TNG Season 5 and Unification on Blu-ray Press Release | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

TNG Season 5 and Unification on Blu-ray Press Release October 15, 2013

by Matt Wright , Filed under: DVD/Blu-ray,TNG Remastered , trackback

There are now a few more details of the Season 5 and Unification single-disc Blu-ray releases thanks to a new press release from CBS Home Entertainment today. Season 5′s special features include a new season 5 documentary titled “Requiem: A Remembrance of Star Trek: The Next Generation.” This two-part documentary explores the making of the series’ fifth season and focuses on the effect the passing of creator Gene Roddenberry on the show. Also exciting for fans of TNG’s music is the newest roundtable discussion documentary: “In Conversation: The Music of Star Trek: The Next Generation” which features TNG composers Ron Jones, Dennis McCarthy and Jay Chattaway.

Both are due out in the US next month, November 19th to be exact. See the full details after the break.

 

STAR TREK:

THE NEXT GENERATION

THE FIFTH SEASON BLU-RAY & UNIFICATION BLU-RAY

Packed With Exclusive, Must-Watch Special Features, New Collections Also Include Episodes With Leonard Nimoy as Spock

The latest high-definition collections of the iconic series, STAR TREK: THE NEXT GENERATION® – THE FIFTH SEASON BLU-RAY and STAR TREK: THE NEXT GENERATION® – UNIFICATION BLU-RAY arrive November 19 from CBS Home Entertainment and Paramount Home Media Distribution.  Packed with newly produced special features, the collections also include some of the most acclaimed episodes of the series, including Leonard Nimoy’s guest appearance in the celebrated, two-part episode “Unification.”

STAR TREK: THE NEXT GENERATION — THE FIFTH SEASON BLU-RAY

tng_bd_s5_profile

Set in the 24th century, the exploits of the U.S.S. Enterprise continue with STAR TREK: THE NEXT GENERATION – THE FIFTH SEASON.  Featuring some of the most memorable episodes of the series, the season includes Paul Winfield’s guest appearance as Dathon and Ashley Judd’s debut performance in beloved episode, “Darmok.” The set also includes the jaw-dropping opening scene portraying the destruction of the Enterprise in “Cause and Effect,” and “The Inner Light,” the critically acclaimed episode that garnered the series its first Hugo Award for Best Dramatic Presentation.

In addition to all-new commentary tracks on select episodes with some of the franchise’s most notable names, deleted scenes and a gag reel, the high-definition collection includes the newly produced featurette, “Requiem: A Remembrance of Star Trek: The Next Generation.” This two-part documentary explores the making of the series’ fifth season and focuses on the effect the passing of creator Gene Roddenberry, which took place halfway through the season, had on the show as well as the production family. The tribute to the late creator includes key cast and crewmembers sharing their favorite memories of working with Roddenberry and bidding farewell to the Great Bird of the Galaxy.

The collection also includes the exclusive featurette, “In Conversation: The Music of Star Trek: The Next Generation.” Jeff Bond, author of The Music of Star Trek, moderates the conversation between the show’s composers Ron Jones, Dennis McCarthy and Jay Chattaway as the group discusses the challenges for writing each episode’s original score, working with a live orchestra and the team’s creative approach to scoring the series. The featurette also shares stories from behind some of the most beloved musical cues including the legendary Ressikan flute melody from “The Inner Light.” STAR TREK: THE NEXT GENERATION – THE FIFTH SEASON BLU-RAY features all 26 episodes of the fifth season, remastered into stunning, crowd-pleasing high-definition.

 

STAR TREK: THE NEXT GENERATION — UNIFICATION BLU-RAY

tng_unification_bd

STAR TREK: THE NEXT GENERATION – UNIFICATION BLU-RAY is a feature-length presentation of the fan-favorite, two-part epic adventure from the series’ fifth season. Over 25 million viewers tuned into the original airing of the episode, making it one of the most-watched of all seven seasons of the series. In the episode, Leonard Nimoy reprises his iconic role as Spock as both he and Captain Jean-Luc Picard (Stewart) venture on a heroic mission in an attempt to unify the Vulcans and the Romulans.

Along with audio commentary and an exclusive deleted scene, the STAR TREK: THE NEXT GENERATION – UNIFICATION BLU-RAY includes the exclusive documentary, “From One Generation to the Next.” This newly produced special featurette takes fans behind the scenes at the making of the classic two-part episode and the introduction of Spock to the 24th century saga of the hit series.

Comments

1. (The Late) Richard Dawson's Ruffled Shirt - October 15, 2013

This info leaves me hoping that there is an as-yet unannounced audio commentary for “Unification”. I’m not holding my breath for Nimoy to do it or anything, but I love listening to commentaries.

2. BatlethInTheGroin - October 15, 2013

Ugh. I can’t believe they’re not including this:

“The Star Trek Logs: An MTV Big Picture Special Edition”

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/The_Star_Trek_Logs:_An_MTV_Big_Picture_Special_Edition

It’s a mini-episode set during season five, starring Marina Sirtis as Troi.

3. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 15, 2013

Unification in a way is a great metaphor on the entire Berman era in Star Trek — great potential and good acting, but boring stories and amateurish execution.

You watch Unification, with Nimoy, Leonard, and Patrick Stewart, and you want so bad for this to be great and awesome, but it’s just lame and boring.

4. Sebastian - October 15, 2013

I plan on buying “Unification.”
Mark Lenard’s swan song as Sarek in part 1 was powerful and moving. And I’m also very curious what the deleted scene is as well.

I don’t quite have the money (nor incentive) to buy all the TNG seasons in HD (I already have TOS-R; that’s enough), I do enjoy getting some random episodes here and there (“Next Level”, “Best of Both Worlds”).

I’m content with a snack now and then, but not the whole buffet….

5. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 15, 2013

@4. Amazing that you can be so negative of STID, but, with a straight face, claim that Unification is great Star Trek.

That is just not credible, dude. Unification is just boring and inept Star Trek. They wasted Nimoy, and sent out Leonard in a depressing “Shatner – Generations” type of unnecessary way….and they didn’t even get Nimoy and Leonard on screen together — I still have not forgiven Berman for that dumb-ass move.

6. I am to Smurfy - October 15, 2013

I am definately intrigued by the deleted scene on the Unification disc.

7. Jay Sherman - October 16, 2013

@5

Prepare to be even more amazed. I think Unification is dull, but STID is awful in its own special way. Dull or dumb, take your pick, they’re both a couple of wasted hours —- that could’ve been great.

8. TUP - October 16, 2013

STID is far from awful. I have been critical of it but anyone who claims it is awful is a simply troll. No debate even worth having. No credibility to that claim whatsoever.

I do find it interesting, the comparison between STID and Unification though. I hadnt thought of that before but its there. Much like Berman didnt really “get Trek” even as the main producer, Orci et al dont really get it either.

9. BatlethInTheGroin - October 16, 2013

#5: It’s not “credible” to like “Unification?” Get over yourself, dude. A LOT of people like “Unification.” That you don’t in no way makes the opinion non-credible.

10. Niall Johnson - October 16, 2013

@2, probably couldn’t secure the rights from MTV. They may also have had to pay Paramount as well.

11. Worgel - October 16, 2013

Series probably should have ended after season 5. Well maybe if all the best eps from season 6 and 7 were put into a shortened season 6, then that would be okay too. Lets face it, there were quite a few boring to bad episodes produced in seasons 6 and 7.
Otherwise pretty good series overall.
Will purchase when price drops about 40%.
If that ever happens. LOL!

12. The Gorn Identity - October 16, 2013

Wow. I like “Unification” AND “Into Darkness”. I DON’T like infighting.

13. windelkin - October 16, 2013

If I remember correctly, MTV and CBS had the same parent company(Viacom?) and this is probably why it was on MTV at the time. I can’t imagine a conflict over copyrights being the reason for not including it.

14. ME!! - October 16, 2013

What happened to the polls on this site? That was part of the fun of coming here.

15. ME!! - October 16, 2013

Bizarre.

I like Unification and thought it was a nice surprise. It’s one of my favorite TNG episodes. Is it perfect? No. Is it all I wanted in a Spock appearance on TNG? No, but I like it anyway. It’s well done and FAR better than what Shatner got in Generations.

Someone likening Spock’s appearance in this to Kirk’s in Generations…what ARE you thinking? Spock, at the end, discovers through a mindmeld, that his father loved him dearly. It was a beautiful moment. Kirk, on the other hand, died a meaningless death that had nothing to do with what he was “brought back” from the Nexus for. Had he been in the captain’s chair, even temporarily, and died defending the TNG crew & the Enterprise it would have been great, but falling to his death because of a metal bridge collapsing (and looking suspiciously like it was made of rubber, moving entirely too much whenever Kirk moved) is sadly pathetic and Berman & co. should be ashamed.

16. Disinvited - October 16, 2013

#11. windelkin – October 16, 2013

No, in 2005 when we talk about the Paramount/CBS split it was actually a VIACOM/Paramount split with old Paramount being renamed CBS with its motion picture holdings being transferred to a new Paramount dubbed motion picture wing of VIACOM. Neither new CBS nor the old CBS that was part of old Paramount is a part of VIACOM. Now VIACOM and CBS are both held by Redstone’s holding company, but he purposely split the two the way he did in the firm belief that setting the two competitively against one another was the best way to use the animosity of his two execs for each other in their desire to head a motion picture/television/entertainment empire, to generate more profits for him.

17. Danpaine - October 16, 2013

At the time I recall enjoying Unification when it aired, but found it pretty dry. Like others said, a missed opportunity to really blow the roof off the house with a great Spock/Picard story. Great, it was not. Today, I doubt I’d re-watch it, unless lying around in front of one of those BBC channel Next Gen marathons (which have so many commercials it’s barely worth it).

Generations? STID? Both those topics were talked-out ad nauseam here a long time ago. Both could have been one heck of a lot better, and should have been.

18. Damian - October 16, 2013

8–You’ll find MJ doesn’t have much use for Berman era Trek (excepting maybe Deep Space Nine). Does make me wonder why he bothers reading articles related to Berman era Trek and aggravating himself. I doubt he intends on buying TNG on Blu-ray anyway.

I do find myself agreeing with him re: Abrams related Trek. I did enjoy Star Trek (2009) and STID mostly, but I agree with his analysis of why STID did not do better.

But I generally disagree with him regarding Berman related Trek. Season 5 had a lot of great episodes. I enjoyed “Unification” myself and Spock and Sarek not meeting before Sarek’s death made perfect sense, based on their past relationship. I thought the scene with Sarek was well done. His fighting for control for just a few minutes to help Picard. Also, as someone noted, Spock learning finally that his father really did love him as a son.

But there were many other good episodes. Darmok was well done and reminded me a bit of “Enemy Mine”, though they weren’t technically enemies here. I remember watching “Cause and Effect” the first time and seeing the Enterprise explode in the first minute of the episode and thinking WTF. And “The Inner Light” was about as good as it gets. “Disaster””Conundrum” and “Power Play” were also other great episodes, IMHO.

19. Cmd. Bremmon - October 16, 2013

@ 15
Pre Season Five they had to tone down the TOS elements because Roddenbery basically wanted to eliminate any hint of TOS as he embraced being a social prophet over action TV writer
After Season Five I feel they thought they still had to tone down the TOS on the show that TNG wasn’t overshadowed and TNG could move into movies. I mean if they had made Generations a super exciting story where Captain Kirk goes out in a blaze of glory, everyone would be asking why weren’t they making more TOS movies while they still could… ironically they STILL ended up making more TOS movies regardless. It is too bad because I think writing good TOS into TNG could have improved the show where we would still be watching TNG movies.
I still wish however that Nick Meyers TNG had taken place (i.e. Saavik, David Marcus, Excelsior, etc new characters gradually coming into TWOK era Trek as the future of Trek). The old DC comic book showed how well that would have worked.

20. THX-1138 - October 16, 2013

#5 MJ

C’mon man. People have to have credible opinions about what they like? There is no reason for that sort of comment. It’s just baiting someone into a fight.

Can we try, just try, to get along with each other?

BTW, I liked Unification. And it’s OK for people to think it was boring. Isn’t that the IDIC thing? Realizing that other people are not exactly the same as you, and that those differences in no way invalidate who they are or who you are?

21. Danpaine - October 16, 2013

16. Cmd. Bremmon – October 16, 2013

That idea which was reportedly floated at the time to meld elements of “Yesterday’s Enterprise” into “Generations” still gives me chills with the possibilities…have Ent-A go back into the rift and help Ent-D against the now-hostile Klingons – have Kirk & Co. go out in a blaze of glory saving their future counterparts. That could have been one Hell of a way to pass the torch. Then, move on with TNG films with a sense of TOS completion, and you’re right, maybe we would still be watching TNG movies.

Missed…..opportunities.

22. Corylea - October 16, 2013

$20 for “Unification”? TWO episodes of a TV show cost twenty bucks? That seems way off!

23. Marja - October 16, 2013

8 Batleth, I think I’m correct in assuming that everyone here is expressing an opinion, and opinions are not facts, no matter how much we might like to think so …

And if we’re diplomatic about expressing them, so much the better,

Gently and nicely yours,
Marja

24. Marja - October 16, 2013

re my 20, Should have included MJ as well …

But I am with MJ on his “pity they couldn’t get Nimoy and Mark Lenard on screen together.” Sarek and Spock could have had a mutually cool moment and later Sarek’s love for Spock could still have been revealed through the mind-meld.

OH WELL.

I liked “Unification,” the idea, but its execution, particularly the bad Vulcan makeup/wig on Sir Pat and most of the rest [except for Nimoy], didn’t move me particularly. And it should have.

25. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 16, 2013

THX,

In principle I agree with you. However, it would have been great if you had practiced this sort of commentary the past several months on other posters who were so negative on those of here who liked STID. And yes, Sebastian was one of them.

So sure, I agree with you, but you would be well-advised to be more even-handed when you dish out this sort of advice. This type of advice should not only be offered by you in cases where you disagree with my or others’ opinion.

17. THX-1138 – October 16, 2013
#5 MJ

C’mon man. People have to have credible opinions about what they like? There is no reason for that sort of comment. It’s just baiting someone into a fight.

Can we try, just try, to get along with each other?

BTW, I liked Unification. And it’s OK for people to think it was boring. Isn’t that the IDIC thing? Realizing that other people are not exactly the same as you, and that those differences in no way invalidate who they are or who you are?

26. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 16, 2013

@21 “But I am with MJ on his “pity they couldn’t get Nimoy and Mark Lenard on screen together.” Sarek and Spock could have had a mutually cool moment and later Sarek’s love for Spock could still have been revealed through the mind-meld.”

Exactly, Marja. Berman and company never really figured out who to honor and use TOS characters in a correct way in TNG. The Scotty episode was the only that kind of worked.

27. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 16, 2013

@18 “That idea which was reportedly floated at the time to meld elements of “Yesterday’s Enterprise” into “Generations” still gives me chills with the possibilities…have Ent-A go back into the rift and help Ent-D against the now-hostile Klingons – have Kirk & Co. go out in a blaze of glory saving their future counterparts. That could have been one Hell of a way to pass the torch. Then, move on with TNG films with a sense of TOS completion, and you’re right, maybe we would still be watching TNG movies.”

Great idea, Danpaine. It’s sad to me how obviously easy it is for us fans here to come up with such better concepts for using TOS regulars in TNG. What a shame that they dropped the ball so bad in this ares of TNG writing.

28. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 16, 2013

“After Season Five I feel they thought they still had to tone down the TOS on the show that TNG wasn’t overshadowed and TNG could move into movies.”

Cmd. Bremmon, you nailed it. What a shame that Berman and Company had that perception. It’s looks so petty now given the time that has now passed by.

29. Red Dead Ryan - October 16, 2013

I agree that “Unification” is overrated. It certainly doesn’t hold up as well as “Relics”. The McCoy cameo in “Encounter At Farpoint” was brilliant and quite touching.

I liked the Enterprise B scenes in “Generations”. That was fun, even though some of the lines were meant for McCoy and Spock. I thought that Shatner was truly Kirk when he bailed out Captain Harriman and saved the ship. They should have left it at that. The petulant Kirk that we see later on in the movie isn’t the Kirk that we all know and love. That was Shatner.

Paramount, Berman, Braga, Moore, and Shatner all share equal blame for that one.

30. Kirkstarter - October 16, 2013

Could we please see a news item on the Star Trek Continues Kirkstarter, er… Kickstarter effort?

It’s bad enough that Trek alum David Gerrold had no support for his Star Wolf Kickstarter from the Trek sites. Please consider an article on the Star Trek Continues Kickstarter. Thank you.

31. THX-1138 - October 16, 2013

MJ

That is exactly what I am working on. If I said anything in the past to get under people’s skin, I own it and apologize for it. I readily admit that my own behavior was sometimes caustic and confrontational. I can’t change any of that in the past but I can try harder to be a better contributor to the discussions here now and in the future.

As for being even handed, I’m not a moderator and I don’t read every post. I only comment on what I see. But I don’t respond well to being told that I would be “well advised” to behave in a certain fashion, since that sort of comes off like a threat and you’re not a moderator either. Please, go ahead and ask me, like a fellow commenter, and maybe even someday a friend, to try to be more fair in the discussion to everyone. I’m doing my best and I’m trying to get better.

Now, as for TNG not paying enough tribute (for lack of a better word) to TOS, in my opinion I’m not sure that they had to. I can see the point that Roddenberry wanted to put some distance between his new TV series and the series from 20 years earlier. Sometimes I felt that the references to TOS were kind of forced in TNG. From my point of view the Alpha Quadrant was a gigantic place populated by trillions of beings and even though we were watching a show taking place on a different ship of the same name, the coincidence of referencing events and characters from 80 to 100 years previous were remote. Kind of fan servicey (I will admit that another part of me liked the TOS references a lot, though. I am a conflicted human being).

32. Sebastian - October 16, 2013

# 5

My opinion, not yours.

And I thought you were leaving, or was that just more of your blowhard drama?

33. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 16, 2013

@31. THX,

Thanks for your comments — I appreciate them. I don’t think that we are that for apart, and I apologize for my choice of words. And I agree — we should be more positive in the future and put the past behinds us. Hope we can be friends as well, dude! :-)

BTW, see post @32 above — this is what I have to deal with here all the time with that guy.

Best, MJ

34. Sebastian - October 16, 2013

# 33 MJ (aka Blowhard 2: Blow Harder)

I never started anything with you on this thread; you came out swinging by insulting my opinion. I would’ve ignored you if you ignored me, but nope. You had to be antagonistic. Don’t play the victim card.

And yes, my opinion of STID has nothing to do with my opinion on “Unification.” My reasons for liking one have nothing to do with my disliking another.

35. Keachick - October 16, 2013

Now that I (and my son) have all seven seasons of TNG on DVD, I have to say that I have not yet watched the two part Unification episodes. I have seen it before and did not like it that much. I am sorry but Leonard Nimoy always seems to be straining to be Spock or anybody else for that matter, especially of late. Just makes me feel tired…

36. Keachick - October 16, 2013

I remember reading where MJ clearly wrote, on another earlier thread, that he was returning here when he saw that Bob Orci has resumed contributing to this site.

37. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 16, 2013

@36 “I remember reading where MJ clearly wrote, on another earlier thread, that he was returning here when he saw that Bob Orci has resumed contributing to this site.”

Thanks, Keachick. Yes, I have been fully consistent on this. I left when Bob left, and came back when he returned. There is not hidden agenda or anything suspicious — I was honest and did what I said I was going to do on this account.

Yea, I am not taking Sebastian’s bait this time. THX suggested I take the high rode here this time, and I am taking his advice.

38. Sebastian - October 16, 2013

# 37 MJ

Oh, how noble of you. After you insulted me first.
You should’ve apologized for insulting others’ opinions in the first place.

39. Red Dead Ryan - October 16, 2013

#38. Sebastian

Please stop trying to bait MJ. You have a history of being negative on this site towards the new movies. MJ only pointed that out. Your response is to launch attacks against him, and that proves it is you who is out of line here.

Please do the right thing and apologize.

40. Dave H - October 16, 2013

Re: Sebastian

You seem to have a lot of anger? Seriously, tone it down a bit, guy.

You did come down pretty hard on Star Trek Into Darkness on some other threads this year. So, I think it should be fair game for anyone to bring that up when you surprisingly comment so favorably here on a ST-TNG episode that many fans view and mediocre.

I mean, at the surface, that does seem a bit inconsistent that someone would be so critical of Darkness while giving Unification a free pass for all its issues?

41. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 16, 2013

@40. “I mean, at the surface, that does seem a bit inconsistent that someone would be so critical of Darkness while giving Unification a free pass for all its issues?”

Yea, that is what I was saying. If people feel that I owe that guy an apology for the way I brought that up, then OK, I apologize for the form I used in bringing this issue up (I wonder if he will similarly apologize for the name calling?).

But the issue itself has merit — it comes across as inconsistent at best, and hypocritical at worst. It is what it is, and I think it is incumbent of a person with such unexpectedly inconsistent opinions to explain to us how he would rationalize this???

– MJ (aka A Good Day to Blow Hard)

42. Disinvited - October 17, 2013

#41. MJ — THE GRAND RETURN !!! – October 16, 2013

I find it confusing that you seem to be implying that it is inconsistent to have one set of standards for a pre-millennium TV production and another set for a post-millennium cinema blockbuster? In its most basic contemporary form, isn’t this why one art form is recognized by an Oscar and the other an Emmy? Or perhaps better: isn’t it a bit like saying that because I enjoyed Trek in the 1960s with its vastly inferior production budget, I therefore can not credibly comment on my likes and dislikes of one whose budget vastly exceeds it by warp factors?

I mean, I can see some validity in commenting on what someone enjoyed in a TNG motion picture versus STID but what they liked on a production constructed for a much smaller screen (not just the width) overall and the softness of its much lower resolution and audio space?

Its not so much now, but back then TV acting was very different from cinema acting; As different as stage acting was to what TV had evolved (Much of it invented by the very DesiLu, i.e. filming for a TV series, that was a part of its production.) by Trek’s first outing.

In fact, I think first Trek’s successful transition to cinema owes much more than they are traditionally given credit to Shatner’s, Nimoy’s and Kelley’s previous experiences in motion pictures. It allowed them to successfully translate in a much more facile manner what they did for TV to the big screen. Their Trek films were the first success in going from a TV series to a series of films. It was something which had never before been successfully done.

Thanks, MJ. When I started my reply to your observation I was just going to make what I thought would be a simple apples and oranges retort but something unexpected resulted along the way.

43. Marja - October 17, 2013

38 Sebastian, For heaven’s sake, MJ didn’t insult you. He said your “opinion was not credible,” which in itself is not worth getting insulted over – it’s his opinion about your opinion; it’s not like he said “You’re an idiot/You’re on drugs/Your momma eats kitty litter.”
———————————————-

To everyone – JMHO:

Folks getting het up about opinions is what makes this board painful to read sometimes. “You insulted me! I demand an apology!” “Well you insulted me first!” “I’ll die before I apologize to a tin-plated dictator with delusions of godhood!”

Really, can we skip the drama and just discuss Star Trek, please?

Opinions are opinions. They are not insults to us or our intelligence. They are the opinion of the poster, and as such, we may always “consider the source” and ignore it.

And no, no one appointed me moderator. I’m just expressing my opinion about how much time is wasted here in vituperation.

44. Victor Hugo Carballo - October 17, 2013

When i was more..uh..engaged to Trek years ago, i would certainly crave and complain over minutia, but then, in the last TNG episode “All Good Things..” there´s this dialogue between Picard and Q, in which Picard says: “We´re doing the best we can….”

So, i think every trek producer over the years really did their best, or at least, the best they could ,so i learned to be very forgiving. :)

45. Damian - October 17, 2013

31–I tend to agree about TNG not really needing many TOS references. I think some of us forget where Star Trek was by the early 90′s. TNG was the highest rated syndicated show by that point. In a way, many of the TNG fans at that time were like the Abrams-only fans today. They loved TNG, like Abrams fans liked Star Trek (2009) and STID, and they really were not interested in what came before. I think you see that today with some nubie fans. They love Abrams Star Trek, but have little or no interest in seeing what came before.

TNG brought in a new generation of fans, many of them teenagers and young adults. But they were not all that interested in the original series.

By the time Unification came to be, TNG very much had come into its own, enough so that they felt comfortable bringing in an original series character like Spock without feeling he might overshadow the show. I thought they did a good job with that. Spock was a significant part of the story, but he wasn’t the only story.

And don’t forget, Unification was supposed to tie in Spock’s motives to Star Trek VI, which was released around the same time. Berman and co. made it clear there was a connection between Unification and TUC.

Finally, releasing Unification makes perfect sense to me. At the time, it was considered one of the highlight episodes, it was a 2 parter. And most importantly, I think CBS is hoping to cash in a bit on Spock’s role in Star Trek (2009). Some nubie fans may be interested in this episode to see how Spock became involved with Romulus in the first place.

46. Sebastian - October 17, 2013

# 39 RDR

He’s had an even LONGER history of baiting me.
Every time I used to post on this site, he’d insult me or my views (for a few years now; and you were always right behind him… like a heckling puppet).

And HE came out swinging on this particular thread; if anyone owes anyone an apology it’s MJ, not me. I will apologize if he does.

Both BattleInTheGroin and THX have also supported my right to like Unification, and YOU are not a moderator RDR, so mind your own business thank you very much.

And my opinion of STID (good or bad) is my own concern. You can disagree of course, but you don’t have to call my POV invalid because it doesn’t fall in line with the great and powerless MJ.

47. Sebastian - October 17, 2013

# 43 Marja~

I agree with the latter half of your post (in fact, I’d just like to post here without MJ’s drama), but I disagree with the former.

Yes, he DID insult me.
I posted an honest opinion and he immediately belittles it and questions my credibility (I’m not a professional critic, BTW; I’m under no mandate to be ‘credible’ to anyone else; my opinion is my own as I repeated to him). I’d call questioning one’s credibility over one harmless post insulting…

There seemed to be a lot more respect on this site for awhile (after the Orci blowup), but I can see that its back to its old pattern of ‘heckle, ridicule, repeat; then demand apology.’

I’ll post again when the climate is a bit more civil. There are other sites I (gladly) go to that don’t have this kind of B/S just for expressing an honest opinion….

48. Ben - October 17, 2013

Are they not releasing episodes into theaters anymore in concert with the blu ray releases? Maybe I missed one, but the last one that came my way was BOBW and it was amazing!

49. Ahmed - October 17, 2013

@39. Red Dead Ryan – October 16, 2013

“#38. Sebastian
Please stop trying to bait MJ. You have a history of being negative on this site towards the new movies. MJ only pointed that out. Your response is to launch attacks against him, and that proves it is you who is out of line here.
Please do the right thing and apologize.”

RDR, sometime I wonder if you really dumb or just pretend to be dumb.

Sebastian posted his opinion about Unification at post #4 where he was basically expressing his personal view about that episode:

“I plan on buying “Unification.”. Mark Lenard’s swan song as Sarek in part 1 was powerful and moving. And I’m also very curious what the deleted scene is as well. ”

And then MJ attacked that personal view in post #5

“That is just not credible, dude. Unification is just boring and inept Star Trek”

If you have the brain to process how this started, then you need to shut up & stop acting like little kid demanding an apology from the person who was attacked!

Sebastian, like any one of us, can post his opinions & views without the need to get permission from you or anyone else here.

50. Matt Wright - October 17, 2013

@ 48 Ben – No theatrical releases anymore. They didn’t for Season 4 and haven’t announced anything for Season 5 yet, which they would have right about now if they were going to since it’s exactly a month away from the Blu-ray release date.

51. Matt Wright - October 17, 2013

Okay seriously guys, everyone is entitled to their opinion and is certainly allowed to say so in a non-confrontational manner, which is what was done initially. So do not start up bullying around here again, it was pretty decent here for a while, let’s keep it that way.

52. Red Dead Ryan - October 17, 2013

Ahmed,

I didn’t see anything in MJ’s post that could be considered an “attack”. Sebastien was being overly sensitive, and responded with unkind posts to MJ.

MJ just pointed out how Sebastien has routinely slammed STID (a critically and commercially successful movie) while praising a highly overrated episode from twenty-two years ago is very inconsistent and lacks credibility.

And its very sad to see you resorting to petty insults again. I won’t demand an apology from you; its clear that you have issues here with some of us that prevent you from being objective and level-headed.

53. windelkin - October 17, 2013

Thanks Disinvited for responding to me with some good info. I still keep thinking that MTV was involved in Viacom back then too. Am I just dreaming? Also, I like your other comment about Unification. Marja and Damian too, very enlightening. You’re all probably done with this thread, but maybe like myself you keep coming back here since we have a lack of new topics on Trekmovie these days so these old ones stay active longer.

54. Ahmed - October 17, 2013

@ 52. Red Dead Ryan – October 17, 2013

“MJ just pointed out how Sebastien has routinely slammed STID (a critically and commercially successful movie) while praising a highly overrated episode from twenty-two years ago is very inconsistent and lacks credibility.”

As others pointed it out, a person can dislike a movie for many reasons, while in the same time, enjoying a TV episode. We are talking about two different mediums here. Sebastien posted his personal view & that doesn’t need to be credible for anyone.

“And its very sad to see you resorting to petty insults again. I won’t demand an apology from you; its clear that you have issues here with some of us that prevent you from being objective and level-headed.”

RDR, you need to stop asking people who disagree with your worldview for apologies all the time or accusing them that they are trying to bait someone. The fact is that you don’t seem to accept that some people don’t like STID, get over it & move on.

55. Red Dead Ryan - October 17, 2013

Ahmed,

You and others here need to accept the fact that “Star Trek Into Darkness” is great Trek, and “Unification” is not. The facts bear it out. Most people on this site prefer STID.

56. Ahmed - October 17, 2013

@ 55. Red Dead Ryan – October 17, 2013

“You and others here need to accept the fact that “Star Trek Into Darkness” is great Trek, and “Unification” is not. The facts bear it out.”

That is not a fact, that is your opinion.

I can show you 10 articles & reviews that say otherwise & I’m sure that you can also show me 10 articles that support your opinion. The reason for that because art is a subjective matter, people will always have different views about any work of art.

You have your own view, and you know what, I’ve no problem with that , it is your personal view after all. Just don’t try to make it like everyone must agree with your view.

57. Matt Wright - October 17, 2013

Yep, opinion, not fact. Knock it off.

58. Matt Wright - October 17, 2013

@ 53 – Yes Viacom has owned MTV since 1985 and Paramount since 1993. Then CBS was spun off in 2005, but Viacom kept MTV, Nickelodeon, etc. So now CBS would have to license it from MTV Networks.

59. K-7 - October 17, 2013

@Sebastian

Ah, look is acting so “noble” now. Cry me a river, dude; I’ll play my mini-violin for you too. You have been so mistreated here by MJ. Wah, wah, wah; will somebody please change Sebastian’s diaper soon. LOL

Sebastian, we got tired of you whiny and aggressive act here years ago, and we don’t buy your fake outrage here.

Enough!

60. Victor Hugo - October 18, 2013

We Trekkies are an endangered species like Pandas, we shouldn´t fall
into temptation of becoming 4Chan trolls. :P

61. Damian - October 18, 2013

55–RDR, I’m afraid I’m with Ahmed on that one. Opinions are opinions.

Everyone who’s seen me post knows I’m one of those few (apparently) fans that love all Star Trek. I agree with you and MJ that STID was a great movie (I actually go a little further and like it more than Star Trek (2009)). But I do differ with some JJ era fans in that I also loved Berman era Trek too. I’ve never really understood the hate that Nemesis gets. No it was not the best Trek movie, but I always considered it a middle of the road Trek movie.

Earlier this year, before STID came out, I decided to watch the 11 prior films. I even liked TFF (some of the best “character” moments for the triad of all the films) and Insurrection (some of the best photography of the films).

I honestly can say I’ve never came out of a Star Trek film and said what a piece of crap. I’ve loved it all.

But, at the end of the day, that is just my opinion. I realize there are people out there that think Berman or Abrams were the worse thing to happen to Star Trek. All I can say to those people is whether you hate them or not, they’ve kept the Trek torch lit. In entertainment, if something is not moving, it’s dead. Even if something is bad, it’s still alive for another day.

62. Disinvited - October 18, 2013

Re:Admiral Archer’s Prize Beagle – October 17, 2013

I noticed this thread appeared closed too but now it seems to be open again.

Try refreshing this page.

63. Disinvited - October 18, 2013

#60. Damian – October 18, 2013

I believe its an old Hollywood money making dictum lately being put to use by Miley Ray Cyrus: There’s no such thing as BAD publicity.

I believe that translates into what you were expressing as: Whether good or bad, as long as people are talking passionately about STAR TREK, it is most definitely NOT a dead phenomenon.

64. Damian - October 18, 2013

62–Yes, I think so. But also, if there is nothing being produced in Hollywood on a project, it’s more or less in what they call development hell. And it’s very hard for a project to crawl out of that.

I know some would argue Star Trek would have been better without Rick Berman (something I strongly disagree with), without those years, Star Trek would have likely died out, perhaps with Star Trek V. Paramount had strongly considered ending the original movies then (V obviously did not do well in the end, and TNG was still floundering at that point). But by 91, TNG had come into it’s own and there was a resurgence of interest in Star Trek. I think that helped convince Paramount to greenlight Star Trek VI.

The same applies to Star Trek after Enterprise ended. There was still movement in the sense that a script was developed by Eric Jendersen (a Romulan War story in that case). While that was never approved, soon after, a new regime took over Paramount and they contacted Bob Orci, and the rest is history. But all along, there was still some movement, which is important for any franchise.

65. Damian - October 18, 2013

61–I noticed it was closed yesterday too. At first I thought it might have been because of the “argument” about opinions here. But I thought that was a little strange. The argument here was downright friendly compared to some debates on other articles.

Must have been an accident since it’s reopened.

66. Marja - October 18, 2013

63 Damian, OH GOD THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN SO GOOD if Enterprise had been able to do a 5th season and tackle the Romulan war.

Though I’m still trying to figure out why Romulans, if they split from the Vulcans only 5,000 years earlier, had different foreheads? Hmmm. Perhaps that was the more aggressive of the races on Vulcan? See, I can retcon anything … i’ve had decades of practice.

I think the Berman era gave us some very valuable Star Trek! there were many wonderful TNG and DS9 episodes. But there was also the reliance – at times – on Technobabble, which is the main reason I stopped watching “Voyager.”

I loved “Enterprise” because the technical stuff – for the most part – was very well woven into the scripts. I think the showrunners had taken the criticisms of the technobabble problem seriously, or were perhaps quite annoyed with it themselves. “Enterprise” is neck-and-neck with my love for TNG.

TOS will always be “my first” ; )

64 Damian, Maybe Matt had had enough of the nonsense, and closed the thread temporarily to dissuade some from perpetrating it.

I certainly skip on down past the accusations of “whining” and all that. I really, really dislike it. And I said this early on in the thread to Sebastian and MJ – OPINIONS ARE OPINIONS AND FACTS ARE FACTS. The fact that I think something is fact does not necessarily [pardon me Capt Picard] make it so.

(For example, I have many opinions on the recent shenanigans in Congress, and some I even regard as facts, but the true facts may never be known, because the media no longer dig to find them.)

67. Disinvited - October 18, 2013

#66. Marja – October 18, 2013

It’s weird you mentioned that because I just saw something on the TV news about anthropologists arguing that there really isn’t all these lines of humans that evolved from Homo erectus. They are just individuals, i.e members of Homo erectus exhibiting the wide variations possible.

I think they even posited there are no homo sapiens. I’ll keep watching the skies for more.

68. Disinvited - October 18, 2013

#66. Marja – October 18, 2013

Here seems to be the reason for the upheaval:

http://www.latimes.com/science/la-sci-homo-erectus-20131018,0,7935539.story

And for fun: it seems that darn DNA stuff has fingered the yeti:

http://www.sfgate.com/news/science/article/DNA-links-mysterious-Yeti-to-ancient-polar-bear-4903466.php

69. windelkin - October 18, 2013

Did people really get turned off by the technobabble when Voyager first aired, or was it later on that it was noticed and complained about? I watched it the first time around and never had an issue with it then. I’m just wondering if I was just such a believer and more forgiving back then than I am now. There definitely were a few episodes I thought were stupid, but overall I enjoyed the series. Love is blind, I guess.

70. Damian - October 18, 2013

66–Voyager was the weakest of the shows, IMHO. I actually didn’t watch it until a few years after it ended (save for a few episodes here and there). I was in college when it started, so I didn’t have much time for TV.

They did get bogged down in technobabble with that one. In TNG and DS9, the technobabble sort of enhanced the story. It wasn’t overwhelming, but it made it clear they were actually trying to put some thought into what they were doing. Unlike Star Wars, they weren’t just throwing stuff out there. But on Voyager, they went crazy with it. I think another problem with Voyager was it was too much like TNG. But, I did find enough to like that I ended up buying it on DVD. There were more than a fair share of dud episodes, but there were also some excellent episodes that have stood the test of time. When the writers pushed the envelope, the show benefited.

I agree if Berman and co. learned anything, it was to tone down the babble when it came to Enterprise. I agree, Enterprise was cancelled just as it was coming unto its own. All the series took about 2 or 3 seasons to find their footing. I was really hoping to see the Romulan War. We were so close. The novels finally picked up on that, but it’s nothing like seeing it on screen.

71. Keachick - October 18, 2013

I am like Damian. I like all the Star Trek spin-offs and movies. There are particular episodes in any of spin-off series or movies that I am not as fond of, however, if anyone puts on any DVD, with any of the Star Trek music playing, I am drawn to the couch, even though I really need to be doing other stuff.

72. Red Shirt Diaries - October 18, 2013

@47 / Sebastian: “There are other sites I (gladly) go to that don’t have this kind of B/S just for expressing an honest opinion….”

Then you must not behave like such an ass on those sites. Yes, please leave and do not return. So tired of your petulant little act here.

73. Damian - October 18, 2013

69–I think it was always there. Just as it went on, people started noticing it more.

I will say, it didn’t really bother me personally so much. It wasn’t until I heard other people complain about it that I realized maybe it wasn’t so popular.

I know Rick Sternbach has noted here from time to time that it wasn’t his or the production design staff’s fault. When they designed things, they tried to keep things consistent, and make sure things had a reason for being there. Ultimately it was the writers who wrote the story.

74. Damian - October 18, 2013

71–Haha. If I’m flipping channels and see Star Trek on, even though I have everything on DVD, I still stop.

Even “Threshold” probably the most maligned episode of all time, pulls me in.

75. Red Shirt Diaries - October 18, 2013

Damian,

This idea of Sebastian’s that because these are “opinions,” that no one should — heaven forbid — dare to challenger the “credibility” of opinions, is utterly ridiculous. Part of the discussion here has always been challenging the content and ideas in each others’ opinions — which is the “credibility.”

So I categorically reject Sebastian’s tactics here where he gets to go into his little “hissy fit” because MJ dared to bring up the credibility. He used this to completely duck the issue that was being brought up — his little adolescent tirade worked apparently, as it completely covered up that he could not come up with an answer to the questions post on his perceive inconsistencies.

If you think someone who is challenging is wrong on something, than then, sheesh, have the nads to tell them why; don’t throw a hissy fit and demand some apology like this is some Shakespeare tragedy. That is so lame.

76. Damian - October 18, 2013

75–I wasn’t so much defending Sebastian or even responding to Sebastian’s comments (though I honestly haven’t followed the ongoing battle between him and MJ–I tend to gloss over arguments when reading comments, usually). This was more about RDR’s response to Ahmed, that STID was liked and Unification not, and that being a fact. I was just saying that’s not a fact, but just an opinion. He and MJ (and myself to be honest) loved STID. However there are those of us (not including MJ and RDR) that actually thought Unification was great too.

77. Damian - October 18, 2013

76–But that’s just an opinion too. I don’t expect people to take that as fact. The only fact is that I loved all Star Trek, and if I ever were to meet JJ Abrams, Bob Orci, Rick Berman, Ron Moore, Harve Bennett, or anyone else that was ever involved with Star Trek, I would shake their hand, ask for an autograph, and thank them for the great ride.

78. THX-1138 - October 18, 2013

In reference to differences of opinion around here:

I am not going to insult everyone’s intelligence and act as though I am more enlightened than anybody else, But I think you can express a difference of opinion without being insulting. Sometimes it’s the delivery of the message that makes all the difference. I am trying to be more respectful of the PEOPLE who express opinions that differ from mine, while at the same time being able to disagree with their position. But I have been making myself aware that everyone here is a PERSON, and not just some “internet adversary” that needs to be “set straight”. And it’s obviously both sides of our Star Trek arguments that are guilty.

I say that we ALL try to modify the way we behave and interact with each other here, on this site. Perhaps we can’t change all of the trolls on the internet but we can change this one really cool place.

And maybe we ALL have to start fresh. Actually put the past behind all of us and start anew. No more bringing up past arguments and retreading our own “ancient history”.

Olive branches for everyone. Holes dug and prepared for hatchet burial.

79. sean - October 18, 2013

Hey, I like STID *and* I like Unification – is that allowed? :)

The scene between Stewart and Lenard is still incredibly powerful, especially when Stewart reaches out and helps him make the Vulcan greeting. Just a beautiful scene.

80. Marja - October 18, 2013

69 Windelkin, I stuck with Voyager for about 2.5 years and gave it up – by that time technobabble was relied on in too many episodes for my taste.

81. Marja - October 18, 2013

72 Red Shirt, I think Sebastian has already left us :-).

Re your 75, I agree with this, but will say, I hope folks can belay the use of “insult language” and ad hominem attacks. [MJ did not do either, he simply thought Sebastian's views of Unification vs. STiD were not credible.] For Sebastian to respond as if MJ were attacking him was illogical and led to a great deal of nonsense.

82. Marja - October 18, 2013

78 Sean, Hee-hee, YES that is allowed. I do myself. I just wish they could have done some things differently in each. : )

83. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 18, 2013

All, just to close out the Sebastian-MJ incident, provided below is the post I provided on the other thread when this thread was briefly closed down by Matt. This will be the last I have to say on this sad chapter in Trekmovie.com discourse…

***************************************************************
366. MJ — THE GRAND RETURN !!! – October 17, 2013
@361 “I am bummed out. I was wanting to post on the Unification Blu-Ray thread, but Sebastian’s hi-jinks led to the thread being closed for all of us. ;-(”

Yea, that was unfortunate. Weird series of posts by him:

1. He demanded an apology for my wording on his opinion (he didn’t like me using the word “credible”).

2. I then apologized to him for that form of my critique.

3. He has several posts where he continues to name call me a bunch and completely ignores my apology.

4. Then — GET THIS — he complains about people always demanding apologies, and makes some statement like he is running off to another site.

Honestly, it’s like dealing with spoiled 12-year old.

My apologies to Matt for that set of posts which are obviously embarrassing now for all of us.

84. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 18, 2013

@78 “And maybe we ALL have to start fresh. Actually put the past behind all of us and start anew. No more bringing up past arguments and retreading our own “ancient history”.”

Great post. I am fully on board with this, starting right now. Thanks, THX !!!

85. K-7 - October 18, 2013

THX-1138 and MJ,

Wouldn’t it be great now if Sebastian were to post that he apologizes as well, and that he is willing to accept THX-1138′s concept of a fresh start.

???

86. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 18, 2013

@81 ” I hope folks can belay the use of “insult language” and ad hominem attacks. [MJ did not do either, he simply thought Sebastian's views of Unification vs. STiD were not credible.] For Sebastian to respond as if MJ were attacking him was illogical and led to a great deal of nonsense.”

Thank you, Marja. I really appreciate that.

@85. Certainly, K-7! I would give Sebastian “a virtual bear hug” and move forward positively with the guy if he would just meet us half-way here and stop stressing over past disagreements.

87. K-7 - October 18, 2013

#75 / RSD:

“This idea of Sebastian’s that because these are “opinions,” that no one should — heaven forbid — dare to challenger the “credibility” of opinions, is utterly ridiculous. Part of the discussion here has always been challenging the content and ideas in each others’ opinions — which is the “credibility.” So I categorically reject Sebastian’s tactics here where he gets to go into his little “hissy fit” because MJ dared to bring up the credibility. He used this to completely duck the issue that was being brought up…”

I agree completely. This builds on what Marja commented on in post #81 as well. I mean, “debating” by its definition is built on assessing the “credibility” of others ideas and opinions here. That is largely what we all do here on these boards.

If someone is too sensitive and emotionally fragile to have the credibility of their opinions challenged, then they probably shouldn’t be here…which I think is kind of how this has all ended anyway, with Sebastain “running away” and not having to be accountable for his previous posts (i.e, avoiding having to apologize, after he got MJ’s to apologize to him).

88. Red Dead Ryan - October 18, 2013

Yes, I agree that everyone should extend the olive branch to each other here. I hope that Sebastien does the same. It is time to move on and stop rehashing old disputes.

The last thing we need or want is a TrekMovie.Com shutdown.

89. Ahmed - October 18, 2013

@ 88. Red Dead Ryan – October 18, 2013

“Yes, I agree that everyone should extend the olive branch to each other here. I hope that Sebastien does the same. It is time to move on and stop rehashing old disputes.

The last thing we need or want is a TrekMovie.Com shutdown.”

RDR, agree with you there. Lets not fight over everything & anything. And I extend an olive branch to you & the rest of the group here.

LLAP

90. DiscoSpock - October 18, 2013

Agree with what everyone is saying here regarding olive branches, fresh starts, being nice, etc.

Sebastian, how about it? We know you are reading these posts. Come on guy, take the positive step to join us here — be accountable please and don’t hold grudges against others.

91. Damian - October 19, 2013

79–Ha-ha. Sometimes reading these boards I feel like something’s wrong because I liked Nemesis and Star Trek (2009).

There do seem to be few of us that like all Star Trek, no matter who’s in the captain’s seat.

Bob Orci has said himself he loved all Star Trek. So I guess if he liked it all, and his team is now at the helm, then it’s fine for me too.

At the end of the day, it’s fun to debate. I love debating why I liked this or that in Star Trek, whatever it is, as well as what could have been done better. But I think it’s important we all remember, it’s still just entertainment. It’s not life or death.

I liked STID, Sebastian didn’t. I liked Insurrection, MJ didn’t. You know what, life goes on. I’m not sweating it. I love debating it, but I’m not going to start throwing out my DVD’s because someone else thought differently.

92. Dom - October 19, 2013

I tend to agree with MJ’s opinion about Unification. I remember how excited I was to see a two-parter (therefore, I assumed, an epic along the lines of TBOBW) with a situation dire enough to unite the generations. I couldn’t wait to see Spock on the bridge of the Enterprise, see him with Sarek again and find out what he’s been up to for the last 80 years.

Wow… what a disappointment! It’s obvious they could only afford both Lenard and Nimoy for a cameo in the first episode, then, showing the Berman era’s usual contempt for original series characters, have Sarek die offscreen. The TNG team never understood that they were a different show from Star Trek and didn’t have the right to kill characters from a different show in their programme. I would have been equally appalled if Orci and Kurtsman had killed off Picard in a spit-and-cough cameo in ST09.

To be honest, the whole Romulus story was very dull and could have been a 45-min episode with any old Vulcan character. Spock had essentially lived another entire human lifetime since Star Trek VI, yet he seems little changed and we learn nothing new about him. We learn more about Spock’s life, his power and influence in the 24th century, in one mindmeld in ST09 than in Unification.

Unification wastes too many opportunities (as TNG regularly did) and commits the biggest sin of all, given the hype, of just being ordinary.

And the cover of the Blu-ray looks like Spock and Picard are about to have a snog!!!

93. Garak's Pride - October 19, 2013

All,

Sebastian asked me this morning to relay to all of you that he expresses his regrets and his apologies for his recent posts. He has decided to take a break from the site for awhile.

94. Dave H - October 19, 2013

“Unification wastes too many opportunities (as TNG regularly did) and commits the biggest sin of all, given the hype, of just being ordinary….Wow… what a disappointment! It’s obvious they could only afford both Lenard and Nimoy for a cameo in the first episode, then, showing the Berman era’s usual contempt for original series characters, have Sarek die offscreen. The TNG team never understood that they were a different show from Star Trek and didn’t have the right to kill characters from a different show in their programme. I would have been equally appalled if Orci and Kurtsman had killed off Picard in a spit-and-cough cameo in ST09.”

Dom, well said. Based on the Star Trek fans I know, I would say that the vast majority share this opinion — that Unification was an opportunity missed, and that the story-line was lackluster, with several “what the hell were they thinking” brain-farts. They blew it.

95. K-7 - October 19, 2013

#93

Hey Sebastian,

Apology accepted. Thanks

96. Cervantes - October 20, 2013

@ Garak’s Pride #93 – Pity you hadn’t post that on the previous thread to it seems.

97. Cervantes - October 20, 2013

‘too’ dammit…’too’… Man, I hate my typos.

98. Hat Rick - October 20, 2013

Has anyone else noticed that interest in Star Trek has declined precipitously in the last six to eight months? Aside from the momentary spike as a result of the latest movie, I really don’t feel any vibe associated with ST anymore to the extent that I did around the time of the first Abrams movie.

For one thing, there’s no news of a sequel to this second movie.

And much as I like “Unification” and TNG Season 5, I can’t get that excited about either of them. I don’t know if it’s just me or maybe a lot of people. That’s why I’m posting this message.

I think a lot of it is from the fact that there is nothing new about the third sequel and that doesn’t seem right at all.

I’ve followed ST for around four decades. There’s more Trek around than during a lot of times — Blu-rays and fan productions, for example. But the excitement just isn’t there.

Also, it seems that more of the discussions in these threads are becoming ego contests rather than an expression of genuine interest in the subject matter.

99. Marja - October 20, 2013

Well, Hat Rick, I certainly agree with you about the ego contests, but many of us are still discussing some points of interest WRT to the latest movie, and now the Khan comix.

There are some points people are “stuck on” and some things we always feel compelled to answer [for example, I'm always countering the charge that "Uhura was just a whiny girlfriend" - when men's emotions drove the movie equally if not much more, and Uhura showed professional competence ...] but anyway, that’s my particular “hobby horse” – that said, I disliked the “shuttle” scene with Uhura/Spock because I just knew certain people would “whine” about it :-}

I’ve loved Star Trek for about the same amount of time you have.

And I have to tell you what disappointed me in STiD was the inclusion of Khan [he could have remained J Harrison, so much better], the almost inevitable inclusion of Klingons, the extreme violence – even on the part of Spock! – the death of Pike! Jaysis!

I could go on, but I got the sense that a LOT of people were pissed off about Khan – either what they called a direct rip-off of TWOK [ which I didn't so much agree with, as I liked the twist on it, but "KHAANNN!!!" was just TOO much ]. Plus the name was included for no good reason, absolutely none. “How It Should’ve Ended” has a great take on this. Also of course the ridiculous and superfluous “LOOK UNDIES!” scene. I mean Ms Eve looks great, but could I get me some Zachary Quinto next time? ;-D

Also the “relentless” pace of the movie, with character moments only crammed in [ a minute here, two minutes there ], did not appeal to me a great deal. I don’t mind action, mind you, but the repeat of a “space dive”

As to Unification, I’m not wowed, I wasn’t originally. Several folks commented here that many opportunities were missed in the two episodes, and I remember being somewhat unimpressed / disappointed. I also have all Star Treks [except most of the movies] available to me on Netflix, so I go there to pick and choose. IDK, Berman Trek was pretty good, but I go back to TOS again and again. Berman Trek had a number of very good eps, but not many draw me back again and again c/w TOS. Maybe because I watched them a fair bit when they were originally on, and I then religiously recorded each one. IDK. I got really tired of all the Klingon honor / revenge stuff. And technobabble wore me out so much, I quit watching Voyager after 2 years. Bore, bore, bore. Too bad b/c I really liked Janeway.

Maybe it’s b/c “Berman Trek” was missing Kirk, Spock, McCoy and Uhura? And now we have them back again in Abrams Trek, younger, a bit stupider [Kirk], and ready to learn? That’s what I love about Abrams Trek, and the turn to an alternate universe / timeline in the new movies. I just wish they would slow the heck down. And show us more new life and new civilizations, no matter what the Chinese audience [or government? ] say.

100. crazydaystrom - October 21, 2013

@99. Marja
…I have to tell you what disappointed me in STiD was the inclusion of Khan [he could have remained J Harrison, so much better], the almost inevitable inclusion of Klingons, the extreme violence – even on the part of Spock!
…pissed off about Khan…”KHAANNN!!!” was just TOO much…

…the “relentless” pace of the movie, with character moments only crammed in [ a minute here, two minutes there ]…”

^^^
And so in a nutshell, my issues with STID. I saw the film thrice in the theaters- 3D IMAX, regular 3D and 2D- enjoying much about the film and wanting to support Trek, but felt an overriding disappointment with because those very reasons you stated. I left the theater each time feeling that the enormous potential of a Star Trek reboot with a huge budget and an obviously talented cast and crew was squandered.

It’s only been recently, since I got the blu ray for my birthday, that I’ve been able to watch it and look through or past those things that bugged me so much about the film and see that at its core it is a better film than I’ve been able to give it credit for. But still if not for those things you pointed out it could have been much better Trek, IMO.

Inception appealed to a wide audience AND received critical acclaim. Gravity, without relentless whiz-bang, is impressing both critics and movie goers. There has got to be a way to make an exceedingly smart interesting Star Trek movie that displays all that is and can be GREAT about Star Trek AND be a box office hit. Frankly I do not think that has EVER been done.

101. Damian - October 21, 2013

98–I agree as far as the general public is concerned. Obviously, we as Star Trek fans are always interested.

But now, STID came out. It did well, but I just did not get the sense of the knockout that went with Star Trek (2009). I think MJ hit the nail on the head with his opinions about the reasons for that (the seemingly lack of advertising in the US, the whole, no way, it’s not Khan to finding out, no it really was deception, the 4 year delay etc). I can’t overemphasize the 4 year delay. The public was into Star Trek (2009), they wanted more. But in today’s day and age, with the ADHD attention span when it comes to entertainment, 4 years is far too long. The magic was gone, squandered. Most of the public had long forgotten about Star Trek (2009) by the time STID came out.

I also agree with Marja. I loved STID, but it could have been far better. I would have had no problem with John Harrison as, well, John Harrison. I really can’t believe they went to Khan. And the magic blood, well, that’s never going to work for me. That has to be the king of plot contrivances. Character who previously never had magic blood now has magic blood. I loved Admiral Marcus, Section 31′s involvement, the improvement in Scotty’s character, and improvements made to the Enterprise.

We’ll see. I do believe Paramount wants a movie in 2016 for the 50th anniversary. But it will likely be overshadowed by Star Wars. I’ll always love Star Trek more than Star Wars, but I’m not delusional. I know Star Wars has much more public appeal.

102. K-7 - October 21, 2013

@98

“Has anyone else noticed that interest in Star Trek has declined precipitously in the last six to eight months? Aside from the momentary spike as a result of the latest movie, I really don’t feel any vibe associated with ST anymore to the extent that I did around the time of the first Abrams movie.”

Apparently, you don’t watch much TV. Star Trek is being hugely promoted right now in new Samsung Galaxy smart-watch campaign, and last night, during Sunday Night Football (the biggest TV ratings show of the week), General Electric premeried their “Brilliant Machines” ad, which has Sulu commanding the Enterprise.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2QMO1SZ0-is&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Star Trek is getting big now. It’s Fin’g Samsung and GE, guy on major showpiece advertising campaigns. Your comment is completely wrong.

103. Dave in RI - October 21, 2013

I wonder if they’ll digitally remove the great blooper that made it past the editors in “Unification”.

I’m referring to the reflection of someone chewing gum on the triangular thing on Sela’s (?) desk.

104. Admiral Archer's Prize Beagle - October 21, 2013

K-7,

I had a similar “what were they thinking” reaction to you as well in regards Hat Rick’s and Damian’s comments. Seeing major product introduction commercials by mega companies right now featuring Star Trek, with one featuring John Cho, Gatt 2000 and the Enterprise, is really, really big!!!

I mean, come on, GE is ranked 8th in the Fortune 500, and Samsung is ranked 14th, and these are ubiquitous commercials that are now being played with the top prime time TV shows, and during NFL games — this is huge in term of public buzz for our franchise. Huge!

105. Ahmed - October 21, 2013

@102. K-7

It was nice seeing that GE ad but that by itself is not an indication. GE ran ads using KITT from Knight Rider, does that mean that Knight Rider is very popular now ??

Because of the time lag between the movies, Star Trek need to be back to television, pure & simple.

106. Marja - October 21, 2013

101 Damian, I have been complaining of the poor advertising in the US since about 6 weeks before the movie premiered. Since, I’ve seen “standee” lobby displays for other movies 6 – 8 weeks in advance of opening. Before STiD opened, Marvel hadn a IM3 standee for about six months, it seemed to me. ST2009 got much better treatment domestic publicity-wise.

All we had at the local AMC 20 was that frowny-face Khan poster, all greys with a little orange, on display in the corner, just like 18 other posters in the lobby, little indication it was Star Trek. Had Paramount got the colorful posters [Kirk running, Uhura with the disruptor, Spock in the volcano, Khan with the inevitable long elegant villain coat, running] into lobbies as “standees”, movie attendance would have increased by probably 1/3 or more.

I thought and still think that the four-year delay was very selfish on the part of Bad Robot and/or its writers; did they really win by putting out “Cowboys and Aliens” and “Super8″ before getting the second movie in what could’ve been an even more successful, enthusiastically received, franchise? With a bigger fanbase a-building?

I realize “Super8″ did well critically, not extremely well, but I’m sure Abrams was happy with the result; it just seems to me that “Cowboys and Aliens” could have been the movie to be “dashed off” between ST2 and ST3, which latter still could have been written and filmed by the 50th anniversary.

Priorities were definitely screwed up and the domestic publicists have, rightfully, been sacked.

I suspect the recent TV publicity, which I’ve not seen yet, is a desperate effort by Paramount to increase DVD sales. The outrage on this board was undoubtedly felt by many Trek fans, who wanted a special DVD/Blu-Ray with “all the extra” features. Instead of scattering the features everywhere, depending on what store you bought it from o..O and there was a total lack of other merchandising because Abrams and CBS were having a snit fit.

CBS/Paramount really have to work out some priorities and realize what possibilities Star Trek holds as a great show that could gain critical and popular esteem. If it returns to its roots, with maybe a little romance thrown in for week-to-week continuity of minor dramatic or comedic moments, and discusses philosophical and moral questions [which despite what some say, I think O&K tried to do in STiD, between all the ACTION! and punching and kicking] with differences and a bit of personal and sometimes comic friction between the officers in their official capacities [see McCoy and Spock in "The Ultimate Computer" or K, S & M at the end of "Tholian Web" - and hell, for drama, Spock and McCoy throughout much of "Tholian Web"].

IT CAN BE DONE, and Trek has a much “bigger” name than it did in TOS’s time. There are many movie audience members who would check it out and possibly stick with it.

Week-to-week continuity is very important to many quality shows these days, and leads to “watercooler discussions” and internet talk and people sticking with the program because they’re curious about what’s going to happen. “Mad Men,” “Firefly,” and many more have “stand-alone” episodes with the continuous sub-plots in the background, and have loyal fans who love the resultant, deepened characters.

I can’t say enough how upset I am about the four-year delay. I’m an old enough fan to understand that Paramount, et. al. think we are pitiful people with no other lives, and will loyally attend no matter how long it takes to build a movie. It was kind of a slap in the Trekfan face to have to wait four fecking years.Yet here we are, because our love defies insults, and is rewarded with our dear and wonderful characters played by excellent actors.

107. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 21, 2013

Admiral, K-7,

Yes, I have been seeing the Samsung and GE Star Trek commercials all over prime this this past week. Huge deal for the franchise. This really is a mega-vibe for Star Trek public awareness. We have never seen anything this big — with two major ad campaigns by two of the largest companies on earth — ever in Star Trek history.

While a subset of Star Trek fans who didn’t like STID so much may be feeling a bit of malaise right now, as far as the general public is concerned, Star Trek is as big as ever right now. With all due respect, the situation here is exactly the opposite of what Hat Rick was trying to say.

108. Damian - October 21, 2013

102 & 104–That’s all fine and good, and I’m always happy to see Star Trek out there.

But what I’m talking about is the general public. Not Trekkies or tech geeks (no insults intended–before someone is offended). But your average Joe Smo. I don’t know about you, but in 2009, Star Trek was the talk of the town. This time, it was more like an afterthought. I kept getting the “Oh yeah” reactions. A lot of people went to see it, but unlike 2009, nobody is talking about it. It almost seems like a has-been now. That was not the case in 2009.

They lost all the momentum from Star Trek (2009). Yes, STID did well enough in the theaters and all that. But there was no STAYING power. It’s done, gone, except with us Trekkies. And unlike 2009, as Marja noted, the advertising was sub-par in the US. It really didn’t shift into high gear until what, a week or so before the movie came out. If you weren’t a Trekkie and looking for every bit of info you could, you probably didn’t even know one was being made.

The point being, you can’t expect to put out Star Trek once every 4 years and think that will be enough to keep Star Trek alive and well. A TV series would be the best vehicle. But CBS is not at all interested in a TV series. But movies could keep things moving, if you were to do it maybe every 2 years (much like the early/mid 80′s.

109. K-7 - October 21, 2013

@107. Knight Rider had better ratings than TNG, and the show was more successful internationally than TNG. They tried a second Knight Rider TV series, and are now doing a movie.

Knight Rider may not be quite at Star Trek TOS or nuTrek’s level, but’s it’s still iconic, and is recognized as such by the public. It’s certainly well above the level of general public awareness of say TNG, Dr. Who or Babylon 5.

110. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 21, 2013

“But what I’m talking about is the general public”

Exactly. I’ll repeat again, this really is a mega-vibe for Star Trek public awareness. We have never seen anything this big — with two major ad campaigns by two of the largest companies on earth — ever in Star Trek history. While a subset of Star Trek fans who didn’t like STID so much may be feeling a bit of malaise right now, as far as the general public is concerned, Star Trek is as big as ever right now.

111. Ahmed - October 21, 2013

@ 109. K-7 – October 21, 2013

“Knight Rider may not be quite at Star Trek TOS or nuTrek’s level, but’s it’s still iconic, and is recognized as such by the public.”

Agree that it is still iconic, I watched the reruns when I was a kid & to this day, I remember stuff from the show. But I won’t say that it is more iconic than TNG or even Dr. Who (at least in UK).

Babylon 5, an amazing Sci-Fi show, is unfortunately way behind when it come to public awareness. With the exception of that little nod that it got from Breaking Bad.

112. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 21, 2013

“Knight Rider may not be quite at Star Trek TOS or nuTrek’s level, but’s it’s still iconic, and is recognized as such by the public. It’s certainly well above the level of general public awareness of say TNG, Dr. Who or Babylon 5.”

Yep. I’ve said this before, TOS is the only Star Trek series that is “iconic”. It’s the Star Trek “brand” that the general public recognizes. None of the other series are even close to being iconic.

113. Damian - October 21, 2013

110–I’d love to believe that. I loved STID and was disappointed with the 4 year gap and the apparent lack of build up prior to the movie.

I’m just not seeing it now. I really think the general public could care less if there is a sequel. After Star Trek (2009) everyone was wondering, when is there going to be a sequel. Then 4 years go by. All that excitement lost. Now, I don’t hear anyone asking about the next Star Trek film.

I think it’s critical for the team, if they want the next film to be successful, to build the excitement. Get a story outline together ASAP. Pump it up. Advertise and talk about it. And please, no more games or BS with the secrets and deceptions. I understand you don’t want to give the whole game away. But you can still give out ACCURATE tidbits (like who’s involved). And did I say, no deceptions this time.

114. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 21, 2013

@113

Dude, you are mixing your personal feelings with reality. The movie would not have made nearly half a billion, and GE and Samsung would not be doing major ad campaigns based on it, if it wasn’t topical.

Take the subjectivity out of this. Your malaise is YOUR subjective feeling, not mine, and not the general publics. This mega-trend of the general public losing interest is just something you feel — you don’t have anything concrete to objectively back this up with.

115. Damian - October 21, 2013

114–Perhaps. But one fact I can put out there is after 2009, everyone I knew was talking about Star Trek. Now, I hear no one talking about it.

In any event, 2 things the team needs to do, don’t wait another 4 years for the next film, and pump it up more than a month before the film.

Oh, and I never feel malaise about Star Trek. I’m always up to watching Star Trek. I’m always reading a Star Trek novel, so I’ve got no problem being excited about Star Trek.

116. Keachick - October 21, 2013

Certainly, for me, there is a degree of disappointment that Harrison turned out to be a Khan (though not necessarily that Khan), however, it did provide an interesting twist on all we had seen before re Space Seed/TWOK. I am obviously not as angry or as disappointed as many posting here are.

Actually, I have found that much of the *darkness* has emanated from this and other internet sites. For a start, even before the movie was released, there were hundreds of posts complaining about the “Undies” scene (all of a few seconds) and yet, if I remember correctly, there was only me and one other person who expressed concern about the wanton violence that was shown in the trailers, let alone in the actual full release movie. People were so obsessed with the sight of Carol/Eve seen in her underwear that they seemed to completely overlook the fact that this villainous character played by Benedict Cumberbatch appeared to be mercilessly, brutally kicking someone who was on the ground. [It turned out to be Kirk, who else would it be - this Kirk deserves such horrendous hidings, for what exactly, I have yet to discern :(]

Then we have people complaining about Uhura being “whiney”, but again, overlook the obvious brutality that takes place soon after the “infamous” shuttlecraft discussion.

That movie shows a man crush another man’s skull with his bare hands, stand on someone’s leg/thigh so heavily, so viciously, that he broke it, kick and punch another person over and over with such viciousness and force – yet, what are most of this group concerned with – a female shown wearing underwear

This has been what has disappointed, shocked, brought me to tears almost – that most of you here appear to be so numb, living in such *darkness* that you mistake a short, harmless, silly scene as being something worthy of hundreds of postings about sexism and on and on, yet scenes that are truly obscene get overlooked, except by one or two lone voices like me and Marja.

It is not what the writers/producers did in STID that has depressed and bothered me so much. It has been the kind of reaction that various aspects of this film has received from so many that really is scary…:(

Hopefully, Paramount and other investors, would-be producers, writers etc are busy “getting all their ducks in a row” before they make an official announcement about the making of the third movie. I am not too worried yet. I just hope that the next movie does take us to a new, unexplored place, where war and violence do not rule… If there is going to be *violence*, it is Bones finding out that this serum from Khan has some unfortunate side effects on Kirk’s nature…Healing comes via Menosia…

117. Danpaine - October 21, 2013

Fact is, nobody in the mainstream is talking about STID anymore. It’s over. I think in Trek’s overall history it’s just going to be a ‘blip’ on the radar. Whether you or I love or hate it notwithstanding.

It’s allll Star Wars now, folks. Just peruse any movie/entertainment site. And it’s just going to grow as Disney’s new behemoth starts picking up steam. And then there’s more Avengers, and more Avatar…

I’m a Trek fan first, but….that’s what I see coming down the pike.

118. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 21, 2013

@116. Violence-wise, the Khan in STID was no different than the Khan in Star Trek II. In ST II, Khan brutalized and tortured the Regula one crew, then hung them in the space station, and then McCoy had to lower down their dead, bleeding corpses. And at the end of WOK, we see graphic scenes of Khan’s face melted away, with and ear missing, skin dissolved, and more blood. In fact, there was actually a lot more blood shown in WOK than STID.

Khan creates a lot of human disaster and violence. STID was no different from WOK in that respect.

119. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 21, 2013

“Fact is, nobody in the mainstream is talking about STID anymore.”

Other than it being at the Top of the disc sales charts just a couple weeks back. LOL So I guess the hundreds of thousands of people who have just bought the DVD/Blu-ray must be under some gag order to “not talk about it?”

Seriously, where you do people come up with this utterly non-convincing drivel? In terms of intelligent discourse, this is “I pulled that statement out of my ass” territory.

120. Disinvited - October 21, 2013

#114. MJ — THE GRAND RETURN !!! – October 21, 2013

You are aware of the two campaigns one is celebrating TMP as a piece in a collage of other homages and the other STID (Although it seems to me to be some new filmed segments and that in itself is very significant.)?

Nice to have an answer to the burning question of what powers Rudolph’s nose so bright?: Dilithium crystals.

121. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 21, 2013

@120

Yep. Both reinforce the TOS Star Trek brand of course, which is now in it’s nuTrek incarnation.

122. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 21, 2013

@120. There is separate commercial for Samsung which is ST-TMP only — not a collage. It’s really cool, too. It was on in prime time last night during the football game on NBC.

123. Disinvited - October 21, 2013

#119. MJ — THE GRAND RETURN !!! – October 21, 2013

I believe Danpaine meant “Mainstream media” by “Mainstream”. In that respect, the focus does seem to be all STAR WARS. But I take your point that these ads featuring ST may be the beginning of a 50th anniversary awareness campaign.

Could it be said with respect to we fans that enjoyed STID to one degree or another:

“We may be nerd but we’re a herd!”?

124. Disinvited - October 21, 2013

#122. MJ — THE GRAND RETURN !!! – October 21, 2013

Thanks for the heads up. I’ll keep an eye out.

125. Marja - October 21, 2013

112 MJ, Yep, TOS is iconic, and so will these movies be, if they get off their … and start it up. I think [hopefully, I know] O&K are already putting their heads together to outline the next one.

That is, [sigh] if they’re not too busy with other things o_O

126. Marja - October 21, 2013

115 Damian, Indeed. The new bunch of domestic publicists for Paramount should, as soon as O&K have a story outline, begin plumping Star Trek. They don’t need to tell the new story! But they should have something like … “Remember the excitement of discovery!” and have some scenes from 2009 and STiD [the discoveries can be various things, alas, they aren't new worlds except for Nibiru] …

“Coming in [fill in the month and year] ‘Star Trek’ … be on the lookout for new worlds and new civilizations!”

And they should by god get the visual publicity into theatres and on video 6 months, not later than 3 months, before the premiere.

127. Red Dead Ryan - October 21, 2013

I agree with those saying that STID is still highly relevent among the mainstream crowd. GE and Samsung are obviously willing to spend big bucks to feature the new cast members in commercials.

I also agree that TOS is currently the only truly iconic Trek series. TNG was iconic for awhile in the nineties, but that flame was extinguished by turds like “Insurrection” and “Nemesis”.

“Deep Space Nine” is generally considered the “buried treasure” of all the series. Like TOS, it was ahead of its time in the kind of stories it told.

128. Red Dead Ryan - October 21, 2013

The new movies have the potential to be the most iconic of the entire franchise. These current films have done what no previous Trek films have been able to do: Bring in new fans and keep them.

If the third movie is outstanding, the nuTrek trilogy could be revered as much as “Lord of The Rings” or “The Dark Knight” trilogies are.

The only thing that hurt the new movies was the lack of decent merchandise, especially in conjunction with STID. We got some comic books, some KRE-O toys and a badly-recieved video game — that’s it. This is one area they need to improve upon next time. The fiftieth anniversary is a chance for “fortune and glory” to be had.

129. Marja - October 21, 2013

127 Red Dead, to play Devil’s Advocate for a mo’ … Mention “Captain Picard” or the Borg, or say “Resistance is Futile” … many people get it … but I’m not entirely sure they get the full context. But these are modern catch-phrases.

Spock, of course, is better known than many of those …. except when older folks mix him up with the baby doctor.

130. Marja - October 21, 2013

RDRyan, “If the third movie is outstanding, the nuTrek trilogy could be revered as much as “Lord of The Rings” or “The Dark Knight” trilogies are. …. The only thing that hurt the new movies was the lack of decent merchandise, especially in conjunction with STID. We got some comic books, some KRE-O toys and a badly-recieved video game — that’s it. This is one area they need to improve upon next time. The fiftieth anniversary is a chance for “fortune and glory” to be had.

I agree about the third movie. After all wasn’t The Two Towers not as well accepted as the other two LOTR movies? Heh. But yes, Star Trek could make up a lot by doing a fantastic third movie. I just worry that marketing to the Chinese, who seem to hate talk and sci-fi elements, will kill good story potential.

Lack of merchandise was certainly not the only thing that hurt the new movie. A four-year wait was Number 1, followed by crappy US marketing [I mean theatre presence alone] and, yes, a lack of merchandise for Trek collectors. However, STiD was in no wise a film for kids, so it would have IMHO been quite wrong to make it Happy Meal stuff. The big prob with merchandise is, CBS wouldn’t get the heck outta the way.

A decent videogame would have been great. I’m not into gaming, or toys, or any of that, but I LOVE texts, and do hope they can put out an AUTrek encyclopedia in time for the 3rd movie.

Mainly, this conflict or whatever pissing contest it is between CBS/Paramount needs to end, especially if they’re to bring Trek to TV.

131. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 21, 2013

@129. I think you vastly overestimate public knowledge of TNG. I would replace your “many people” with “some people.” And very few people under the age of 20 know those characters or references. TNG hasn’t had a lot of staying power outside of fandom.

This blu-ray remastering effort is a nice way for us to remember it though, but it does kind of feel like an obituary to me.

132. Colin - October 21, 2013

As for the merchandising, what is about the quality of Star Trek merchandise? I could never understand why so much of the merchandise for this franchise comes off as the product of indifference or greed.

Indifference – The Star Trek: Starships Collection is a collection of models that come off to this fan as the product of wage slaves in a Chinese factory. Parts are haphazardly slapped together. The paint job is sloppy. And there are design decisions that are puzzling. Plus, on top of that, models have a good chance of coming to the subscriber or buyer broken. The magazines show that the writers didn’t fact check. (The Enterprise refit was launched in 2272 or 2273; Q2 states that the five-year mission ended in 2270.)

Greed – The mulitple versions of Star Trek: Into Darkness. Paramount could have gone the path of other studios. Pacific Rim is chocked full of goodies. (And, now Paramount is re-re-releasing the movies with additional printed material, but the movies are still the same. No additions to what was on the discs with the movies.)

Paramount is attempting to turn Star Trek into a global franchise. But, the franchise is already a niche product in its home country, and never gained a wide following. True, elements of it have entered into the public consciousness, but the majority of people are “meh” about it. Global audiences don’t want Trek, they want action-adventure movies chocked full of set pieces supported by a thin structure of cutscenes. (Cutscenes like those in video games.)

133. Vultan - October 21, 2013

I just did a search for “Star Trek” on my DirecTV menu. The only results that came up were pay-per-view showings of STID and several episodes of TNG.

It’s unfortunate TOS and DS9 don’t get more reruns on American TV, but I’m glad at least one series is still replayed at least. And happy it’s the one that made me a fan (along with the TOS movies).

“Make it so.”

134. K-7 - October 21, 2013

@132

You should be a “de-motivational speaker.” Or they could use you in a drug rehab center to help people come down from their highs.

;-)

135. Hat Rick - October 21, 2013

I want to thank everyone for your interesting comments in response to my Post No. 98. I’ll give them all some thought.

Much of my current feelings can probably be traced my personal expectations about how STID could possibly reinvigorate the franchise. I was hoping that it would fill the news with stories about how Paramount would be raring to go with the next sequel, for example. And the absence of that type of news worries me. It just does.

It’s also possible that my own distance from Las Vegas these days, making it impractical for me to go to the “official” conventions, has had something of a dampening effect on my own personal enthusiasm; maybe I’m simply out of touch. But I can’t help feeling that there are those out there, like some who have expressed similar thoughts above, who wish things had turned out as positively from a broadly cultural point of view as we had hoped.

I do agree that the four year delay was just a killer. No one wants to wait four years for a movie — not even a dedicated fan, let along the current generation used to receiving a new installment of Iron Man every 16 to 24 months or so. Again, those high school seniors (for example) who saw ST (2009) are now college seniors. That puts things in perspective. A lot can happen in four years; a lot of interest has had time to dissipate. I wish it had turned out differently, but it didn’t. And there it is.

136. Marja - October 21, 2013

131, MJ, I was thinking, I suppose, of my fellow Coasties, many of whom enjoyed Star Trek. And the “pop” references of newscasters and others are probably based on quick research or picking up phrases from others. Anyways, hope springs eternal in this one. Let’s not sit shiva or have a wake for Star Trek just yet.

132, Colin, Help me out. What are cutscenes? [I don't play videogames.]

I would bet that if Bad Robot had stood to profit from Trek merchandise, it would have been personally vetted by Abrams or his trustee, and not been so shoddy …. but CBS just had to pee on it, didn’t they. Jiminy. Too bad for us fans, eh?

133 Vultan, Every ST series is up on Netflix, and the rights to run them are secured for, like, a hundred years. I don’t think the rights are exclusive to Netflix. Netflix runs in several countries beside the US … so tell all your friends ; )

137. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 22, 2013

Rick, I think we all agree that the four year delay was ridiculous. If there is not going to be a delay this time around, then I would expect that will will here of the director announcement NLT December/January.

138. Damian - October 22, 2013

132–I do agree that Paramount really dropped the ball on the DVD/Blu-Ray for STID. There was definite greed involved there, forcing people who want the goodies to have to buy different versions of the same film.

For now, I’ve held off buying STID. Sometimes studios will release a “Special Edition” with more of the goodies down the road. Paramount may wait until everyone they think has bought all the extras has done so, then release a Special edition. Maybe not. At some point I’ll buy it. I’ll admit though, everytime I see it at the store, I’m sorely tempted.

I’ll just say, there was huge excitement around Star Trek (2009). Paramount and the Abrams team did an excellent job with the buildup and the merchandising. This time, with STID, not so much. We keep bringing up the 4 year delay because that was a big deal. You had to try to recapture all that magic, and that topped with the lackluster buildup here in the US, I do think they lost a bit in the excitement department.

I think the team needs to make sure for the next film, build it up. It’s great to go around the world and pump it up, but don’t forget the home market here in the US. Start next year to talk about it.

139. Damian - October 22, 2013

127–True. Star Trek (the original series) will always be what everything in Star Trek is based on. Even the new movies are based on that. It will always be my favorite. I became a Trekkie about a year before TNG came out. TNG was an excellent show too. I remember thinking by about the middle of the 2nd season that TNG was actually turning out to be a great show. It was king of syndicated TV for a number of years. But I do agree, I wouldn’t classify it as iconic. Marja makes a good point, there are certain things people remember about TNG, and it does have a legion of loyal fans. First Contact being a blockbuster film I think helped cement its status in history probably as number 2 behind the original series. The Borg were probably one of the best villains ever created, and people will remember that.

A friend of mine is a fan of the original series and Enterprise (believe it or not). I keep encouraging him to try out Deep Space Nine. He noted he liked Babylon 5 and Battlestar Galactica. I keep telling him he needs to check out DS9. I agree with RDR, DS9 was a hidden gem of Star Trek history. It does say something for the series that Deep Space Nine had a legion of its own fans, who were just fans of DS9.

140. Colin - October 22, 2013

@136

Wikipedia has the best description of a cutscene:

“A cutscene or event scene (sometimes in-game cinematic or in-game movie) is a sequence in a video game over which the player has no or only limited control, breaking up the gameplay and used to advance the plot, strengthen the main character’s development, introduce characters, and provide background information, atmosphere, dialogue, and clues.” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cutscene)

Star Trek had its set pieces; however, as set pieces cost money, they were judiciously used. Most of a TV show or movie was focused on the character interaction and dialog. When the budgets became larger, and CG became more prevalent, the scales tipped to the other end, with set pieces taking more and more of a film’s running time. Dialog was pushed to a minor role – it kept the momentum going, while not slowing the film down.

Global audiences associate Star Trek with talkiness. They wanted less talking. (And, funny enough, they voiced a suggestion that was as old as Star Trek itself. They wanted to get rid of Spock’s ears. This was a suggestion made by NBC execs as well in the 1960s..)

I think the next film in the series will be closer to a generic action-adventure movie and farther away from Star Trek.

141. Disinvited - October 22, 2013

#140. Colin – October 22, 2013

Interesting, there are only three times that I recall that they sidestepped the ears by covering them up, in San Fran, on Zeon, and in the city on the edge.

142. Disinvited - October 22, 2013

Who said no one notes the first pilot’s anniversary?:

http://trekweb.com/articles/2013/10/17/50-Years-of-the-First-Star-Trek-Pilot-The-Cage.shtml

Another one bites the dust:

http://thecelebritycafe.com/feature/2013/10/damon-lindelof-lost-and-star-trek-darkness-writer-quits-twitter

Shatner opening 50th anniversary dialogue?:

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/movies/news/a524110/william-shatner-on-star-wars-7-jj-abrams-will-make-fabulous-movie.html

143. Damian - October 22, 2013

142–Yes, technically next year is the 50th anniversary of the creation of Star Trek. Obviously most consider 1966 as the birth since that’s when it was first seen on TV. But just as a baby takes 9 months before it is born after being created, Star Trek took 2 years from it’s creation to be born.

144. Dom - October 22, 2013

Sadly, Star Trek, with its peculiar ownership issues, seems doomed to be stuck in a second tier. James Bond films had this for years, in this case because they were stuck with a duff studio that was semi-permanently in debt and litigation. The films would make splash when they showed up, then vanish again and the literary rights holders keep the novels and their spinoffs completely separate.

Star Trek has an issue, in part, because of the Viacom split. Star Wars brand awareness is massive: the acclaimed Clone Wars series is shutting down immediately to be replaced by Rebels in order to prime the younger audience for the post-New Hope/Jedi era, there are the cartoon spinoffs, the movies have a Extended Universe, there are nice looking models and action figures, basically keeping everything in the public’s (and especially kids’) perception. Marvel and Transformers are the same and, doubtless, having sorted out issues from the first film, by the time GI Joe 3 turns up, there’ll be a proper regular cartoon to run alongside the comics and films.

Star Trek, on the other hand, suffers from mostly having cheap movies (until lately) and a portion of its fanbase that has a vocally dismissive, snobbish, contemptuous attitude towards animation and the methods other franchises commonly uses to stay in the public eye (hardcore Trek fans being a hugely snobbish, self-righteous, humourless shower who think Trek is some kind of world-changing philosophy and not merely a commercial franchise), yet churns out books and comics month in, month out that only appeal to and are only marketed to a tiny wing of hardcore fans.

Abrams and his team are far more worldly than the TNG mob, who came over more like a peculiar California religious sect than programme-makers and who ignored the rest of the TV industry, meaning they haemorrhaged viewers, but the perceived lack of marketing clout backing the Bad Robot seems to me to be hobbling any attempt to push the Abrams series into the stratosphere!

145. Dom - October 22, 2013

Oh, and speaking of cartoons, RIP Filmation’s Lou Scheimer of the Star Trek cartoon series, He-Man, She-Ra, Space Sentinels, the Planet of the Apes and many others . . .

146. Disinvited - October 22, 2013

#145. Dom – October 22, 2013

He definitely constructed memorable things that filled my childhood and inner child with much joy.

Noticed in his obit that DreamWorks Animation now owns Filmation’s STAR TREK library. I didn’t know that.

R.I.P.

147. Marja - October 22, 2013

138 Damian, “Paramount may wait until everyone they think has bought all the extras has done so, then release a Special edition.” Yeah, this is what I’m hoping for too, although even with ST2009, the deleted scenes were only viewable if one had a BluRay player >:-P

I bought the plain ol’ DVD for $13, to participate in a Re-watch, and hope there will be a Special Edition down the road, with maybe a few character-oriented deleted scenes [I can dream can't I?] or a few bloopers ….

“I’ll just say, there was huge excitement around Star Trek (2009). Paramount and the Abrams team did an excellent job with the buildup and the merchandising. This time, with STID, not so much. We keep bringing up the 4 year delay because that was a big deal. You had to try to recapture all that magic, and that topped with the lackluster buildup here in the US, I do think they lost a bit in the excitement department.” I seem to recall that there were small Standee lobby cards announcing Trek1 as early as December. And boy was I stoked! The lackluster [or, simple lack of] buildup in the US was completely inexcusable. Yes, they did devote many $$ to wooing overseas audiences, but to forget viewers in the US was plain stupid.

148. Marja - October 22, 2013

SORRY FOR THE “ESSAY” BUT I AM STILL ANGRY ABOUT THE LACK OF ADVANCE PUBLICITY …

144 Dom, “Star Trek, on the other hand, suffers from mostly having cheap movies (until lately) and a portion of its fanbase that has a vocally dismissive, snobbish, contemptuous attitude towards animation and the methods other franchises commonly uses to stay in the public eye (hardcore Trek fans being a hugely snobbish, self-righteous, humourless shower who think Trek is some kind of world-changing philosophy and not merely a commercial franchise), yet churns out books and comics month in, month out that only appeal to and are only marketed to a tiny wing of hardcore fans.

Abrams and his team are far more worldly than the TNG mob, who came over more like a peculiar California religious sect than programme-makers and who ignored the rest of the TV industry, meaning they haemorrhaged viewers, but the perceived lack of marketing clout backing the Bad Robot seems to me to be hobbling any attempt to push the Abrams series into the stratosphere!”

Well, personally I can’t say I’m crazy about CHEAP animation, nor animation in general [even the type used in the ST videogame seemed silly with the running in a turbolift, but maybe that's a game design issue]; a “cleaned up” less violent version of Trek to appeal to young and “peacenik” elders. I would definitely watch it, but don’t want it as a substitute for live-action films or TV.

As far as the comics, I’ve enjoyed some of them, but would enjoy novels more. I did like the “Starfleet Academy” novels, at least 2 out of the 4 were quite decent stories. But none of these, even mass-market novels, really reach past Star Trek fans to the “general Sci-Fi public.” Some “serious” Sci-Fi fans often dismiss Star Trek, which is sad; I think they dislike the “limiting” concepts of a Federation, a Starfleet, and a regular crew of humanoids. Where is the world creation, they wonder; where are the challenges to imagination, &c.

The worship of Roddenberry really needs to be toned down. At the bottom, GR was a TV writer who had a grand idea and finally succeeded in getting it sold and produced. He consulted frequently with Rand Corporation, which I believe was one of the huge participants in the early the Defense Advance Research Projects Agency [DARPA]; I’m not dismissing his creative ideas by any means; I mean that he “checked them out” and possibly got better solutions for technical problems that had to be resolved for fictional dramatic purposes, or to ease the public’s comprehension.

I agree that Abrams & Co. are quite realistic as regards the movie business – I think this is frankly what offends many Trek “religionists” – while I welcome their business-like approach to a degree, I really dislike the concept of market research influencing the writing and production of scripts – I think that may come more from Paramount Studios’ end, but it is intensely destructive of the creative process.

Heh – I feel strongly that it was much more than a “perceived lack” of support behind Bad Robot’s marketing of Star Trek – it was a “pissing contest” [territorial competition] between CBS, Paramount, and Bad Robot. Abrams apparently wanted much more control over marketing than either corporation was willing to give him, and so Bad Robot “dropped the ball.”

As to Paramount, their US publicity utterly failed. There was last-minute market saturation campaign that only began here TWO WEEKS before the movie opened. I’m not sure if this was due to JJ Abrams’ now ridiculous Magic Box idea [and the resulting lack of discussing plot/characters in media], and the opening overseas two weeks in advance of the US opening [WHY??], or if it was laziness on the Paramount US marketing team [who incidentally have been sacked].

I’ll be charitable and attribute it to a lack of budget, but SUDDENLY two weeks before the movie opened there were huge banners in Los Angeles and other cities, colorful banners depicting the main characters in action moments. There were beautiful posters [after months of that stupid "Dark Knight"-influenced poster] that never even appeared in my local cinema. That is all a mystery to me – why did they delay? Did they want to tamp down the curiosity of web-savvy audience who could have found all the plot details on European websites? WHY did they delay the US opening by two weeks?

Is … a … puzzlement!

149. Disinvited - October 22, 2013

“Olivia Munn presented the Hollywood Movie Award, which was determined by fan voting, to Star Trek: Into Darkness.”:

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/race/hollywood-film-awards-a-parade-649970

150. Damian - October 22, 2013

148–I agree with your analysis of the marketing of STID. I think many fans here noted some of the same issues. Star Trek movies have always had their secrets, all 12 of them to one degree or another. But the outright deception about Khan being the villain was probably the most egregious. I took them at their word. I didn’t think the team would outright lie about it. I’ll always be glad I found out it was Khan before seeing the film (partly due to the mind boggling decision to release it weeks before overseas). I was able to “get over it” before seeing the film and I was able to see all that I liked about STID without focusing on the whole Khan thing too much.

I know Dom noted about the novels/comics appealing to mostly hardcore fans, but I think that’s all they’ll ever appeal to. I mean your casual fan is not going to pick up and read a Star Trek novel. Especially in this day and age. Probably video/computer games are CBS’ best opportunity, outside of DVD/Blu Ray sales of course, to generate more broad based appeal, since so many play video games today.

I am an avid novel reader. I love the original series books and the various relaunches focusing on the spin-offs. But I really don’t expect that John Doe out there is going to be buying Star Trek books. People don’t seem to even read the classics these days.

Speaking of novels, I liked the original series books, but I’d love to see some books written between Star Trek V and VI. I mean, there’s this whole mission of the Enterprise-A almost untouched by novels, outside of maybe 4 or 5 in the 90′s. What did the Enterprise-A do after Star Trek V. Or even novels between TMP and TWOK (that period is better covered by some of the older novels in the 80′s).

Also, I do keep noting I’d love to see a Tales of the Romulan War anthology (similar to the Dominion War version) since the Romulan War novels were truncated by Pocketbooks to help fill in some of the gaps.

151. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 22, 2013

@144 “Sadly, Star Trek, with its peculiar ownership issues, seems doomed to be stuck in a second tier…Star Wars brand awareness is massive: the acclaimed Clone Wars series is shutting down immediately to be replaced by Rebels in order to prime the younger audience for the post-New Hope/Jedi era, there are the cartoon spinoffs, the movies have a Extended Universe, there are nice looking models and action figures, basically keeping everything in the public’s (and especially kids’) perception.”

Star Wars = bigger franchise that has current cartoons and toys; ZERO GOOD MOVIES IN THE LAST 30 YEARS

Star Trek = smaller franchise, no current cartoons, at least 6 good movies in the last 30 years.

Yea, I think I’ll stick with Star Trek, Dom. But you go right ahead watching the toons and getting your Legos.

152. Damian - October 22, 2013

150–MJ

In general I agree. I think was Dom was getting at, was movie wise, yes Star Wars is a bigger draw. Also, the Star Wars franchise has done a better job of staying internally consistent with it’s extended universe of novels and comic books.

In Star Trek, you have all different continuities. Novels and comic books do not share the same storylines, and both can be overridden at any time by official canon on screen.

Personally, I think that’s actually a strength for Star Trek. I generally follow the novel continuity, but someone who prefers comics can follow that continuity. Others may like both and they get a huge variety of storylines based on the same Star Trek.

And Star Trek (2009), along with TNG episodes “Yesterdays Enterprise” and “Parallels”, along with numerous other examples of canon have shown us there are multiple universes operating in Star Trek. So for me, those are all strengths.

Not to mention, at least Star Trek tries to insert some science into the fiction. Star Wars just makes things up :).

153. Damian - October 22, 2013

152–Darn it. My response is to 151 now. I see one of my earlier posts is now at 150

154. Robman007 - October 22, 2013

Not sure if anybody noticed, but the Khan mini-series from IDW looks like it will go into the difference in appearance between TOS Khan and STID Khan. Actually, his difference in appearance is the first thing brought up in his trial by Kirk, Spock and Cogley. They question who he really is because he looks and sounds nothing like Khan Noonien Singh…then starts the backstory..

Interesting

155. Dom - October 22, 2013

151. MJ — THE GRAND RETURN !!! – October 22, 2013

‘Star Wars = bigger franchise that has current cartoons and toys; ZERO GOOD MOVIES IN THE LAST 30 YEARS’

In your opinion. Kids loved the prequels and love all the spinoffs built around them. When kids watch Anakin Skywalker in Revenge of the Sith, they’re well aware of the character after years of the cartoons.

‘Star Trek = smaller franchise, no current cartoons, at least 6 good movies in the last 30 years.’

Yes, but my point is that it could be much bigger if they’d sort out their strategy the way Lucasfilm/Disney/Marvel have. Star Trek seems forever to be playing catchup. I mean, where’s our 20-minute exclusive Spock Prime film on the Blu-ray? ;)

‘Yea, I think I’ll stick with Star Trek, Dom. But you go right ahead watching the toons and getting your Legos.’

Now you’re being nasty for no reason! I’m talking about these these things being in addition to the films and not replacements. We’ve generally been fine in conversation down the years, MJ, so please don’t spoil that now.

152. Damian – October 22, 2013

‘In general I agree. I think was Dom was getting at, was movie wise, yes Star Wars is a bigger draw.’

I think it’s more that the Star Wars franchise has a self-promoting showmanship built out of its own self-confidence. Star Trek often seems to be apologising for being Star Trek.

‘Also, the Star Wars franchise has done a better job of staying internally consistent with it’s extended universe of novels and comic books.’

To an extent, but Lucasfilm knows that having a quality cartoon series that recognisably ties in with film characters works both ways, introducing new generations of kids to the series and building the universe for fans.

‘In Star Trek, you have all different continuities. Novels and comic books do not share the same storylines, and both can be overridden at any time by official canon on screen.’

Like I say, too many fingers in the pot. Really, Parmount ought to strip back their licensing and start a fresh strategy.

‘Personally, I think that’s actually a strength for Star Trek. I generally follow the novel continuity, but someone who prefers comics can follow that continuity. Others may like both and they get a huge variety of storylines based on the same Star Trek.’

I don’t. That way lies brand confusion. I knew people back when Nemesis came out who would normally see a Trek film, but not rush to watch the TV show, who said they weren’t going because they were bewildered with all the different crews and so on and already didn’t get references in the previous film to the TV shows.

‘And Star Trek (2009), along with TNG episodes “Yesterdays Enterprise” and “Parallels”, along with numerous other examples of canon have shown us there are multiple universes operating in Star Trek. So for me, those are all strengths.’

There’s always a place for a deuterocanon of some sort and some contradiction is inevitable. But audiences who pay their hard-earned to be entertained don’t want to have to read Wikipedia before they go into the cinema. That said, a cartoon’s continuity neither needs to be contradicted nor confirmed in a movie. But Clone Wars has given a young generation a whole different view on Star Wars and a Star Trek cartoon with Kirk, Spock and McCoy could do the same.

‘Not to mention, at least Star Trek tries to insert some science into the fiction. Star Wars just makes things up :).’

Most ‘science’ in Star Trek is pseudo-science at best. It’s as much fantasy as Star Wars is. Getting ‘scientific advisors’ on the production team is for appearances and they can easily be ignored! Again, that sounds like Trek-snobbery! ;) Star Trek’s great, but it’s no more special than Star Wars, Batman, Spider-Man, Superman, The X-Men, the Marvel Cinematic Universe, 007 or Harry Potter, except to its fans.

I think the biggest thing Trek fans fear is the marketing men getting it right and Trek really getting promoted like a professional franchise should, because they’d have to acknowledge it’s not a real cult.

156. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 22, 2013

@155. Kids like Bob the Builder and Barney as well. So????

157. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 22, 2013

and kids just loved Jar Jar Binks as well. What does that prov — that they will be pre-disposed to like what will probably be an OK new trilogy — better than the horrid prequels, but probably not even coming close to the original — so Trek needs Jar Jar Binks-like characters to indoctrinate the kiddies?

Huh?????

158. Dave H - October 22, 2013

MJ, pretty much agreeing with you here. If we need to bring in kids star or silly buffoon aliens like SW has done to make Trek bigger, then my vote is to not make Star Trek bigger. Star Treks doing fine as is — I am not hung up on trying to make it more like Star Wars through getting the kids early like Dom is suggesting. That’s a sell-out.

Star Wars has the opposite problem. They do great at merchandising and the kids stuff, but can’t seem to do much that adults like anymore. So outside of the money they make, why do Dom and others keep holding SW up as the gold standard of franchises? What’s there to be so happy about if you are an adult SW fans the past 30 years???

159. K-7 - October 22, 2013

All,

I don’t want to see Star Trek follow the children’s marketing as some are suggesting here. If that means a smaller franchise, then so be it. You don’t see James Bond cartoons or Tom Clancy toy sets, but those franchises have decent staying power.

And, regarding Star Wars, where’s the beef? The last good S-Wars movies was in 1983, and that’s a fact. And the kids argument isn’t even viable there — my 18-year old son, who saw the prequel trilogy as a child, now sees that they are crappy movies.

160. Dom - October 22, 2013

156. MJ — THE GRAND RETURN !!! – October 22, 2013
‘@155. Kids like Bob the Builder and Barney as well. So????’

Im simply saying kids embraced the prequels in the same way my generation and Generation X originally embraced the originals. You might consider the prequels a crime against cinema and I admit I’m not big on them either, but they weren’t aimed at me anyway!

Why are you being so aggressive and unpleasant? Or is this some kind of cyberbullying, troll thing where I’m supposed to feel intimidated? Y’know, I make a remark, you take part of it out of context, launch an attack on me, so I’m forced to defend myself, diverting me from what I’m saying, so you get a dopamine kick thinking I’m sitting here thinking: ‘Oooh! MJ’s being mean to me… I’m so scared!!’ Take a chill pill, pal.

157. MJ — THE GRAND RETURN !!! – October 22, 2013
‘and kids just loved Jar Jar Binks as well. What does that prov — that they will be pre-disposed to like what will probably be an OK new trilogy — better than the horrid prequels, but probably not even coming close to the original — so Trek needs Jar Jar Binks-like characters to indoctrinate the kiddies?’

No. I’m not talking about any of that and you know that’s not what I’ve said. Do you have any knowledge at all of the Star Wars cartoons? Of anime? Do you think TV cartoons are still at the the level of the early 1980s? I’m talking about cold, commercial common sense: a franchise is a multimedia brand and cartoons generate awareness of said brand. Where did I say Star Trek should dumbed down for animation? Go on! I’m asking you! Where did I say you should have a Trek cartoon full of cute comedy aliens? Trawl back through all the posts I’ve made on this site since day one!!

Aside from the massive scope and creature design made possible, a cartoon can tell great stories and introduce loads more characters and worlds. And, crucially, it keeps Star Trek on the mainstream viewers’ map in the four-year gaps between films and brings in a new audience between those films. Why is that a crime? And why are you intimating that cartoons are just for a less intelligent subset of kiddies? Have you seen Akira, Ghost in the Shell, Grave of the Fireflies, Perfect Blue, Paranoia Agent and countless other cartoons?

‘Huh?????’

Huh indeed.

161. Dom - October 22, 2013

158. Dave H – October 22, 2013
‘MJ, pretty much agreeing with you here. If we need to bring in kids star or silly buffoon aliens like SW has done to make Trek bigger, then my vote is to not make Star Trek bigger.’

I never said we did. The cartoons, if anything have less of that stuff than the movies.

‘Star Treks doing fine as is — I am not hung up on trying to make it more like Star Wars through getting the kids early like Dom is suggesting. That’s a sell-out.’

No, that’s snobbery and a lack of realism about modern commercial products. Some of my earliest memories are of watching Star Trek in the late 1970s. And, seriously, what harm would a cartoon series do to you?

‘Star Wars has the opposite problem. They do great at merchandising and the kids stuff, but can’t seem to do much that adults like anymore.’

Maybe. Because SW was always, in essence, a great kids’ matinee serial condensed into a movie that adults could enjoy. In the period between ROTJ and TPM, fans got older and were alienated that TPM wasn’t some dark movie aimed at their teenage to twentysomething age range!

‘So outside of the money they make, why do Dom and others keep holding SW up as the gold standard of franchises?’

I’m not. I simply think they market themselves very well.

‘What’s there to be so happy about if you are an adult SW fans the past 30 years???’

Plenty actually. But there are way to many Wars fans with an exaggerated sense of entitlement.

159. K-7 – October 22, 2013

‘I don’t want to see Star Trek follow the children’s marketing as some are suggesting here.’

I never said it should. But it’s ***part*** of the strategy.

‘If that means a smaller franchise, then so be it. You don’t see James Bond cartoons or Tom Clancy toy sets, but those franchises have decent staying power.’

Tom Clancy and Ian Fleming wrote adult books aimed at adults. They’re not aimed at families. Star Trek is a visual medium original so different rules apply to the written word than comics and TV shows. Both the Clancy films and the Bond films have been messy down the years. Sony really turned around the Bond franchise with Casino Royale. The Jack Ryan films have barely been a franchise, given they’ve had four actors in five films across 20 years. You also have Tom Clancy and James Bond console games for which the films’ directors haven’t felt it necessary to apologise.

‘And, regarding Star Wars, where’s the beef? The last good S-Wars movies was in 1983, and that’s a fact.’

That’s an opinion! :p Plenty of people moaned about ROTJ back in the day, believe me!

‘And the kids argument isn’t even viable there — my 18-year old son, who saw the prequel trilogy as a child, now sees that they are crappy movies.’

Yes, but he watched them at the time, and liked them then. You paid for him to go to the cinema to watch them. Younger kids are about to start watching Rebels.

Bottoms on seats makes profits and profits pay for more films. So why not make as much money as possible keeping the brand alive in people’s minds?

162. THX-1138 - October 22, 2013

When I was a kid Star Trek was being marketed toward me. And it didn’t lose any of it’s intelligence. TAS, whether it’s your cup of tea or not, was pretty decent for a mid 70′s Saturday morning cartoon. And we watched it. Mego toys, 3/4 sized landing party AMT models (and all the rest of AMT’s models) were meant to be played with. In the 70′s there were several different products aimed at kids, and this is during a period when there was pretty much no Star Trek save for TAS and TOS in syndication. And I would guess that it is one of the primary reasons people of my age are STILL Trek fans.

Think back to when you were a kid in the 70′s. Maybe you were a bit too young to really catch Trek in it’s first run but when it hit syndication it routinely played at 4 in the afternoon in most markets. Just who was watching at this time? Kids, who had come home from school and would plop themselves down in front of the TV while dinner was being prepared. And when TMP was released in ’79 who were the audiences primarily made up of? Those same kids who got hooked on Trek in syndication. And when TNG came around the marketing got aimed squarely at kids once again. Playmates toys made a mint on their Star Trek products and kept a presence in stores.

I think the precedent for marketing to kids was set 40 years ago. It worked pretty well to keep Star Trek alive. If done right it keeps Star Trek going.

163. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 22, 2013

Dom, I’ll give you this — you answer every point everyone brings up. A for effort, and I mean that sincerely, even though I don’t agree with all your content.

164. Colin - October 22, 2013

@162

It is not an issue that is unique to Star Trek. Many things have faded away because the young didn’t continue it for whatever reason.

According to one article, 75% of the audience who saw the latest Star Trek film were over 25. (Apparently, for the purpose of this article, anyone who is over 25 is “old”.) If Star Trek fades away, I think people will mention this as one of the reasons.

http://www.thewrap.com/movies/article/star-trek-darkness-box-office-needs-younger-audience-fast-furious-hangover-III-92796

165. Damian - October 23, 2013

164–I think a big part of the reason for that is kids and teens don’t play the same toys and games that they used too. Now everything is electronic and computers. In the 70′s kids played with toys. Nowadays, if it’s not a video game, it’s lame.

Now Star Trek can still try to tap into that market, and they’ve tried, though not always successfully. I think there’s room for both here. They can still make a mature film that adults can get into, while trying to market Star Trek to kids and teens through video and computer games.

I understand what Dom is trying to say. I think the primary difference is Star Wars is based all on a movie series, the original trilogy, basically. That already makes it broader in scope. Star Trek is based on a TV series. That’s a totaly different medium in a lot of ways. I actually don’t think the two have very much in common as a result. They both take place in space, that’s about it. Everything else is different. I really don’t think Star Trek should emulate Star Wars, nor vice-versa. I happen to prefer Star Trek. I’ve got nothing against Star Wars. It’s fine, I watch the movies now and again. They’re entertaining. But Star Trek is what I love. I love the fact that they created this whole universe for Star Trek that shows us an Earth of the future that finally found its way. I also love the fact that I have 12 movies, 5 TV series, an animated series, and literally hundreds of books to read expanding on that universe.

166. Colin - October 23, 2013

Or, it could be the stigma that is often said to be attached to things that the older generation liked. For whatever reason, the younger audience is not getting into Trek. I am not sure how Paramount, or CBS, or Bad Robot will be able to turn this around completely.

It seems that the attempts to entice the younger audience have either suffered from a case of being aborted almost as soon as the product is on the shelf or from quality issues. There are a few exceptions, the IDW comics and the Hallmark Ornaments come to mind.

Recently, we have had a Star Trek video game which the director of ST: ID admitted was a failure, a collection of die cast models that vary in quality and cost at minimum $1400, and a small line of LEGO-like toys which don’t seem to extend past the movie.

My understanding of the conflict between Bad Robot and CBS was that BR wanted to “bury” the original series by having products related to this series shelved. They did focus groups, which revealed that people were confused by the two groups of characters and couldn’t tell which group belonged to what side of the franchise, the Old Trek or the New Trek. I don’t know what they expected; however, this was no surprise to me. The New Trek was new, with the characters not yet established. Why not give the audience the benefit of the doubt by giving them the ability to learn about the new and to come to learn the difference between the two?

For a man who was touted as a marketing genius, JJ Abrams created a marketing campaign that failed his product and nearly failed the studio.

167. Smike - October 23, 2013

It’s October 23… in seven days from now, last year’s big “Star Wars” announcement will celebrate it’s first anniversary. Maybe I’m wrong but I think this COULD be the right timing for some huge Star TREK news this year. Call it wishful thinking, but maybe these talks about new TV projects have gone further than we think.

There have been more and more people speaking out about new Trek on TV throughout the last couple of weeks…even the ENT Season 5 Facebook campaign has had some real exponential boost throughout the last ten days. It’s been almost 9 years now…that’s half the span of time that had passed between TOS and NextGen, a pretty long time for our helter-skelter day and age.

If Paramount, Bad Robot and CBS want a product out by the time Star Wars hits the big screen, the time is now…

About those people who think youngsters and kids don’t care about Star Trek (yet)… It’s not going to get any easier with new Star Wars around. Plus, the truth is kids don’t care about cinema and quality TV in general these days. They are growing rather bored with conventional media, so it’s not a problem that Star Trek has to face on its own. Even Star Wars and Marvel will face that challenge at some point.

168. Colin - October 23, 2013

It’s not that I don’t think the youngsters and kids don’t care about Star Trek. It’s that they are not being encouraged to give a damn. Disney, who own Star Wars, are experts at encouraging these two groups into investing their time and money into their products. So, I think that Star Wars is in good hands and has a greater chance of longevity than Star Trek. I think we can expect months ahead of the next Star Wars film a marketing blitz that willl make people nostalgic about the past and excited about the future.

http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/2808:how-disney-magic-and-the-corporate-media-shape-youth-identity-in-the-digital-age

Here is a page from Walt Disney World Resort. They are already planning Star Wars Weekends for late spring 2014.

https://disneyworld.disney.go.com/events-tours/hollywood-studios/star-wars-weekend/

Another aspect that Disney, and Marvel, understand is that they have to be constantly in the mind of Jane and John Doe and their kids. Disney is planning on making Star Wars films that are stand alone and will appear between the films 7-8-9. Since the films will appear over a six year period, that means there might be a film every year.

http://screenrant.com/star-wars-standalone-movies-release-dates/

In the 1980s, films 2-3-4 of Star Trek came out every two years, and the quaility of the films was either good or very good. Paramount could release the next Star Trek film in the fall or winter of 2015. (Summer 2015 will see a glut of tent-pole films. I heard, at last count, that there were something like 25 to 30 of these films coming out that summer.)

169. Red Dead Ryan - October 23, 2013

Another route could be some adult-oriented animated Blu Rays/dvds similar to what Warner Bros. have done with their DC Universe adaptations. Those animated movies are well done, and they aren’t for young kids.

170. Colin - October 23, 2013

Here is an article on movie marketing for Star Trek: Into Darkness.

http://blogs.imediaconnection.com/blog/2013/01/15/movie-marketing-insight-star-trek-into-darkness/

The writers writes,

“Long-standing franchises like Star Trek have some demographic challenges. Audiences age up and have to be replenished from below. Star Wars licensing of Lego products, their ancillary animated show, and other youth-oriented products keeps bringing younger audiences to the franchise. James Bond does it through marketing and casting. In order to make real money on these expensive-to-produce pictures, the studios need to appeal to all four quadrants: men and women, over and under 25 years old. Skyfall achieved that in spades, becoming one of the small class of movies to gross over $1 billion worldwide.”

Another article on movie marketing.

http://howmoviemarketingworks.com/2013/04/18/marketing-strategy-audience-segmentation/

171. Marja - October 23, 2013

There’s a reason we used to sneeringly call George Lucas’s production company LUCASH-films …

LuCASH had all kinds of profits rolling in from the movies, plus he was a genius at merchandising, and did not seem to pass up any opportunity to do so – which did not strike some of us as quite the same as good storytelling – so when the Ewoks appeared in ROTJ, we all nodded sagely and murmured, “Kiddie toys.”

Perhaps our snottiness was jealousy that Star Trek did not do as well financially as SWars, or perhaps it had something of a legitimate basis: shouldn’t the aim of storytelling be communication of a message, and emotional/intellectual exchanges based on that message?

Or should the aim of storytelling be to make little toys and lots of other merchandise and make a ton of money off a not-so-deep story?

I suppose our sagacity and condemnation made Lucash cry all the way to the bank :-p

… and I think here you can see the reason that many older fans condemned Abrams, because they saw the same tendency in him that they had observed in Lucas.

I don’t exactly condemn Abrams, what I condemn is flash-punch-kick-whiz-bang style at the expense of storytelling. Why should Orci&Kurtzman have to cram a story in around a dozen noisy, violent action set pieces, is what some of us want to know.

172. Dom - October 24, 2013

166. Colin – October 23, 2013

‘My understanding of the conflict between Bad Robot and CBS was that BR wanted to “bury” the original series by having products related to this series shelved. They did focus groups, which revealed that people were confused by the two groups of characters and couldn’t tell which group belonged to what side of the franchise, the Old Trek or the New Trek.’

To be honest, they probably should cease to promote anything Trek-related from before 2009. There are plenty of books, comics and so on about different groups of characters and their ships or starbases and they’ll never be out of print thanks to Kindle. All the old Trek shows are getting archived in HD, so really all comics, novels, toys released and so on should relate to the current version of Star Trek and nothing else.

As I said earlier, many people ‘tuned out’ because of too many different incarnations of Trek spinoffs. Now, the focus should be on what’s current: a high quality, well written, cartoon series with the design and likenesses of the current Star Trek and its characters; comics and novels (an adult series and another that skews younger) and, for heaven’s sake, toys and computer games! It’s part of selling a franchise that Paramount don’t seem to get. Having one version of Star Trek would bring focus to a franchise that’s currently an unholy, flabby mess!

I mean, having a nu-Who Doctor Who in a Star Trek TNG crossover? Who let that one through? It should have been the 11th Doctor and Chris Pine’s Kirk on the cover and in the story! It’s time for a massive licence cull, because, to be honest, Trek is a flower being choked in a garden of its own weeds!

173. Damian - October 24, 2013

169–It seems Paramount/CBS has never been interested in doing direct to video, animated, mini-series, or TV shows outside the traditional broadcasting medium. If it can’t be a regular TV series on a network or in syndication, they’re not interested. And CBS seems adamant that they are not interested in doing a new TV series. I’ve always believed, if these TNG blu-rays fall flat on their face and end up in the bargain bins at Big Lots, that will be all CBS needs to flatline any future Star Trek TV shows for a long time. I don’t think they have to be #1 sellers or anything like that, but if they have poor sales, CBS will see no value in doing Star Trek TV. Honestly, would anyone out there from a business standpoint take that risk? Star Trek isn’t exactly cheap to produce, at least if you wanted it done right.

174. Damian - October 24, 2013

170–Star Trek should do more to bring in younger viewers as you noted. Successful video games are probably the way to go, since so many kids and teens play video games. Successful is the key word though. Toys are fine too, but kids don’t seem to play with toys as much these days. I do think it’s important that they bring in kids. As Marja noted, I don’t think the movies have to do action at the expense of a good story. There should be room for both. I thought STID did a decent job at this, but there’s always room for improvement.

I’m also a big James Bond fan, and Bond films, especially in the last 15 to 17 years have done an excellent job promoting their franchise. I went to see Skyfall the weekend it was released and their was a good mix of older adults and teens in the theater. That’s what you want. And the Bond films give everybody something. There’s plenty of action for the teens/young adults, yet a mature storyline in line with what adults expect from a Bond film. That’s been the case really since Goldeneye. I’ve seen every Bond film in the theater since Goldeneye and have noticed the same mix of people in the audience.

175. Danpaine - October 24, 2013

One example – I work with a woman who has a 5 year old son. He was visiting our office, and came in mine because he saw a Darth Vader mug I keep candy in on my desk (a gift from my daughter, who knows her Dad is an old-time Geek). The boy wanted to look at stuff on my computer, which was fine, he was bored. I asked him what he wanted to see…..”Darth Vader,” he says. So I Googled pics of Darth Vader, and he was thrilled.

His Mom tells me Darth Vader and Star Wars are his favorite thing in the world. Halloween costumes, videos, toys, etc.

I wonder how many 5 year olds are out there saying “Khan” is their favorite? My guess is not many. Just one example of how Star Wars products saturate the younger crowd in a way Trek is clearly not.

176. crazydaystrom - October 24, 2013

@174. Danpaine
“I wonder how many 5 year olds are out there saying “Khan” is their favorite? My guess is not many. Just one example of how Star Wars products saturate the younger crowd in a way Trek is clearly not.”

Well Danpaine, Star Wars definitely is much more recognizable to the younger crowd than Star Trek is and I’d like that to not be the case. But this whole “Khan is the Darth Vader of Star Trek” thing is just not a matter of fact. Vader as a ‘big bad’ is essential to the SW mythos. That cannot be said about Kahn. Sure they’re each the most recognizable villains of their franchises but Khan is not to Trek what Vader is to Wars.

Now it would seem Bad Robot sees Khan that way and/or is trying to place Khan in that position in Trek but I think doing so does a disservice to the Star Trek premise. Star Trek is much, much more than an arch nemesis to go up against. Khan’s no Darth Vader or Joker or Dr. No or Lex Luthor and I feel to make him so diminishes what Star Trek is. IMO

177. crazydaystrom - October 24, 2013

And I don’t think an arch nemesis is necessary to appeal to youngsters.

178. Danpaine - October 24, 2013

175. crazydaystrom – October 24, 2013

I agree with what you’re saying. It wasn’t my intent to insinuate Khan is the Darth Vader of Trek. Agreed, that diminishes Trek’s message overall.

I think my example more generally shows that Star Wars as a brand is much more prominent than Star Trek to the younger crowd. And I think now that Disney is at the helm, that prominence is only going to grow. Unless something rather memorable comes down the pike to celebrate Trek’s 50th, Trek is going to find itself far in Star Wars’ rearview for some time to come (it already is). Disney (and Marvel) are simply better at marketing their products.

179. Damian - October 24, 2013

175–Agree about Khan. The last 3 movies have tried the whole arch-nemesis thing and are basically carbon copies of the basic plot of TWOK. I hope the next film breaks that trend. Does there have to be a villain at all? All but TVH had a villain of some sort, though V’Ger was more a new life form trying to evolve and Sybok turned out to be not a villain (though the god-creature was).

What’s funny is before TWOK, nobody really gave much thought to Khan. Space Seed was a good episode, but of all 79 episodes, that would not have been most people’s first pick to follow up with a movie. It just so happened Harve Bennett saw something in that episode that he could work with.

Khan was a great villain after TWOK. Montalban’s portrayal had a lot to do with that. He is an iconic character. But Star Trek is much more. I tend to agree that the new team seems almost obsessed with TWOK. It was a great movie, my number 2 of the 12. But it does not mean I want to see it redone over and over again. I loved much of STID, but my one big disappointment was that it was about Khan. Benedict’s acting in STID was good enough that he could have easily been John Harrison, and STID would still have been a great movie.

180. Danpaine - October 24, 2013

178. Damian – October 24, 2013
176. crazydaystrom – October 24, 2013

Writing in an arch-nemesis is simply easier than say, writing a thoughtful piece with a more comprehensive, compelling moral or physical conflict in it. Especially when said arch-nemesis, as you pointed out, is pretty much a carbon-copy of what came before.

Just my opinion.

181. Marja - October 24, 2013

I’m also a big James Bond fan, and Bond films, especially in the last 15 to 17 years have done an excellent job promoting their franchise. I went to see Skyfall the weekend it was released and their was a good mix of older adults and teens in the theater.

James Bond has always appealed to older audiences; some grew up watching the sophisticated spy with his super elegant gadgets and his collection of winkingly named ladies; of these two I’m not sure which took precedence in the character’s mind.

James Bond has never had the “geeky” reputation Trek has had. It appeals to the bourgeoisie, whle Trek appeals across the board to geeks, who don’t necessarily buy the associated merchandise. For Bond fans, well, the merchandise is certainly “upscale” from toys &c.Thus you saw “Bond” advertised and celebrated in magazines like Vanity Fair and other “mainstream” publications. ’50 YEARS OF BOND’ ad infinitum.

Trek’s 50th Anniversary – it may attract some mainstream attention, but unless they dress the cast up in designer duds and have a page spread in Vanity Fair, you won’t see it there, and it will certainly not be on the cover. At least I really doubt it.

182. Marja - October 24, 2013

Above was to 173 Danpaine Et. Al.

183. Marja - October 24, 2013

Sorry – gad! – it was directed to Damian

184. Marja - October 24, 2013

CrazyDaystrom and DanPaine,

I couldn’t agree more with you regarding the importance of Darth Vader to Star Wars vice the importance of Khan to Trek.

Perhaps Abrams Et. Al. were reaching for an equally popular villain they could mine for merchandising purposes, because at the time of story approval, CBS hadn’t started disputing Bad Robot’s merchandising plans.

Compared with Disney, Trek’s marketing will be a clusterf*ck.

As has been pointed out, Disney are masters of inculcation. Look how many girls have been named Ariel in the last 15-20 years, cripes. How many of us have more than a nodding acquaintance with ALL the Disney characters, and with Disney’s new property Marvel and its characters. And parents, I almost pity those who sit their kids down with a nice clean Disney movie for a couple of hours every day. PROGRAMMING, THEY HAZ IT.

185. Damian - October 24, 2013

183–LOL, my 18 year old sister is named Ariel. Why, you guessed it. The Little Mermaid

186. Danpaine - October 24, 2013

…and once Disney starts releasing stand-alone Star Wars movies, along with all the merchandising, not to mention Episode 7, and whatever, ALL ever else they’re planning, Star Trek won’t even be on the radar. What’ll we get, maybe one film with Pine & Co?

Luckily I dig Star Wars, too (I made my Dad take me to Episode 4 13 times in 1977), but in a different way. I never drew a line in the sand to like only Wars or only Trek.

Trek needs to get back to television, where it belongs.

187. crazydaystrom - October 24, 2013

180. Marja
If Paramount fail to make the absolute most of Trek’s 50th heads should roll!!! I’m all for tradition but this tradition of dropping the Trek ball is madness! Plain and simple! Really what it is is a bad habit. I actually have faith Star Trek is going to one day soar to the spectacular heights of its true and full potential but MY GOD WHEN? When will the Star Trek bullseye be hit? When will CBS knock one out of the park, as it were?

While I don’t see it happenning with Bad Robot, I just hope the 50th will be cool and respectful of Star Trek. THEN take the gloves off, get a team at the helm who will be bold and smart and who’s goal is not to give us the best ‘McDonald’s Happy Meal’ of a Trek, but a great intelligent and provocative gourmet meal of a science fiction film set in the Star Trek universe and involving our beloved friends the crew of the Starship Enterprise.
IT. IS. POSSIBLE. How probable? *shrugs*

When I think of films such as Avatar, Inception and Gravity, and of how well received and successful they are…when I see the box office successes of Avengers, Iron Man 3 and the Star Wars prequel trilogy…my mind reels at the thought of Star Trek not being truly top-tier science fiction entertainment.

IT IS POSSIBLE!

Don’t eliminate the humor. But stay away from all the cutesyness. Don’t have a dash of what you think this group wants and a sprinkle of what might appeal to another and a shot of something else to make yet another demographic happy. Lower the budget to reduce the risks, write a good story and make a solid film!

And put Star Trek back on television and make that smart as well.

188. Marja - October 24, 2013

187 Daystrom, If Paramount fail to make the absolute most of Trek’s 50th heads should roll!!! I’m all for tradition but this tradition of dropping the Trek ball is madness! Plain and simple! Really what it is is a bad habit. I actually have faith Star Trek is going to one day soar to the spectacular heights of its true and full potential but MY GOD WHEN? When will the Star Trek bullseye be hit? When will CBS knock one out of the park, as it were?

The weird thing is, Trek [according to Smithsonian's "The Real Story"] is the most popular franchise worldwide.

Oh, wait. That’s popular, not profitable.

Sheee-yit!

I don’t think of “Avatar” as anywhere near the grown-up science fiction/speculative fiction that “Gravity” is … mainly because the story was derivative of films like “Dances with Wolves” which was derivative of other films before it. The SFX however were gloriously 3D in the very best sense. I hope Cameron has talented and ORIGINAL screenwriters for the next installments.

I haven’t seen “Inception” so can’t render an opinion on that. Didn’t it have some really creepy or scary things “too intense for younger viewers”? I usually count myself among that group even though I’m not young … even clips from “American Horror Story” creep me the hell out.

189. crazydaystrom - October 24, 2013

Marja
My point was if such varied and interesting films as the ones I mentioned could receive great acclaim and/or do mega box office, there’s every reason to believe Star Trek if handled properly could do even better than it’s last outing. All the basic ingredients are there. I hear so many people say Star Trek can’t and won’t ever be at the level of today’s billion dollar films. I firmly believe IT IS POSSIBLE! There’ve been so many and various depictions, renditions and iterations of the Trek universe; it’s iconic status cannot be denied. There’s something (or somethings) about Star Trek that resonate(s) with a very wide variety of people. Presented with the proper balance of its essential elements (not too much ‘pew! pew! pow! pow! and ’90210 cutesy’) A Trek film could be considered the SMART thing, the COOL thing, the INTERESTING thing to see by a great many of that wide variety and spark curiosity (and receipts) like it never has before.

You see I’ve loved Star Trek since 1966. Through all it’s ups and downs. When I found I was not alone with my infatuation I knew it had the potential to be more, even, than it wonderfully was. With Star Trek 2009 I said to myself “Yes! It’s going to happen!” Then…into darkness. Now I wait for the light. If JJ’s Star Wars ends up satisfying me more than his Trek does I’m going to be one pissed Trekkie.

Sorry, I’ve been really ‘ranty’ of late.

Btw Inception is a great smart film. I highly recommend it. And American Horror Story gives me the creeps too. That’s why I love it. :-)

190. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 24, 2013

@176 ““I wonder how many 5 year olds are out there saying “Khan” is their favorite? My guess is not many. Just one example of how Star Wars products saturate the younger crowd in a way Trek is clearly not.”

Good. Let’s keep it that way, please.

191. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 24, 2013

Marja,

I have several friends who are hardcore Bond fans. And NONE of them read Vanity Fair, nor do they own Austin Martins. Not sure what you point is, but Bond merchandising is well below Trek’s I would think.

192. Dom - October 25, 2013

191. MJ — THE GRAND RETURN !!! – October 24, 2013
Marja,

‘I have several friends who are hardcore Bond fans. And NONE of them read Vanity Fair, nor do they own Austin Martins.’

But surely that’s the point: you and your friends aren’t Vanity Fair readers, yet watch Bond films and so do Vanity Fair readers. It means the franchise can reach well beyond one demographic.

The trouble is, a section of Star Trek fans seem to think Star Trek is something special compared with other franchises, where actually it isn’t (except to them!) Hardcore Star Wars fans, Iron Man fans, Bond fans, Harry Potter fans or what ever love their franchises just as much. The only peculiarity with Star Trek fans is that a section of them actually seem not to want Star Trek to be successful and do what’s necessary to get there!

193. Damian - October 25, 2013

191–The main difference is Bond movies have become an event that attracts both the younger crowd, and the older crowd all at the same time.

I think Star Trek can do the same thing. With the right marketing, it can certainly attract younger viewers. With a sufficiently mature story, it can still bring in the older crowd at the same time. It’s finding that balance that Bond movies have done so well with.

But it’s not that Bond and Star Trek have much in common. It’s more about seeing how Bond has been so successful and seeing how that can be adapted to Star Trek.

194. Danpaine - October 25, 2013

189. crazydaystrom – October 24, 2013
Sorry, I’ve been really ‘ranty’ of late.

Perhaps, but I agree with you 100%. Over the years I’ve often thought of both the films and series, ‘Gee, that was pretty good, but….” or “maybe the next one will….” but it doesn’t. Squandered opportunities.

Agreed. Nobody has knocked a Trek movie out of the park yet. And I think A LOT of the ideas I’ve read on this site over the years are one helluva lot better than what’s shown up on screen. But how long do we have to wait?

195. crazydaystrom - October 25, 2013

194. Danpaine
“Agreed. Nobody has knocked a Trek movie out of the park yet…
…But how long do we have to wait?”

I dunno. How wonderful would it be if our wait is over in 2016. I can sincerely hope for that but I just can’t expect it.

No doubt it’s no simple task writing a major motion picture that will satisfy most of the people interested. But obviously it does happen. You asked “how long?”. I’m also wondering- What’s it going to take for us to get the, till now elusive, ‘mega’ Star Trek film. ST’09 seemed to me an indication of steps in that direction.

196. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 25, 2013

@192 “But surely that’s the point: you and your friends aren’t Vanity Fair readers, yet watch Bond films and so do Vanity Fair readers. It means the franchise can reach well beyond one demographic”

Then how to you explain the huge marketing campaigns for two Fortune 15 companies — GE and Samsung — both RIGHT NOW running major Trek-themed TV commercials? If that isn’t reaching beyond one demographic, what is? I mean, they are running a commercial right now during NFL games that features John Cho and Gatt-2000 on the Enterprise.

With all due respect, you hypothesis here is D.O.A.

197. crazydaystrom - October 25, 2013

MJ — THE GRAND RETURN !!!

Do you think it’s possible for a Trek film to do significantly better box office than the last film? Avengers or Star Wars numbers?

198. Hat Rick - October 25, 2013

There are some terrific “arty” movies that have seen general release, but I cannot think of a single one that has been a blockbuster. “The Remains of the Day” did make $63 million in 1993, but that starred Anthony Hopkins.

I don’t think one can do an “arty” ST movie if one expects it to rake in the money.

On a side note, most people probably don’t know that the author of the highly acclaimed novel on which it was based was born in Nagasaki, Japan and immigrated to Britain.

199. Hat Rick - October 25, 2013

Also, has anyone thought of issuing an All Points Bulletin for Anthony Pascale? I don’t think he’s been seen on these boards since shortly after the release of STID.

200. Marja - October 25, 2013

MJ, “Then how to you explain the huge marketing campaigns for two Fortune 15 companies — GE and Samsung — both RIGHT NOW running major Trek-themed TV commercials?”

I explain it by saying that even Star Trek nerds buy GE and Samsung products.

They’re not, however, in the usual demographic that buys Rolex, Aston Martin cars, or bespoke suits. Or in the demographic that aspires to do so, which is the Vanity Fair demographic – the strivers to social pretentiousness

We’re authentic. We’re nerds and proud of it ; ) … with all due respect.

201. Marja - October 25, 2013

189 Daystrom “You see I’ve loved Star Trek since 1966. Through all it’s ups and downs. When I found I was not alone with my infatuation I knew it had the potential to be more, even, than it wonderfully was. With Star Trek 2009 I said to myself “Yes! It’s going to happen!” Then…into darkness. Now I wait for the light. If JJ’s Star Wars ends up satisfying me more than his Trek does I’m going to be one pissed Trekkie.”

I’ve been a fan since 1967, then re-watched ad infinitum on WPIX-TV out of NYC : ) … so I’m with you on the iterations. And I agree with most of your points, especially the excessive amount of bang-bang, but I do like a little kiss-kiss with my bang-bang. Also some science fiction. That would be nice [sigh].

202. Marja - October 25, 2013

192 MJ, “I mean, they are running a commercial right now during NFL games that features John Cho and Gatt-2000 on the Enterprise.”

I am wondering how many general audience TV viewers know that that’s the Enterprise. From Star Trek. And who Sulu is.

I hope the commercial at least raises curiosity and raises awareness of Trek.

And that we get a flippin’ movie in two years with a far-reaching and excellent publicity campaign.

Even FANDOM has dropped off after the long wait for STiD [sad shrug].

203. Marja - October 25, 2013

197 Daystrom, “Do you think it’s possible for a Trek film to do significantly better box office than the last film? Avengers or Star Wars numbers?”

Sadly, no. Mainly because we don’t have DisneyPower rocking the planet. >:P

204. Red Dead Ryan - October 25, 2013

#194. Danpaine.

“Agreed. Nobody has knocked a Trek movie out of the park yet. And I think A LOT of the ideas I’ve read on this site over the years are one helluva lot better than what’s shown up on screen. But how long do we have to wait?”

Hmm…..I think it’s pretty obvious that J.J Abrams and co. hit a homerun with “Star Trek”. They really hit that one out of the park. “Star Trek Into Darkness” wasn’t quite a home run, but it still was a three-run hit.

Also, a lot of ideas posted on this site — contrary to your opinions — are simply junior high grade fanfiction that, if adapted, would pretty much kill the entire franchise. Most fans here have no clue as to how to write an entertaining Trek movie, never mind something that is on the level of the new movies.

205. Admiral Archer's Prize Beagle - October 25, 2013

“I explain it by saying that even Star Trek nerds buy GE and Samsung products.”

That’s nonsensical. This has been running during NFL and college football games. Thus, it’s not targeted at Star Trek fans — Star Trek fans are generally not into TV sports, at least not as compared to the general public.

However, a lot a male action movie fans have seen ST 2009 and STID. That is obviously who they are targeting this to.

206. Keachick - October 25, 2013

#204 – And I suppose you do?

Actually, most of the ideas presented here over time have been based on formerly established notions, concepts and characters that are already part of Star Trek canon.

207. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 25, 2013

@205 “This has been running during NFL and college football games. Thus, it’s not targeted at Star Trek fans — Star Trek fans are generally not into TV sports, at least not as compared to the general public. However, a lot a male action movie fans have seen ST 2009 and STID. That is obviously who they are targeting this to.”

Yes, Admiral. Exactly.

208. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 25, 2013

Hey, Anybody see the new Captain America 2 trailer? You are going to be shocked, but it looks like they ripped off a lot of the general theme and story from STID. Take a look at let me know if you have the same impression?

209. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 25, 2013

@204.

I agree, RDR. Trek 2009, was a home run. STID and WOK were triples.

210. Red Dead Ryan - October 25, 2013

I never said that I know how to write a good script. I don’t. I have never even tried. But I know script-writing isn’t my strength. I could come up with ideas, sure; but I doubt anyone in Hollywood would care simply because I happen to be a die hard Trekkie with delusions of grandeur.

Nope. It takes a special talent to be able write a competent, good quality screenplay. I haven’t seen much of that on this site. In fact, quite the opposite. Most of what I have read involves stuff like bringing back an 82 year old Shatner, going back to the Prime Timeline, a Klingon-Federation war, remaking “The Deadly Years” just to include the remaining TOS cast…..blah, blah, blah.

211. K-7 - October 25, 2013

MJ,

I just looked at the Captain America Winter Solider trailer. Wow, you nailed it — MAJOR COPY of STID, from the asking of Captain America to support preemptive attacks, to his not wanting to play by thos rules (and stand up for what is right and legal), and to the end of the movie where the huge flying aircraft carrier crashes into a major city at the port.

This looks like a completer ripoff of STID.

212. Dave H - October 25, 2013

Guys,

Wow. Yea, just saw it myself. It’s ridiculous how much the Winter Soldier trailed looks like the basic story theme from Star Trek Into Darkness.

213. crazydaystrom - October 25, 2013

204. Red Dead Ryan
My “knocked it out of the park” metaphor meant a movie that appealed to fans, critics AND did box office near or above a billion like Avatar or Avengers. I think Danpaine understood this and that’s what he was agreeing with. But yeah ST09 was a home run but the ball doesn’t have to be knocked out of the park for the hit to yield a home run. Don’t mean to quibble here.

208. MJ — THE GRAND RETURN !!!
211. K-7
212. Dave H

The Captain America movie is is based on Ed Brubaker’s ‘The Winter Soldier’ storyline from the Captain America comic. I’ve not read it but from what I have read the movie is pretty faithful to its source material. That story was published in 2005. I don’t think anyone copied or ripped off anyone else but if they did the Winter Soldier story couldn’t be a ripoff of STID.

214. K-7 - October 26, 2013

@213

So, let me get this straight. You haven’t seen the trailer, and you haven’t read this Winter Solider 2005 comic either, but yet you come here with a contrary opinion based on some third hand comment you read somewhere once? Huh?

Why don’t you come back here when you have actually learned something — like either actually viewing the trailer or reading that comic that you yourself reference.

Sheesh!

215. DiscoSpock - October 26, 2013

All, I have both seen the trailer and read the original Winter Solider comic series, and I can categorically state that why I see in the trailer is significantly different from what I remember of that comic series.

And yes, I also do see some uncanny similarities to the Into Darkness story — the ship falling at the end into the city by the water is a complete steal from Darkness, and was never in the comic series.

216. DiscoSpock - October 26, 2013

Re: crazydaystrom,

I agree with K-7. How can you intelligently comment on this given you have neither seen the trailer, nor have you read the comic series?

In retrospect, perhaps you should have learned more yourself first, before commenting here on this topic?

217. Red Shirt Diaries - October 26, 2013

Perhaps crazydaystrom’s father’s, sister’s best friend’s, roommate, did the research on this topic for crazydaystom? LOL

218. crazydaystrom - October 26, 2013

Hey! I did not say I haven’t seen the trailer. I did in fact. Jeez! I stand by what I said and feel it has every bit as much weight as your assertions of rip off and copying, if not more. Wow!

Also Captain America: Winter Soldier began actual production, if memory serves, in January of this year. Even if the filmmakers could know what story elements the Trek movie would contain there’s absolutely no reason to they would change their film to be more like STID.

What I read was an interview with the writer of the comics, Ed Brubaker, who said the film was faithful to his work. Maybe he’s lying about that but I’m not cynical and suspicious enough to not give him the benifit of the doubt on this.

There are similarities between that trailer and the last Trek film and you pointed those out. Fine. But to jump to a erroneous conclusion- that I hadn’t seen the trailer- and sayin I’m in able to intelligently comment based on that, says more about you than it could ever say about me.

What about friendly exchanges here and not attacks?

219. crazydaystrom - October 26, 2013

That’s – *an* erroneous conclusion
And
*unable* to intelligently comment

You know, with all the elements in the last two Trek movies dirivative of other films- Raiders of the Lost Ark, Star Wars, and other Star Trek films to name a few- it’s amusing to see all the calls of rip off and copying, especially when they’re based on a few minutes long trailer of an hour and a half or two hour long movie.

220. Marja - October 26, 2013

219, Daystrom, an awful lot of movies are ripoffs of one another. Rip off element A from movie 1, element B from Movie 2, etc. ad infi-movie-um.
————————–

As to the script ideas, I think some real silly fannish ideas have been posted as stories here, usually featuring the TOS cast in some fashion – yikes.

But some admirable ideas have come through in comments regarding plot ELEMENTS, i.e., themes, moments in the movies, science fiction-y things, and more.
—————————

As to the NFL fans, gathering them into the audience will, I’m sure, up the $$ gain for Paramount/BR, but reduce the quality of the product, because it’s just going to mean more violence, IMHO, and didn’t we all get enough of that from STiD? Whatev. I guess if it helps Star Trek remain a factor in the Industry, then I must accept it. Doesn’t mean I have to like it.

At any rate, I think the adverts now are mainly to get people to buy the DVDs for holiday presents, along with those GE and Samsung.

221. crazydaystrom - October 26, 2013

220. Marja
“219, Daystrom, an awful lot of movies are ripoffs of one another. Rip off element A from movie 1, element B from Movie 2, etc. ad infi-movie-um.”
————————–
Oh sure. Things are “borrowed”, homages are made and there are rip offs. I know. Similarities of elements are often inadvertent (perhaps more often than not) due to the limitations of cinema and storytelling. You know it’s said there are only seven basic plots of conflict. And there are only ten digits. So elements will recur- they must, it’s inevitable. But knee-jerk accusations of rip off seem to me to be somewhat easy (and perhaps lazy and anti-intellectual) disparagement.

BTW ad infi-movie-um! Love your “Latin”, Marja! I’m going to rip of..um..borro…uh…use that one… in homage to you!

222. Ahmed - October 26, 2013

@219. crazydaystrom

“You know, with all the elements in the last two Trek movies dirivative of other films- Raiders of the Lost Ark, Star Wars, and other Star Trek films to name a few- it’s amusing to see all the calls of rip off and copying, especially when they’re based on a few minutes long trailer of an hour and a half or two hour long movie.”

I was laughing while reading the the original comment last night. Take my advice & don’t get yourself dragged into pointless argument with STID worshipers here.

To them, STID is a masterpiece that other movies is trying to ripoff not the other way around !!

A movie that doesn’t have a single unique idea, in fact it uses ideas from other movies. Like the villain allowing himself to get caught (Dark Knight, Skyfall) or the enemy from within (GoldenEye, Skyfall & others) or the command ship is destroyed (Avengers & many other movies) or the total ripoff from TWOK (The reactor scene).

Captain America: Winter Soldier ripping off STID, give me a f**king break

223. Ahmed - October 26, 2013

I watched the trailer again & noticed other MAJOR COPY of STID :)

1- Captain America jumping from a plane, complete ripoff the Kirk & Khan space jump scene
2- Captain America not playing by the rules. I mean, come on, we all know that STID was the ONLY movie in the history where the hero didn’t plays by his boss rules ! another MAJOR COPY.
3- Lot of explosions
4- mano a mano fight
5- There was something about a war.

The only real difference from STID, was the absence of a whining girlfriend. Hopefully they will fix that before the movie is released.

224. crazydaystrom - October 26, 2013

222. Ahmed
“Take my advice & don’t get yourself dragged into pointless argument with STID worshipers.”

I definitely won’t get dragged in, Ahmed. I don’t come here to argue. It’s just the several comments made about my not seeing the trailer when in fact I had, then proceeding from that false assumption and commenting on my ability to intelligently comment and what I should do before posting -based on their error- was , frankly, bizarre! I have every reason to say each of them should take their own advice and suggestions from the comments they made. I can only shake my head about all of that. Wow!

“To them, STID is a masterpiece…”

I don’t know if that’s how they feel. A flawed masterpiece is what they think of it, perhaps. But again I don’t know. I do know: False assumptions yield erroneous conclusions. And: Knee-jerk reactions <<<< considered responses.

@223
Hahaha

225. Red Dead Ryan - October 26, 2013

Ahmed,

Dude, you seem to have a problem with the fact that some of us happen to like STID.

And you also seem a bit bitter about it for some reason. Kind of like how a bunch of kids are having fun in a sandbox while another kid is pouting about how he thinks the sandbox sucks and at the same time angry that the others are having a good time and he is not.

226. Ahmed - October 26, 2013

@ 225. Red Dead Ryan – October 26, 2013

“Dude, you seem to have a problem with the fact that some of us happen to like STID.”

Nope, my problem is when you guys gang up on someone who disagree with you. Like you did with crazydaystrom when all of the STID worshipers ganged up on him.

“And you also seem a bit bitter about it for some reason. Kind of like how a bunch of kids are having fun in a sandbox while another kid is pouting about how he thinks the sandbox sucks and at the same time angry that the others are having a good time and he is not.”

lol, agree about the kids metaphor because sometime you guys are acting like kids .

Seriously, do you think that STID is a such unique movie with unique ideas that when you watch a trailer of another movie, you immediately think the movie is ripping off STID, really ?

227. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 26, 2013

“Nope, my problem is when you guys gang up on someone who disagree with you.”

Ahmed, I like you, dude. But do you realize how ridiculous this sounds coming from they guy who had the infamous altercation with Bob Orci that went viral all over the scifi internet.

I mean, come on, if someone else wants to comment like this, I’ll accept that, but you, dude….with all due respect, you should not be allowed in my book to comment much on others’ behavior here. You set the bar pretty low for all of us in that regard.

228. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 26, 2013

crazydaystrom,

Here is your original post:

“The Captain America movie is is based on Ed Brubaker’s ‘The Winter Soldier’ storyline from the Captain America comic. I’ve not read it but from what I have read the movie is pretty faithful to its source material. That story was published in 2005. I don’t think anyone copied or ripped off anyone else but if they did the Winter Soldier story couldn’t be a ripoff of STID.”

Where do you even give the impression here that you saw the trailer that people are referencing? Based on your original post, I think it’s completely understandable that most of us would assume that you have not seen the trailer.

229. K-7 - October 26, 2013

@ Ahmed: “The only real difference from STID, was the absence of a whining girlfriend…A movie that doesn’t have a single unique idea.”

That/’s just great. Hopefully, Bob Orci is not seeing this baiting this time around. We know how this can spiral down the drain…

@ Crazydaystrom:

1. “But knee-jerk accusations of rip off seem to me to be somewhat easy (and perhaps lazy and anti-intellectual) disparagement.”

2. “I definitely won’t get dragged in, Ahmed. I don’t come here to argue.”

Well, nice job or not getting dragged in and arguing, given you implied in #1 that people you are disagreeing with are lazy and anti-intellectual.

You must be a proud graduate of the “Ahmed School for Internet Behavior?” LOL

230. K-7 - October 26, 2013

@MJ

Yea, reading Crazydaystrom’s original post, any objective person would conclude that he hadn’t seen the trailer.

231. Keachick - October 26, 2013

STID worshippers? Yes, I know – “worship” has become a dirty word and is often used to put down others for showing an understanding and liking for something that the person using the term “worship” in an obviously derogatory manner who does not think and feel similarly.

No one was saying that STID was “such a unique movie with unique ideas”. All they were saying is this trailer reminded them of how similar the scenes shown in the trailer for this new movie were to the scenes in STID.

If you think that I am “ganging up” on you again, think again. I am just calling you out for your erroneous, smartass comments directed at others.

232. Admiral Archer's Prize Beagle - October 26, 2013

Just saw the CAWS trailer. Have to agree with MJ and company. The type of story and the ship falling into the city/bay the end are eerily similar to STID. And in relation to this, here is what the Wall Street Journal movie reviewer said about that scene in the trailer:

“The carrier crashing into the water was a little too “Star Trek Into Darkness” for me.”
– Michal Calia, WSJ Arts and Entertainment, Oct 24th

So anyone here who is just complaining that this is something being cooked up by some “STID worshipers” needs to realize that the mainstream media is now even agreeing with the comparisons to STID.

233. Keachick - October 26, 2013

#228 – Well, that would be a false assumption. Why would you assume that because someone says that they have not read the comic that a movie storyline is based on, also means that they have not seen the trailer either? What the hell has one got to do with the other?

This is like saying that because many people, including me, have not read the IDW comics relating to this alternate Star Trek universe, would also mean that these people would not have seen the trailers and two movies relating to this alternate universe. See how stupid the assumption is…oh dear, oh dear, oh dear…

234. K-7 - October 26, 2013

@233. “Why in the hell” would I assume that. Because crazydaystrom went to the trouble of specifically referencing the 2005 comic book series, and also referenced some obsure memory about hearing about how the movie would be like that comic, but then didn’t even bother to mention that he had seen the trailer.

That’s why in the hell I assumed that. I am not a mind reader.

235. K-7 - October 26, 2013

@232 “So anyone here who is just complaining that this is something being cooked up by some “STID worshipers” needs to realize that the mainstream media is now even agreeing with the comparisons to STID.”

Wow, the fracking Wall Street Journal agrees with us! There you have it!

236. Keachick - October 26, 2013

#210 – “with delusions of grandeur.” Really? People presenting ideas about how a story may go in the next movie iteration to a professional writer who works on the Trek movies are people with delusions of grandeur?

Seriously, Red Dead Ryan, WTF?

It really does not matter whether these people can write a screenplay or not, or whether you or the man with his dog might think some of the ideas presented would make a good movie or not. They are just ideas, notions, concepts, wish list of the person presenting…so what? Maybe a good screenwriter, eg Bob Orci, may find something useful, imaginative, even inspirational, maybe not. However, referring to people who do have the courage or could it be foolhardiness?…:( to present their own wishes for what might be told in another movie iteration as having “delusions of grandeur” is rude and pathetic.

Please remove your own “delusions of grandeur” thorn from your arse before it does you and others serious damage. Thank you.

There is this saying, which might be appropriate to repeat on this site – “Those who can, do. Those who can’t, criticize.”

237. K-7 - October 26, 2013

@236. What’s with all the cussing by you today?

238. Keachick - October 26, 2013

K-7 As you say, you are not a mind reader. I would assume (correctly?) that others here are not mind readers either.

Would it not be more reasonable, even polite, to actually enquire as to whether crazydaystrom had seen the trailer instead of assuming that someone reading a comic automatically means that they must have seen a trailer for a movie based on that comic story?

As I said, sometimes a person doing one thing does not necessarily follow that that same person would do what another person might assume that they would do.

239. K-7 - October 26, 2013

And by the way, it’s pretty obvious that RDR’s comment, “I happen to be a die hard Trekkie with delusions of grandeur,” was self-deprecating humor.

Keachcik, f I had a dollar for every time you misinterpreted someone here, I’d have a nice pot of spending money for Christmas.

240. K-7 - October 26, 2013

@238. No, in this particular case, it would not have been reasonable for me to have to put words in his mouth or ask him additional questions given the content and context of his post.

I’ll repeat, given the content and context of the discussion, any objective person would assume that he had not seen the trailer.

241. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 26, 2013

K-7, Keachick,

Go back and read crazydaystom’s original post again. Given what he wrote, I am comfortable with my conclusion that it seemed pretty obvious at the time that he had not seen the trailer.

This is not a court of law, so I don’t have to prove my conclusion, nor does crazydaystrom have to prove that he really saw the trailer (or more likely, that he watched it after he saw this criticism here).

Keachick, I agree with K-7 on Red Dead Ryan’s “grandeur” comment. Obviously, he was making fun of himself with that remark. Seriously, get a grip and stop jumping all over the guy, please.

242. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 26, 2013

@235 “Wow, the fracking Wall Street Journal agrees with us! There you have it!”

Awesome to have that sort of mainstream media validation of my original comments on this!

243. Ahmed - October 26, 2013

@ 227. MJ — THE GRAND RETURN !!! – October 26, 2013

Do you understand what “gang up on someone” means ? The so called altercation was basically comments made by 2 people back & forth. What we saw today that a group of STID worshipers ganged up on crazydaystrom when he disagreed with your view that Captain America: Winter Soldier was ripping off STID.

It is the mentally of a wild pack attacking someone, in this case crazydaystrom , for disagreeing with your view. So, don’t give me lecture about how I conduct myself here & see how your gang are acting.

244. Admiral Archer's Prize Beagle - October 26, 2013

All, get this, even more comparisons to STID are now emerging. Apparently the villain in the Winter Solider is also taken out of suspended animation to wreak military-like havoc, just like Khan — this is from Fark.com”

“The only thing that troubles me is that this MIGHT have the same premise as Star Trek Into Darkness. Use a thawed out dude as your justification and / or means for building up your technology as preventive measures for a future war.”

245. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 26, 2013

@243. I get that. But again, are you really the person with credibility her to be lecturing us on appropriate behavior.

I don’t disagree with you message, but I just think it’s inappropriate for you to be trying to show us the right way given your track record here.

If someone else were to bring this up, I would take them more seriously. It’s like if Lance Armstrong came to my house and offered me criticism on my workout program. He’d probably give me good advice, but would I trust his intentions and advice?

246. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 26, 2013

@244 “Apparently the villain in the Winter Solider is also taken out of suspended animation to wreak military-like havoc, just like Khan”

WOW! I did not even pick up on that from the trailer. This is getting ridiculous now. This might be up there with Sergio Leone’s stealing Kurosawa’s “Yojimbo” story for “A Fistful of Dollars”.

247. Ahmed - October 26, 2013

@ 245. MJ — THE GRAND RETURN !!! – October 26, 2013

“I don’t disagree with you message, but I just think it’s inappropriate for you to be trying to show us the right way given your track record here.”

Alright, I got your message. But I take it that you have no problem at all when a group of people gang up on one person.

Thanks for the clarification.

248. Keachick - October 26, 2013

K-7 – Cussing? I don’t know. Perhaps it is because I think that RDR has made similar insults towards those who come up with ideas, inane though some of them might be, in the past. Anyway, one can *cuss* without actually cussing. I believe there is something of an *art* to it. As long as someone does not use one of them “bad words”, they can be as disparaging, denigrating, hurtful etc as they like…

The *problem* is that I have grown up learning to call a spade a shovel and have, albeit rather slowly…:(, learned what gets shoveled where and the fact that some things need to get shoveled back to where they really belong…

249. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 26, 2013

@247. Thanks for acknowelging that. So now I will respond to you — No, I don’t approve of people ganging up on one person; however, I think you are being overly dramatic though, as I don’t see any name calling or ill will here from anyone, other than Keachick with the bad language.

250. Admiral Archer's Prize Beagle - October 26, 2013

Here’s more from swiftfilm.com:

“There’s a lot in this trailer about militarization and freedom vs fear and how SHIELD wants to strike before anything happens because that’s how the times are.”

Sound familiar?

251. Ahmed - October 26, 2013

@Admiral Archer’s Prize Beagle

“Here’s more from swiftfilm.com:

“There’s a lot in this trailer about militarization and freedom vs fear and how SHIELD wants to strike before anything happens because that’s how the times are.”

Sound familiar?”

Yep, the TV series 24. Also most of the movies about terrorism that were made after 9/11

btw, I never heard of these sites that you mentioned here, Fark.com & swiftfilm.com, so thanks for bringing that to our attention.

252. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 26, 2013

@250. “Sound familiar?”

Yep!

253. Admiral Archer's Prize Beagle - October 26, 2013

#251. Yea, but on 24, did they also thaw out the villain, and did they have a huge space/air-ship crash in a bay by a major city at the conclusion? ;-)

Come on, collectively, this obviously looks pretty damn suspicious.

254. Keachick - October 26, 2013

#240 – “I’ll repeat, given the content and context of the discussion, any objective person would assume that he had not seen the trailer.”

No, an objective person would not have assumed that at all. He did not say whether he had seen the trailer or not, so why assume anything? All anyone had to ask crazydaystrom was “Hey, dude, have you seen the trailer? What do you think?”

I did misread crazydaystrom’s post, however there is nothing in there that would make me take back my later statements. MJ, K-7 – you did jump all over crazydaystrom for no sensible reason and there was nothing objective about it.

#239 – I do not believe I misinterpreted anything – this is the actual quote that you know I was referring to, except that you missed out the first bit –

“but I doubt anyone in Hollywood would care simply because I happen to be a die hard Trekkie with delusions of grandeur.”

Perhaps I did misinterpret this but I don’t think so, especially given some of RDR’s previous criticisms of people’s contributions. And I am supposed to be giving him a hard time? Really?

255. Ahmed - October 26, 2013

@ Admiral Archer’s Prize Beagle

“Apparently the villain in the Winter Solider is also taken out of suspended animation to wreak military-like havoc, just like Khan”

I guess you & the site forget about another movie with similar plot,
Demolition Man (1993) where Phoenix (Wesley Snipes) was taken out of suspended animation to wreak havoc on the utopian San Angeles & to kill the leader of the resistance !!

256. Keachick - October 26, 2013

Oh dear, MJ – re my bad language – you and K-7 just dumped on crazydaystrom and you are worried by my “bad language”. As I said, dumping on someone without resorting to use “bad” language is a little artsy fartsy for me…I still have a way to go…

Dude – nice going there, *mate*…:(

257. Ahmed - October 26, 2013

@ 253. Admiral Archer’s Prize Beagle – October 26, 2013

“#251. Yea, but on 24, did they also thaw out the villain, and did they have a huge space/air-ship crash in a bay by a major city at the conclusion? ;-)”

Nope, but I’m sure that a future Jack Bauer won’t mind crashing a space/air ship into a city to save us all, again :)

258. Keachick - October 26, 2013

#255 – Frankly, who cares? I don’t!

259. Admiral Archer's Prize Beagle - October 26, 2013

@255. Again, you or anyone can selectively nitpick each piece of the comparison by itself to other movies/media, but taken collectively, you will find that you will have a much more difficult time to solve this.

Your single element to single element comparisons are not the point — it’s taking all of this collectively that you should be addressing if you disagree with me. But I certainly get why you prefer to take each comparison as a single element — that’s the easy way to explain the comparison away.

260. Red Shirt Diaries - October 26, 2013

All,

Hollywood is pretty incestuous. STID’s filming was done from Jan 2012 to June 2012, with Winter Soldier filming done one year later, from Jan 2013 to June 2013. I would thus not be a bit surprised if someone in Hollywood shared the STID script with the producers/writers of Winter Solider.

261. DiscoSpock - October 26, 2013

RSD,

Based on how weirdly CA-WS looks like STID, I think it is highly likely that someone in Hollywood “misbehaved” back in 2012, and shared the script as you suggest.

262. Dom - October 26, 2013

196. MJ — THE GRAND RETURN !!! – October 25, 2013
‘With all due respect, you hypothesis here is D.O.A.’

There was no hypothesis: I simply stated that 007′s appeal to Vanity Fair readers indicated a breadth of audience.

Here’s a hypothesis: your diatribes are best read of in the voice of Kenny Everett’s character Cupid Stunt. That could mean your deepest desire is to be queen of Trekmovie.

In the best possible taste, of course! ;)

263. crazydaystrom - October 26, 2013

228. MJ — THE GRAND RETURN !!!
“Where do you even give the impression here that you saw the trailer that people are referencing? Based on your original post, I think it’s completely understandable that most of us would assume that you have not seen the trailer.”

I don’t want to argue about this MJ, but no I did not give any impression one way OR the other, did not intend to imply anything about the trailer other than exactly what I said. And I’m not equivocating here, honestly. But something was inferred that I did not imply. As I see it an illogical leap was made.

229. K-7
“Well, nice job or not getting dragged in and arguing, given you implied in #1 that people you are disagreeing with are lazy and anti-intellectual.”

Yeah, probably a ‘fail’ on my part K-7 but the responses to my post befuddled me. So here I am, in an argumentative debate. *sigh* And I can easily see why you think I was calling you lazy and anti-intellectual. I could say a lot more about that in my defense but I’ll just say- I apologize. I want neither to offend nor be offended.

230. K-7
“@MJ

Yea, reading Crazydaystrom’s original post, any objective person would conclude that he hadn’t seen the trailer.”

But the plain and simple truth is I HAD SEEN IT.

233. Keachick
“#228 – Well, that would be a false assumption. Why would you assume that because someone says that they have not read the comic that a movie storyline is based on, also means that they have not seen the trailer either? What the hell has one got to do with the other?”

Thank you Rose.

238. Keachick

“Would it not be more reasonable, even polite, to actually enquire as to whether crazydaystrom had seen the trailer instead of assuming that someone reading a comic automatically means that they must have seen a trailer for a movie based on that comic story?

As I said, sometimes a person doing one thing does not necessarily follow that that same person would do what another person might assume that they would do.”

Again, thank you.

240. K-7
“I’ll repeat, given the content and context of the discussion, any objective person would assume that he had not seen the trailer.”

That’s arguable. What is not arguable is the fact that I’d seen the trailer before I made my post. I really don’t see why that’s so hard to believe.

241. MJ
“This is not a court of law, so I don’t have to prove my conclusion, nor does crazydaystrom have to prove that he really saw the trailer (or more likely, that he watched it after he saw this criticism here).”

Thank you MJ. But I repeat and aver, I had seen the trailer prior to making that now notorious post.

243. Ahmed
254. Keachick

For me it’s just just that they’re so sure and so wrong about when I saw the trailer.

Everybody-
I can’t prove when I saw the trailer and if I could I’m not sure I would want to. All this proves to me just how wrong a person can be and how sure and adamant a person can be believing they’re correct when in fact they are not. And what I just said should not be inferred as my implying I’ve never been wrong because of course I have.

Wow! Took a day away from the web to do some yard work and and a little tempest brewed!

264. Red Dead Ryan - October 26, 2013

All,

My “delusions of grandeur” comment was an example of exaggeration and sarcasm.

I also agree with those saying that “Captain America 2″ looks to be a rip-off of “Star Trek Into Darkness”. Mind you, it’s only a two minute trailer — and a very small snippet to judge a two-hour movie by — but it definitely reeks of some sort of plaguerism/theft, or maybe someone in Bad Robot “sold” some STID plot points to Disney.

265. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 26, 2013

@262

“Here’s a hypothesis: your diatribes are best read of in the voice of Kenny Everett’s character Cupid Stunt. That could mean your deepest desire is to be queen of Trekmovie.”

Huh? Darn, where is that Universal Translator when I need it? LOL

266. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 26, 2013

crazydaystom,

Peace, dude. Let’s move forward.

267. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 26, 2013

@264 “I also agree with those saying that “Captain America 2″ looks to be a rip-off of “Star Trek Into Darkness”. Mind you, it’s only a two minute trailer — and a very small snippet to judge a two-hour movie by — but it definitely reeks of some sort of plaguerism/theft, or maybe someone in Bad Robot “sold” some STID plot points to Disney.”

Exactly!

268. K-7 - October 26, 2013

MJ,

I think Dom was cleverly trying to call you a “stupid-cunnt” in a way that perhaps he mistakenly thought provided him plausible deniability.

That is just plain shameful and well beyond extreme name calling here.

269. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 26, 2013

@K-7

Wow, I see that now. I am frankly speechless. That’s just plan sad.

Dom, what’ up with this, dude? I mean, come on, man???

:-(

270. Dave H - October 26, 2013

Dom,

That was completely uncalled for. You should be ashamed of yourself. You owe MJ and all of us an apology for bringing that sort of crap onto this site.

271. Marja - October 27, 2013

Dayum, Dom, I’d never heard of Kenny Everett, but the anagram is not nice at all, a’tall.

Please don’t do that.

272. Red Dead Ryan - October 27, 2013

I agree that Dom’s language was uncalled for. He really needs to apologize to MJ.

273. Red Shirt Diaries - October 27, 2013

Dom, that is really nasty and uncalled for.

274. Keachick - October 27, 2013

I guess Dom has managed to prove my point that one can be nasty, not particularly nice, without resorting to *bad language*…:(

275. Admiral Archer's Prize Beagle - October 27, 2013

Dom, you are an embarrassment to Star Trek fans everywhere.

276. Garak's Pride - October 27, 2013

Shame on this Dom guy.

Shame on him!

277. K-7 - October 27, 2013

Keachick, if Dom used that term on you, instead of if being funny to you, you would “go nuclear” here. And don’t try to convince me otherwise.

278. DiscoSpock - October 27, 2013

@277

Yes, Keachick would absolutely freak-out if Dom called her by that term. You can take that to the bank.

Dom, that is a horrible term, that is really a slam against all women.

DOM, WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU?

279. Garak's Pride - October 27, 2013

#278

If someone called my sister or my mom by that nasty, derogatory term used by Dom, I would punch them.

280. K-7 - October 27, 2013

Dom,

Are you to “come back here” and take accountability for your horrid remarks?

Or or you going to slink away like a little baby…like that guy Sebastian always does when people try to hold him accountable for his actions?

Or maybe you are Sebastian?

281. Red Dead Ryan - October 27, 2013

That was pretty cowardly of Dom. He didn’t have the balls to use the straight-up version of “stupid c*nt” so he anagramized it to let it fly under the radar undetected.

Not only that, but he hasn’t bothered coming back to apologize.

Hopefully he owns up to this, and that we can all move on.

If he’s out there, we would all gladly accept his apology and move on.

282. K-7 - October 28, 2013

Curious how Ahmed is so silent this time around when someone is misbehaving here, isn’t it? Why isn’t Ahmed condemning Dom’s nasty personal attack and use of language here? Where is he now?

283. Danpaine - October 28, 2013

Ok, so returning here after the weekend, and from what I’m seeing we’re pre-t-t-y far from any kind of productive, much less fun Trek talk on this thread.

Ah well. Guess I’ll go read about the new ‘making of’ TOS book.

284. THX-1138 - October 28, 2013

Well, it was going OK for a while there. Perhaps old habits die hard.

Yes, Dom was way out of line with that remark. He should own it and then maybe others could move forward. But what does it have to do with Ahmed? That’s just baiting a fight that doesn’t exist. Let’s not beat the drumhead and call for everyone to join in and condemn someone. Unproductive. Let’s put our big boy and big girl pants on and turn the other cheek.

Remember, everyone who posts is a person, not and adversary. Awards are not handed out to the winner of the argument. And none of this is personal in any way.

I have not seen the Winter Soldier trailer or the Trek themed ads, save for the X-Box ad and the Galaxy watch ad. From my perspective Trek was only a bit player in either of those commercials. What I will say is where were those ads before the movie came out, when it probably counted the most? STID might have benefited from having more of a presence in advance of the movie. Airing Trek themed commercials, while better than nothing, really seems like more of an afterthought. My point of view is that Bad Robot and Paramount have consistently dropped the ball in terms of advance promotion and marketing for Star Trek. The secret box thing might be getting carried a bit too far. Yes I like surprises but I also like to know what day Christmas is and I like to decorate the tree before I unwrap the gifts.

And yes, Star Trek definitely needs to pay some attention to promoting itself to a younger generation. Younger than most of us here. We will die out and Star Trek shouldn’t get buried with us. Kids do indeed need a way to take what they saw on the screen (large and small screen) and put it in their hands in the form of games, books, toys, videos, and any other way that let’s them personally engage Star Trek. This fuels their imaginations which leads them back to filmed adventures, which in turn keeps the franchise popular during it’s down times. Using Star Wars is completely legitimate as an example. Love or hate the stories they have successfully kept Star Wars in the popular consciousness (even before Disney’s help) for great stretches of time while the franchise was pretty much dormant.

285. Ahmed - October 28, 2013

@ 282. K-7 – October 28, 2013

“Curious how Ahmed is so silent this time around when someone is misbehaving here, isn’t it? Why isn’t Ahmed condemning Dom’s nasty personal attack and use of language here? Where is he now?”

K-7, are you trying to bite me into a fight or what :)

I read Dom comment #262 & my reaction was similar to MJ original reaction at comment # 265:
“Huh? Darn, where is that Universal Translator when I need it? LOL”

Then you came with your interpretation of that comment, following that the usual suspects (Dave H, RDR, Red Shirt Diaries, Admiral Archer’s Prize Beagle, Garak’s Pride & DiscoSpock ) all joined you in condemning the comment & demanding apology.

I googled Kenny Everett & this is what I found on Wikipedia:

“Kenny Everett (born Maurice James Christopher Cole, 25 December 1944 – 4 April 1995) was a British comedian, radio DJ and television entertainer. Everett is best known for his career as a radio DJ and for The Kenny Everett Video Show.”

As for “character Cupid Stunt”, it was indeed a character on his BBC show, The Kenny Everett Television Show:

“Thames Television claimed copyright on Everett’s characters, and tried to prevent their use by the BBC. Whilst this action failed, it led to the creation of new characters such as Gizzard Puke (intended to replace Sid Snot), and the spooneristically named Cupid Stunt, an American B-film actress with pneumatic breasts, and played with no attempt to disguise Everett’s beard”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenny_Everett#The_Kenny_Everett_Television_Show_.28BBC_1981.E2.80.931988.29

Until Dom come back & tells us what he meant, we are not mind readers after all; I’m not going to jump into conclusions.

286. K-7 - October 28, 2013

@285

Unfortunately, that is about how I thought you would respond to this.

;-(

Here is the definition of the slang term “cupid stunt” from the Urban Dictionary:

1. cupid stunt
First letters interchanged of “stupid cunt.” While the phenomenon of accidentally interchanging the first letters of adjoining words is not uncommon, use of cupid stunt is generally intentional and merely a way of euphemizing or masking an extremely offensive epithet.
‘Hey Dickie Roberts, you must be nucking futz you cupid stunt!’

The fact that Dom referenced this TV show by that name was SO OBVIOUSLY his way of trying to be be clever in getting away with calling MJ a “stupid c*nt”.

If you can’t see that, and come to MJ’s defense, then you are just so guilty of “showing your cards” here as someone who is unfair and does not have a level playing field when they ask others’ to behave.

287. K-7 - October 28, 2013

@285

Unfortunately, that is about how I thought you would respond to this.

;-(

Here is the definition of the slang term “cupid stunt” from the Urban Dictionary:

1. cupid stunt
First letters interchanged of “stupid c*nt.” While the phenomenon of accidentally interchanging the first letters of adjoining words is not uncommon, use of cupid stunt is generally intentional and merely a way of euphemizing or masking an extremely offensive epithet.
‘Hey Dickie Roberts, you must be nucking futz you cupid stunt!’

The fact that Dom referenced this TV show by that name was SO OBVIOUSLY his way of trying to be be clever in getting away with calling MJ a “stupid c*nt”.

If you can’t see that, and come to MJ’s defense, then you are just so guilty of “showing your cards” here as someone who is unfair and does not have a level playing field when they ask others’ to behave.

288. Ahmed - October 28, 2013

@286. K-7

“If you can’t see that, and come to MJ’s defense, then you are just so guilty of “showing your cards” here as someone who is unfair and does not have a level playing field when they ask others’ to behave.”

MJ himself didn’t see it that way at the beginning. I guess MJ & I don’t have your clear insight into other people minds !!

289. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 28, 2013

Hey Ahmed,

I’ve tried to avoid commenting further on this sad deal, but….

I think you are quoting me out of context. I didn’t pay that much attention to the “cupid stunt” wording at first. However, it’s pretty obvious now that that person was trying to call me the really nasty term in a way that might seem to given him cover.

I know you mean well, but you are unintentionally providing an excuse for that person to get away with using that sort of really nasty insults on this site. I know you don’t like K-7, but come on, this guy was being absurdly nasty to me, and used a term that is extremely offensive to all women.

290. Dave H - October 28, 2013

Re: Ahmed,

Hey guy,

Please stop inferring that I am part of some “gang” here. I take offense to your comment:

“…following that the usual suspects (Dave H, RDR, Red Shirt Diaries, Admiral Archer’s Prize Beagle, Garak’s Pride & DiscoSpock ) all joined you…”

Just what sort of accusation are you trying to make here? My opinions are my own, and if you are trying to imply something nefarious about me agreeing with others here, then come right out and say it please?

When someone calls someone a “Stupid-C” here, I am going to respond, and I would certainly hope that other good people here would respond as well, but that is their decision, not mine.

291. Ahmed - October 28, 2013

@288. MJ

What I was saying that Dom didn’t come back to explain what he meant by his comment.

If he really was trying to do that, using that term as nasty insult, then I’m with you 100% & he should apologize to you & not use that kind of language again. But so far, no word from him, that why I was waiting to hear back from him.

Again, I’m with you my friend if Dom real intention was using that term as an insult.

Since everyone expressed their opinions about that comment, how about we wait until Dom come back & reply to these comments ?

292. Ahmed - October 28, 2013

@ 289. Dave H – October 28, 2013

“Just what sort of accusation are you trying to make here? My opinions are my own, and if you are trying to imply something nefarious about me agreeing with others here, then come right out and say it please?”

No accusations were made against you or the others mentioned in my comment. Just an observation that this particular group tend to agree on almost everything & share similar attitude against any dissident, in a way very similar to the Borg collective, shall we say ?

However, this doesn’t imply lack of individuality in this group, just a tendency to follow the group mind more often than not.

293. Keachick - October 28, 2013

At first, when I read the words “cupid stunt”, I did not know what he was talking about. I did not realize that it was an anagram, but when another poster pointed it out, I could see how it could be that, given the context of the post.

Using anagrams in this context is deceitful. I was called out for using bad language. What I wrote was obvious, as in for example, using “WTF?”

Sadly, my point has indeed been proven – that people can be nasty, disrespectful, insulting without using a single “bad” word…they just cover it up by flipping letters around…:(

294. Red Dead Ryan - October 28, 2013

Again, this will all go away if Dom explains himself and apologizes. I’m not sure why he has remained silent.

295. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - October 28, 2013

Ahmed,

Thanks!

PS: K-7, let’s tone things down a bit, dude.

296. K-7 - October 28, 2013

Sure, MJ.

But it’s telling, isn’t it, how Dom has all of a sudden disappeared?

297. Marja - October 29, 2013

293 Keachick, Well, I also disliked it when you called Spock a “prick” and Carol a “bitch,” but since they’re merely characters, I guess that doesn’t count, especially as neither could ever post on this board : ) … and personally I thought you might have had a terrible awful horrible day. It would be much appreciated by this TM member if you could restrain your “language” in relation to characters you dislike, but that’s just me.

Other than that, Rose, I generally appreciate your views and worldview very much. You’re sometimes a bit “offbeat” and as another who’s not always in step with others, I appreciate that very much. That you’re a PineNut is perfectly understandable to me as a Quinto fan [even though we don't have a special name]. We each appreciate “our” actors immensely.

WTF is a pretty common abbreviation for extreme puzzlement, so I wouldn’t worry about that if I were you. But then, I’ve used it myself ….

298. Marja - October 29, 2013

291 Ahmed, I think we’ll probably be waiting for Dom to apologize till the hot place freezes over.

I know he’s posted some things I’ve agreed with, but insults, however couched, aren’t acceptable in polite society, which I hope this Board would aspire to …

but insults have a way of redounding to the rep of those who hurl ‘em, so if Dom reappears I guess he should wear his Kevlar.

299. Keachick - October 29, 2013

#297 – Yes, you are right. I should not resort to calling these characters bad names any more than I should resort to calling a poster here a bad word. Sometimes I have done so though. It is not good, however, in my defense, it has only been in certain circumstances where forever trying to think of more civil and polite references towards others who appear quite unkind and rude to me, seems futile. So I use bad words and of course, I have received flak because of it… I know – I really need to step away and sometimes I have done just that…

Actually the idea that these characters (via the actors who play them) could answer is interesting. It could even be a might exciting and exhilarating…hmmm

300. K-7 - October 29, 2013

Dom, wherever you are, note that I have a LONG memory. Don’t count on showing up two months from now, or even a year from now, and expect to get a free pass on this.

301. Marja - October 29, 2013

I wonder if Dom = Domluvr or whatev, remember that poster?

302. Dave H - October 29, 2013

D = Dumbass
O = Obnoxious
M = Moron

303. Keachick - October 30, 2013

Are you guys still going on about Dom?

Yes, he screwed up and we’ve let him know that he wrote something unacceptable. Now let it go.

Some plumbers managed to cut our landline phone and internet connection so I have nonline for more than 24 hours and this is what I find when I come back. Come on – please – give it a rest.

304. K-7 - October 31, 2013

Hey Spock Uhura Admirer,

I know you don’t like Keachick, but come on, sending people to try to cut her internet line?

:-))

305. Ahmed - October 31, 2013

@ 304. K-7 – October 31, 2013

“Hey Spock Uhura Admirer,

I know you don’t like Keachick, but come on, sending people to try to cut her internet line?
:-))”

LOL

306. Red Shirt Diaries - October 31, 2013

Does anyone else think it was kind of unusual that nearly the minute Sebastian left following his little hissy fit here, this “Dom Guy” suddenly appears…and then, just like Sebastian, when he went over the top he simply disappeared in a cowardly manner to avoid having to be accountable?

Sebastian = Dom

???

307. K-7 - November 1, 2013

Red Shirt,

I agree. I think they are the same person. Too many coincidences.

308. MJ -- THE GRAND RETURN !!! - November 2, 2013

STAR TREK 2016 NEWS ALERT — Joe Cornish to Direct, Filming Starts next Summer

http://collider.com/star-trek-3-joe-cornish/#more-292539

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