploit all aspects of the franchise, you can bet he would sit at the top of that food chain for 20 years too if he could, nothing altruistic about his approach. He will no doubt try to do exactly that for Star Wars as well.

932. lurkercowboy - July 1, 2013

Another thing, enough of the “revenge” angle for a plot device. It has been done so many times, it has diluted the impact.

Other commentators have listed many other things to avoid so here is a list of things to include –

Have the crew isolated and having to deal with something on their own, solving a problem that deals with something meaningful, not some previously unknown race or situation that the audience doesn’t care about. Example, have Prime Spock being tortured by the Romulans into revealing future data about star going nova.

Show a wider scope. Deal with the realities of the new universe. Example, the Klingons having the Narada for 25 years. Have a sense of the political situation both inside and outside of the Federation. Have the galaxy be an interesting place.

Have the Enterprise crew encounter something weird, really strange, something that shows that they are going into unknown (in every sense of the word) territory. TOS was really good at this. Something out of left field that gives the story an unexpected twist and creates additional problems to deal with.

Have Starfleet look competent again, trying to keep the peace in a troubled galaxy, not perfect, but not corrupt either.

Have the characters be forced into making choices, ones that may not have an obvious right or wrong answer. Some moral dilemma that the audience would care about.

Have Kirk be a more seasoned, respected starship commander, one that can outwit an enemy.

Something new. It can (and must) have elements of previous treks but not a rehash or retelling of an old episode or movie.

933. NC Trekker (not lurkercowboy) - July 1, 2013

Oops wrong handle for this forum.

934. Classy M - July 1, 2013

A bit more about the Japanese roll out (translated with Google, so pardon the ‘poetic’ syntax):

Big favorite summer vacation movies Paramount Pictures is distributing “Star Trek Into Darkness” (August 23 (Friday) National super expansion roadshow) is large tie-up campaign two months to publication, with various companies. There was determined, continuous development of angry waves begins in July! First step starting from (month) July 1, the crew of the enterprise special message to 500 next-generation vending machine, which is installed in the JR station metropolitan area In addition to JR East Water Business held – the video that appears along with the page? The flow is, on the side of the next-generation vending machine, Kirk and Spock life-size appears. We conducted a campaign not for sale items of this work is to win by a point to buy a drink In addition, about 5,200 units vending machine in the station of the Kanto area is dyed to “Star Trek” one color, the thirst of our and thus moisten. I want you to experience the near future and the world of “Star Trek” in the next-generation vending machine acure. Genius producer of Kitai, is director JJ Abrams latest prominence to the name to the world as a genius director, SF action blockbuster carve out the future of film history is “Star Trek Into Darkness”. National super expanding road show in 3D/2D from Friday August 23. LINK □ work more “Star Trek Into Darkness” http://www.cinematopics.com/cinema/news/output.php?news_seq=17882

935. Bill Peters - July 1, 2013

@931. Curious Cadet

JJ is Confirmed to be doing Episode 7 ONLY at this point, however the Writing team from Bad Robot isn’t going over with him, The Writers for Episode 7 are being chosen by Disney and Lucas Arts and they are not part of JJ Crew.

Robert Orci and Damion Lindlof can write a Script for Star Trek 13 and Paramount will probably find another Director with JJ in Executive Producer spot, Paramount will want something by the 50th in 2016, I wish CBS had been more Copropritve in letting JJ do what he wanted, but CBS and Paramount haven’t seen Eye to Eye over Trek sence there dirvorce.

I Really don’t want to go back to the Berman Era, when he had a chance to walk away and leave Trek in good hands and let there be a season 5 of ENT, he said no to both and gave us second New Trek Dought, what your asking for IS a return to the Berman Era, someone who is only into Trek, and I have to hand it to Orci and Crew they are fans and they know how to show it in there work.

936. Disinvited - July 1, 2013

#919. Devon – June 30, 2013

As a major motion picture studio in 2009, Paramount was always focused on any of its pictures’, including their Trek’s, worldwide take.

See Mel’s German perspective in msg 925 to which I reply next.

Also, if it wasn’t important then, they wouldn’t have done anything to address it now. You don’t fix something that ain’t broke.

#925. Mel – July 1, 2013

Exactly. 2009 was a squeaker but it was so much a better performer at the B.O. than what came before it that it deserved to be celebrated. But not to the point that people in these parts would call it a major blockbuster of that year.

#922. & 928. Curious Cadet – July 1, 2013

Is a “thirst” based campaign really that surprising given the Budweiser product placements and location shootings? The cynic in me expects to see Romulan Ale served in an “antique” Budweiser etched glass.

” Yup and it has nothing to do with box office receipts.” – 928. CC

Please, if Paramount is any kind of motion picture studio, they’ve found some way for it to have something to do with B.O.

937. Bill Peters - July 1, 2013

Here is what we know about Star Wars Episode 7:

Director: J.J. Abrams
Writer: Michael Arndt

nothing out of this information Precludes Orci and Co from writing Star Trek 13, getting it to Paroumount by 2016 if that is what they want, and having someone from Bad Robot or outside Direct while JJ is in Exective Proudcer Role or one of them.

I find that a lot of people don’t like JJ Trek cause it isn’t everything they love about Trek and think Trek Should be, but you know I think Trek Fans should accept IDIC when it comes to New Trek, we all have our Favorite Series and Episodes and movies and we all have a right to an Opinion but to attack people who are making us new Trek cause it doesn’t fit what we think new Trek should be isn’t right. I love that Bob Orci comes here and Interacts with us, it is cool and Unusual for writers to do so in any fandom.

938. Disinvited - July 1, 2013

#935. Bill Peters – July 1, 2013

You are right about the writers but as has come out about Damon, I would not discount the possibility of any or all of them being called in as script doctors if JJ felt the need. Also, JJ and his bud have producing credits. While this could just be merely an accounting label to get agreed upon funds to Bad Robot in the most tax advantageous manner, there is reporting that, if accurate, indicate JJ is more involved with this SW’s production than just merely directing it.

939. Bill Peters - July 1, 2013

@Disinvited, for them to be Script Doctors it would have to have to OK of Disney and Lucas Arts, I think JJ did Star Wars cause of the Frustrations of having CBS say no to him having more Creative Control over more then Just the Films and the fact Steven Spellburg told him don’t miss the chance to Direct a Star Wars Flim,

Nothing Precludes, JJ from being Executive Producer or one of them, while Bad Robot writes and Produces Star Trek 13 as well Paramount will want to be able to cash in on the 50th in 2016 and they need something new to show to be able to cash in on it,

940. Curious Cadet - July 1, 2013

@935. Bill Peters,
“JJ is Confirmed to be doing Episode 7 ONLY at this point, however the Writing team from Bad Robot isn’t going over with him, The Writers for Episode 7 are being chosen by Disney and Lucas Arts and they are not part of JJ Crew.”

Abrams and Bad Robot are producing Star Wars. Abrams was only the producer for both Trek movies, declining to direct until he saw the script for both. As a producer, and confirmed director (presumably prior to seeing the script), do you really think Abrams will not try to direct Episode VIII? And the extent of his producing deal is not known, but most likely he will oversee all 6 projects (whether he dires or not) unless something goes horribly wrong.

Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof are writers for hire. They have nothing to do with Bad Robot. They could write the next script whether Abrams is involved or not. Lindelof is not part of Orci and Kurtzman’s team. He was brought in by Bad Robot, or Bryan Burke, not sure which. Either way, all of those guys could be hired by Paramount without Abrams or Bad Robot involved. Also, since Abrams likes working with those guys, he may well offer them writing obs for the first ‘stand-alone’ or ‘episode VIII’.

Abrams will be producing and directing the first film right up to Summer 2015, and if he directs episode VIII (which I think he most likely will), he will immediately go into pre-production, not to mention producing the first stand-alone. He will not have time for Star Trek, even if all he does is Episode VII! and walks away. Who will produce in his absence? Abrams has already shown he couldn’t produce STID while directing other projects, what’s going to be different here where the pressure is immeasurably greater? And what does Bad Robot bring to the table exactly if Abrams is not hands-on involved?

I am absolutely not asking for a return to the Berman era. There is nothing in what I previously wrote that would enable you to infer that at all. I am asking for the guy who produces Star Trek to actually focus on the project at hand and plan for its future, I could care less how many years he does it. If you can prove to me Abrams has done anything toward planning for Star Treks future, then please do. From where I sit, he jumped ship at the first opportunity … Picked up his toys when CBS wouldn’t play his way, and announced he was going to direct the next Star Wars before STID opened, when they could have waited to make that announcement they way he won’t commit to directing Star Trek until he sees the script. Please.

If anything, I am asking for a return to the Harve Bennett years — you know, only the best and highest grossing Star Trek films until Abrams came along? That’s all Bennett did was Star Trek until he let Shatner screw him with TFF. And it was Bennett who proposed ST VI be a return to the academy years — that’s right the same reboot idea Abrams produced, but Paramount shut him out and went with Berman instead. Bennett had a plan, and it would have worked too, as evidenced by Abram’s success. That’s vision and commitment. How about a little more of that? What’s a distracted Abrams going to give us, except more Mystery Boxes out of which stale canon characters ramrodded by Lindelof awkwardly pop?

941. "The Captain's Neck is Broken" - July 1, 2013

I heard that they killed Kirk in this one, in the same fashion that Spock died in the Wrath of Khan. Are they going to “genesize” Kirk like they did to Spock to bring him back into the story as well?

942. Disinvited - July 1, 2013

#940. Curious Cadet – July 1, 2013

I have to admit that the ability to toe the line and NOT acknowledge that Harrison was Khan until the premier does make one suspect, that JJ not keeping a lid on his SW hiring till then was a deliberate choice. Have to wonder if it was specifically directed at someone in Paramount and/or CBS, or was this just that JJ really held the deep conviction that any SW’s news would not have any effect on STID domestic marketing?

#941. “The Captain’s Neck is Broken” – July 1, 2013

If by “genesize” you mean “Did they use genes to resurrect him?” then you are correct. If you are referring to Gene having many Trek characters killed and resurrected (Scotty, Kirk, Chekov, etc.) then that is correct too.

943. Phil - July 1, 2013

Oh, no one ever dies in sci-fi. There are always….possibilities.

944. CJS - July 1, 2013

So two weeks out World War Z gets a sequel confirmation, but all I’ve seen regarding a follow-up to STID are assurances from posters here that “of course they are going to do another movie.” Maybe they will, but they sure don’t seem too enthusiastic about it.

http://wegotthiscovered.com/movies/paramount-moving-world-war-sequel/?_r=true

945. Bill Peters - July 1, 2013

@ Courious Cadet, How do you know that JJ and Orci and Paromount don’t have a plan? What do you want them to show you to show they do, part of the Script, part of there Contracts what?

I think Orci and the Crew have a plan but do they have to tell us what it is no I don’t think they do, part of keeping Star Trek Alive is that you have to get a new fan base and new people willing to take a look at the movies, yet fans Conplain cause the new stuff isn’t A,B,C and D to what they think Trek Should be and that Paroumount has to make a Trek that fits what Fans want more then what might sell more to a General Audance, for there to be more Trek it has to make money.

946. Curious Cadet - July 1, 2013

@944. CJS,
“Maybe they will, but they sure don’t seem too enthusiastic about it.”

It’s not enthusiasm, it’s politics.

Look at it this way. It’s possible, though not likely, that Abram’s incarnation of Trek is over. Even though the cast is signed for three movies (and Pine for a possible 5), it’s entirely possible, but not likely, for all 7 of the cast to make themselves unavailable when Paramount wants them if negotiations aren’t handled to the letter of their contracts.

Paramount could decide it’s too much trouble, and put Trek on ice for a while. Again possible but not likely. But if they did, CBS would start the clock again and force them to get back into the Trek business, or forfeit their license to make movies. CBS in turn would shop it around to any number of potential studios and producers who are more than happy to get into that business with CBS, or take it in house and produce their own movie, or TV series.

There’s just too much money at stake with Star Trek, if not necessarily on the front end box office. Trek is a Golden Goose which no matter what happens at the front end, gold keeps dropping out the back.

So Star Trek will be produced forever, one way or another. Good, bad, indifferent, it all eventually makes money. So that’s why there’s no worries.

Abrams took a leisurely 4 years to make another movie with this crew, a span during which Iron Man turned out 3 movies. In that incredibly long time in the entertainment business, anything can happen. Consider you waited patiently four years for STID. You waited 4 years after the end of Enterprise. So clearly there is NO rush to make any decisions now.

In four years, everything could be different, and you will be right back here eagerly awaiting what comes next.

947. Curious Cadet - July 1, 2013

945. Bill Peters,
“How do you know that JJ and Orci and Paromount don’t have a plan?
… for there to be more Trek it has to make money.”

Perfect bookend for my response:

I know they don’t have a plan because Abrams took FOUR YEARS between ST09 and STID and Paramount LET them. So Abrams doesn’t care, or Paramount is run by idiots, or both. But I’ll settle for they don’t have a plan.

For Trek to make money, Paramount has to offer it in the market place. So what did they do after one of the greatest resurrections in franchise history? They left their product dying on the vine. Paramount pursued other franchises, Abrams pursued other projects, as did the writers, and actors, for FOUR LONG YEARS, during which other studios with well thought out plans put out as many as three films in their respective franchises, just like Disney is going to do with Star Wars. Studios and producers who actually have a plan broadcast with enthusiasm their commitment to their brands. They start booking release schedules — some 8 years in advance! They don’t have to give us all the details, or any. But Paramount and Abrams have done none of that. The only person talking about the next Trek film is Lindelof.

Abrams, the man with the plan, is skipping off to another franchise, after his followup to the resounding critical and box office success of ST09 fared significantly lower with critics, and had a major domestic box office falloff. Now is not the time to desert the ship. Now is the time to build on the foreign momentum and rekindle the fire under domestic audiences. But instead he’ll be gone for at least three years, during which time the next Trek movie will have had to go into production without him to make a 3 year 2016 50th Anniversary window (we can’t wait another 4, and it really should be 2). So unless Abrams is planning on thanking George Lucas for the opportunity to direct a Star Wars movie and running back to Trek in time to oversee the editorial process, we won’t see Abrams doing much else over the next 6 years, much less continue to put his imprint on Star Trek.

So, no, that’s not much of a plan.

948. Keachick - rose pinenut - July 1, 2013

This is just more long winded, crystal ball gazing speculation – useless *speech*. It is tiresome, boring and not particularly productive.

So what’s new?….UGH!!!!!!

So how do I wean myself off this site until genuine news is presented that is engaging and important?

949. Curious Cadet - July 1, 2013

@948 Keachick,
“So how do I wean myself off this site until genuine news is presented that is engaging and important?”

Oh do tell us more about gazing into Chris Pine’s dreamy blue eyes … ;-)

950. Craiger - July 1, 2013

Keachick just curious, weren’t you complaining about the people who where saying where is the news now you are one of them? :)

951. Keachick - rose pinenut - July 1, 2013

#949 – You (along with a member of my family) seem more *obsessed* with me being a bit a Pine-nut than I am. I only have to mention this site or Star Trek and they immediately believe I am thinking about Chris Pine. I know it might be hard for some to believe, but I do not spend much time at all “gazing into Chris Pine’s dreamy blue eyes” etc.

Sorry, CP – that’s how it is. That does not mean that I do not think of you at some point in a day – wondering how you are – as in well, happy, OK – what you are doing, how I would like to see you play Jim Kirk…, but it just does not happen all the time. I hope you can forgive me…

952. Disinvited - July 1, 2013

#947. Curious Cadet – July 1, 2013

Exactly. We and Paramount learn from history. They’d have to be blithering business buffoons to let Bad Robot or any other entity involved risk squandering the recent foreign gains with another 4 year stall.

However, it should be noted that in 4 years time, if they do let it slide like the domestic, they’ll still be able to pay the rent and keep the lights on – especially if they lower the production costs.

953. Khan 2.0 - July 1, 2013

thank you to boborci for answering my Qs at 561 (now at 567?)

btw – im hoping STID makes it past 475m ww so it will be the first Trek film to outgross a Star Wars (Jedi is 475m – ok that was 1983 which is about 1billion when adjusted but be cool so see a Trek before a Wars on the all time BO chart LOL :)

954. Aurore - July 1, 2013

“… And it was Bennett who proposed ST VI be a return to the academy years — that’s right the same reboot idea Abrams produced, but Paramount shut him out and went with Berman instead. Bennett had a plan, and it would have worked too, as evidenced by Abram’s success…”
____________

It was not exactly the same reboot idea:

“…We had a script called The Academy Years – it was a prequel. It was Kirk and Spock aged seventeen entering Starfleet Academy. Kirk falls in love for the only time in his life. The cadets save the world. The premise of the film was racial tension. Spock becomes the first green-blood to enter the Academy, which is a red-blooded organization, and he is discriminated against. And there was a planetary cabal against green-bloods and the cadets at the Academy are the ones that save the day. Kirk’s love is killed heroically saving the planet from the ship…etc…”

http://trekmovie.com/2010/10/28/harve-bennett-criticizes-star-trek-2009-talks-starfleet-academy-movie-more/

For more on the topic:

http://trekmovie.com/2007/02/26/bennett-may-contest-star-trek-xi-script/

http://trekmovie.com/2010/08/25/harve-bennett-talks-academy-years-concept-jj-abrams-star-trek/

“How about a little more of that? What’s a distracted Abrams going to give us, except more Mystery Boxes out of which stale canon characters ramrodded by Lindelof awkwardly pop?”

…Ah, yes.

Damon Lindelof.

The convenient and (ever-smiling) willing “scapegoat”…

:)

955. Disinvited - July 1, 2013

Congratulations to STID’s Mary Jo Markey and Ramiro Belgardt on being invited to join AMPAS!

956. Aurore - July 1, 2013

“Congratulations to STID’s Mary Jo Markey and Ramiro Belgardt on being invited to join AMPAS!”
_________

Congratulations to both of them, indeed!

957. Just wondering - July 1, 2013

What is AMPAS?

958. Craiger - July 1, 2013

Keachick, I think maybe we could all be addicted to just chatting here and when their aren’t daily news updates maybe we are afraid of this site shutting down and won’t be able to chat here anymore. I looked up the expiration date and it says Trekmovie expires on August 18th 2013.

959. Old Guard - July 1, 2013

#462 – Precisely! I think you hit the mark with your statement and it seems more than just several agree.

With respect, its new writer time…

960. Curious Cadet - July 1, 2013

@954. Aurore,
“Damon Lindelof. The convenient and (ever-smiling) willing “scapegoat”

As you would be if you were paid anything like he is to take the heat.

I have to say, Bennett’s idea sounds a lot more interesting and logical than than what we got, but many of the same themes and plot points are shared if not exactly …

961. Bob Tompkins - July 1, 2013

Since Man of Steel has crept into the topic discussions, here is my 2 cents’ worth.
Aftyer and opening roughly equal to Superman Returns [after factoring inflation and the upscale IMax and 3D pricing], it dropped like a stone, pretty much like STID.
We have a set image of Superman in our minds. He is not a dark hero. The movie went wrong with the death of Pa Kent. It is at that point of the movie than when the character of Clark should have veered into Christopher Reeve territory, saved Jonathan cleverly without exposing himself any more than he already had, Let Pa Kent bear the doubts from there forward, have the usual touching death scene where Pa admits he was wrong and play the movie pretty much the same until the killing of Zod. Have Superman try to draw fire away from Metropolis and fail, and play the final showdown exactly the same way- with the exception being play this into how the Reeve version would have reacted to killing someone.
Then they could honestly play the doubt and darkness card in the sequel with Superman rising triumphant and whole in the sequel, resolving the huge crisis without killing, allowing Superman and Batman to be opposite sides of the coin- not the same side of a different coin.

962. Supermankills - July 1, 2013

@960 Bob Thompson. Dude Superman killed Zod in Superman II, he took away his powers, crushed his hand, and dropped him in the Artic ocean, believe me Zod died, at the hands of Christopher Reeve’s Superman, who afterwards went to a craphole diner and beat up an unpowered human, out of sheer ego. Never mind that in the comics Superman has executed Zod multiple times (different dimensions), and that is far from the only time he has gone lethal.

963. Theatre Historian - July 1, 2013

943
Unless your Prime Kirk, in which case apparently there are no possibilty of bringing you back to life after falling off a bridge.

964. Keachick - rose pinenut - July 1, 2013

Craiger – No. I was not complaining about the lack of news. I guess I am tired of reading what some people are commenting about of late – ie constantly comparing how well or otherwise STID has done so far in box office returns compared with other similar types of movies etc.

Star Trek is a “blockbuster” (whatever that means) to me. I really don’t care much how it compares with other movies, just so long as it makes back what has been invested into its production, and some. It has already done that. I am happy.

Also I was referring to MYSELF, no one else, re my comment about weaning MYSELF off. Sometimes I think I may be a little addicted – possibly. Whether others may feel similar, I cannot say. That is their call to make.

965. Mr. Anonymous - July 1, 2013

Superherohype.com just blew up when someone said they thought Karl Urban oughta be the next Batman, and you know what? That’s an AWESOME idea!

Just thought I’d share. :)

966. dmduncan - July 1, 2013

No, I don’t think they need all new writers for #3.

But I wouldn’t protest if Damon got sidelined.

967. Ahmed - July 1, 2013

@ 965. dmduncan – July 1, 2013

“No, I don’t think they need all new writers for #3.
But I wouldn’t protest if Damon got sidelined.”

I will protest if Lindelof got near the 3rd movie. I had enough of his crappy scripts.

968. Phil - July 1, 2013

@964. Obviously, these people didn’t see Dredd…

969. Bob Tompkins - July 1, 2013

In rewatching the old NBC miniseries V on Encore Channel, even JKJ Abrams ‘brilliant’ idea of using a brewery as the engine room was lifted from elsewhere. The V mothership’s engine room was a brewery as well.

970. Aurore - July 1, 2013

“@954. Aurore,
‘Damon Lindelof. The convenient and (ever-smiling) willing ‘scapegoat’

As you would be if you were paid anything like he is to take the heat.”
__________

No.

I see what you mean, but, I don’t have to smile to people I don’t feel like smiling to.

It’s the kind of luxury I would never renounce…not even for the kind of money he’s being paid in order to take the heat. Not to mention that complaining on the Internet is probably easier than doing what he does.

So, I would not want to renounce that either!

:))

“I have to say, Bennett’s idea sounds a lot more interesting and logical than than what we got…”

I don’t know about the sequel which I haven’t watched yet.

But, compared to what I saw and liked in 2009, Bennett’s idea does not sound interesting to me. At all.

Nevermind though ; when I said that we were all entitled to our opinions earlier, I meant it.

:)

971. Disinvited - July 1, 2013

# 967. Phil – July 1, 2013

How could they through that frikkin’ helmet! ;-)

968. Bob Tompkins – July 1, 2013

Are you sure you aren’t confusing that with their ocean stealing pumps and storage tanks rooms?

972. Aurore - July 2, 2013

@ 969

I don’t have to smile at people I don’t feel like smiling at

(I smile to myself as I am typing this.).

P.S. : In my opinion, his being an “ever-smiling”, willing “scapegoat” has not much to do with what he’s paid… although it might help…at least, just a little…

:)

973. Mitchell - July 2, 2013

@840. CecilofRil – June 29, 2013
Your points only validated mine. Really all you did was build the case against abrams trek.

As for offering up ideas to bob, wow. One of the most laughable things i have ever read anywhere on the internet. The supreme irony of you stating that i’m sure in completely lost on you.

974. Mitchell - July 2, 2013

@865. Captain Slow – June 30, 2013
if you ever publish it let us know, i’d love to read it!

@866. Phil – June 30, 2013
Wrong on both counts. In fact waves of reviews and blogs are opening up now addressing how wrong complaints about Man of Steel are… Star Trek would not have the politics to play with Superman and Batman do in Hollywood. So Star Trek would fare much better across the board with a team like theirs, doesn’t have to be them exactly just filmmakers similar etc..etc..

975. Mitchell - July 2, 2013

@897. Keachick – rose pinenut – June 30, 2013
No my friend it’s you and others who think likewise who don’t get it. Ha ha and wow, the conversation started mainly on the topic of what was actually communicated on film and not “thought up in our own minds”. Yet that’s all people keep doing ha ha…
—–

“you’ve never seen a player arrogantly cross a football goal line casually and hold his arms out like Kirk did”
-’No, I have not. This is a site on the worldwide web. Please do not assume that everyone here knows what you are referring to on your local level.’

The “local level” part did produce a laugh from me. i did expect since it is the world wide web most have at least seen such acts in highlight clips or advertisements that are sprawled all along the sides of websites or while waiting for videos load etc…etc…

976. Spock's Bangs - July 2, 2013

#974. “In fact waves of reviews and blogs are opening up now addressing how wrong complaints about Man of Steel are”

Hey, there will always be people out there who like burnt toast. Doesn’t mean it tastes good. lol

977. Wish it was the 80s again - July 2, 2013

Mr. Orci,

Is everything on the table for a 50th anniversary film? Like time travel, or bringing the alternate reality back inline with the original timeline? What about bring Shatner back is that possible too? Have you two talked about doing something like with the guardian of forever? Would love to hear your feedback. Oh just as a supporter I wish you guys would have been given a chance to tackle a new He-Man franchise or even try bringing to life a Quantum Leap or Knight Rider big screen film, maybe even Thundercats!

Enjoy your day : )

978. Mitchell - July 2, 2013

@907. Supermankills – June 30, 2013
Not “fanboys” just people who flat out don’t know the character.

@913. Curious Cadet – June 30, 2013
Bingo! Star Trek was tossed aside far too easily by it’s competition. When i left 2009′s screening i truly felt the sequel would break the then Dark Knight’s record. Egg on my face about that bold prediction.

979. Mitchell - July 2, 2013

976. Spock’s Bangs – July 2, 2013
that accurately defines Star Trek fans embarrassing themselves supporting jj and his friends. Not the actual fans of Superman correcting clueless movie critics.

980. Mitchell - July 2, 2013

@961. Bob Tompkins – July 1, 2013
Crossed the half billion mark in less than a month, while Superman Returns cost more than Man of Steel lol! Adjust inflation for that ;)

and you are far too caught up in Reeve.
I love Chris, no one has seen more of his movies or loved that Superman more than me. III and IV are perfectly fine movies with me, that’s how much i love Christopher Reeve as Superman. But it’s time to let it go. He’s gone and his Superman won’t work without him or Donner and there’s much much more to the character to explore than that version.

@965. Mr. Anonymous – July 1, 2013
i would like for Karl Urban to try to play “Bones” McCoy first.

981. Aurore - July 2, 2013

@ 960

The first two lines of my post @ 972 were just a correction (made in jest) to my post @ 969 ( the Internet being what it is, I thought I should clarify this).

982. Robman007 - July 2, 2013

“that accurately defines Star Trek fans embarrassing themselves supporting jj and his friends”

Another douchebag statement from yet another drama queen Trek fan.

No wonder Anthony wants nothing to do with this site. Bunch of idiots that make comments like that just cry and whine all day long. Bet ya complained about Berman Trek while it was on.

983. Bamasi - July 2, 2013

982

Now that’s not fair. We all complained about Berman Trek toward the end – with the exception of season 4 of Enterprise – it was flat-lining.

984. Robman007 - July 2, 2013

983. Bamasi

How is that unfair? What we have is a majority that bitch and moan about wanting to go back to “old Trek” when we as fans stopped watching old Trek, nevermind trying to get any new fans in. New Trek is around because we showed the suits at Paramount/CBS that we didn’t care about old Trek. We failed to show up for Nemesis, stopped watching LONG before Enterprise (as far back as DS9)…

I’m not saying these new films are all that and a pack of gum. I liked 09, I liked Into Darkness. They had issues with the plots and it was very sci-fi/fantasy…but that’s kind of what Trek needed. Besides, they work as excellent portal films, something the more militant whiners can’t seem to understand. New fans are being made every time they put a new flick out. The Abrams films have almost made more money (adjusted) then then TNG films.

Yes, it was flat lining, but new Trek is not. The last film had some issues, but geezus, it’s NOTHING like Berman era Trek was turning into…and I also seem to remember militant Trek fans getting pissy about TNG when it aired.

The drama and the “Gene wouldn’t approve” and “It’s not my Trek” stuff gets old..especially when you can bet top buck that the same folks cried and whined about every version of Trek..until the next one came out. Kind of like Tony Soprano’s mom…bitched and cursed her husband until he was dead..then he was “a saint”…same deal…..at least Wars fans had a reason to complain about the prequels…those films were craptastic.

also, when did Trek fans become a bunch of easily offended PC pushers? Geezus.

985. Supermankills - July 2, 2013

@978/Mitchell. One would think it is people who don’t really know the character who make such complaints, however my personal experience has been the opposite.

For example, there have been quite a few stories where Superman has had a beard, stories like “The Death of Clark Kent”, yet I see quite a few complaints out there about Superman having a beard in part of MOS.

Then there is the complaint about him killing Zod, I can make a list of the characters killed by Superman, its fairly long, and Zod is on it 4 times, as is Ursa, Non, Faora, Doomsday, and so on, and its even longer when you include the rest of the DC Multiverse, and all the otherdimesional Supermen, some of which are evil, and murderers from day one.

But I read complaints where people claim they have been Superman fans for years and read hundreds of comics and they claim “Superman never did anything like that”. Frankly complaints like that leave me with no choice but to assume that the person making them is someone who knows nothing about the character but the name and is trolling.

It makes as little sense as people claiming they have seen every episode of TOS and say that Kirk wasn’t a male slut, or that Spock never showed emotion, utter nonsense really.

986. Supermankills - July 2, 2013

Well, this might explain some things, apparently Paramount has been negotiating with Disney, so they probably haven’t really started the talks with Bad Robot and K/O Paper Products for the next movie yet.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-02/disney-buys-rights-to-four-marvel-movies-from-viacom-s-paramount.html?cmpid=yhoo

987. Robman007 - July 2, 2013

“It makes as little sense as people claiming they have seen every episode of TOS and say that Kirk wasn’t a male slut”

Yeah, I don’t get it when folks bring up that nice bit of denial. What f**kin show where they watching? Kirk was always looking to scam some chick. I especially like it when they go into justification mode on “well, he was doing this, not picking up on that chick”…wake up. Kirk loved the ladies..

Nonsense indeed.

988. William Bradley - July 2, 2013

That’s simply false.

989. William Bradley - July 2, 2013

Sure.

Meanwhile, Paramount had plenty of time to greenlight a new Terminator series coming out of the ashes of Terminator Salvation.

And to announce there will be a sequel to World War Z about 5 minutes after that picture opened.

>986. Supermankills – July 2, 2013
Well, this might explain some things, apparently Paramount has been negotiating with Disney, so they probably haven’t really started the talks with Bad Robot and K/O Paper Products for the next movie yet.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-02/disney-buys-rights-to-four-marvel-movies-from-viacom-s-paramount.html?cmpid=yhoo

990. William Bradley - July 2, 2013

… BTW, that “big deal” with Marvel is for movies we’ve already seen. One of them came out five years ago!

991. EM JAY - July 2, 2013

Another week, and another series of long-winded, depressing, “the sky is falling” posts from Curious Cadet about how bad STID is doing, and inferring that he/she has a real understanding of how Paramount and Bad Robot work, blah..blah..blah.

And most of you here just eat this stuff up and assume that Curious Cadet actually knows what they are talking about?

It’s sad and unnecessary. For my part, I am not going to join the crowd in enabling Curious Cadet on this topic. I don’t buy any of this doom and gloom.

992. MJ (The Original). - July 2, 2013

Matt, what it the deal with you blocking all of my posts? And at the same time, guys like William Bradley run amuck. I have been posting here for 5 years, and yet you block me without so much as a warning?

993. Phil - July 2, 2013

Whoa….go over to an article discussing Batman/DC/JL movie, and all the sniping there sounds just like what goes on here, Just substitute the character and related director, and it’s all the same word for word…

994. Phil - July 2, 2013

@991. I see a lot of my stuff going into the filter, too.

995. Phil - July 2, 2013

All the Disney deal with Paramount was for was a bit of housekeeping. If anything gets read into it, it would be either CBS/Viacom or Paramount acquiring the others part of the franchise.

996. Dial S for Star Trek - July 2, 2013

984) Love it when people think they speak for everyone.

I had know problem or complaints with any of the 4 90s-00′s Trek series or the people who ran them.

997. Dial S for Star Trek - July 2, 2013

MJ

say what you will about William, but he doesn’t resort to name calling starting fights with those who disagree with him

998. the captain - July 2, 2013

Star Trek into Darkness uses a recipe. The ingredients of that recipe is a mixture of all we know well. We know Khan, we know section 31, we know the Klingons and so on.

STID is a good Khan-Story, but its just using well known stuff.

Trek needs unexpected, new, fresh storys!

999. Dial S for Star Trek - July 2, 2013

I just started the Novel for Into Darkness, I am up to the part where Marcus allows Kirk to take the Enterprise to Qo’noS after Harrison.

So far the book stays pretty close to the screenplay doesn’t really expand upon much of the backstory like other Trek Movie adapations have.

1000. MJ (The Original). - July 2, 2013

Let me try again….

I was trying to respond to incessant doom and gloom posts by Curious-Cadet(CC), who keeps presenting a false negativity on the STID box office numbers, and who pretends to understand and criticize what is going on with Paramount. And people seem inclined to buy into this manufactured negativity.

Paramount seldom moves quickly on Star Trek movie official decisions, and this time it is more complicated in the JJ is not available to direct. That is all this is about, as the movie will make about $460 M when done with its run, and a sequel is obviously a done deal. These made up negative scenarios that CC is trying to scare everyone with, like the actors making themselves unavailable for future movies, are a complete figment of CC’s imagination. CC is trying to be overly negative and scare us, and we need to reject these “manufactured issues” completely.

But for some reason, my post like this one gets deleted every time. Maybe this one will make it?

1001. Dial S for Star Trek - July 2, 2013

How is underperforming by 20 million dollars at the domestic box office compared to the last movie, (especially when you factor in the higher budget and higher prices for 3D and IMAX tickets) manufactured negativity?

Yes the International BO is up, but the new movie is really underperforming at home.

1002. Phil - July 2, 2013

@995. Yeah, it made it. The status of the third installment is definitely in the kangaroo court of public opinion at the moment. I’m also of the opinion that the next installment will be made, it’s just a question of when. CC has no more insight into this then Craiger does with his incessant predictions of doom and gloom for the status of this site.

Having said that, like most everything else Trek related on this site, Paramount’s actions are subject to debate. Their dusting off Arnold for Terminator, and announcing a sequel to WWZ, a movie where profitability is still very much in question does give people cause to speculate. It is fair to speculate on when the movie will be made, and when it will be announced. We’d all like to think that the studio learned it’s lesson about extended periods of silence regarding a franchise, but if they remain quiet into Q4, maybe not so much…

1003. Keachick - rose pinenut - July 2, 2013

#987 – “…’and say that Kirk wasn’t a male slut”

“Yeah, I don’t get it when folks bring up that nice bit of denial. What f**kin show where they watching? Kirk was always looking to scam some chick. I especially like it when they go into justification mode on “well, he was doing this, not picking up on that chick”…wake up. Kirk loved the ladies..”

I think it is the terminology used that I and others find offensive. Words like “male slut” or “scam some chick” are very derogatory and condescending. Kirk was not looking to “scam” Edith Keeler or Miramanee. Yet, in the same paragraph, you write that “Kirk loved the ladies”. Does that mean that for a man, eg Kirk, to love the ladies automatically makes him a user/abuser of women and/or “slut”?

Kirk was shown to like women, enjoy their company in and out of the bedroom and it seemed that many women seemed to feel similarly towards him. He is no more a “slut” than any of those women and also, it pays not to refer to a female as ‘chick’ unless she gives you permission…

1004. Supermankills - July 2, 2013

@Bradley the bully. Firstly, what exactly is simply false? You make the statement but give no indication whatsoever what you are talking about, if you were referring to the comment just before yours, by Robman007, then you are completely wrong, if you are referring to my post about the Disney/Paramount deal then you should have noticed that I specifically said it “Might” explain a few things, not that it did, I was speculating, nothing more, based on the fact that there will be some renegotiating done for the next Trek, just like there is for every sequel made, and that perhaps, just perhaps, Paramount only has so many people that do their negotiating and they were busy with Disney.

As for the announced sequels for World War Z and the (long overdue) Terminator reboot, who says they have started the negotiations that will have to happen for those films either, all they did is announce they were eventually going to happen, even that doesn’t make it a certainty, I remember Time Warner confirming a sequel to Green Lantern a few years ago that never happened, and won’t happen at all now without a reboot.

I figure that Paramount doesn’t want to have to delay three Trek movies in a row so they are making sure of everyone’s schedule before they make any announcement. They also most certainly want to take advantage of the 50th anniversary so they want to get everyone on the same page about it, nothing more complicated.

1005. William Bradley - July 2, 2013

That’s a lotta typing there.

I’m obviously referring to the generally flaming comment directly above.

TOS Kirk is far cooler with the ladies than Nu-Kirk, who acts like a frat boy. That’s obvious.

Bye bye, anono …

>998. Supermankills – July 2, 2013
@Bradley the bully. Firstly, what exactly is simply false? You make the statement but give no indication whatsoever what you are talking about, if you were referring to the comment just before yours, by Robman007, then you are completely wrong,

1006. William Bradley - July 2, 2013

Actually, the word you are trying for is “amok.”

Which is hysteria on your part.

>991. MJ (The Original). – July 2, 2013
Matt, what it the deal with you blocking all of my posts? And at the same time, guys like William Bradley run amuck

1007. Supermankills - July 2, 2013

Hey Keachick, my ancestors who came to the USA may have been Puritans, but I am not, I will use any words I want at any time I want, whether anyone likes it or not. I have friends who call themselves sluts, both male and female, I use the word chick all the time, and guess what, not one person says a word about it, not one. I work with 10 females every day, they all like me, I’m their favorite co-worker, and a large part of why that is happens to be my absolute refusal to be politically correct in my use of language.

Kirk was a slut, pure and simple, he was also a raging narcissist.

1008. William Bradley - July 2, 2013

Exactly so.

Kirk could not have been kinder or more appropriately attentive to Edith Keeler. He was anything but a “male slut.”

For those who don’t know, she’s the lead character, played by Joan Collins, in perhaps Star Trek’s most classic episode, The City on the Edge of Forever.

>997. Keachick – rose pinenut – July 2, 2013

1009. Supermankills - July 2, 2013

@Bradley the Anonymous Troll. The difference in the two Kirks is just a matter of their age, nothing more, TOS Kirk was 31 when he took command, NuKirk was 25, they are not at the same level of maturity, and don’t tell me that a year or two can’t make that much difference, I know for a fact that it can.

TOS Kirk was a Bond level male slut, Nu Kirk is more like Col. Sheppard of Stargate Atlantis.

1010. Phil - July 2, 2013

Great. Who let the emotional 14 year old in…..

1011. Keachick - rose pinenut - July 2, 2013

“These made up negative scenarios that CC is trying to scare everyone with, like the actors making themselves unavailable for future movies”

That aspect does not make sense to me. The actors have signed on to do three movies and, barring awful misfortune occurring for an actor, they have every good reason to fulfill their contracts and not so many good reasons not to do so. Apart from any financial loss, not fulfilling contracts is not a good look as far as studios are concerned. There has a damned good reason for the actor to not be there, come start of principle photography.

1012. Phil - July 2, 2013

Interesting STID had a decent hold 7/1 to the previous Monday domestically. 392K to 354, I’d of expected a 40-50 percent drop – what happened was the per-screen average went up. Given that a few new openings are projected to be duds, STID probably has legs well into July now….

1013. Phil - July 2, 2013

TOS Kirk a ‘male slut’? The guy wasn’t lacking for company when he wanted it, but Kirk was a duty first kinda guy, which he demonstrated repeatedly.

1014. Phil - July 2, 2013

TOS art prints released…

http://www.startrek.com/article/first-look-new-star-trek-art-prints-released

1015. Khan 2.0 - July 2, 2013

random stuff i want to see in ST3:

-set a good 5 years after STID (which would be the TMP movie era or ‘Lost years’ era in the Prime timeline)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_Star_Trek#23rd_century
(like the first film showed us the pre 5 years mission, this would show us post 5 year mission which is also untold onscreen and allowing it to be more a big budget updated version of the original movies, not so much the original series like ST09/STID). also 2016 will already be 7 years in real time from ST09 anyway

-mushroom space dock with the massive blue lit interior housing all the ships
http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20120316224125/memoryalpha/en/images/6/6b/Earth_Spacedock,_2293.jpg

-ripped shirts drop kicks and Kirk-Fu:
http://th07.deviantart.net/fs71/PRE/f/2012/305/c/8/an_introduction_to_kirk_fu_by_rabittooth-d5jnrdo.jpg

-TOS & movie music nods (Goldsmith & Horner rifts – not anything big – just a musical ‘cameos’ like Amok Time fight music in STID)

-lengthy phaser ‘beams’ not star wars ‘bolts/blasts’
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Polls/Pictures/Poll007-Phaser.jpg

-Enterprise refit more sleek like TOS movies (esp if set years later)

-Kirks green season 2 wraparound tunic
http://i212.photobucket.com/albums/cc108/ADMBAXTER/TOS%20pics/Kirkfashionpose.jpg

-getting more toward foreshadowing the TWOK style uniforms/field jackets/equipment/ship designs (again esp if set good few years later)

-more vicious Trek III style Klingons again (like VI had them as villains for 25th ann)

-Twilight Zone/Outer Limits/early TOS style eeriness/horror

-unexplained wonder/unknown – questions and mcguffins that are not answered and are left to the imagination which is far more powerful than any explanation the film maker can give

-more references to the prime timeline/alternate future for the 50th anniversary – maybe a ‘Days of Futures Past’ type story involving alternate realities, prime timeline links etc (maybe involving TNG and or Shat Kirk)

-the borg (maybe something to do with them if above.) FC will be 20 years old in 2016

-various Trek stuff cameoing/referenced/easter egging – e.g. Talosions, Doomsday machine, gorns, cloud killer, Guardian of Forever, corbomite, tholians, wild west, rand, No 1, Nurse Chapel (finally), Capt Terrel, Kruge, Matt Decker (Stephen Collins?), Ilia, Savvik, Sybok, Admiral Archer, Botany Bay/Khan(again), Reliant/Excelsior, Patrick Stewart and the next gen (see points above), Vger (somehow linked to the borg? see points above)

-TMP style transporter malfunctions (with gory aftermath)

-TWOK style nebulas (hiding/battling in)

-more movie style to the sound FX/visual FX of the beaming/phasers etc

-more federation starship vs. federation starship carnage

-big name cameos/supporting roles? – e.g. some big shot Starfleet Admiral dishing out orders to Kirk at some point just like in TOS (Harrison Ford? Hanks?)

-dark perma haired Kirk:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_7vjDE3ZM2SA/TGGK2Fu-3tI/AAAAAAAAANw/TIfaidmDOYQ/s1600/ShatCurly.jpg

-more Bones

-Spock Prime (on phone-a-Spock help out duty again – esp if its the borg)

-Shatner….maybe retro footage from some outtakes from previous Trek movies or little seen tv movies or TJ Hooker or even Shatner as he is now – Kirks grandpop? alternate reality future Kirk? aged up Pine Kirk? (Deadly Years style)

-more redshirt deaths – im talking ‘Obsession’ levels

-maybe change the classic ‘STAR TREK’ font to the movie font for promo stuff? (i always liked the movie font best):
http://fanart.tv/fanart/movies/152/movielogo/star-trek-i-the-motion-picture-4fcd213f87a8d.png

1016. Keachick - rose pinenut - July 2, 2013

#975 – “No my friend it’s you and others who think likewise who don’t get it. Ha ha and wow, the conversation started mainly on the topic of what was actually communicated on film and not “thought up in our own minds”. Yet that’s all people keep doing ha ha…”

First of all, I am NOT your friend and nor are you mine. I am sorry but when I read or hear “my friend” or “son” being spoken by someone who is debating a topic, it comes across as being condescending and demeaning. We all heard how Admiral Marcus behaved toward Kirk, in a similar fashion and kept calling him “Son!” It made/makes my skin crawl.

It was your reference to Kirk behaviour similar to that of a football player. It was something that I and others did not necessarily see or equate Kirk’s behaviour with. It was you who made it up. I related just what the scene showed. You inferred the rest. What I did “make up” was the notion that Captain Pike may have given stowaway Kirk (after all, Kirk was quickly able to make himself useful) the field-promotion to first officer because of how he handled the KM test. That was my only inference, which made some sense, to me at least.

I don’t see much advertising on the internet, probably because I don’t go to that many sites and also because I believe one of my sons found a way to stop much advertising hit my Dell screen. I do not pay attention to sports ads – not interested in the least. I will occasionally watch netball, because my daughter plays it at school, and every four years, catch highlights of the All Blacks play in the Rugby World Cup – sort of a “patriotic” kiwi thing hahaha…Using your logic, I guess I should expect that you know about things rugby – kiwi style – eg the various hakas etc. Great if you do, but I am not expecting that you would necessarily or call you or make fun of you if you don’t.

1017. William Bradley - July 2, 2013

Sorry, little boy, I am a real person who does not hide behind a childish anono handle.

Enough time wasted on you …

>1003. Supermankills – July 2, 2013
@Bradley the Anonymous Troll.

1018. William Bradley - July 2, 2013

Exactly.

>1007. Phil – July 2, 2013
TOS Kirk a ‘male slut’? The guy wasn’t lacking for company when he wanted it, but Kirk was a duty first kinda guy, which he demonstrated repeatedly.

1019. Mitchell - July 2, 2013

@985. Supermankills – July 2, 2013
Man of Steel very closely resembled what we saw with Superman in most of his comics. Despite years of damage done to him by various outsiders who took him beyond camp or lowered his power level and intelligence dramatically.
Snyder, Goyer and Nolan along with more modern comics have returned him closer to what he was for most of his 75 years

What those “fans” or guys like Phil don’t get is suggesting Man of Steel or The New 52 comics are betrayals is implying things like Superfriends, Lois & Clark, Smallville or Bruce Timm’s appalling animated version are definitive and yikes what a horrible argument to make.

@992. Phil – July 2, 2013
On Superhero Hype? not the most reliable showcasing of fans. Most there love to troll and are casual at best.

1020. MJ (The Original).. - July 2, 2013

Hi Phil,

I agree with you in general. However, I find it amusing that people keep mentioning the new Terminator movie as an analogy of “why can’t Trek move as fast as Terminator V in getting a green light,” because in reality, it took 4 years from the last Terminator movie for them to green-light the next one. So that example proves exactly the opposite of this supposed point people are trying to make about why can Trek 2006 get green-lighted as quickly as Terminator 5 — that just doesn’t make any sense..

1021. Keachick - rose pinenut - July 2, 2013

#1001 – Well, good for you.

Anyway, who says I’m a “puritan” or indeed being politically correct? Given most people’s understanding of the word “puritan”, I doubt anyone could see me as being that. As for being “politically correct”, I am probably the least “politically correct” poster on this site.

Still – I found your use of the words “male slut” and “chick” in reference to either universe Kirk and some of the women he has known as being OFF. Just like you, I will say what I think!

1022. Mitchell - July 2, 2013

@1009. Keachick – rose pinenut – July 2, 2013
I meant no demeaning or disrespect. Calling somebody “son” i would agree but i did not do that.

As for the other subject, we are splitting fine hairs now but i will concede i should not have assumed all pay attention to such things…

1023. Phil - July 2, 2013

Hey, Rose, you might appreciate this….

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADof_PWg7RE

1024. Disinvited - July 2, 2013

#984. Robman007 – July 2, 2013

I can’t speak for others but since its cancellation in the 60s I have always been an advocate, not for going back, but for Paramount to create an environment/demand for writing that evolved to be better than the best that went before. Something that, at least, eventually regularly bests or equals Ellison and not continually be dwarfed by him.

#990. William Bradley – July 2, 2013

”… BTW, that “big deal” with Marvel is for movies we’ve already seen. One of them came out five years ago!” – William Bradley

Not sure what your response is meant to convey in Disney negotiating rights to Paramount’s existing Marvel library? Five year old Marvel products have little current value? Paramount wouldn’t bother trying to seal the deal by staying out of IM3′s marketing way?

In the AVENGERS and IRON MAN 3 negotiations, Paramount has proven to be a tough negotiator who gets full value for what Disney wants much to the Disney Marvel wing’s much publicized exasperation.

#994. Phil – July 2, 2013

I think you meant “Viacom/Paramount or CBS”?

# 995. MJ (The Original). – July 2, 2013

“Paramount seldom moves quickly on Star Trek movie official decisions, and this time it is more complicated in the JJ is not available to direct.” – MJ

First, let’s be clear about something: The Paramount that now controls film Trek is an entirely new entity that Redstone strung together at the very end of 2005. What was Paramount before that is now called CBS.

If my memory serves, the current Paramount’s track record on Trek consists of greenlighting 2009′s sequel even before it’s official release. Moonves’ gave Paramount’s Gail Berman his ultimatum in early 2006. Filming start November of 2007. Paramount slated 2009′s sequel without this Trek lugubriousness of which you speak – that came from other parties.

# 1000. William Bradley – July 2, 2013

” Actually, the word you are trying for is “amok.”” – William Bradley

According to my NEW OXFORD AMERICAN DICTIONARY “amuck” is an acceptable alternate spelling of “amok”. Though I must admit AMUCK TIME just doesn’t have the same impact..

1025. Red Dead Ryan - July 2, 2013

#1001.

“Kirk was a slut, pure and simple, he was also a raging narcissist.”

And you’re an f#cking idiot.

1026. Disinvited - July 2, 2013

Science has determined the line between geeks and nerds:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-57591390-1/at-last-science-draws-a-line-between-geeks-and-nerds/

1027. Photon70 - July 2, 2013

@ 1005. Keachick – rose pinenut – July 2, 2013

Not so much making themselves unavailable, but more along the lines of BEING unavailable.

For example, Zoe Saldana and the Avatar 2 and 3 sequels.

Once James Cameron finishes writing the scripts for Avatar 2 and 3, these will be shot back-to-back.

The current schedule is for the shooting to begin in early 2014.

This will take at least a year, if not more. There could be production delays, or any other number of delays.

If, if shooting spills into early 2015, right when we would want ST2016 to start shooting, it could impact the timely completion of the next Star Trek film due to Saldana still being tied up.

However, we’re not at the ‘it’s too late now’ stage.

An annoucement from Paramout for the 2016 sequel could come as late as the autumn of 2013, and that would be fine.

However, if we all sitting here in Jan/Feb 2014, and nothing has yet been announced, then I’d start getting worried.

1028. William Bradley - July 2, 2013

NOTA.

Translation: Nothing to do with greenlighting a new Trek, since Paramount found the time to move forward on other movies seemingly less important to them.

As we know.

The post was an irrelevancy.

>1016. Disinvited – July 2, 2013

#990. William Bradley – July 2, 2013

”… BTW, that “big deal” with Marvel is for movies we’ve already seen. One of them came out five years ago!” – William Bradley

Not sure what your response is meant to convey in Disney negotiating rights to Paramount’s existing Marvel library? Five year old Marvel products have little current value? Paramount wouldn’t bother trying to seal the deal by staying out of IM3′s marketing way?

1029. William Bradley - July 2, 2013

Yep, Klendathu was a tough gig …

Kidding aside, I have absolutely no favorite storyline for the next movie. I want to be surprised.

>923. Phil – July 1, 2013
The Borg would be an even worst choice the resurrecting Khan again. I can see the trailer now ‘An unstoppable evil threatens the galaxy”….then, guess what? They’re stopped! Gee, what did you think would happen, the Borg would actually take over the Federation?

Sorry, but the underlying theme of TOS was that, while prepared for war, the Federation knew it was a no win situation for both sides, and it was much better to avoid one. For all you guys wanting to see the Federation and Klingons/Romulans/Gorn/Cardassians/Etc,etc, go toe to toe, there are a couple of franchises out there just for you.

Star Wars or Starship Troopers. Enjoy.

1030. Hugh Hoyland - July 2, 2013

No offense to anyone who thinks there wont be a sequel (announced now, soon, or many moons from now) is in a dream sequence and cant wake from it.

There WILL be a sequel, and I suspect it will be sooner rather than later. Who directs it is up in the air, who writes it is in talks as Bob said before. But the studio isnt going to let a big time money making movie like STID drift off into space, aint going to happen. And they for sure will have this cast back if humanly possible. So get ready for Star Trek Into Darkness 2 (or what ever its going to be called) cause its going to come.

1031. MJ (The Original). - July 2, 2013

@ Phil,

I agree with you in general. However, I find it amusing that people keep mentioning the new Terminator movie as an analogy of “why can’t Trek move as fast as Terminator V in getting a green light,” because in reality, it took 4 years from the last Terminator movie for them to green-light the next one. So that example proves exactly the opposite of this supposed point people are trying to make about why can Trek 2006 get green-lighted as quickly as Terminator 5 — that just doesn’t make any sense.

1032. Curious Cadet - July 2, 2013

@1019. Photon70,
“Not so much making themselves unavailable, but more along the lines of BEING unavailable….An annoucement from Paramout for the 2016 sequel could come as late as the autumn of 2013, and that would be fine.”

Oh no, another ‘doom and gloom’ scenario. Careful Photon, you might get a reputation around here.

But, EXACTLY.

Four years is an awfully long time. Look what happened after ST09. While I put the blame squarely on Abrams, who could not even be bothered to look at the script Orci and Kurtzman were completing to speed up the process, they were all guilty of pushing the date further and further back, including the actors who took projects that made them unavailable sooner. I mean they have to coordinate the schedules now of 8 international actors, each with thriving careers, along with the writers, director, star villain(s), and producers. And they have less than 18 months as of today to do it in order to start shooting to make a Summer 2016 release. As fast as the studios are moving now with their franchises, even Autumn might be too long to make an announcement in order to lock in all of the parties.

This is why I say ditch Abrams and Bad Robot who will be more than preoccupied with Star Wars, announce the date, and lock everybody in. If Orci and Kurtzman can’t commit, move on. As long as the cast is locked in, there is no shortage of rich talent working in Hollywood who would love the opportunity to take on a new Star Trek film. These guys may have named themselves the “Supreme Court”, but it doesn’t mean they can’t be replaced. They’ve done Star Trek a great service in breathing life back into it. Abrams has been extremely professional in crafting these films considering he openly admits he doesn’t get Star Trek and prefers Star Wars. But they’ve also done Trek a disservice by placing their own needs above the needs of the many and delaying the sequel as they did. That can’t be allowed to happen again if Paramount is serious about making Trek a world class blockbuster franchise able to stand toe-to-toe with Star Wars and Marvel.

The longer Paramount waits, the more likely they won’t be able to get another film rolling by January 2015, and therefore no film by the 50th Anniversary in 2016. And then the franchise will be right back where STID found itself this Summer. 18 months folks — to find a director, get a script written, cast a new villain(s), and gear up for production. STID has made most of the money it’s going to at the box office, there’s nothing else to wait for, and interest is waning in Trek as mega-blockbuster after mega-blockbuster continues their assault every weekend. By the time Paramount gets around to announcing the sequel, perhaps nobody besides us will care anymore.

1033. Photon70 - July 2, 2013

@ 1023. Curious Cadet – July 2, 2013

Agreed. Not being gloomy at all, just being pragmatic.

What nobody has said is if an organisation like Paramount cannot enforce dates on key players in their movies, they need to come up with better contracts or use better lawyers.

Nobody is irreplaceble.

People have already commented here and in other threads that all Paramount has to do is announce a sequel for 2016. That’s all they have to do.

They can say that negotiations with interested parties are still taking place and further comments will be issued at the right time.

What it then means is their competitors sit up & take notice, the cast can block out their schedule for the first half of 2015, the movie can be booked into cinemas, OTHER movies have to move their dates etc etc.

It doesn’t matter that a 1000 other things have yet to be discussed or finalised.

An anology will be when a man askes a woman to marry him, does he pop the question first or does he make all the wedding arrangements before asking the question?

I would argue that accouncing the sequel early would strengthen Paramount’s negioting position.

1034. Marja - July 2, 2013

Hurry up and ask the cast and the writers to marry you, Paramount! Don’t be an idiot! ;)

1035. dmduncan - July 2, 2013

I actually like the idea of the Borg, but really it’s my idea that I like; I’m not sure what other people are thinking would thrill me.

But the concept does have some meaningful potential to speak about transhumanism.

Certain scenarios permit the outcome where the Borg are not defeated but voluntarily stop what they are doing, but you might have to cross territory previously explored in TMP to do it.

It all begins with an archaeological dig that unearths the corpse of a 21st century man who believed he could live forever by uploading his mind onto a computer chip….

1036. Photon70 - July 2, 2013

@ 1025. Marja – July 2, 2013

Hee hee hee.

The key is to avoid a repeat of what happened after ST09.

Waiting for 1 person or another to be available, and just when you’re ready to start, someone else starts working on something else . . . sigh.

Cough up the dough, sign them up and lock em in.

Can’t blame the talent for going elsewhere to work on more lucrative projects if they can’t be sure about the release date of the next Trek film.

I’m still absolutely confident that in this universe at least, there will be a 50th anniversary Star Trek movie.

1037. Red Dead Ryan - July 2, 2013

#1026.

That is not a bad idea.

1038. Red Dead Ryan - July 2, 2013

Well, yesterday was Canada Day. I live in Victoria, B.C., which was the target of a terrorist attack by a couple of nutjob Muslim converts, a man and a woman. Never thought of my city as a potential site for mass casualties (outside of the inevitable west coast mega quake). The would-be bombers were busted before carrying out their twisted acts, and the bombs were similar in nature and design to those used by the Boston bombers.

The attacks were planned to occur at the B.C Legislature building where thousands of people (including myself and others I know) were celebrating.

Unfortunately, mad men (and women) seem to be everywhere these days…

1039. Capt.Everhart - July 2, 2013

When I saw the early screening of STID (which didn’t feel was as “special” once they bumped up the release date by a day), I felt indifferent about it – much like I did with ’09. However, ’09 grew on me and I liked it overall.

STID, after viewing it 2 more times, got a little better. I am curious what others thought of certain spots in the movie – were there similar reactions to the following (these are just the big ones):

Spock screaming “KHAAAAN!” – I rolled my eyes at how hammy it came off; other people laughed. Thought this was “overkill” for the “homage” – this was the nail in the coffin following the death scene.

The “role reversal” death scene – I thought this was pure laziness. While my dad said that “parallels could occur within different realities” (which I can agree with), this had me squirming in my seat.

Khan’s reveal – I figured out by the time Kirk had punched him and he didn’t fall down that he was “Khan” (by name only, might I add). He just reveals himself as “Khan” – that’s like saying “I am Sam” or Bob or any other name. His fuller name may have had a bigger impact possibly.

Fast pacing – I thought some of the action was a bit relentless. Just as some dialogue was going to happen, the warp core would shut off, “Khan Harrison” shoots up Klingons, etc. This may have been because they couldn’t work off from the dialogue.

Essentially, STID is more or less a carbon copy of ST’09. Revenge driven villain, “big evil” starship, space jump scene, Spock punching people, Kirk yelling, recycling lines from other Trek films – for a minute, I thought the ending was exactly the same as ’09, until Bones said “5 years in space…”

JJ is a good director, he just has poor writers. I was a bit let down having to wait 4 years for this. Hoping ST3 is better and a bit more original. Stop “playing it safe” and take some risks for once!

1040. Disinvited - July 3, 2013

#1024. Photon70 – July 2, 2013

Exactly. FWIW Saldana, has even let it be known in no uncertain terms that she wants to be in STAR WARS.

It’s not realistic to assert Paramount has the resources and clout to take on Disney legal if Paramount decides they have to have her and she’s filming SW. And even if their contract could trump Disney, there’s no way her AVATAR contract wouldn’t trump Paramount under that same logic so they’d still have to deal with that.

And who at Paramount in their right mind would believe that an unhappy actress denied her SW gig would deliver them her best performance in any movie they would have her in after that?

One thing Brad Grey’s Paramount in noted for is being extremely frugal. Even if they gave the Trek main cast pay or play contracts, I’d be surprised if the Big P is paying them to keep their dates open. The least expensive way for Paramount to exercise their options and lock them down is to announce the sequel and slate its dates.

They can color in the rest later.

The longer this holding back the announcement takes, gives me pause to wonder if someone in these Trek negotiations really is pushing for only celebrating the 40th anniversary of the films in 2019 and leaving the series’ 50th to CBS which just seems absurd to me as a rational business decision? But then again, maybe the calculation is that nuTrek fans just wouldn’t care or only old fans that aren’t being courted do?

1041. Disinvited - July 3, 2013

#1029. Red Dead Ryan – July 2, 2013

I don’t think many of my fellow citizens in the country below are aware of the excellent work your officials do in stopping threats to us as well.

Assuming your celebrations extend beyond the day as ours do, give them our thanks too if you get the chance to express yours

1042. Disinvited - July 3, 2013

This is old and it’s reasonable to be suspect of its source:

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/gossip-from-the-baftas-helen-mirrens-plans-for-green-hair-ben-afflecks-sneaking-around-and-simon-pegg-on-star-trek-3-8489868.html

”But Pegg did confirm that JJ Abrams, who has just been signed up to direct the next Star Wars films, will also direct the third Star Strek film. “He will do Star Trek 3,” he said.” – Matilda Battersby, February11, 2013, THE INDEPENDENT

1043. Yanks - July 3, 2013

Worldwide: $438,545,947

I don’t know how anyone can complain about that, especially for a Star Trek movie.

Over 90 million more from the foriegn market over ST09.

ST09 was “only” $385,680,446 worldwide.

A marked improvement and STID hasn’t been out for 2 months yet.

Pretty damn impressive if you ask me.

1044. Hugh Hoyland - July 3, 2013

@1035 dmduncan

hmmm interesting concept. Anything else you have in mind with the Borg?

1045. Curious Cadet - July 3, 2013

@1040 Disinvited,
“someone in these Trek negotiations really is pushing for only celebrating the 40th anniversary of the films in 2019 and leaving the series’ 50th to CBS”

It’s really not about the 50th anniversary anymore. It’s about getting another Trek film in the theaters in less than four years. Other franchises do it and are proving wildly successful. Why not Star Trek? Certainly they’re not going to do it waiting for Godot … I mean Abrams.

1046. Curious Cadet - July 3, 2013

@1043. Yanks,
“I don’t know how anyone can complain about that, especially for a Star Trek movie.”

Because it isn’t just a “Star Trek” movie in the sense the first 11 were. The latest one had a 190 million dollar budget, and plays like none of those earlier original formula films. It’s a whole new era Star Trek has entered and it has proven it has the potential to do just as well as other billion dollar franchises.

I don’t know that anyone is complaining about 438.5 million dollars, but honestly, ST09 should have made that much to begin with. International BO is finally where it should be, and that’s cause for celebration. However, domestic box office is down and that’s cause for concern. ‘Dissapointed’ is a better word. Paramount invested a quarter of a million dollars into this film, and it should be performing closer to 600 million.

In the end, I think we want a franchise that holds high expectations. Paramount treated Trek the opposite way for too many years and we all saw the results from having such low expectations.

1047. Yanks - July 3, 2013

@ 1046. Curious Cadet – July 3, 2013

I understand “high expectations”, but the frachise is still the franchise. The only difference is Paramount is taking more risk now with JJ at the helm. All the other ST movies, with the exception of TMP were made for ST fans.

Not sure what the loss was in the domestic market. It might have been all the forgiegn promotions the did. I’ve heard that STID didn’t “pull” the younger female crowd. Not sure why exactly.

Personally I think the real loss was probably in repeat viewing by discruntled ST fans… where in 2009, they were flocking to the theaters frequently. Could it be all that saw 2009 were stoked for a new and fresh story with our young heroes and we got a rehash?

Who knows I guess, someone will lok at the detailed numbers and figure it out someday.

1048. Khan 2.0 - July 3, 2013

now at 438m ww – so near to beating TMP (when adjusted)

1. TMP 139m = 445m
2. ST09 385m = 417m
3. TVH 133m = 282m
4. TWOK 97m = 234m
5. FC 146m = 216m
6. TSFS 87m = 194m
7. GEN 118m = 185m
8. TUC 98m = 166m
9. INS 112m = 159m
10.TFF 70m = 131m
11.NEM 67m = 87m

1049. Curious Cadet - July 3, 2013

@1048 Khan 2.0,
“1. TMP 139m = 445m”

Your math is off. Average ticket price in 1979 was 2.51. Current average is 7.94. TMP=439.7 based on $139 (which is one of many unverified gross numbers floating around out there). And it also depends on which inflation index you use. Plus you’re adjusting a worldwide figure, which is not terribly accurate considering fluctuating economic indices. To get a truly accurate picture, you’d have to go country by country.

I think we need to let TMP thing go. None of us on these discussion boards are ever going to ‘prove’ anything with the public data that’s available. Only Paramount could settle this once and for all, and that’s never going to happen. Besides 1979 was the silent era as far as how things were done and what choices audiences had then compared to today’s cinema experience. I’m not even sure those numbers are relevant today.

At this point the numbers are close enough to say STID has done what no other Trek movie has been able to do. It has made more money internationally than any other Trek film, and will close having grossed more money than any other film in the franchise regardless of how the numbers are adjusted, but more importantly, it’s attracted hordes of new audiences.

If you want to look at some tangible measures of its success, look at its adjusted revenue after the production budget is subtracted. TMP (while subjective) is still No. 1, followed by ST09 by 13 million dollars:

TMP 328.9
ST09 261.4
STID 248.5
WOK 229
TVH 227.7

Look at domestic box office where it might not beat TVH:

ST09 274.3
TMP 260.2
TVH 229.2
STID 220.9
TWOK 213.1

Look at critical reviews where it scored much worse than ST09, and arguably worse than other favorites like TWOK and FC for which there is no accurate measure for comparison:

ST09 – 95 percent
STID – 87 percent

Look at Oscar wins:

ST09 — the only Trek to ever win an Oscar so far for makeup

While STID hasn’t yet had any nominations, it’s unlikely to even be nominated for makeup, leaving only sound and visual effects, and possibly best supporting actor in Cumberbatch, but that’s a long shot.

So is STID the most successful Trek film? Depends on what your definition of success is. If all that matters to you is gross box office receipts, then yes. But if critical reception, profitability, demographics, and accolades matter, then maybe not …

1050. Phil - July 3, 2013

@1049. One little problem with whatever the hell point it is you are trying to make, outside of anyone employed by Paramount, there are what, 12-13 people who really feel the need to prove this at the level you are trying to dissect it at?

I’m as comfortable saying STID is one of the most successful Trek films ever, as I am saying it’s the most successful Trek film ever. Anything else is just splitting hairs…

1051. Curious Cadet - July 3, 2013

@1050 Phil,
“STID is one of the most successful Trek films ever”

I’m pretty sure that’s the general point I made.

But I believe the point I made was that there are many definitions of success. To simply label STID as “the most successful” Star Trek film EVER as Orci and others here have done based on box office alone, does a disservice to other movies’ contributions to the franchise.

From your response am I to infer that money is all that matters to you, and critical appraisal counts for little? It seems as long as the box office revenue tops the previous films, it does not matter if the film isn’t as well received, or the story isn’t as good. And if that’s your definition of success, you are more than welcome to it.

1052. Curious Cadet - July 3, 2013

^^^^^^More,

Let me put it another way — I had high hopes STID was going to be the best film of the entire franchise, if not the best filmed installment ever including TV.

It wasn’t. The critics back me up on this. It wasn’t just me. The domestic box office may reflect exactly that.

But I look forward to the day that a Star Trek film is not only the highest grossing, and most profitable, but the most well received, compelling, and greatest critical success of the franchise, along with corresponding accolades to acknowledge it to boot.

Until that day, STID will be one of the most successful films in franchise history, but not THE most successful. That honor I give to ST09 for now. After all, whatever you think about a film walking away, they already have your money. So commercial success is but one measure of a films success, and usually not the most comprehensive. One look at the Transformers franchise is all you need to prove that.

1053. Symar - July 3, 2013

So…. at the end of the movie they’re starting their “Five Year Mission”. Shouldn’t Spock Prime warn them that they’re about to run into Clint Howard???

1054. NuFan - July 3, 2013

1000

What are you talking about? I haven’t seen a single person here that believes him and his made up statistics.

1055. Disinvited - July 3, 2013

Just a little reminder of what went before:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/05/movies/j-j-abrams-on-his-new-star-trek-and-star-wars-films.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&amp;

“I would routinely get calls from the studio asking for confirmation that he [Abrams] was directing the movie, and we never really confirmed it. We just kept going forward.” – Bryan Burk

“[Abrams is] wherever the fire is burning the most severe. But there’s always a fire burning.” – Damon Lindelof

1056. Phil - July 3, 2013

@1051 & 1052. Yes, the ‘and, but’ discussion. Sorry, but you have printed volumes here picking apart various stats regarding where the film has performed, and how. The problem with your criteria for success of the franchise is that none of the TV or film productions have EVER met your lofty goals. Most people are going to weight the definition of success on financial goals, then consideration for critical acclaim. It’s finding that balance that you seem to disdain that ensures the success of the franchise. We have all rated the movies and shows based on personal preference, but without financial success, the franchise dies. I’d rather have bad, financially successful Trek then none at all.

1057. Disinvited - July 3, 2013

#1054. NuFan – July 3, 2013

If he is “making it up”, he’s in good company:

http://moviecitynews.com/2013/06/weekend-estimates-by-purged-kladyanalysis-by-pol

“…this film [STID] is right at the border of profitability and loss.” – David Poland

http://moviecitynews.com/2013/06/friday-estimats-by-repeating-u-klady/

”Also in the “just on the edge” category are STAR TREK: INTO DARKNESS and EPIC.” – David Poland

1058. Disinvited - July 3, 2013

#1054. NuFan – July 3, 2013

If he is “making it up”, he’s in good company:

http://moviecitynews.com/2013/06/weekend-estimates-by-purged-kladyana

“It’s down about 25 percent domestically from the first JJ movie and up about 50 percent internationally. What does this mean going forward? Well, probably at least one more shot at this franchise breaking out foreign. The ceiling would appear to be 400m dollars worldwide, which is not bad, but not great at the price of production and marketing. Depending on how much they are paying Mr. Abrams in adjusted gross, this film is right at the border of profitability and loss.” – David Poland

http://moviecitynews.com/2013/06/friday-estimats-by-repeating-u-klady/

”Also in the “just on the edge” category are STAR TREK: INTO DARKNESS and EPIC.” – David Poland

PS today’s filter word to
avoid is “AN/-\LYSIS”

1059. Disinvited - July 3, 2013

#1056. Phil – July 3, 2013

“I’d rather have bad, financially successful Trek then none at all.” – Phil

You just sent a shiver through The Guardian.

Taking me back to the time before Trek when I held the opinion “I’d rather have bad Irwin Allen LOST IN SPACE science-fiction on television and hope that it would get better, than no science-fiction at all.”

1060. DarkTrekkie - July 3, 2013

I just want to make it public that Paramount Pictures Spain has been cheating on fans in Spain before the release of Star Trek Into Darkness this friday —yes, two months after the international release—.

In the past two months I’ve been in touch with various exhibitors in order to organize some kind of event for the release of the movie in our country, and I was informed almost six weeks ago that it was in the Paramount Pictures Spain interest TO NOT TO release this movie in IMAX (and of course, not in IMAX 3D).

Nevertheless I give the distributor the oportunity to explain themseves, and asked them in public about the release in such format. The official answer was that they were really commited to release it in IMAX. And although I knew they were probably lying, I give their word some credit.

But today the two only cinemas in our contry that have IMAX dependencies have confirmed that STID will not be released in that format.

This is not my first experience with spanish Paramount representatives. Some time ago I was present when the representatives just kicked two invited fans off of a premiere junket when one of the actors present asked them (the representatives) to give just two tickets for the fans to attend the aforementioned premiere.

@boborci, if you are reading this, you can ask Lorenzo Di Bonaventura about it, because he also was there.

Spanish fans associations are doing nothing, waiting for a change to happen. But I know that there are a lot of fans out of the associations that are tired of waiting, and are fully commited to support any initiative that can give them some hope.

So please, if anyone knows a Paramount representative that can at least slap on the wrist of the spanish ones, tell them about what I’ve just told you.

ADDENDUM
Some of the things Paramount Pictures Spain has done to “Star Trek”, regardless what they have done to other frenchises include:

— Keeping the same dude in charge of the translation since 1991, when he translates things like “warbird” to “halcón de guerra” (“falcon of war”), “metaphase” to “metafísica” (“metaphysics”), “pawn” to “títere” (“puppet”), “warp” to “hiperespacio” (“hyperspace”), “vulcan” to “vulcaniano” (“vulcanian”), “phaser” to “láser” (“laser”), and even changing the asigned gender to the Enterprise from femenine to masculine, among others.

— Keeping the same woman as translator for the series since the same date as before, whe she translates things like “silicon” to “silicona” (“silicone”), “ore” to “oro” (gold). She also carries the same mistakes in other productions like “Andromeda”, where she even confused Guinevere with Lizzie (Ginebra with Genoveva), and other series with mistakes like “coroner” to “coronel” (“colonel”), instead of “forense”.

— Not releasing the last season of Enterprise in DVD arguing that “Paramount Europe has forbidden them to do so”.

— Keeping above normal prices for DVD collections. For instance, when in United Kingond the same package (same DVD region, same contents) has been down to a normal price below 30 euros, in Spain usuarlly the prices are retained to at least 90.

— (This is not related to Star Trek) Blocking the distribution of some productions, even on DVD, so it’s impossible to acquire them legally in Spain, or at least to create legal subtitles to them for the people who may want to see them, but are not proficient with english (or another foreign language).

And this is only part of it.

So again, please, spread the word about how Paramount Pictures Spain treat their customers in Spain.

1061. MJ (The Original). - July 3, 2013

Phil, I agree with you completely.

Let’s take a look at some of the ridiculous things that CC has been saying:

- Some ST actors, and possibly (but not likely) all, will claim that they are unavailable for the next movie, Huh, they have legal contracts and would be sued? WTF???

- Claims there is not way to compare the critical response of people between the JJ Trek movies to the old movies; yet right there on IMDB, we see STID with and 8.2, ST 2009 with and 8.0 and WOK with a 7.7….or if you prefer Rotten Tomato reviews, ST2009- 91, STID-92, WOK-91 (watch now as CC attempts to explain this away). Nice try!

- Says, “But I look forward to the day that a Star Trek film is not only the highest grossing, and most profitable, but the most well received, compelling, and greatest critical success of the franchise, along with corresponding accolades to acknowledge it to boot.”….blah, blah, blah. What you are trying to say is that, SUBJECTIVELY, you yourself didn’t like this Trek film. We get that, OK? But please stop trying to mix up your dislike for this film with the general very positive opinions AND box office that are out there should you care enough to find them.

- Keeps bitching incessantly about the STID domestic box office, when the international box office has nearly doubled for this film. Paramount focused nearly all of its marketing overseas, and took the domestic market fore-granted…and opened the movie internationally well ahead of North America…DUH !!! — even my 11 year old figured that out when the Sneak Peak theater we saw it in wasn’t full.

- Says, “Paramount could decide it’s too much trouble, and put Trek on ice for a while. Again possible but not likely. But if they did, CBS would start the clock again and force them to get back into the Trek business, or forfeit their license to make movies. CBS in turn would shop it around to any number of potential studios and producers who are more than happy to get into that business with CBS, or take it in house and produce their own movie, or TV series.” Huh? This is your own conjecture — nothing more? A sequel is assured — you can take that to the bank. Stop making negative scenarios like this up — there is absolutely no basis for this as STID will end up with at least $460M by the end of its run, making it the most financially successful Trekmovie in history. ENOUGH with your “the sky is falling” scenarios for Treks future. Enough already!

- Calling somebody “wrong,” because their calculation of TMP revenues were $445M, which was just so different from your “expert calculation” of $439.7M. Are you fracking kidding us? LOL !!! How asinine!

CC, I have an easy solution here that will save you the time of having to write you repetitive “process over substance” treatises here, as well as more importantly, save us all the time of having to read all of this drivel — just post the following to all of us instead:

“I can’t stand STID”

And then go away…please!

1062. William Bradley - July 3, 2013

Oh, poor fellow.

“Analogy” doesn’t mean what you think it means.

You also fail logic.

Terminator was DEAD four years ago.

Is Star Trek DEAD now?

Terminator has suddenly been revived by Paramount. But Paramount hasn’t a word to say about Star Trek, which is still making money in the theaters!

>1031. MJ (The Original). – July 2, 2013
@ Phil,

I agree with you in general. However, I find it amusing that people keep mentioning the new Terminator movie as an analogy of “why can’t Trek move as fast as Terminator V in getting a green light,” because in reality, it took 4 years from the last Terminator movie for them to green-light the next one. So that example proves exactly the opposite of this supposed point people are trying to make about why can Trek 2006 get green-lighted as quickly as Terminator 5 — that just doesn’t make any sense.

1063. Disinvited - July 3, 2013

Regarding this site’s filter. I’ve always known this site did not like certain 4 letter sequences to appear in any manner, as in the case of “HI\/E” for example. But I didn’t catch “sHI\/Er” and it is fascinating watching this thing’s apoplectic reaction to it.

1064. Jamie - July 3, 2013

MJ
so lets get this staight it’s ok for you to push people around when YOU dont agree with a posters criticism of something,
I got it now, and your last post says it all about you
Hypocrite

1065. Cinema de Merde - July 3, 2013

There are a lot of books and articles going around right now about the state of the movie industry, specifically that 80% of profits right now are from overseas. Speilberg says that “Lincoln” barely escaped being on HBO for this reason–which is unbelievable [as is the fact that new films by Neil Jordan and Brian De Palma are going straight to on demand]. And in an article about foreign focus groups for Star Trek, the feedback was that audiences want more ACTION, and hate things like pointy ears and people standing around talking on the bridge! i.e.: they HATE everything that makes Trek Trek! So I think we have to consider the environment these movies are being made in, and that efforts are being made to preserve what Trek is amid pressure for every movie to be THE BIGGEST, MOST EXPLOSIVE MOVIE EVER!!!

That said, I just re-watched THE NAKED TIME last night and was blown away by how great it is! It makes me sad that that Trek will never be back.

Re: that, some of the things I’d like to see in the next movie are:
1) That Naked Time kind of thing where there are two separate situations that affect each other … this could be an okay way to have one situation be a classic ST alien civilization kind of thing and the other require action and fistfights and explosions
2) Let’s remember that Bones is often very serious and sincere, he does a lot more than just make wisecracks
3) For some reason I LOVE it in TOS when the characters snap at each other for no reason, then have to come apologize later… makes it very real
4) I also love the little grace notes to certain episodes, like again in Naked Time, when they’re going back in time for a few moments…
5) I always like it when there’s subtle jealousy between Bones and Spock over who is closer to Kirk
6) I like it when Treks edge into other genres, like Undiscovered Country is a bit of a murder mystery
7) Maybe solidify the team by having them have to make a serious choice over a less prominent character, like I was a bit shocked [maybe I'm just a bastard] that in Voyage Home they almost botched the whole mission to go save Chekov
8) Kirk being really smart. I liked the Kirk/Marcus faceoff in STID because it started to show Kirk negotiating from the bridge, but… let’s have more! In TOS he really was very clever and smart, not just brave and brawny
9) PON FARR

That’s it for now. When you consider that these film have to please audiences who don’t like what Trek is, I think we’re doing pretty well. Hey man–Superman is allowing millions of people to die now, right?

1066. dscott - July 3, 2013

Anyone here plan on getting one of these?

https://store.qmxonline.com/Enterprise-NX-01-Artisan-Replica_p_231.html

I’m building fully lit PL refit enteprise myself and know the cost/effort involved. Not to mention this comes with some cool extras so I think it’s worth it – as one of the few Enterprise fanatics anayway :)

1067. Mel - July 3, 2013

In Star Trek Ongoing 22 we see that Klingons have built ships, which look like a mix of their usual ships and the Narada. And they are going to attack someone. I hope the writers are satisfied with doing war stories in the comics and we won’t see a big war in the next movie.

By the way Vulcans in pon farr and Vulcans who have rejected Surak’s teaching and are feral, have glowing red eyes in the comic.

1068. Curious Cadet - July 3, 2013

@1056. Phil,
“Most people are going to weight the definition of success on financial goals, then consideration for critical acclaim. It’s finding that balance that you seem to disdain that ensures the success of the franchise. We have all rated the movies and shows based on personal preference, but without financial success, the franchise dies”

If the bottom line is financial success for “most people”, then the TMP remains a constant thorn in the stats for Trek, at least until the first movie hits 600 million, to be absolutely certain, given respectable citations from legitimate news sources of the time posted by Disinvited above. I’m saying it shouldn’t matter because TMP was a critical dud. Not only that, but if you look at the TMP trailer YouTube link I posted above, you’ll see a lot of those people might not have gone to see it had the true nature of that film been known beforehand.

Look, you infer some things about me, and that’s fine. But all I’m doing is analyzing, and contrary to popular belief I don’t have a particular agenda. It’s fun to look at the numbers and survey the landscape, second guessing what’s next, and discuss those views with others. I mean what else am I supposed to do in the absence of any other news being reported? What I “disdain” are sweeping generalizations that aren’t supported by facts, or don’t consider other viewpoints. If anything I play devils advocate to look at things from the other side, whether I necessarily agree or not. Frankly I don’t care whether anyone else is interested, or likes what I am thinking, though a few here also share my interest in these matters and I appreciate that.

As for assuming anything about me, rather than coming out and directly asking me … well we all know what they say about people who ass-u-me.

1069. IDIC Lives! - July 3, 2013

#1061 Cinema de Merde
I love all 9 of your ideas! And agree on the brilliance of “The Naked Time” and the other great TOS episodes. They blow me away every time. Yes, sad that true Trek can not ever be on the big 2013, 2014, 2015 screens but I did really like STID anyway.

1070. Phil - July 3, 2013

@1058. Well, I’m sure the Guardian will survive, it’s just a shiver. Most of Trek is very watchable, so space hippies, Lester, Spock’s brain, Transwarp lizard evolution, Aztec Data, Vulcan zombies, and Trek 5, 7, 9, and maybe 3 are excusable.

Now, I’m the first to admit that I’ve not seen every episode of Lost in Space. Happened to stumble across later years of it first, then found the first season by accident. I seem to recall the first b&w season was pretty good drama and sci-fi….and when they switched to color parody ruled the day. I’d be sick of Trek, too, if 75% of it was bad…

1071. Curious Cadet - July 3, 2013

@1056. Phil,
“Most people are going to weight the definition of success on financial goals, then consideration for critical acclaim. It’s finding that balance that you seem to disdain that ensures the success of the franchise. We have all rated the movies and shows based on personal preference, but without financial success, the franchise dies”

If the bottom line is financial success for “most people”, then the TMP remains a constant thorn in the stats for Trek, at least until the first movie hits 600 million, to be absolutely certain, given respectable citations from legitimate news sources of the time posted by Disinvited above. I’m saying it shouldn’t matter because TMP was a critical dud. Not only that, but if you look at the TMP trailer YouTube link I posted above, you’ll see a lot of those people might not have gone to see it had the true nature of that film been known beforehand.

Look, you infer some things about me, and that’s fine. But all I’m doing is anlyzing, and contrary to popular belief I don’t have a particular agenda. It’s fun to look at the numbers and survey the landscape, second guessing what’s next, and discuss those views with others. I mean what else am I supposed to do in the absence of any other news being reported? What I “disdain” are sweeping generalizations that aren’t supported by facts, or don’t consider other viewpoints. If anything I play devils advocate to look at things from the other side, whether I necessarily agree or not. Frankly I don’t care whether anyone else is interested, or likes what I am thinking, though a few here also share my interest in these matters and I appreciate that.

As for assuming anything about me, rather than coming out and directly asking me … well we all know what they say about people who assume.

1072. Curious Cadet - July 3, 2013

@1066. Phil,
“found the first season by accident. I seem to recall the first b&w season was pretty good drama and sci-fi….and when they switched to color parody ruled the day. I’d be sick of Trek, too, if 75% of it was bad…”

I’d say your assessment is spot on.

I had a flash of nostalgia a few years ago and as all of LIS can be found for free on Hulu, I had a bit of a marathon. While I can say I’m happy I finally saw them all, the color seasons were almost unbearable. I have no idea what made that show so expensive as to have such cheap sets and alien costumes, but boy, they did. It made Star Trek look like a high budget feature film by comparison.

In contrast, aside from a few fantastic ideas, the first season in B&W was as close to hard scifi as you could get on network TV — the vast majority of it is quite watchable and compelling. Dr. Smith took the nastiest arc of all of them, about which I’ve read the rest of the cast did not appreciate.

I’ve been watching it lately when I happen to catch it on a local channel and it really has lost all appeal. Unfortunately, it does not hold up to the scrutiny of re-watching them over and over the way Star Trek does. For me, it’s definitely a case of being far better in memory than it actually is.

1073. Robman007 - July 3, 2013

1062. dscott – July 3, 2013

I’ve done a 1/350 Refit and TOS Enterprise…the cost is up there, but not the crazy amount that QMx charges for their ships..especially since the NX-01 and Refit models they sell are the Round 2 kits. Don’t get me started on the Enterprise D..$10,000? Yeah, right.

1074. Disinvited - July 3, 2013

#1065. Phil – July 3, 2013

Well, watching that message disappear, reappear, and numbers shift sure felt like something akin to a Guardian shiver was occurring.

Yep, LIS first season was pretty good in spite of Allen’s glaring misconceptions about what was hot or cold in space. Amazed me that a real planet’s been found with an orbit like the one they cooked up for Pre-Planis.

1075. Disinvited - July 3, 2013

#1065. Phil – July 3, 2013

Hmmm…it let us post shiver without any reaction that I can detect. For the longest time it wouldn’t let me use the word “archive”. I wonder if someone has addressed its issues?

1076. Keachick - rose pinenut - July 3, 2013

Let’s see – health?

1077. Keachick - rose pinenut - July 3, 2013

It won’t let me post the word ins-r-nce

1078. Keachick - rose pinenut - July 3, 2013

Nope to p*orn/p*rnog*phy

1079. Keachick - rose pinenut - July 3, 2013

Duh!

1080. dscott - July 3, 2013

1068. Robman007 – July 3, 2013
I don’t think the NX-01 is just a round 2 model – unless they are lying in the description :) I know the refit is – haven’t looked into any others.
I’ll let you know when I inspect it (probably some time next year I imagine)

When I mentioned cost, that’s not just dollar signs. It’s also time, and that’s something I have very little to play with. Already balls deep in the refit, and my insatiable need for really nice ST reproductions, well, again… it’s worth it to me.

I do hate that I won’t be able to say “I built that”. But I have PLENTY to say that about already :/

1081. Disinvited - July 3, 2013

FWIW Here’s what THE WRAP reports:

http://drupal.thewrap.com/movies/article/will-star-trek-success-cure-paramounts-disappointment-jj-abrams-93516

1082. James McFadden - July 3, 2013

I think that Pocket Books could do 2 or 3 4-part novel series. Suggestion number 1 would be a 4-part Romulan Empire. Suggestion number 2 would be a 4-part Borg. Romulan Empire would deal with the fall of the Typhon Pact and the rise of Gell Kammemor’s successor to power among other things. Borg would deal with what happens after the formation of the Borg Collective on the planet Arehaz. Suggestion number 3, a novel series depicting events after the 2387 disaster, could see the likes of Fleet Admiral Kathryn Janeway replacing the leader of Section 31 and Chakotay being promoted to Commodore along with being given command of his squadron of warships.

1083. James McFadden - July 3, 2013

i wonder how will the Romulans behave with Red Matter?

1084. James McFadden - July 3, 2013

will we see more of the Dreadnought-class?

1085. Photon70 - July 3, 2013

If reports that Chris Pine signed up for 2 more, i.e., 4 movies in total, are correct, then I would love it if Movies 3 and 4 were shot back to back.

Pros:

Allows some monetary savings in the production costs.

Allows a longer story perhaps with three story arcs (action, sci-fi, romance) to be told more completely and at a good pace.

Allows momentum to be maintained at the box office if the movies came out 1 year apart.

Whilst the going is still pretty good, it allows the Studio to take stock of the franchise quite quickly about 4 years from now instead of perhaps 8 or even 10 years from now.

Cons:

A leap of faith required by studio.

1086. Disinvited - July 3, 2013

FWIW FROM THE WRAP:

drupal.thewrap.com/movies/article/will-star-trek-success-cure-paramounts-disappointment-jj-abrams-93516

* Paramount has a veto clause in Karl Urban’s contract against any project they label as interfering with STAR TREK.

* Paramount’s Brad Grey wanted to send Abrams a message by intimating he would exercise that veto against BAD ROBOT/FOX’s ALMOST HUMAN

Now I’ve expressed my doubts about THE WRAP’s sources and accuracy of reporting in this Trek area before and I’m doing so here again. Just last year Paramount extended Abrams’ script first look options. Why would Grey risk ticking JJ off by messing with his TV project and risk JJ returning the favor by tying the Big P’s film projects up while he puts their scripts in looking over for consideration hell?

However, it does occur to me that JJ’s 1st look script option for ST3 could be a stickler in the P’s announcing that sequel. Because, I suppose, they can’t give it to anyone else until there’s a script for JJ to look at and decline?

1087. Craiger - July 3, 2013

Should time travel be used again? What about having the Enterprise E go to the Alternate Universe for some reason and Picard would be able to find out what happened to Prime Spock. Then we could see how the Alternate TNG Universe looks with new designed Enterprise E.

1088. Curious Cadet - July 3, 2013

@1079. Photon70,
“A leap of faith required by studio.”

It’s hard to imagine with a franchise like Star Trek that the studio would have to take much of a leap of faith. For all the disappointment over STID’s domestic box office, the movie is more than going to make back the budget and a tidy profit, just like ST09. Two movies back to back, each with smaller budgets than STID and cumulative savings between them just seems like a good idea. It also guarantees their creative team doesn’t scatter to the four winds until who knows when. The bottom line is that is they make a halfway decent movie with this cast and slap Star Trek on the title, there’s little reason to believe it won’t make money. The reality is, they could slap Star Trek on just about anything and it would probably make money. Even TFF and Nemesis made money in the end.

But I’m not sure about the Chris Pine deal … Weren’t they all signed for a 3 picture deal? If so, and Chris said he was signed for two more, that’s 5. Is it possible they made him make that deal in exchange for Jack Ryan?

Either way, the main issue is whether Paramount wants to wait around for Bad Robot and Abrams to give such an ambitious project their full attention, or bring in a new producer to bring it in on Paramount’s time table, which should be no later than Summer 2016. I wouldn’t hate a Holiday 2015 release either.

1089. Phil - July 3, 2013

@1072. I sell that, and while I don’t mention it often, it might explain why some things disappear.

1090. Captain, USS Northstar - July 3, 2013

@1079 — I concur with the back-to-back idea. I was so certain we were going to find out that two movies had been shot back-to-back this time around and that’s why we were waiting four years for a new movie. I figured Paramount would make this big announcement about a sequel already “in the can” for the 50th Anniversary.

Unfortunately, that was just wishful thinking on my part.

@1058 and other Lost In Space fans — lest we forget, Irwin Allen was also entertaining us with “Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea.” Same thing: the black and white episodes were pretty good, but when they switched to color we pretty much got a “Monster of the Week” format with a few pretty good exceptions.

And talk about a crew that snapped at each other alot: Captain Crane and Admiral Nelson — yeesh! Those were some moody characters.

1091. IDIC - July 3, 2013

After having read posts on this thread since STID came out, I have noticed that a pattern has emerged. It’s really the same pattern that is in almost every other thread on this website, but may be worth mentioning, given the devotion to Roddenberry’s vision that many fans seem to connect with.

You’ve got the Informer: “I have information that you don’t and you need to know about it. So here it is.”

Then there’s the Condescending Contrarian: “The information you just gave is incomplete / incorrect / everyone already knows the information you just imparted. Also, you’re an idiot.”

The Librarian: “They should make a movie of (insert favorite Pocket Books Star Trek Novel)”.

Then there’s the Teacher: “Your viewpoint is wrong and I will tell you the correct viewpoint because you don’t know / love Star Trek as much / as well as I do. Also, you’re and idiot.”

Followed by the Reactor: “I have taken offense at what you have written because I can’t stand any viewpoint of the Star Trek Universe other than my own.”

The Economist: “STID made more money than STMP adjusting for inflation and the value of the dollar in relation to the price of Gold in 1979″.

The Insider: “Chris Pine has signed to do 4 more films, but Zach and Zoe haven’t committed yet.”

The Screen Writer: “I would have the Enterprise fly through a wormhole backwards and have the crew switch genders and then, not have them switch back until Star Trek 14.”

And on a positive note, there are a few out there who take the ideas and input of others in a constructive and healthy fashion. True followers of IDIC. Live long and prosper.

1092. Keachick - rose pinenut - July 3, 2013

Although the quote from Chris Pine was published on a site of May of this year, 2013, I do have to wonder if it was not from something he said just after the first movie was released, ie Star Trek in 2009. If so, what was quoted would be in line with what we know, ie he had just completed the first of three movies that he had signed on to make. I hope I am wrong but I suspect this is some crap site quoting something he said four years ago (which was true at the time) and made it seem like he had only just said it this year.

1093. Keachick - rose pinenut - July 3, 2013

BTW – It is actually Thursday, 4 July (4.03pm) here, so Happy Independence Day to all in the USA! Have a good one!

1094. Dave H -- trying to post here, but keep getting delted ??? - July 3, 2013

# 1059 / MJ-The Original

Agreed, my friend. Agreed.

Curious Cadet has repeated the safe HumptyDumpty negative stuff in so many posts, over and over now that, by comparison, it makes WBrad look like someone who brings a lot of fresh ideas to the table here all the time. :-)

1095. MJ (The Original). - July 3, 2013

“The reality is, they could slap Star Trek on just about anything and it would probably make money. Even TFF and Nemesis made money in the end.”

There you go again, CC. You just make this up — just pull this stuff out of your butt, eh???

Nemesis’s production cost was $60M, and the marketing and print cost was $33M, for a total cost of $93M.

Total worldwide gross revenue for Nemesis was $67M.

So, doing 4th grade math, Nemesis lost $26M

Cased closed. Please stop making stuff making stuff up, CC

1096. Ahmed - July 3, 2013

Star Trek related news item.

===========================
Why District 9’s Neill Blomkamp doesn’t want to direct Star Trek 3:

In a recent interview with the Danish movie site Filmz, Blomkamp was asked about Star Trek. Even though the guy’s a major Star Trek fan—make that even a Trekkie—he’s apparently not interested in being involved with the franchise.

“Dude, I used to be a ‘Star Trek: The Next Generation’ fan. Like, big time… But no, I probably wouldn’t do that. I don’t know if me getting involved with a franchise is the best thing for me. When studios smell franchises, they smell money. And they’ll try to do what they can to the franchise to make it make the most money it can make, and a lot of those interesting ideas kind of fall by the side of the road.

So… Do I like ‘Star Trek’ on its own without the politics of making it? Yes, absolutely. But do I think that you could make it in the way that I would want to make it? Probably not, which makes me not want to make it.”

http://www.blastr.com/2013-7-3/why-district-9%E2%80%99s-neill-blomkamp-doesnt-want-direct-star-trek-3

===========================
I think we saw that clearly with STID.

1097. Phil - July 3, 2013

@1085. Thank you!

1098. Disinvited - July 3, 2013

FWIW:

http://www.thewrap.com/movies/article/will-star-trek-success-cure-paramounts-disappointment-jj-abrams-93516

* Paramount has a veto clause in Karl Urban’s contract against any project they label as interfering with STAR TREK.

* Paramount’s Brad Grey wanted to send Abrams a message by intimating he would exercise that veto against BAD ROBOT/FOX’s ALMOST HUMAN

Now I’ve expressed my doubts about THE WRAP’s sources and accuracy of reporting in this Trek area before and I’m doing so here again. Just last year Paramount extended Abrams’ script first look options. Why would Grey risk ticking JJ off by messing with his TV project and risk JJ returning the favor by tying the Big P’s film projects up while he puts their scripts in looking over for consideration hell?

However, it does occur to me that JJ’s 1st look script option for ST3 could be a stickler in the P’s announcing that sequel. Because, I suppose, they can’t give it to anyone else until there’s a script for JJ to look at and decline?

1099. Disinvited - July 3, 2013

FWIW THE WRAP reports WILL STAR TREK SUCCESS HEAL THE HURT BETWEEN PARAMOUNT AND J.J. ABRAMS?:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=y6O6X7ebYkA

* Paramount has a veto clause in Karl Urban’s contract against any project they label as interfering with STAR TREK.

* Paramount’s Brad Grey sent Abrams a message by intimating he would exercise that veto against BAD ROBOT/FOX’s ALMOST HUMAN

Now I’ve expressed my doubts about THE WRAP’s sources and accuracy of reporting in this Trek area before and I’m doing so here again. Just last year Paramount extended Abrams’ script first look options. Why would Grey risk ticking JJ off by messing with his TV project and risk JJ returning the favor by tying the Big P’s film projects up while he puts their scripts in looking over for consideration hell?

However, it does occur to me that JJ’s 1st look script option for ST3 could be a stickler in the P’s announcing that sequel. Because, I suppose, they can’t give it to anyone else until there’s a script for JJ to look at and decline?

1100. Disinvited - July 3, 2013

#1086. MJ (The Original). – July 3, 2013

I’m pretty sure CC means in ancillary air rights and various home video releases to this day. NEMESIS, much as I’d rather it weren’t, is still part of Paramount’s Trek revenue generation and by now surely has turned a meager profit in that respect and any more revenue from it is now gravy. Much as the currently in print Blu-rays of the series ENTERPRISE surely are?

1101. Li'l Shat - July 4, 2013

After Trekking into darkness, where do we go?

We’re on the five year mission now! Which to this team of writers apparently means, boldly going where we’ve already gone before.

If I could make just two suggestions:

First, ditch Damon Lindelof. Just get rid of him.

Second, tell Orci and Kurtzman that they don’t have to keep remaking previous Star Trek episodes.

1102. Photon70 - July 4, 2013

@ 1091. Li’l Shat – July 4, 2013

Get Brad Bird to direct!

He’s pretty good at writing too!

1103. Li'l Shat - July 4, 2013

I understand that these current writers are in love with the idea of the two timelines sort of resonating off one another, but to me this is just an excuse to reuse old ideas in order to fill a creative vacuum.

What would be much more interesting to me is for this new timeline to go wildly off in a direction… where no one has gone before!

That is in fact what I thought the first movie promised. They imploded Vulcan! What a strong suggestion that everything would be new, different, and (here’s what Star Trek needs most) fresh.

Instead, we get Khan again. And an aging Nimoy. Again.

I thought Nimoy was just going to appear in the first movie, in order to give his blessing to this new venture? His completely gratuitous appearance in this new film to me undermines that intent. This new crew can’t face any threat without a cameo from… Leonard Nimoy!

Star Trek needs to boldly go where no one’s gone before. That is its mandate.

1104. P Technobabble - July 4, 2013

1091. IDIC

I had to chuckle as I read your post. Good observation.

1105. PaulB - July 4, 2013

#1092 – Keachick, I think you’re right about the Chris Pine quote. In a 2010 interview with Ralph Lauren Magazine, Pine replied to the same question with the same “I’m committed to two more” statement.

http://qa.entertainment.ralphlauren.com/magazine/editorial/ho10/chrispine.asp?cat=INTERVIEWS

I think the “recent” interviewer may have “borrowed” a bit, but it’s possible that Pine just answered with standard wording to a standard question.

But I think you could be right, it’s an old statement that was re-quoted.

1106. Ahmed - July 4, 2013

@1091. IDIC

In other word, we sound very much like members of the Congress :)

Happy 4th of July to all Americans!

1107. Aurore - July 4, 2013

“…And on a positive note, there are a few out there who take the ideas and input of others in a constructive and healthy fashion. True followers of IDIC…”
________

Indeed.

To me, they include the owner , and the contributors to this site.
Star Trek means different things for different people, after all.

Thus, it is a pleasure, for me, to have the opportunity to visit a place where I can read posts from “informers”, “condescending contrarians”, “librarians”, “teachers”, “reactors”, “economists”, “insiders”, and “screen writers”.

In other words, a place of…Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations, as it were…

Live long and prosper, fellow Star Trek fans!
Long live this site!

And, happy 4th of July to all Americans!

1108. Curious Cadet - July 4, 2013

I’m stunned at how bad the reviews are for The Lone Ranger. RT gives it an agregate 23, with the top critics giving it an 11!! With a 215 million budget … What is Disney doing!? This on the heels of the 250 million flop John Carter. Man they really needed Marvel and Lucas. Hopefully they will be a little more hands off with them …

STID may have a shot at picking up a little more business this weekend, even though it is sure to be on fewer screens.

1109. boborci - July 4, 2013

1096. ahmed

what you and others fail to understand is that what we pitched Paramount both times is what ended up on screen. in this case, you cannot make a demon of paramount for using evil genius to architect money making formula. there is no such formua. that is a conspiracy theory, if ever heard one.

1110. Curious Cadet - July 4, 2013

@1096. Ahmed,
” Blomkamp was asked about Star Trek. Even though the guy’s a major Star Trek fan—make that even a Trekkie—he’s apparently not interested in being involved with the franchise.”

Sounds a lot like Abrams saying he wasn’t interested in being involved with Star Wars. And now look. I wouldn’t rule Blomkamp out just yet. ;-)

1111. Stephan - July 4, 2013

@boborci:

Nice to see you here. Any progress on the Star Trek 13 front?

1112. Curious Cadet - July 4, 2013

@1109. boborci,
“you cannot make a demon of paramount”

How about a demon out of Damon? ;)

Curious, was Paramount ever pitched the story of STID without Khan?

1113. OldDarth - July 4, 2013

Two years too late describes how best I feel about this sequel to the highly enjoyable 2009 reboot of the adventures of Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock. Two years earlier and my expectations would not have been as demanding. Two years ago another exploration of these characters before they started their 5 year mission would have been something agreeable.

But 4 years later, my expectations were higher. A highly polished script and a brand new adventure to go boldly once again were want I wanted – and I suspect a lot of the fans of the Trek franchise before this reboot started. Instead we get a perfectly serviceable summer blockbuster that the general movie going public and critics have found enjoyable.

As a summer blockbuster movie I found it enjoyable. And instantly disposable.

As a long time Trek from when the original series aired I found this a mediocre Trek movie that recycled elements from the original series and the second movie. The recycling lacks the impact from the original iteration because the events that take place in The Wrath of Khan work so well because of what transpired in the original Space Seed TV episode. Khan works as a threat in the movie because he and the crew of the Enterprise have a shared history. In STID, Khan means nothing to these new versions of Kirk and Spock et al. So their moments together have no way of carrying the same dramatic tension.

I remain hopeful the next movie will finally deliver some new and original ideas. The cast is fantastic and they really deserve their own adventure.

It’s time for them to see what’s out there.

1114. Disinvited - July 4, 2013

Ummm…To whoever is currently in charge of this site’s filter catch and release:

Thanks for attending to it. I’d ask you to delete the duplicates at your discretion, but I doubt the price of having all the numbers jumble up is worth going to the trouble so I’m just going with appreciation for your attention, again thanks.

1115. Mad Mann - July 4, 2013

“Everything comes to he who waits, and I have waited so very long for this moment!”

For all the bitching we do about the current Trek movies, I am just so jazzed that new Star Trek is being produced.

1116. Curious Cadet - July 4, 2013

@1091. IDIC,
“I have noticed that a pattern has emerged.”

You forgot ‘The Savior’: “It is I, your righteous and beloved leader, heed not the heretic and his blasphemous lies, for he seeks to lead you down the path of hellfire and damnation, and only I can expose him for the true demon he really is and lead you to salvation.”

1117. Other Guy - July 4, 2013

Happy 4th of July, Everyone!

1118. Phil - July 4, 2013

For all the clucking about STID …’ahem’ underperforming…I present The Lone Ranger. Now THAT’S a disaster. Who the hell do you spend 215MM making a western, anyway?

1119. Mel - July 4, 2013

The Lone Ranger may still be a financial success. Bad reviews don’t necessary mean, that a movie will be unsuccessful. The best example for this are the Transformers movies.

1120. Disinvited - July 4, 2013

# 1071. Curious Cadet – July 3, 2013

“Not only that, but if you look at the TMP trailer YouTube link I posted above, you’ll see a lot of those people might not have gone to see it had the true nature of that film been known beforehand.” – CC

If I recall correctly Wise was under Paramount’s blind bid gun and practically splicing TMP together on the way to its December 1979 Smithsonian premier; so, it is a bit of misrepresentation to make it appear as if anyone (Surely not the marketing department nor, perhaps, even Wise himself) had a clue as to exactly how it would appear on screen. It is true Wise was more than willing to revisit, re-edit it, and recook undone sfx for the Director’s Cut DVD which is probably good enough to conclude that possibly no one was completely satisfied with its theatrical run cut.

Marketing had to put that trailer together with basically whole lot of nothing. And I would be remiss if I did not remind you that 2009′s trailers won prestigious awards so I doubt it’s much of a hit to bemoan how essential a great trailer was/is to a Trek film’s success.

Besides, TMP didn’t make $175 million all on opening night and bad word of mouth will trump a great trailer every time. It was an industry rule of thumb at the time that “no movie makes big bucks at the end of December” but TMP broke that rule and new ground in so doing. So there was more to its success than the credit you and others are giving it.

I think the critic Roger Ebert in giving it 3 out of 4 stars said it best:

“Such reservations aside, STAR TREK: THE MOTION PICTURE is probably about as good as we could have expected. It lacks the dazzling brilliance and originality of 2001 (which was an extraordinary one-of-a-kind film). But on its own terms it’s a very well-made piece of work, with an interesting premise. The alien spaceship turns out to come from a mechanical or computer civilization, one produced by artificial intelligence and yet poignantly “human” in the sense that it has come all this way to seek out the secrets of its own origins, as we might.

There is, I suspect, a sense in which you can be too sophisticated for your own good when you see a movie like this. Some of the early reviews seemed pretty blase, as if the critics didn’t allow themselves to relish the film before racing out to pigeonhole it. My inclination, as I slid down in my seat and the stereo sound surrounded me, was to relax and let the movie give me a good time. I did and it did.”

And that’s exactly how I recall watching and enjoying it back then too.

1121. Curious Cadet - July 4, 2013

@1119 Mel,

While you are absolutely correct, TLR only earned 9.7 million including Tuesday night previews. Unless that changes substantially, it’s going the way of John Carter.

1122. dmduncan - July 4, 2013

1107. Aurore – July 4, 2013

Nicely said.

1123. Curious Cadet - July 4, 2013

@1118. Phil,
“Who the hell do you spend 215MM making a western, anyway?”

Yeah, 163 million is much more reasonable. Just ask Bob Orci.

FWIW, estimates are as high as 250 million for TLR.

1124. Disinvited - July 4, 2013

Happy Fourth my fellow citizens.

Here’s something fun to ponder: What Trek episodes/movies would be appropriate to revisit in celebration of our holiday?

OMEGA GLORY comes to mind. I think THE VOYAGE HOME for the movie if only for the antique (Benjamin Franklin?) spectacles getting hocked in the U.S.

Anyway state your preference and “patriotic” reason.

1125. orionette - July 4, 2013

How about doing a movie about “The Furies”?

1126. Curious Cadet - July 4, 2013

@1120 Disinvited,
“So there was more to its success than the credit you and others are giving it.”

Without a doubt. However, as I said, I don’t recall ever seeing any advertising for TMP. That trailer notwithstanding, Star Wars had the nation in a fever pitch, and I do recall being very excited for TMP. I think I expected as much from TMP as I had been given with Star Wars. It obviously did not deliver. And I don’t think I was alone.

I think you also can’t discount the turnout of Star Trek fans, who were going to see it regardless of the word of mouth. And after 10 years without any real Trek, I wonder if the fans alone could account for the entire box office? No, that’s probably unrealistic. Unfortunately because nothing like Rotten Tomatoes or Metacritic existed at the time, there’s no way to accurately compare the reviews it received then, with reviews received on Trek films today, and what the paying audiences actually thought after seeing it.

I also wonder about the other choices at the box office. TMP was the first big action/adventure movie since Summer, then followed a week later by 1941 (and we all know how well that did), and the Jerk. Mid-December offered the incredibly well received Kramer vs. Kramer, followed by the poor showing of the Black Hole. So one could say that TMP was the lesser of the evils for a public eager to get out of their homes during the holidays.

BTW, I’m not sure that the quote about opening a movie at the end of December applies here — TMP opened Dec 7th, and Superman opened December 15th the previous year, as did King Kong in ’77. That doesn’t really seem like a smart move if that’s a bad time of year to make big bucks, nor does it seem like TMP broke particularly new ground. In fact, the Hindenberg, Towering Inferno, the Man with the Golden Gun, Godfather II and Flash Gordon all opened in early December. If anything I would say the studios traditionally thought that was a great time to make big bucks.

1127. Disinvited - July 4, 2013

#1118. Phil,

Let me take you back to those thrilling days of yesteryear (1979):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heaven%27s_Gate_%28film%29#Production

on how to literally “blow” millions on a Western.

And for the record, I like HEAVEN’S GATE; I’m just at a loss to tell you exactly which version of it I saw, but I enjoyed it.

1128. William Bradley - July 4, 2013

It would be four Trek movies for Chris Pine.

He said in the interview I watched that he had two more Treks on his deal after the current one was released.

>1088. Curious Cadet – July 3, 2013
@1079. Photon70,

But I’m not sure about the Chris Pine deal … Weren’t they all signed for a 3 picture deal? If so, and Chris said he was signed for two more, that’s 5. Is it possible they made him make that deal in exchange for Jack Ryan?

1129. Disinvited - July 4, 2013

#1125. Curious Cadet – July 4, 2013

I stand corrected on the axiom. I think I confused TMP breaking SUPE’s record with actually opening in Supe’s time frame which I acknowledge you have correctly identified. So, I’ll amend to: TMP earned more money in December than it was thought possible by breaking through to set a record new ceiling and my apologies for mixing that up.

1130. Phil - July 4, 2013

@1126. Hmmm…. 50% of the budget for coke. That might explain a few things. Or a lot of things…..

1131. Phil - July 4, 2013

@1119…check out the box office on TLR. Transformers was bubble gum for the eyes, and people bought a lot of that bubble gum. TLR is tanking faster then you can say John Carter.

@1127. There is some confusion about when that interview occurred, and if CP was thinking STID hadn’t been released yet. I’m under the impression that the cast has a three picture option, and that no one has renegotiated. Bad Robot has first look rights for the next movie, I’d hope that if there was any animosity about the back end stuff that it would not come into play in regards to making a decision about the next movie.

1132. Disinvited - July 4, 2013

#1125. Curious Cadet – July 4, 2013

A little waybacking and I think I have straightened out my cobwebs and the axiom for which I was groping:

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=BSNlAAAAIBAJ&sjid=SogNAAAAIBAJ&pg=3188,1010154

“Star Trek was released Dec. 7-9 traditionally a slow time for movie business.” – STAR TREK SETS BOX OFFICE RECORD, “Edmonton Journal”, Dec 12, 1979

Article also confirms your deduction that the end of Dec was/is a “lush” period.

1133. Keachick - rose pinenut - July 4, 2013

This link was just posted on the IMDb STID message board and it may help to explain how Kirk, despite dying from radiation poisoning, was brought back to life, via Khan’s “magic blood” – in his case.

I had no idea, until just now, that there has been research going on for quite a while into how to combat the lethal affects of being irradiated, but I figured there would have to be some research into the topic, given how many people work in environments where the chances of exposure is higher than for the majority of the population.

http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0014486

Add another 200-300 years of medical research/technology (Star Trek universe style), along with a bit of that “magic blood”, Kirk being revived does not seem so outlandishly crazy – just a long shot which Dr McCoy vigorously worked at bringing about.

1134. Nemesis4909 - July 4, 2013

@boborci

Sorry, you must be getting tired of me going on about this but I’m curious as to the answer to my questions/points.

Would you be able to supple some answer? I see you’ve been active so I’m fanboying slightly.

Questions are under post 792

Craig McKenzie

1135. Killamarshtrek - July 4, 2013

Guys,

If anyone’s still feeling a little let down by STID (I, like most fans, had my issues with Khan canon (Khanon?) & TWOK mash up), go see Man of Steel, it’ll make you feel a whole lot better! It is just a CGIfest devoid of any life, feeling or character. Even Spock shows more emotion during STID than the entire cast of MOS! I just wish it had come out before STID!

1136. Khan 2.0 - July 4, 2013

@1134

LOL@’Khanon’

i too much prefered STID over MOS. MOS was good (well the first half-three quarters) but i was on th eedge of my seat all through STID

1137. MJ (The Original). - July 4, 2013

@1108 / CC: “I’m stunned at how bad the reviews are for The Lone Ranger. RT gives it an agregate 23.

Oh CC, so now we are using Rotten Tomatoes to establish critical acceptance for movies. Good. Then let me please refer to what you said earlier:

““But I look forward to the day that a Star Trek film is not only the highest grossing, and most profitable, but the most well received, compelling, and greatest critical success of the franchise.”

Cool, so let’s look at the review ratings numbers from the source that you yourself have now shown you trust to judge movies on, Rotten Tomatoes, to see what the 3 highest rated TOS-dervived Star Trek movies are of all time:

1. STID = 92
2. Star Trek 2009 = 91
3. Wrath of Khan = 87

Great, so using your own preferred source her for critical ratings of movies — you yourself trust this source, as you reference it in your posts — we see that STID is the highest rated Trek movie.

So, the day you have been waiting for has actually arrived, CC — this is the greatest critical success of the franchise according to the information that you yourself rely on to assess critical reaction to movies.

Well done, CC. You’ve proven my point for me. Much appreciated!

1138. Marja - July 4, 2013

1091, IDIC, LOL at the TrekMovie posters “dossier” :)

Let us not forget the posters who snap, “CASE CLOSED” at the end of their post in an argument…

… and the Flouncers, who say “I’m done here” and then come back repeatedly to argue with their opponent poster, who also either Flounces or Closes the Case …

only to continue ad infinitum.

The ones I really try to skip are the Haters and Trolls … but I guess everyone has a different opinion as to who those might be too, at any given time.

Happy Independence Day to an independent-minded bunch! :)

1139. Ahmed - July 4, 2013

@ 1109. boborci

“what you and others fail to understand is that what we pitched Paramount both times is what ended up on screen. in this case, you cannot make a demon of paramount for using evil genius to architect money making formula. there is no such formua. that is a conspiracy theory, if ever heard one.”

I always thought that you are a believer in conspiracy theories :)

In my view, not saying many agree with that view but some are, STID lack any new ideas or even old interesting ideas. It is just a typical summer movie that leave no lasting effect, unlike ST2009. I think that what Blomkamp was talking about in the interview.

STID did made tons of money, mostly abroad, so it is a successful movie if we are looking at it financially. But it just wasn’t as good as we hopped it to be, specially after you guys took 4 years to do it.

I just hope that you guys will bring a more coherent & interesting story for the 3rd one. No more revenge or huge black ship again, please. We seen that TWICE already.

1140. MJ (The Original). - July 4, 2013

@1100 / Disinvited: “I’m pretty sure CC means in ancillary air rights and various home video releases to this day. NEMESIS, much as I’d rather it weren’t, is still part of Paramount’s Trek revenue generation and by now surely has turned a meager profit in that respect and any more revenue from it is now gravy. Much as the currently in print Blu-rays of the series ENTERPRISE surely are?”

First, no I don’t think CC was going there. The context of DVD/Blu-Ray and other sales was never brought up in discussion.

However, even if that was the case, the numbers still don’t add up. Consider that about 50% of the gross receipts of a movie go back to the studios, and you end up with a “real” estimate for the box office of Nemesis of only $34M, which means, in real terms, that Nemesis lost an astounding $60M dollars.

Now, if using the rule of thumb, that, after expenses, the percentage of gross DVD/Blu-ray sales is 40% of the sale price — let’s assume that is $10 per disk — that means that they would have had to sell 6 million discs — which is a ridiculously high number for a bad star trek movie.

For comparisons sake, ST 2009 sold 7 million disks, and made $375M in worldwide box office. That equates to $70M of dick revenue — which shows that 19% of the movies gross was the figure for disk revenue. So when you take 19% x $67M (worldwide gross for Nemesis), you get a rough estimate of perhaps $13M in disk sales.

So if you add this estimate of $13M in disk sales to Nemesis’s $60M loss, you are still in the hole by $47M.

That would mean that additional revenue from TV deals an online download sales would have to be greater than $47M — there is no way that these additional revenue sources could come to even half that amount.

Star Trek Nemesis lost money, big time. And it is singularly the only movie in ST history to lose money, thank goodness.

So CC shouldn’t be throwing around untruths like this doosie.

1141. MJ (The Original). - July 4, 2013

Ahmed to Orci: “I always thought that you are a believer in conspiracy theories :)”

Ahmed, I though that response from Bob was ironically hilarious as well. LOL

1142. Ahmed - July 4, 2013

@MJ

“Ahmed, I though that response from Bob was ironically hilarious as well. LOL”

lol, yep.

1143. Marja - July 4, 2013

1134 Killamarsh, I couldn’t agree more.

Tired of all the CGI fests with little character development (MOS developed only Superman, and they did a good job of that, thus I liked the first 45-60 minutes of it). And, lo, the violence! OMG.

For all its plot holes and the unfortunate scream and the silly choice of villain name, STiD had great character development, a plot reflective of today’s events and the evil that fearful men do, and great moments of true emotion. The main reason I go to movies is to see acting, to watch the choices actors and directors make, to listen to how the scoring affects the moments on screen. Oh, and if it’s Star Trek, to see beloved characters interacting like family. The first time through, even though I’d read a complete spoiler of it, STiD held me rapt – I laughed, I cried. Yes, even at the “dreaded” part.

Though they had to shoehorn the emotions and philosophy into a relentlessly action-packed film, Orci and Kurtzman deserve lots of credit.

Although the wait of 4 years was wayyy too long, and I had hoped they put two movies in the can, I was still glad to see it, and will attend any future IMAX screening at my local museum (since – snif! – STiD is no longer showing at the local cineplex).

I hope we’ll get another in 2016 … (crossing fingers)

1144. Marja - July 4, 2013

Though I MUST agree with Ahmed, PLEASE no giant black ships with incredible firepower that could blow our little Enterprise to smithereens :(

And PLEASE no Villain-capital-V with an axe to grind.

1145. Disinvited - July 4, 2013

#1136. MJ (The Original). – July 4, 2013

Have to applaud your magnificent touche to CC. Congrats.

And I like to remind those that rely on Rotten Tomatoes that they freely admit their methods are not mathematically rigorous nor do they submit their methods to peer review, i.e. they don’t rely on the scientific method nor do any of the numbers they generate represent any kind of science. The closest I’d give them credit in any sort of technical expertise is engineering: social engineering.

Also, even if they were mathematically accurate in some meaningful way the bulk of the Trek films were made before their existence and they provide no reinvestment from their revenues collected to research archives so that STID’s 92 would have any meaning against the bulk of that which came before.

1146. Photon70 - July 4, 2013

@ 1138. Ahmed – July 4, 2013

Three times in a row counting Nemesis!

Must be a special on for black paint.

1147. Photon70 - July 4, 2013

@ 1145. Photon70 – July 4, 2013

Curious to see that despite starting with a bang, FF6 is now only $13m ahead of STiD.

It went from No 6 to No 8 at the North American box office last weekend.

STiD has stayed at No 9 for 2 weeks.

Dare I say it, FF6 could slip below STiD this weekend!?

Whatever the merits or lack of them for STiD, that we’ve all debated ad nauseum, I’m glad STiD didn’t go the way of ST5 or Nemesis.

When the first Friday took just $21.6m, there were even websites proclaiming STiD could end up in the $50-$60m range on the opening weekend.

That the movie found an audience and continues to build on the box office it has to date, makes me, as a Star Trek fan, very happy.

If the 1st was a reboot, and the 2nd was a nod to Trek past, then please, let the 3rd be a new adventure set in the 1st 5 year mission.

With a cumulative total that should sit comfortably above $850m, this surely proves the financial strength of nu-Trek and should give the team confidence in widening the scope of the next film to include sci-fi/romance.

It’s time to live up to the Captain’s Oath.

1148. Disinvited - July 4, 2013

#1139. MJ (The Original). – July 4, 2013

Allow me to remind you:

In 2003 Paramount released NEMESIS on VHS and DVD.

In 2005 Paramount released NEMESIS on DVD again. I believe it was a special 2-disc set.

In 2010 Paramount released NEMESIS on DVD yet again.

And as of this year NEMESIS gets a Blu-Ray with material not contained on any other release.

Now by what the NYT says, your DVD numbers are off:

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/08/17/us/action-hungry-dvd-fans-sway-hollywood.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm

”Sales are also more profitable. A studio might make about $12 profit from the $20 price of a DVD, said Scott Hettrick, editor of the trade journal Video Business. In contrast, studios make about $5 on the sale of a $10 theater ticket and may make little or nothing from a video rental.

”The Hours,” a literary film that was nominated for nine Academy Awards and earned $41 million at the box office, has sold 350,000 DVD’s since its release in May. In contrast, several action films or slapstick comedies with similar or lower box-office receipts — including ”Tears of the Sun” and ”Star Trek: Nemesis” — at least tripled those sales in roughly the same period.” – DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK, NYT, August 17, 2003

1149. MJ (The Original). - July 4, 2013

#1147.

Hmm. Well, let’s take a more rosy scenario then using some of what you mention here. Let’s assume, against all odds, that DVD and Blu-ray sales of Nemesis somehow in the past 10 years got to approximately 40% of the value of ST 2009 (the bestselling Trek disk of all time) disks and Blu-ray sales from the last 4 years (which total 7 million). So let’s incredibly optimistically say 3 Million Nemesis disks have been sold (and will include all 10 people who bought the VHS as well..lol). Do I believe that? — no way — but let’s use that as a base scenario to give this the benefit of the doubt.

Now though, you are trying to get me to accept your quote that we should credit costs of the Nemesis Discs at $12 back to the studios based on a typical sale price of $20 — well that is ridiculous, as the Nemesis DVD’s for years have been selling in the $12 to $15 range (and even the Blu-Ray sells for only $18 on average). So I think my $10 back to the studio per disk is more than optimistic, and equates with numerous internet references with have figures that range from 40% to 60% of the value of DVD sale price to studio profit.

So, assuming the ridiculously optimistic figure of 3 Million Nemesis discs sold, with the more than generous $10 per disc assumed for studio profit, we get a total of $30M. So if you add that to the total estimate I provided of a $60M loss for Nemesis, you are in the hole still by $30M. Perhaps online downloads and licensing may have made up $10M here, but I doubt much more than that — but even if we assumed a preposterous $20M, then Nemesis is still in the hole by $10M.

And again, we have to make all of these unbelievably rosy assumptions to get Nemesis somewhat close to breaking even. I would tend to lean to the case that Nemesis is still at least $25M – $30M in the hole, as the most likely case.

Anecdotally, I suspect many Trek fans are like me. I waited many years before I added Nemesis to my collection — I finally got the Blu-ray recently for $16 at Wal-Mart, and when I watched it, it reconfirmed to me what the movie is so lame. So, I really think that 3 million, even with some double-dipping, is incredibly optimistic. But, by all means, if you can find somewhere a reference that provides the actual number of Nemesis discs (and including the incredibly successful VHS edition ;-)) sold to date, that would be great, as then we could put this matter to rest once and for all.

But thanks for this interesting discussion, Disinvited. I comment you for having a real discussion with me on this. It’s a shame that CC is never confident enough in his/her own opinions to defend his/her views here when I legitimately challenge some of his/her facts. But, you always seem to be around at the right time to debate CC’s posts with me on his/her behalf. Some might find this a tad suspicious, but not me. CC has a good friend in you.

1150. MJ (The Original). - July 4, 2013

@1137 “1091, IDIC, LOL at the TrekMovie posters “dossier” :) Let us not forget the posters who snap, “CASE CLOSED” at the end of their post in an argument…”

So people get a free pass when just making shit up — I don’t recall Gene R. ever saying that was part of IDIC.

I believe in IDIC, but would prefer:

“IDIC, but verify”

Treat everyone as you would like to be treated and accept all differences, but don’t be afraid to challenge people who fabricate facts and make stuff up.

Remember, for every “case closed”, there is some clown here saying stuff like the actors are not going to make themselves available for the next movie, or telling someone they are “wrong” when that persons calculation of $445M deviates from their own “expert” calculation” of $439.7M.

If you make up shit, twist the truth, or conjecture ridiculous scenarios, I will be here to check your facts.

1151. MJ (The Original). - July 4, 2013

@1144 “Also, even if they were mathematically accurate in some meaningful way the bulk of the Trek films were made before their existence and they provide no reinvestment from their revenues collected to research archives so that STID’s 92 would have any meaning against the bulk of that which came before.”

ST 2009 versus STID though — both are recent — is in fact a good comparison to make though, even if you don’t believe the older Wrath of Khan rating. And again, STID is rated a point higher than ST2009 on RT. So there you have it.

And again, your buddy were themselves using RT references here as their measure of critical response to a movie.

And I will make an observation here — every time I hear some criticize RT or IMDB or Yahoo Movies here, it is usually because those numbers don’t agree with their personal SUBJECTIVE perception of their own idea of the critical perception of the movie by the public.

These measures aren’t scientific and are not perfect, but I prefer them to the “trust me, I know” alternative posts that we get so much of here from your buddy and others.

1152. DiscoSpock - July 4, 2013

“Curious to see that despite starting with a bang, FF6 is now only $13m ahead of STiD. It went from No 6 to No 8 at the North American box office last weekend. STiD has stayed at No 9 for 2 weeks. Dare I say it, FF6 could slip below STiD this weekend!?”

Ah, hey guy, FF6 has made about $690M worldwide, to STID’s $445M worldwide to date. So you STID beats FF6 cerebration is perhaps a little premature?

Looks like you went the Curious Cadet School for Movie Production Studies. :-))

1153. William Bradley - July 4, 2013

Actually, the original “MJ” was Michael Jackson.

That is all.

Happy ID4*, all!

Heh.

* (ID4-2, that is, of course.)

1154. Adolescent Nightmare - July 4, 2013

Hi boborci

Thanks for keeping us updated on Star Trek 3. What are you working on now?

1155. Disinvited - July 4, 2013

#1148. MJ (The Original). – July 4, 2013

HAH! Here I thought you had seen us going at it in these very forums over his “definitions” of death and resurrection.

From THR reporting from around May 29th of 2003:

“The Hollywood Reporter reports today that the debut of
STAR TREK NEMESIS on DVD last week brought
Paramount Home Entertainment the #1 spot in overall
DVD sales for the period. Selling 1.3 million copies, the
Nielsen VideoScan’s First Alert DVD sales chart reports that
NEMESIS bested ANTWONE FISHER for the top position.
That film, directed by Hollywood heavyweight Denzel
Washington, surprised industry insiders by selling over one
million units in its debut.

The tenth TREK film made $10.6 million in video rental
sales in its first five days, according to Video Store maga-
zine data published by the trade. The number one rental
spot was taken by ANALYZE THAT, a comedy sequel star-
ring Billy Crystal and Robert de Niro, which made $13.6 in
the period. NEMESIS was “clearly expected to perform well
on DVD because of its genre, brand recognition and cult
following” according to HR.”

Here’s its initial #1 chart placement on May 29th:

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/topic/127566-antwone-fisher-and-nemesis-sales/

Here you can see it was still topping the DVD sales charts as of June 9, 2003 :

http://www.seattlepi.com/ae/movies/article/New-on-video-this-week-1116693.php

I think you’ve made it clear you don’t need the following but for completeness sake the LA TIMES reported 2003′s NEMESIS DVD was released with a retail price of $30.

1156. Disinvited - July 4, 2013

#1148. MJ (The Original). – July 4, 2013

HAH! Here I thought you had seen us going at it in these very forums over his “definitions” of death and resurrection.

From THR reporting from around May 29th of 2003:

“The Hollywood Reporter reports today that the debut of
STAR TREK NEMESIS on DVD last week brought
Paramount Home Entertainment the #1 spot in overall
DVD sales for the period. Selling 1.3 million copies, the
Nielsen VideoScan’s First Alert DVD sales chart reports that
NEMESIS bested ANTWONE FISHER for the top position.
That film, directed by Hollywood heavyweight Denzel
Washington, surprised industry insiders by selling over one
million units in its debut.

The tenth TREK film made $10.6 million in video rental
sales in its first five days, according to Video Store maga-
zine data published by the trade. The number one rental
spot was taken by AN/-\LYZE THAT, a comedy sequel star-
ring Billy Crystal and Robert de Niro, which made $13.6 in
the period. NEMESIS was “clearly expected to perform well
on DVD because of its genre, brand recognition and cult
following” according to HR.”

Here’s its initial #1 chart placement on May 29th:

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/topic/127566-antwone-fisher-and-nemesis-sales/

Here you can see it was still topping the DVD sales charts as of June 9, 2003 :

http://www.seattlepi.com/ae/movies/article/New-on-video-this-week-1116693.php

I think you’ve made it clear you don’t need the following but for completeness sake the LA TIMES reported 2003′s NEMESIS DVD was released with a retail price of $30.

1157. carbon_unit - July 4, 2013

ok. i’ll do the .. thing. boborci

first. why do you come here? it’s so dense.

second. great movie. to be better understood, after some time. bold choice.

third. can’t wait for number three.

can you say if there’s a fourth? probably not.

1158. K-7 - July 4, 2013

Hi Disinvited,

I remember when the Nemesis DVD release first came out. I bought it myself, because some Trek friends of mine told me it was so bad that I skipped in in the theater. I think the DVD sales were an anomaly, as many fans who skipped the release at the theater, got the DVD. You might clear this up by providing the total DVD sales to date, rather than just a couple reports right when it came out? I suspect that the sales have been lackluster since those first few months when it was a novelty for casual fans who skipped it at the movies.

Also, not to rain on your parade further, but the studios only get on average about 25% of video rental gross reported revenues. So that $10M you mentioned, is really more like $2.5M.

1159. K-7 - July 4, 2013

Hey, also….

I just looked up Star Trek 2009′s DVD sales early on. ST 2009 sold a whopping 50% of its total sales to date in its first week, for 3.5 million discs:
http://the-numbers.com/movies/2009/TRK11-DVD.php

So, if you apply this to Nemesis, then total sales from Nemesis for the first 4 years would be double 1.3 million = 2.6 Million, which is 1/3 the amount of ST2009 disc sales. Then, if you look at ST09 at the 4 year point, it it selling about 240,000 discs per year, so we multiply this by 1/3, and we can get a steady state factor for years 5 through 10 of Nemesis sales of 80,000 per year. So, the total estimate for Nemesis sales = (2.6M + 6 x 80K) x $10 = $31M.

Coincidentally, this $31M figure nearly matches the $30M “most optimistic” figure that MJ used in estimating Nemesis disc sales to ST 2009 disc sales.

So I think MJ pretty much nailed it here.

1160. Admiral Archer's Prize Beagle - July 4, 2013

LeVar Burton – I’ve Got a Problem With New ‘Star Trek’ Flick:
“At the end of the movie, I really care about what happens to the characters … but I’m pretty much missing Gene Roddenberry in J.J.’s interpretation … and at the end of the day, that’s just not OK for me.”

Levar,

Where in the hell was Gene Roddenberry in Nemesis — your last movie???

I’ve got a problem with your last Star Trek movie, Levar!

Hypocrite!

1161. Baby - July 5, 2013

1136. MJ (The Original). – July 4, 2013
@1108 / CC: “I’m stunned at how bad the reviews are for The Lone Ranger. RT gives it an agregate 23.

Oh CC, so now we are using Rotten Tomatoes to establish critical acceptance for movies. Good. Then let me please refer to what you said earlier:

““But I look forward to the day that a Star Trek film is not only the highest grossing, and most profitable, but the most well received, compelling, and greatest critical success of the franchise.”

Cool, so let’s look at the review ratings numbers from the source that you yourself have now shown you trust to judge movies on, Rotten Tomatoes, to see what the 3 highest rated TOS-dervived Star Trek movies are of all time:

1. STID = 92
2. Star Trek 2009 = 91
3. Wrath of Khan = 87

—————————-

Are you sure this are the right scores on RT?

Last I checked this was where the real scores.

STID= 87%

ST09= 95%

WOK=91%

1162. K-7 - July 5, 2013

Hi Baby,

Yea, I noticed that to. It looks like MJ was referencing the “Audience Scores”, not the Tomatoemter review average scores.

Nevertheless, looking at the Audience Scores and Tomatoemeter scores, WOK, Trek 2009 and STID are all in pretty much a statistical dead heat for best Trek movie ever.

So we can all take our pick at to which of the three is the best.

1163. Captain Slow - July 5, 2013

Just to start a new topic, since it’s been reported that the rights to Terminator were sold for about 20 million dollars, how much would the rights to the Star Trek franchise cost? Surely it couldn’t cost that much more, in which case, CBS should just sell the rights to someone who wants to do something with it.

It’s long been a theory of mine that the only reason there hasn’t been a new series is because CBS just doesn’t want to make one. I’m sure it would even be possible to get many of the current cast members for a series. Bad robot should just buy the rights.

1164. Classy M - July 5, 2013

SFX are reporting a concert called ‘Star Trek Into Darkness – Live in Concert’ will be on at London’s Royal Albert Hall.

“Following the recent announcement that the Royal Albert Hall will host the UK premiere of Star Trek: Live In Concert (a celebration of the extraordinary collaboration between JJ Abrams’ 2009 hit film and Michael Giacchino’s score) on May 29 2014, the venue has now announced another Star Trek-related first.

One day later, on May 30, 2014, the Royal Albert Hall will host the UK premiere of Star Trek Into Darkness -– Live in Concert, giving fans old and new a unique chance to experience Abrams’ newest blockbuster film with Giacchino’s score performed live on stage.”

For further information, see the SFX article: http://www.sfx.co.uk/2013/07/05/experience-star-trek-into-darkness-live-in-concert-at-the-royal-albert-hall/

1165. Aurore - July 5, 2013

1122. dmduncan – July 4, 2013
1107. Aurore – July 4, 2013
__________

Thank you, mon ami.

1166. Curious Cadet - July 5, 2013

@1161 Baby,
“Are you sure this are the right scores on RT?”

You are correct. For anyone who cares here are the current ever changing RT aggregate critic’s reviews scores, which is all I’m concerned with, for the entire franchise, in order of best reviewed. I’ve also included the actual number of reviews for each as well, giving an indication of why comparing a film from 1982 — before the internet and RT, to a film made this year is not a valid basis for comparison. I follow this with the current audience ratings and their respective participant count as an indicator of why these cannot be compared effectively, or reliably from one decade to the next, and more importantly why RT themselves don’t include an agragate total incorporating these user numbers.

Perhaps the most important disqualification of any user reviews or ratings prior to RT’s existence, is the fact that some of these reviews, and the user ratings in particular, were written (in some cases decades) after the movie was well out of the box office.

Aggregate Critic’s Reviews / User Ratings
ST09 95 (298 reviews) / 91 (593,885 ratings)
STFC 92 (53 reviews) / 83 (93,423 ratings)
TWOK 91 (45 reviews) / 86 (79,195 ratings)
STID 87 (240 reviews) / 92 (158,823 ratings)
TVH 85 (39 reviews) / 77 (64,854 ratings)
TUC 83 (48 reviews) / 77 (61,211 ratings)
TSFS 78 (40 reviews) / 61 (62,558 ratings)
INS 55 (67 reviews) / 51 (61,392 ratings)
GEN 47 (47 reviews) / 60 (67,753 ratings)
TMP 44 (34 reviews) / 46 (67,744 ratings)
NEM 37 (158 reviews) / 54 (72,754 ratings)
TFF 21 (43 reviews) / 35 (57,056 ratings)

1167. Chain of Command - July 5, 2013

@1160

Levar Burton has said many times that Nemesis was terrible. It’s no secret that most of the TNG actors hated that film.

1168. Curious Cadet - July 5, 2013

@1161 Baby, (MORE)
I had a thought that if I looked at just the ‘Top’ critics review scores on RT, I might get a more normalized picture across the three decades of films, since most of the reviews dating prior to NEM are from the major publications.

However, as you can see, they are equally unbalanced. I suppose if one were to delve into the individual publications, e.g. Time, THR, Variety, et al, one could form some kind of relative review score that would accurately reflect a balanced assessment across all 13 films. But that’s a little beyond the scope of what I’m prepared to do … perhaps someone else on here …

Indeed, looking at only the RT Top Critics, an interesting picture emerges, which I think is far from accurate (or perhaps surprisingly revealing). But it does throw in some more data for comparison to the other numbers and a clearer picture of how RT works, and how it can be used. For instance, I gave more weight in a tie such as FC and TSFS to FC because it has more reviews from which to average it’s score. Also because it made more money and I think was generally better received (though that is completely subjective on my part). However, applying the same logic to the tie between INS and TWOK makes no sense, as I KNOW TWOK was a better received movie and made quite a bit more money. So attempting to compare RTs numbers from 30 years ago doesn’t really seem to work very well, either that or hindsight reviews have vastly improved some of those films.

RT Top Critics

ST09 94 (50 reviews)
TUC 88 (8 reviews)
STFC 86 (14 reviews)
TSFS 86 (7 reviews)
STID 79 (47 reviews)
TVH 75 (8 reviews)
INS 71 (14 reviews)
TWOK 71 (7 reviews)
GEN 64 (11 reviews)
TMP 50 (6 reviews)
NEM 46 (35 reviews)
TFF 0 (8 reviews)

1169. Spock's Bangs - July 5, 2013

1139 “STID did made tons of money, mostly abroad, so it is a successful movie if we are looking at it financially. But it just wasn’t as good as we hopped it to be, specially after you guys took 4 years to do it.”

That last sentence should read, … It just wasn’t as good as “some” hoped it would be…not “we”. I know my Trekkie friends and I loved it!

1170. Red Dead Ryan - July 5, 2013

#1163. Captain Slow.

“Just to start a new topic, since it’s been reported that the rights to Terminator were sold for about 20 million dollars, how much would the rights to the Star Trek franchise cost? Surely it couldn’t cost that much more, in which case, CBS should just sell the rights to someone who wants to do something with it.”

I would imagine that CBS would demand at least $2 billion. It is much bigger and popular than the “Terminator” franchise, which is really made up of four movies, a two-season tv series, a couple of poorly-recieved video games, and a some comic books. “Star Trek”, on the other hand, is made up of six tv series, with over 700 episodes, as well as tons of merchandise. That is all owned by CBS. So I don’t think there is a comparison here.

1171. The Sinfonian - July 5, 2013

@1157 Carbon unit…. C’mon, you already know what he’s going to say to each of those questions. We could almost create an ELSA-like Boborci response program, that would churn out good Boborci answers, but occasionally throw in a JFK or Bilderberger reference, etc. (Frankly, I think it’s all Leon Czolgosz’s fault.) So…. you know he’ll say:
first. why do you come here? ==> “Because, he ain’t afraid of no posts. Postbusters!”
second. great movie. to be better understood, after some time. bold choice. ==> Just remember, his version didn’t use Khan, but a different member of the Kha(i)n Gang. Khan is Lindelof. I think it would have made much more sense as Harald Ericssen, Khan’s other right hand man to Joaquin (and perhaps… lover?).
third. can’t wait for number three. ==> Sooner it gets greenlighted, the sooner he’ll write it.
can you say if there’s a fourth? probably not. ==> He’s said before he’d do Trek until they told him he couldn’t.
.
I think we all need to remember that Bob is a loyalist when it comes to Star Trek. He’s the “us” in the Supreme Court there. However, he just happens to have years of writing and producing experience, so he gets to do it. All we get to do is cheer and/or jeer. :) :(

1172. Disinvited - July 5, 2013

#1163. Captain Slow – July 5, 2013

When, Les put on THE DOME I thought “Oh-oh Les likes horror.” then after thinking of the many ways Horror Trek could be bad I realized at leased it would be something different, new, and its not like there’s something about the genre that inherently prevents it from being written well. TD’s pilot was a mess but the 1st episode was better.

1173. K-7 - July 5, 2013

@1168 Curious Cadet,

But I thought you were making the point that critical response to the movie put STID well below WOK as well? You final data set here completely disproves your own point. In fact, according to your “top critics,” STID was demonstratively more critically appraised than TWOK. And that same data actually tries to make us believe that “Top Critics” liked Insurrection more that TWOK? Huh??? Does anyone really believe this data set???

Having Insurrection being rated higher than TWOK for me completely invalidates all the conclusions you are attempting to draw in post #1168.

So, let’s agree to remove and ignore the Tops Critics ratings, since obviously that is not trustworthy.

So on RT, you have the users who rate, STID #1, you have all reviewers who rate ST09 #1. And then on IMDB, you get the membership rating of STID as #1. In these three measures, none of the original Trek movies get a #1 ranking in any of the three RT measures or on IMDB. Rather, we have a dead heat between ST09 and STID.

So in terms of overall critical response across the internet, its a wash — take your pick between STID and ST09.

1174. Curious Cadet - July 5, 2013

@1173. K-7,
“But I thought you were making the point that critical response to the movie put STID well below WOK as well?”

Never my point.

1175. Disinvited - July 5, 2013

#1172. Disinvited – July 5, 2013

“leased” SHEESH should be “least”

1158. K-7 – July 4, 2013

Hey my problem is I like to find the original source of the information/story and apparently only a very few news publishers and aggregators online thought any NEMESIS retail sales data was worth archiving. It really shocked me when I went to the-numbers.com and they didn’t have any DVD chart data for it. NEMESIS DVDs aren’t THAT old. What’s really fun for me is I have haven’t had the urge to acquire NEMESIS in any format: purchase, rental or loan either [Well, there was one time I saw it dropping below $2.50, I believe, but my support group here helped me through that. ;-)]. But I suppose the same might apply to the aggregators too? ;-)

FWIW I found out then Paramount released NEMESIS on two more alternate video distribution media: VCDs [disc format before DVD that most disc players will still play but not all so do] and UMDs [play on Sony PSPs].

One, thing I’m certain Paramount would be like Sony:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who%27s_the_Boss%3F#DVD_release

and if any NEMESIS video release failed to meet their sales projections, they’d stop publishing it as a stand alone unit.

Another thing that surprised me is according to the reviews Paramount made a near perfect transfer of the film to DVD in its first release in 2003 and used that same file in the 2005 release. I believe one reviewer pointed out that he could see the fingerprints on Riker’s silver gun toward the end of the movie?

For the record: the largest chunk of NEMESIS that I have ever seen was the Spanish version on an OTA Spanish channel and Spanish is not my native tongue.

1176. William Bradley - July 5, 2013

Of course, the real problem with all this “statistical analysis” is that RT etc falsely equates the critical view of the New York Times with various whatevers …

It’s like the other statistical, er, “contribution” of this media era, poll averaging.

>1173. K-7 – July 5, 2013
@1168 Curious Cadet,

1177. Barney Fife - July 5, 2013

Box Office/Home Video/Critic analysis of all 12 Star Trek movies is exciting stuff…but I really hope there will soon be something new to talk about.

1178. MJ (The Original). - July 5, 2013

@1173. K-7,
“But I thought you were making the point that critical response to the movie put STID well below WOK as well?”

@1174. CC,
“Never my point.”

There you go again, CC. That is simply not true, CC. You had earlier said:

““But I look forward to the day that a Star Trek film is not only the highest grossing, and most profitable, but the most well received, compelling, and greatest critical success of the franchise, along with corresponding accolades to acknowledge it to boot.”…

You are lamenting that STID is not the best film in the franchise to date. And the two most generally accepted ST movies to date are WOK and ST 2009. So yes, you inferred this comparison.

And you’ve also caused much confusion here with you first using RT in you post to make points about another movie, and then you yourself later criticizing RT stats? Make up you mind, please???

And please stop being so footloose and fancy-free with the facts.

1179. MJ (The Original). - July 5, 2013

@K-7

“Also, not to rain on your parade further, but the studios only get on average about 25% of video rental gross reported revenues. So that $10M you mentioned, is really more like $2.5M……Coincidentally, this $31M figure nearly matches the $30M “most optimistic” figure that MJ used in estimating Nemesis disc sales to ST 2009 disc sales…..So I think MJ pretty much nailed it here.”

Thanks K-7 for validating my numbers.

Yep, my rough estimate based on our assessments, is that, best case, Nemesis is still in the hole today by $20M.

I will acknowledge that within another decade or two or continued sales, licensing and perhaps new formats emerging, that the movie would eventually end up in the black at some point.

Except that in terms of business success, this is all a moot point. Studios and their stockholders typically have a limited 2-year return on investment window to determine whether a movie is financially successful or not, and by all measures, Nemesis was a major loss for Paramount. There is no getting around this.

So again, CC was being untruthful by making the claim that Nemesis made money. In fact, Nemesis was the only ST movie in history that was a complete failure, financially.

1180. MJ (The Original). - July 5, 2013

@Baby “Are you sure this are the right scores on RT? Last I checked this was where the real scores. STID= 87%, ST09= 95%, WOK=91%”

@K-7 “Yea, I noticed that to. It looks like MJ was referencing the “Audience Scores”, not the Tomatoemter review average scores.”

Guys, yes, I used the Audience Scores, as the Reviewer Scores on RT are unreliable, as even CC admits, even though CC was the one to lead us all into the RT discussion morass with his/her using RT info to validate their Lone Ranger conclusions.

And the Audience Scores track and “self-validate” with the IMDB User Scores and the Yahoo Movies User Review scores — all three of these agree that STID and Trek 2009 are rated the highest of all Trek movies, with the race between these movies too close to call….a tie.

1181. Dave H - July 5, 2013

MJ and Phil,

Thank God someone is finally providing a counterpoint to all the malcontented malaise posts on Trek Into Darkness from Curious Cadet of late.

Keep fighting the good fight! Thanks!

1182. Disinvited - July 5, 2013

This isn’t much from the UK sales:

http://www.concatenation.org/vidrev/vid04.html

But I found it amusing the aggregator impugned against the fact that the BARB numbers forced the NEMESIS DVD to make it to the SF Top 10 DVD chart for 2004 by blaming it on the “power” of trekkies and absolving trekkers.

1183. Phil - July 5, 2013

Amazon.com is doing a video Q & A with Orci and Kurtzman. The link is on the Star Trek Facebook page.

1184. Other Guy - July 5, 2013

I take back one of my science criticisms about STiD.

I said that the E appeared way too high up to be encountering re-entry atmospheric frictions on their crash decent toward the Earth. But this YouTube clip shows otherwise.

For those interested look at this clip at 26 minutes and 15 seconds.

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

It looks to me like the STiD fx team got the height correct, visually.

However, I remain skeptical that the E would survive a direct 90 degree crash into the atmosphere at 250 kilometers an hour as Sulu had stated a bit earlier. But who knows what materials the E’s hull could be made of anyhow, or what other efforts the crew were making to slow the ship. So, not bad on that point either.

Yes, STiD still has me thinking.

1185. Curious Cadet - July 5, 2013

This is fun. This time I’ve grouped all the professional critics reviews. These are the only critical reviews that count as far as I’m concerned, and what most people mean by “critical review”.

Looking at these scores, it quickly becomes clear why Rotten Tomatoes cannot be used to realistically rate any movies before Nemesis. How can you compare an aggregate rating of 298 reviews for ST09 with and aggregate rating of 34 reviews for TMP? You can’t. Apples and oranges. That’s why these reviews don’t matter prior to Nemesis, because Rotten Tomatoes didn’t exist and some of these reviews were written after the film was decades out of the box office. The Top Critics reviews are even more skewed since there are so few for the earlier films.

Metacritic, is arguably the most respected of the aggregate online ratings sites, and their ranking is generally in line with most. However, earlier than Nemesis they too are aggregating half the reviews of the newer films. It’s simply not reliable.

But no matter how you slice it, with relatively similar number of reviews, ST09 is the critical favorite over STID.

RT — All Professional Critic’s Reviews
ST09 95 (298 reviews)
STFC 92 (53 reviews)
TWOK 91 (45 reviews)
STID 87 (240 reviews)
TVH 85 (39 reviews)
TUC 83 (48 reviews)
TSFS 78 (40 reviews)
INS 55 (67 reviews)
GEN 47 (47 reviews)
TMP 44 (34 reviews)
NEM 37 (158 reviews)
TFF 21 (43 reviews)

RT — Top Professional Critics
ST09 94 (50 reviews)
TUC 88 (8 reviews)
STFC 86 (14 reviews)
TSFS 86 (7 reviews)
STID 79 (47 reviews)
TVH 75 (8 reviews)
INS 71 (14 reviews)
TWOK 71 (7 reviews)
GEN 64 (11 reviews)
TMP 50 (6 reviews)
NEM 46 (35 reviews)
TFF 0 (8 reviews)

Metacritic — Top Professional Critics
ST09 83 (37 reviews)
STID 72 (43 reviews)
STFC 71 (18 reviews)
TWOK 70 (9 reviews)
TVH 67 (10 reviews)
TUC 65 (18 reviews)
INS 64 (19 reviews)
GEN 55 (22 reviews)
TSFS 55 (10 reviews)
NEM 51 (29 reviews)
TMP 48 (10 reviews)
TFF 43 (16 reviews)

1186. Curious Cadet - July 5, 2013

Now for the User ratings. These are the least reliable and unimportant, since they are made up of a random sampling of various audiences who may or may not have even seen the film. In fact, one freelance journalist was banned from RT after lying about seeing TDKR and reviewing it before it opened, so imagine what anonymous internet users might do. Studios have even been known to pay individuals to promote a film on message boards and vote in the positive, using various sockpuppets for multiple votes and posts — unlike professional critics who if nothing else must be held to task for their criticism.

But assuming that anonymous people on the internet have the best of intentions, comparisons are made invalid by the disparity of users voting between films. Again how can you compare an aggregate rating for two films when ST09 has well over half a million votes, and STID barely has 150,000? Again, you can’t. For further proof, Meta critic has far fewer users than RT or IMDB and the rankings are way outside any of those seen elsewhere, demonstrating the power and influence of individual votes in small samples, and emphasizing the importance of a large and relatively similar sample size.

It’s even worse because for the older films, the user ratings are decades after the fact, taken out of the time period where they were relevant. How can a person reliably rate a film made in 1979, if they didn’t see it until 2013? Apples and oranges. They can’t. Which is why it’s impossible to reliably compare the movie ratings prior to Nemesis in general, before these sites even existed.

RT — User Ratings
STID 92 (158,823 ratings)
ST09 91 (593,885 ratings)
TWOK 86 (79,195 ratings)
STFC 83 (93,423 ratings)
TVH 77 (64,854 ratings)
TUC 77 (61,211 ratings)
TSFS 61 (62,558 ratings)
GEN 60 (67,753 ratings)
NEM 54 (72,754 ratings)
INS 51 (61,392 ratings)
TMP 46 (67,744 ratings)
TFF 35 (57,056 ratings)

IMDB — User Ratings
STID 8.2 (120,554)
ST09 8.0 (328,162)
TWOK 7.7 (64,403)
STFC 7.5 (73,182)
TVH 7.2 (42,058)
TUC 7.1 (38,974)
GEN 6.5 (42,743)
TSFS 6.5 (40,153)
TMP 6.3 (42,808)
INS 6.3 (40,652)
NEM 6.3 (42,073)
TFF 5.2 (30,216)

Metacritic — User Ratings
TUC 8.6 (5 users)
STFC 8.3 (48 users)
ST09 8.0 (1043 users)
STID 8.0 (829 users)
TWOK 7.9 (9 users)
TVH 7.7 (7 users)
TMP 7.1 (1 user)
TSFS 6.9 (7 users)
NEM 5.8 (75 users)
INS 5.8 (25 users)
GEN 5.7 (6 users)
TFF 5.6 (5 users)

1187. Disco Spock - July 5, 2013

For what it’s worth, when I want to see a movie, the User Reviews such as those posted by Curious Cadet, more often than not, align much more closely with my opinion, and the opinions of my friends and family, then the supposedly expert critics.

There are exceptions, but many critics are artsy fartsy cynical and unsentimental types who are more interested in saying clever things and getting notoriety than giving honest opinions of movies that track with what the public would like. And the have a “gang up” mentality, where they try to shut down certain movies like John Carter with their unearned power.

I find IMDB to be the most accurate of these user reviews — because you need a paid account to vote there, you eliminate duplication and gaming of the system by certain fan groups. I’ll take IMDB rating any day compared to the untrustworthy RT review Tomatoemeter.

1188. Disco Spock - July 5, 2013

Also, on a simple movie rating poll, a sample size of 2 million can easily be compared to a sample size of 150,000, provided both samples are based on ubiquitous public access to the polls. The 2 million sample would have a slightly smaller margin of error, but not by much, since both are very robust public sample sized.

So that is false to say that you can’t directly compare these two samples — both samples have a very robust number of data points.

1189. David H - July 5, 2013

Curios Cadet, Dicso Spock,

In reading both of your posts in regards to RT critics ratings versus IMDB user ratings, I did an experiment. I rated my top 12 Trek movies here, and then compared them directly to IMDB User Ratings and RT Top Critics.

IMDB Rating—MY Rating—RT Top Critics
1. STID ————- 1 ————– 5
2. ST09 ———— 2 ————– 1
3. TWOK ———- 3 ————– 8
4. STFC ———– 4————— 3
5. TVH ————– 5————– 6
6. TUC ————– 8————– 2
7. GEN————– 9————– 9
8. TSFS ———— 6 ————- 4
9. TMP ————– 7————- 10
10. INS ————- 10———— 7
11. NEM ———– 11———— 11
12. TFF ————-12———— 12

The results here are interesting. Similar to what Disco Spock was saying above, my own ratings track pretty close to the IMDB ratings, and in many cases do not agree much at all with these RT Top Critic Ratings. In fact, the RT Top Critics Ratings look like a moron did the ratings — they have Insurrection better than WOK, they have TMP way down with Nemesis and TFF, and they have TUC as the 2nd best Trek movie. Very weird.

I’ll have to agree with Disco. The IMDB User Ratings look much more reliable to me. Those are going to be my go to guidance for reviews from now on..

1190. P Technobabble - July 6, 2013

I wonder if Abram’s bringing the Paramount/CBS split to a head is going to have an effect on all future Star Trek possibilities. Dosen’t Paramount have a limited number of years to continue making Trek films before that reverts to CBS (I thought I read that somewhere some time ago)? Considering the way CBS is suffocating Star Trek, do we really want to see any kind of Trek coming from them? Are there any possibilities that Paramount could own the entire brand? At least they seem interested in keeping Star Trek alive…

1191. Craiger - July 6, 2013

#1190, That was stupid to split Trek up into two groups. I think it would be easier to manage if Trek was all under one group. Aren’t TV shows are actually mini motion pictures anyway? At the end of TNG doesn’t it say something like “This Motion Picture….”

1192. Ahmed - July 6, 2013

@ 1191. Craiger – July 6, 2013

“#1190, That was stupid to split Trek up into two groups. I think it would be easier to manage if Trek was all under one group.”

I was under the impression that it was always like that. That CBS runs the TV shows & Paramount take care of the movies.

1193. Craiger - July 6, 2013

Ahmed, they were once all under the same company Viacom. Then Viacom split into two companies in 2006, and like you said now Paramount runs the movies and CBS run the TV shows.

1194. SoonerDave - July 6, 2013

@1189

Online polls are virtually worthless from a statistical point of view, because they represent only the opinions of the folks who bother to complete them. Worthwhile polls need to be drawn from random samples.

1195. Ahmed - July 6, 2013

Craiger, Rick Berman was the man overseeing Star Trek in the 90s & early 2000s, is there someone now in that role ?

I know Abrams was in charge of the movies but he is kinda busy now in that other far away galaxy. They should have someone else to guide Trek.

1196. Phil - July 6, 2013

@1184. Except that when an aircraft is falling outside of it’s flight dynamics design parameters, the end result is the craft usually breaks up. The 747 in the Lockerbie bombing and Space Shuttle Columbia are examples. Powerless Enterprise (and Vengeance, for that matter) would have broken up high in the atmosphere.

1197. Craiger - July 6, 2013

Ahmed, I don’t think anyone knows who is overseeing Trek on TV right not Maybe Les Moonves? Abrams wanted to take over the whole Trek franchise including Trek on TV but their was an article saying that Abrams wanted CBS to stop merchandising old Trek merchandise because he said that was confusing people about the two Trek versions out their. CBS said no and some think that is why JJ went over to Disney to do SW since SW is all under one company.

http://www.thewrap.com/movies/article/how-web-star-trek-rights-killed-jj-abrams-grand-ambitions-91766

1198. Craiger - July 6, 2013

Also found this interesting article.

http://spinoff.comicbookresources.com/2011/10/22/why-isnt-there-a-star-trek-tv-show-already/

1199. Curious Cadet - July 6, 2013

@1187. Disco Spock,
“many critics are artsy fartsy cynical and unsentimental types who are more interested in saying clever things and getting notoriety than giving honest opinions of movies that track with what the public would like. And the have a “gang up” mentality, where they try to shut down certain movies like John Carter with their unearned power.”

They may be, but they also are still quite relevant to the movie review process, opinions of which are valued by audiences and studios alike, and are whom most people refer to when they use the term “critical review”.

As for John Carter, the critics may or may not have tried to “gang up” to shut it down, but I for one completely agree with them, as does the IMDB user ranking.

—————-
“I find IMDB to be the most accurate of these user reviews — because you need a paid account to vote there, you eliminate duplication and gaming of the system by certain fan groups.”

This is absolutely untrue. All you need to be is a registered user. I have never paid IMDB a dime, yet I am able to freely vote on anything. IMDB even stipulates this on their website, so access is unrestricted and uncontrolled.

@1188. Disco Spock,
“Also, on a simple movie rating poll, a sample size of 2 million can easily be compared to a sample size of 150,000, provided both samples are based on ubiquitous public access to the polls.”

But we aren’t talking about 2 million vs. 150K — we’re talking about 328K vs. 120K, and we’re talking 2 months vs. 4 years, and before the movie has even closed at the box office. Moreover, the IMDB polls require registration (a barrier for some), so it’s not ubiquitous public access (such as here at Trekmovie), and there’s no controls over the selection of the samples in such a restricted venue. Moreover, most, if not all IMDB rankings start high and drop over time. ST09 held an 8.4 rating as of May 19th, 2009.

———————
@1189. David H,
“my own ratings track pretty close to the IMDB ratings, and in many cases do not agree much at all with these RT Top Critic Ratings.

And this is what I’ve been pointing out all along. None of these ratings much before Nemesis cannot be reliably used for a normative ranking of Trek films. They make for a nice point of departure, but are hardly definitive. The only rankings that can be reasonably compared using these sites are ST09, STID and Nemesis, and maybe Insurrection.

———————
“The IMDB User Ratings look much more reliable to me. Those are going to be my go to guidance for reviews from now on.”

Of course you can chose to go with any ratings guide that mirrors your own tastes for selection of your personal entertainment. However, user ratings are NOT ‘critical reviews’. And that was my original point. None of these reviews are imperical, but it’s the critic’s reviews that carry the most weight. Just like Oscar nominations and wins carry more weight for most than some random guy in the street, whether you personally agree with them or not.

1200. Marja - July 6, 2013

Lordy, it’s getting so if I see dollar signs and movie titles in a post, I just skip on down.

Maybe we can talk a little more about Trek, as opposed to Trek-as-a-moneymaker?

Just a suggestion :)

1201. Ahmed - July 6, 2013

Craiger, I think reason # 1 is very valid. Abrams & co wanted to get full control of Star Trek, to the point of cancelling new novels. I can envision them not wanting to have Trek on TV until they are done with their trilogy.

Normally, this should be no problems if we are getting the movies every 2 or 3 years. But Abrams took bloody long time to do the 2nd one & the end result was not that great, IMO.

Things might change now after Abrams jumped ship & moved to Star Wars

1202. Disco Spock - July 6, 2013

Re: Curious Cadet

“As for John Carter, the critics may or may not have tried to “gang up” to shut it down, but I for one completely agree with them, as does the IMDB user ranking.”

This is simply false. The IMDB user rating of John Carter is 6.6. And do you know what the average IMDB rating is? It is a 6.5. So, IMDB users say this is an average movie.

Now, what do the Top Critics say on RT? They give JC only a 38% rating. That is a “this movie stinks” rating by any measure for sure.

Moreover, the RT figures completely prove out my point about the Top Critics trying to gang up and derail John Carter — look at this:

RT Top Critics Rating: 36
RT All Critics Rating: 51
RT Audience Rating: 61

This trend speaks for itself. The Top Crtics, just as I said, were way off base as compared to general critics and the audience — they “piled on” and shut this movie down. I mean come on, their is a HUGE disparity when you go from Top Critics to All Critics, and even more when you look at the audience, who thought (like IMDB) that is an average movie.

And by the way, this is a great example of why many of us don’t trust the elite group of reviewers that you appear to be so enamored with.

“But we aren’t talking about 2 million vs. 150K — we’re talking about 328K vs. 120K,”

What? I used 2 million to compare to 150K as as extreme comparison of two different size data sets. 328K to 120K is even better. Did you understand at all the statistics 101 point that I was trying to make with this comparison?

“However, user ratings are NOT ‘critical reviews’. And that was my original point. None of these reviews are imperical, but it’s the critic’s reviews that carry the most weight.”

(BTW — I think you meant, “empirical.”) Well back to you original point then, you said you wanted a Trek movie that was critically acclaimed. Yet you pretty much admit that quantitatively, that can’t be determined. OK, I get that.

So, in conclusion, what you are really saying is that you want a Trek movie where your subjective personal opinion is that the movie is critically acclaimed in general by some group of “expert critics” that you will determine, right?

I guess all of us here will just have to wait, Trek movie by Trek movie over the next decade here for you to tell us when we get to a Trek movie that you personally assess meets the mysterious, unmeasurable threshold of critical acceptance that you are waiting for? ;-0

1203. Dial S for Star Trek - July 6, 2013

I just love how in MJ’s mind he can speak no wrong.
He will attack those who voice their own personal criticisms with a project that he likes.
And he is just as quick to attack and tell posters who love a project he hates to shut up. or accuse you of being someone else he disagrees with.

If you look up the word hypocrite in the dictionary it will surely feature a picture of MJ’s real world persona.

1204. Dial S for Star Trek - July 6, 2013

MJ doesn’t change the fact that into Darkness is underperforming 09 by a little over 20 million dollars domesticly.

1205. MJ (The Original). - July 6, 2013

@1202 (DiscoSpock to Curious Cadet) “This is simply false. The IMDB user rating of John Carter is 6.6. And do you know what the average IMDB rating is? It is a 6.5. So, IMDB users say this is an average movie. Now, what do the Top Critics say on RT? They give JC only a 38% rating. That is a “this movie stinks” rating by any measure for sure…..”

Disco Spock, Curious Cadet has a documented habit of fabricating facts and being untruthful. Sufice it to say that if Gepetto were to make a puppet of Curious Cadet, the artisan would need put into an order for a Coastal Redwood if he wanted to build the puppet’s nose from a single piece of wood.

“So, in conclusion, what you are really saying is that you want a Trek movie where your subjective personal opinion is that the movie is critically acclaimed in general by some group of “expert critics” that you will determine, right? I guess all of us here will just have to wait, Trek movie by Trek movie over the next decade here for you to tell us when we get to a Trek movie that you personally assess meets the mysterious, unmeasurable threshold of critical acceptance that you are waiting for? ;-0″

LOL. Exactly. We just need to trust that CC’s knows better than us. CC will let us all know when his/her “imperical” (where is Palpatine when we need him?) calculations provide us with a movie that the mysterious, unquantifiable groups of elitist critics that CC trusts rates a Trek movie to CC’s satisfaction. Consider it a leap of faith — CC knows best here.

1206. Craiger - July 6, 2013

Wouldn’t a Trek movie just based on what Trek fans want not do well in the theater?

1207. Curious Cadet - July 6, 2013

@1202 Disco Spock,

You never specified anything about referring to Top critics in your post @1187. The only reason I even brought up the top critics was because they demonstrated another flawed data set, not because I prefer them. The critics aggregator I was looking at is the one I think is more accurate, and the one IMDB itself uses — Metacritic, which also happens to draw from a similar pool as RT’s top critics. They also gave the John Carter a 51, which is in the ballpark of a 61 in my mind. But, whatever, the audience thought it was slightly better than the critics, and just as you think it was unfair, I think it was well deserved. Interestingly when I look at the individual reviews for John Carter on Metacritic, I don’t see this conspiracy you speak of. 15 were favorable, 20 were mixed, and only 7 of the 42 were negative. When I look at RT I see them split about 50/50. And despite having almost 200 more reviews they agragate out to the same score of 51.

As for statistics, I meant to concede that a smaller sample can have the same results as a larger sample, as demonstrated by the actual numbers — so long as all things are equal, which I went on to outline how they were not. Also in the case of John Carter the sample size is quite small, at 140,545. That in of itself can tell you something about who’s voting, or not.

Then there’s the historical evidence on IMDB that shows the larger the sample of registered users the lower the score. So whether “statistics 101″ applies here, the sample is not accurate enough to allow for your model, and has been proven invalid movie after movie. ST09 started out with an 8.6, dropped to 8.4 and stayed there at least to the end of 2009. In fact I was surprised to find it had dropped as low as 8.0 when I went to compare to STID. And STID is at 8.2 only three months out with a third the votes. But guess what, on May 20th 2013 STID had an IMDB user rating of 8.3. See a trend? So if we are to compare STID and ST09 at the same point in their history, ST09 is the clear winner — 8.4 to 8.2. That’s really the only fair way to currently use the user ratings, given their historically reliable tendency to drop over time.

You like to draw a lot of inferences about me, rather than just asking. But no, I’m not interested in gerrymandering the critical reviews for each film to achieve some specific result. I’m interested in a fair evaluation. Because of the internet there’s no way to reliably gauge the critical sucess of Abrams films against some of the most beloved in the franchise. But that has been my whole point … There’s no need to. For all practical purposes, ST09 is arguably the most successful Trek in the franchise. I outlined my criteria for that as well:

1. Total Box Office — Arguably STID (depending on TMP)
2. Critical Reviews — ST09 arguably the best of the franchise (based on available information)
3. BO Profit minus budget — ST09 arguably the largest (depending on TMP)
4. Domestic Box office — ST09
5. Foreign Box Office — STID (only an issue because of Trek’s historical problems)
6. Accolades — ST09 only Trek film to win an Oscar so far

So even if it were somehow proven TWOK or FC had a higher critical rating than ST09 (which I doubt) it wouldn’t matter because it wasn’t as successful in any other area. Since STID definitely trails in critical reviews, it’s a moot point exactly how it fairs against the others since the question has always been which is the most successful.

1208. Number 3 - July 6, 2013

I don’t post very often..but I want to say that IMO STID was the best scifi. movie I’ve seen since the last one. I’ve seen STID twice ( 3 times for ST09) and found it more enjoyable than MOS, at least to me.
Just waitng for the STID DVD release.
While STID may have af few problems, it’s definately more entertaining than the last 2 NEXTGEN movies,IMO.
Many thanks to the entire team that brought STID to life.
All others.. you can nitpick all you like, quote numbers all you like and sqabble amongst yourselves all you like.( it gives me something to read when I’m bored)….but were you enyertained? I was.

Can’t wait to see the next one.
All my best.

1209. Number 3 - July 6, 2013

but were you entertained?

1210. Forrest Leeson - July 6, 2013

“You can never see enough Klingons” — Lindelof

Then spin them off into their own franchise. It would be everything Paramount really wants. (Paramount Pictures Presents Ron Perlman in a Guillermo Del Toro Film: BATTLECRUISER VENGEANCE!)

1211. TrekMadeMeFat - July 6, 2013

@1205

ST09 is arguably the most successful Trek in the franchise. I outlined my criteria for that as well:

1. Total Box Office — Arguably STID (depending on TMP)
2. Critical Reviews — ST09 arguably the best of the franchise (based on available information)
3. BO Profit minus budget — ST09 arguably the largest (depending on TMP)
4. Domestic Box office — ST09
5. Foreign Box Office — STID (only an issue because of Trek’s historical problems)
6. Accolades — ST09 only Trek film to win an Oscar so far

Wow. You need to stop all that arguing there, fellah. It’s not arguable at all. Being an angry fanboy doesn’t mean you get to ignore both the box office pundits and the industry analysts. Nor do you get to substitute your own criteria for theirs.

It’s clear enough what you’re agenda is with this nonstop lying, but believing that different writers would somehow be more obedient to your canon is more than sufficient proof that you are clinically insane.

1212. Noropolis - July 6, 2013

@boborci,

STID was a great film! I am still shocked that it did not do better domestically, BUT it still is #1 ST film overall when you include international gross. Great job!

I can’t wait to hear more about a sequel! I am hoping there is official news soon! I am personally hoping for a serious Klingon sequel..since in STID they went to “Kronos” and really ticked off the Klingons and “precipitated a full scale war” (STVI reference..lol)

1213. Noropolis - July 6, 2013

BTW…there’s tons of success left in STID when it hits PPV/Blu-ray/DVD etc…

I can’t wait to buy it on Blu-ray!

1214. Ahmed - July 6, 2013

A funny news item about STID

============================

Colorado Pastor Condemns Star Trek Into Darkness For Promoting Bestiality

“On his daily radio show, “Generations with Vision,” Reformation Church pastor Kevin Swanson, and his co-host Dave Beuhner, publicly denounced the latest Trek film for depicting bestiality. The scene in question happens early in the film when Captain James T. Kirk (Chris Pine) is seen in bed with two members of what Swanson calls the “wrong species.” They have tails. Swanson explained that he doesn’t want to take his children to a movie that involves interspecies romance, which he apparently considers bestiality.”

http://www.giantfreakinrobot.com/scifi/colorado-pastor-condemns-star-trek-darkness-promoting-bestiality.html

============================

wow, can’t think of anything else to say!

1215. MJ (The Original).. - July 6, 2013

CC: “Now for the User ratings. These are the least reliable and unimportant…”

There you go again. I don’t think so:

Disco Spock: “I’ll take IMDB rating any day compared to the untrustworthy RT review Tomatoemeter.”

Dave H: “I’ll have to agree with Disco. The IMDB User Ratings look much more reliable to me. Those are going to be my go to guidance for reviews from now on…In fact, the RT Top Critics Ratings look like a moron did the ratings — they have Insurrection better than WOK, they have TMP way down with Nemesis and TFF, and they have TUC as the 2nd best Trek movie. Very weird.”

Myself (earlier): “Guys, yes, I used the Audience Scores, as the Reviewer Scores on RT are unreliable…And the Audience Scores track and “self-validate” with the IMDB User Scores and the Yahoo Movies User Review scores — all three of these agree that STID and Trek 2009 are rated the highest of all Trek movies, with the race between these movies too close to call….a tie.”

I think most people know what “common sense” means. If a rating system, objectively, agrees with common understandings of movies, like that WOK is one of the Top 3 Star Trek movies, and that Insurrection stunk, you kind of trust those ratings and view them as more important that other supposedly more “expert” rating systems that spit out what we would consider to be nonsensical results. Furthermore, those ellitist critics frequently have petty little agendas, as Disco Spock showed with his/her analysis of John Carter:

“This trend speaks for itself. The Top Crtics, just as I said, were way off base as compared to general critics and the audience — they “piled on” and shut this movie down. I mean come on, their is a HUGE disparity when you go from Top Critics to All Critics, and even more when you look at the audience, who thought (like IMDB) that is an average movie.”

While we can’t quantitatively prove this, it is kind of like that famous Chief Justice who said about poourn, something along the lines of: “I can’t define poourn, but I know it when I see it.”

Well, most of us here can’t define a good way to accurately assess any of these critical and audience ratings systems, but some of us know an accurate rating system when we see it.

So, CC, your are completely wrong here.. The User Ratings are actually the most reliable and the most important.

1216. DiscoSpock - July 6, 2013

Curious Cadet,

Something you’re missing here is the changing times. Many people now, especially in my generation (I’m 28), don’t really trust the old fart major newspaper critics anymore. When I want to see I movie, I read the user reviews on IMDB and RT, as I find that in reading about 20 of those, I can get a lot better “review” of the movies than some 60 year old guy in a newspaper office in NY who is still pissed that Film School didn’t get him his dream job of directing movies…

I don’t trust those “major reviewers,” and so your quest for this “critical acclaim thing” from these types of reviewers to me might as well be like Don Quixote chasing windmills.

1217. Disco Spock - July 6, 2013

@1212

I notice that that minister didn’t take exception that it was with “2″ female members of a different species.

Good to know that he support threesomes, at least, right? LOL

1218. Disinvited - July 6, 2013

#1193. Craiger – July 6, 2013

According to NYT reporting referenced on this very site, Moonves dictated to Paramount’s Gail Berman to get the ball rolling on film Trek and not the other way around. She then went and approached Abrams.

1219. Buzz Cagney - July 6, 2013

#1211 well, it was kind of unnecessary to have Kirk in bed with Kitty and Pussy Galore.
I’m afraid these writers do seem to have slightly warped sense of humours.
Clearly they knew it was going too far, hence the quick edit out of the scene, but they just had to put it in there.
I know Kirk had said he slept with farm animals in ’09 but, i think we all figured he was joking! Seems not.

I watched ’09 the other day and found it to be far superior to Dorkness. Such a shame they didn’t seem able to build on the solid start that they had made.

1220. Disinvited - July 6, 2013

#1193. Craiger – July 6, 2013

Well, pretty sure most would agree that the vast majority of Trek films were made with the fans in mind and almost all of those were successful save for one. I suppose the real question is whether the the financial failure of one film could reliably indicate the death of all possibility of making money off of fan servicing films as establish by the track record of 9 other films? One failure against 9 doesn’t seem very rigorous statistically to clearly indicate the end of that possibility. I don’t see the creation of megablockbuster Trek films necessarily precluding CBS from exploiting other Trek film markets such as the established fan one — anymore than I see Marvel needing to cease publishing all and any Avengers based or themed comics to ensure the success of THE AVENGERS film franchise.

It seems to me that the real problem may be that the guy in the Captain’s chair of the Trek ship, Les Moonves, has self-proclaimed that it is incomprehensible to himself and he doesn’t know how to make money off of it as a narrative committed to flickering images precisely because of that. That singular lack of vision likely has more to do with the inability of CBS to successfully exploit all manner of such possible markets than flippantly assuming that the fan serviced one is dead or not worth it.

1221. MJ (The Original). - July 6, 2013

Curious Cadet: “Now for the User ratings. These are the least reliable and unimportant…”

There you go again. I don’t think so:

Disco Spock: “I’ll take IMDB rating any day compared to the untrustworthy RT review Tomatoemeter.”

Dave H: “I’ll have to agree with Disco. The IMDB User Ratings look much more reliable to me. Those are going to be my go to guidance for reviews from now on…In fact, the RT Top Critics Ratings look like a toddler did the ratings — they have Insurrection better than WOK, they have TMP way down with Nemesis and TFF, and they have TUC as the 2nd best Trek movie. Very weird.”

Myself (earlier): “Guys, yes, I used the Audience Scores, as the Reviewer Scores on RT are unreliable…And the Audience Scores track and “self-validate” with the IMDB User Scores and the Yahoo Movies User Review scores — all three of these agree that STID and Trek 2009 are rated the highest of all Trek movies, with the race between these movies too close to call….a tie.”

I think most people know what “common sense” means. If a rating system, objectively, agrees with common understandings of movies, like that WOK is one of the Top 3 Star Trek movies, and that Insurrection stunk, you kind of trust those ratings and view them as more important that other supposedly more “expert” rating systems that spit out what we would consider to be nonsensical results. Furthermore, those ellitist critics frequently have petty little agendas, as Disco Spock showed with his/her analysis of John Carter:

“This trend speaks for itself. The Top Crtics, just as I said, were way off base as compared to general critics and the audience — they “piled on” and shut this movie down. I mean come on, there is a HUGE disparity when you go from Top Critics to All Critics, and even more when you look at the audience, who thought (like IMDB) that is an average movie.”

While we can’t quantitatively prove this, it is kind of like that famous Chief Justice who said about poorrn, something along the lines of: “I can’t define poorrn, but I know it when I see it.”

Well, most of us here can’t define a good way to accurately assess any of these critical and audience ratings systems, but some of us know an accurate rating system when we see it.

So, CC, you are completely wrong here. The User Ratings are actually the most reliable and the most important.

1222. Captain Slow - July 7, 2013

I have two requests for boborci if he’s still reading this thread. In the next movie, I would like there to be some kind of tribute to Ray Harryhausen like there was for Ray Bradbury (who was Harryhausen’s best friend). Also, in the first movie, Spock quoted Sherlock Holmes. This movie topped that by having Sherlock himself. But they missed out on having the ultimate Holmes quote in the movie. From The Sign of the Four:
“emotional qualities are antagonistic to clear reasoning.”
I’m sure there’s a way to work that into the movie.

1223. Bamasi - July 7, 2013

1222 – That is a great quote. It would be lovely to continue the tradition of Spock quoting Sherlock, which began way back with Undiscovered Country. I’m sure if Mr. Orci is reading, he will find a way to make it so.

1224. Inthemachineghost - July 7, 2013

Question…. Has “Into Darkness” been pulled from Boxoffice Mojo tracking?
Have not seen an update since July 2.
If so, dies that mean 221,000,000.00 is the final domestic rally?

1225. Curious Cadet - July 7, 2013

Since Yahoo Movies user ratings has been brought up as a definitive ratings standard, I decided to have a look. And ST09 is hands down the clear winner of the users. STID is trailing by a full half a star — that’s about a 80 to ST09′s 90 on a scale of 100. Yahoo users scores proves ST09 is the top choice in their survey and is also consistent with most critic’s aggregate reviews.

Yahoo Users
ST09 4.5 stars (33,104 votes)
STID 4 stars (1,275 votes)

1226. stephan - July 7, 2013

But STID is way better than ST09,

1227. William Bradley - July 7, 2013

The limited edition STID release features a, wait for it, gun …

Actually, a special phaser, with a big picture of Kirk holding the gun.

When did the gun become the key icon of Star Trek?

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/ref=pe_170630_30879540_pe_button/?ASIN=B00CTT9646

1228. William Bradley - July 7, 2013

I find there is usually a little coterie of self-appointed “enforcers” around a web site …

>1203. Dial S for Star Trek – July 6, 2013
I just love how in MJ’s mind he can speak no wrong.
He will attack those who voice their own personal criticisms with a project that he likes.
And he is just as quick to attack and tell posters who love a project he hates to shut up. or accuse you of being someone else he disagrees with.

If you look up the word hypocrite in the dictionary it will surely feature a picture of MJ’s real world persona.

1229. William Bradley - July 7, 2013

It really sucked that they killed the new novels.

The rebooted the Trek universe by altering the timeline, which would allow for all manner of new storytelling.

But then, with the exception of their own comic books, very few and far between, they made sure there was absolutely nothing for four long years.

A ridiculous situation.

>1201. Ahmed – July 6, 2013
Craiger, I think reason # 1 is very valid. Abrams & co wanted to get full control of Star Trek, to the point of cancelling new novels. I can envision them not wanting to have Trek on TV until they are done with their trilogy.

Normally, this should be no problems if we are getting the movies every 2 or 3 years. But Abrams took bloody long time to do the 2nd one & the end result was not that great, IMO.

Things might change now after Abrams jumped ship & moved to Star Wars

1230. Lurker - July 7, 2013

@1227
A phaser is a very iconic piece of hardware from Star Trek. Especially from the TOS era.

And what would you have chosen to include with the limited edition set?

1231. Red Dead Ryan - July 7, 2013

#1225 — Curious Cadet.

“Since Yahoo Movies user ratings has been brought up as a definitive ratings standard, I decided to have a look. And ST09 is hands down the clear winner of the users. STID is trailing by a full half a star — that’s about a 80 to ST09′s 90 on a scale of 100. Yahoo users scores proves ST09 is the top choice in their survey and is also consistent with most critic’s aggregate reviews.

Yahoo Users
ST09 4.5 stars (33,104 votes)
STID 4 stars (1,275 votes)”

Well, it seems STID is doing quite well then if it is a half-star behind with only 1,275 votes compared to STO9′s 33,104.

So the lesson here is that while STID may not be as critically acclaimed as the first movie, it is still one of the top favorites for many people, and the box office results show that, on the financial side, it is the most successful Trek movie ever.

1232. Lurker - July 7, 2013

@1224
Check again – latest update now at $443.9 for STID worldwide.

It actually beat F&F6 this past weekend while playing in less theaters. ;-)

1233. Curious Cadet - July 7, 2013

More research on the IMDB user ratings.

While IMDB may be a fantastic way to gauge he current pulse of an audience, it is a very poor way to compare a historical ranking versus a current one, for the chief reason that IMDB is an aggregate of ratings over time.

When viewed apples to apples of the popularity of the movies during the same point during their run, and that is the ONLY way this data can be used for reliable comparison, ST09 is once again, clearly the hands down winner.

IMDB User Ratings
5/11/09 — ST09 8.6
5/11/13 — STID 8.3
6/23/09 — ST09 8.4
7/5/13 — STID 8.2

So there is no question, that at the same point during its theatrical box office run, IMDB users voted ST09 the better film by a measurable difference.

In 2017, we can compare ST09′s 2013 IMDB rating to STID’s current rating to see if audiences still feel that way.

So that’s two out of three audience review sites that agree ST09 is the better film.

Rotten Tomatoes user ratings shows STID ahead by one point (92 to 91), but with a VAST difference in votes (158,823 to 593,885), and since it has been reliably shown that more votes historically lowers ratings on movie review sites, STID may not hold that position on RT very long. Moreover, I cannot find any historical, or current citations of the RT Audience User Ratings to make a more accurate comparison to ST09′s current rating. The ONLY RT ratings professionals and casual users alike quote on the Internet are the All Critics agregate. In fact this is the first time I recall having ever seen anybody citing the user ratings over the universally accepted All Critics.

Final conclusion, based on available information, a majority of audiences agree with critics, ST09 is a better film than STID.

1234. dmduncan - July 7, 2013

The cat women scene was funny. And they weren’t CATS anymore than people are monkeys. So Star Trek has a planet where cats evolved into intelligent beings the way we did from apes. What’s the big deal? We’ve seen Kirk’s interest in alien babes before, and Spock is the product of a human-alien relationship.

</