Analysis: When In 2016 Will Next Star Trek Be Released + Could Star Wars Butt In? | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Analysis: When In 2016 Will Next Star Trek Be Released + Could Star Wars Butt In? July 6, 2014

by Kay Reindl , Filed under: CBS/Paramount,Editorial,ST: Into Darkness Sequel,Trek Franchise , trackback

2016cal


The next Star Trek film is due in 2016, but fans want to know exactly when. Could it be on the 50th anniversary? And what about competing with JJ Abrams’ Star Wars movie which was just put on production hold – might Star Wars slip into 2016 and go head-to-head with Trek? TrekMovie has invited Hollywood writer/producer (and release date bingo aficionado) Kay Reindl to take a look at the 2016 landscape. Read the full analysis.

50 Years A Trek?

The speculation about who is going to direct the next Star Trek movie has ended. It’s Roberto Orci, and hopefully he has already put on his fan-retardant flame suit. He did come back to Twitter, so he must have some kind of protection. And according to Paramount, his Star Trek will be released in 2016, but when in 2016 will it come out?

Some fans would love it if the movie was released in September, to coincide with the 50th anniversary of the franchise. But seeing as how the highest grossing movie released in September is Crocodile Dundee, which came out in 1986, it seems highly unlikely that Paramount would sacrifice box office just for the sake of nostalgia. The overwhelming majority of people who saw the two JJ Abrams Trek films have no idea when exactly Star Trek premiered on TV, and the only goal for the studio is getting those people back into the theater. Paramount are still likely to use the 50th anniversary as a marketing hook regardless of the date they choose because it adds a uniqueness to the film.


Star Trek’s first episode “The Man Trap” aired Sept. 8, 1966 – does the next Trek film need to be released in September to be part of the 50th anniversary?

Disney 2016 Jedi Mind Trick?

The injury to Harrison Ford on the Star Wars set has added a potential new wrinkle to 2016, as JJ Abrams was rumored to have asked Disney to push the release of the film from December 2015 to May 2016. Every Star Wars movie has been released in May but since the last one came out in 2005, the summer movie landscape has changed. Chief among these changes is that Disney now owns Star Wars and Marvel. And they have already reserved May 2016 for Captain America 3. Couldn’t Disney just push the Captain America movie and give Abrams the time he needs to revive Star Wars? Well, no. Because in July, Disney will be releasing an as yet untitled Marvel film. There may even be another Marvel film coming out later in 2016. Star Wars is a property, while Marvel is a studio. So the influence on Disney is going to be greater from Marvel.

Paramount would likely want to avoid having Star Trek and Star Wars released close to each other, so a Star Wars in May 2016 release could be a big factor in their calculations. However, it looks like Paramount won’t have to worry about that. Just today, Disney announced that they are indeed halting production on Star Wars: Episode VII in order to accommodate Ford’s recuperation, but the film is still “on track” to wrap in the fall and be released in December 2015.



Harrison Ford’s injury is slowing the Star Wars production – but not the release date

Box Office Bingo

Studios have always reserved release dates for their big tentpole films. But since Marvel arrived on the scene, release date bingo has heated up. Because Marvel has planned out movies through 2028, the other studios have to set release dates for their untitled films, too. That’s what DC has done with Man of Steel, which is the launchpad for their other properties. In 2017, for example, DC is planning to release three films. So movie schedules are already taking shape years in advance, way before there’s even an idea for what the movie will actually be. It’s like the gold rush with capes.

Given all of that, where does Star Trek go in 2016? First of all, let’s take a look at the top box office average per film per month (based on top 10 domestic opening weekends for each month…

As you can see in the above chart, May, July and November are the biggest months for movies. Most of the Marvel films have released in those months. The fallow months are and have been (for quite awhile) January, February, August and September. Since the studios don’t make many smaller films anymore, those months are dumping grounds. You’re not going to isolate your blockbuster in a month when people have gotten out of the habit of going to the movies.

The Treks of Summer

Prior to the JJ Abrams movies there were three Star Trek films released in June (which used to be a bigger movie-going month), three in November (which used to feature midlevel films the studios don’t make anymore) and four in December. The three June films are Wrath of Khan (’82), The Search for Spock (’84) and The Final Frontier (’89). The lackluster box office for that last film may have changed Paramount’s mind about summer releases for Star Trek, as the next five films in the franchise were all released in the fall or winter. The last Next Generation film to be released was Nemesis in December of 2002, where it grossed a paltry $43 million and almost put an end to the movie franchise (it certainly ended the TNG-era and put the Trek films into a hiatus).

When they brought the franchise back, Paramount initially stuck with the pattern and set the release for the first JJ Abrams Star Trek film on Christmas 2008, but later they moved it up to May 2009 in hopes of bigger box office. After that worked out, Into Darkness was also released in May, although that one was initially set for 4th of July weekend in 2012. However, delays on Abrams’ Super 8 made that date undoable. Bad Robot and Paramount could have got Into Darkness ready for a Holiday 2012 release, but instead they chose May 2013, indicating that the studio has deemed the summer as the best fit for the renewed Trek franchise.

So, let’s take a look at how the Summer of 2016 is shaping up

Summer 2016 Wkd Films [Sci-fi/Action/Comic Book Bolded]
May 6th Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice (WB)
Captain America 3 (Disney)
May 13th Universal R-Rated Comedy (Uni.)
May 20th
May 27th
(Memorial Day)
X-Men: Apocalypse (Fox)
Alice in Wonderland 2 (Disney)
June 3rd Sausage Party (Sony)
June 10th The Amazing Spider-man 3 (Sony)
June 17th Finding Dory (Disney)
How to Train Your Dragon 3 (Fox))
June 24th
July 1st
(4th of July wkd)
Independence Day 2 (Fox)
Tarzan (Disney)
Angry Birds (Sony)
The BFG (Disney)
July 8th Marvel Untitled (Disney)
July 15th Untitled Bourne (Uni.)
Ice Age 5 (Fox)
July 22nd King Arthur (WB)
July 29th Untitled Planet of the Apes (Fox)

Yeah, that’s a lot. But there’s no guarantee that all of those movies will stay where they are, either. By the end, like every summer, there will be at least one tentpole film for each weekend. Both Star Trek and Star Trek Into Darkness had to compete against big movies opening in May 2009 and 2013. Yet the 2009 film ended up ranked 7th for the year and even though Into Darkness had to contend with the megahit Iron Man 3, it still made close to what the first film made domestically and outgrossed it by 20% globally. So from Paramount’s perspective, May has worked well for both Star Trek and Into Darkness. I’m sure there are some who will argue that point, but the absolute fact is that a studio does not greenlight a sequel if the previous film didn’t do well enough to warrant it.



Summer 2016 kicks off with “Batman v. Superman” on May 6th – will the next Trek follow it soon after?

Beam May Up

Looking at what Paramount has to release in 2016, it is likely that they are looking for summer slots for the Star Trek movie and Transformers 5. It is a good bet that the Transformers film will end up in June – quite possibly in the open slot of June 24th. And with three superhero movies in May, the next Star Trek begins to look like counter-programming. Where Paramount has an advantage is that they aren’t Disney, juggling Marvel, Star Wars, Pixar and Disney Animation. They don’t have to lock in a release like Disney or DC do. They can set the Trek film in May and change it if they need to, whether it be for production reasons or for positioning. Frankly, I’d be surprised if they didn’t do just that.

And it’s not just about how crowded the movie palaces will be with superhero films. The theory is that if you can get people to the theater, they will see your movie if The Avengers is sold out. According to the studio logic, a rising tide lifts all films. A big movie gets people in the habit of going to the movies. And if this hadn’t been proven, then they wouldn’t do it. The bottom line is not aesthetics, or creativity, or craft, although the notion that studios don’t care about quality isn’t true. They do, but they have to make money. That’s the bottom line for a corporation, and it always will be. They have a thousand Nate Silvers running numbers that lead them to these decisions.

So in the end, my bet is the next Star Trek film will be released on May 20th, 2016. With shooting set to start in the spring of 2015 (according to Bob Orci), making that release date is very doable. And for those fans that want to see the film celebrate the actual 50th anniversary of Star Trek in September 2016, there is always the DVD/Blu-ray release.

For now we will have to wait and see, but Paramount shouldn’t wait too long to make their choice.



Start lining up now for May 20th, 2016?

 

POLL: Predict!

What’s your best guess at a release date. Discuss it in the comments below and vote in the new poll.

When in 2016 do you expect release of Star Trek movie?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

 

Kay Reindl is a TV writer/producer who’s written for Millennium, Twisted and Beware the Batman. A long-time Trekkie, she has not technically defended Star Trek Into Darkness to the death, but will if pushed. Follow her on Twitter: @KayReindl.

Comments

1. Harry Ballz - July 7, 2014

September 2016 would be ideal in regard to commemorating the 50th anniversary of Star Trek.

But, since Hollywood doesn’t give a flying fig about things like that, who knows?

2. James McDonald - July 7, 2014

If they want to wait to release the 50th Anniversary movie of Star Trek in September 2016, that would be fine with me. September 8, 2016 will mark 50 years ago when the first STAR TREK tv series debuts on NBC in 1966.
However, I would like to hear how early they will begin filming this movie.

3. Sisko is the Prophet - July 7, 2014

The article actually says shooting starts in the spring of 2015. May 2016 sounds right

4. Captain Kirk's Nipples - July 7, 2014

You’re forgetting Prometheus 2 set for 2016

5. JRT! - July 7, 2014

Why wouldn’t Paramount want to avoid going up against SW? Because if SW is sold out people will go and see ST? Nah,not everyone would do that,not with so many other movies to see. And May 2016 is great,release it then. lol

J-R!

6. AJ - July 7, 2014

Just like JJ and the last two Trek films: ANY reason for a delay.

Just NOT a deadline person, bless his artistic heart.

7. Khan 2.0 - July 7, 2014

@4 I think it was announced RScott is doing The Martian for March 2016 instead of P2 (as was thought)

Re ST3s release – I guess if SW7 has to move to May2016 that would mean ST3 would have to be a late release Nov or Dec as happened in 2002 with Clones/Nemesis as I couldn’t see Paramount releasing Trek the same summer as Wars (with Marvel also moving Capt America which is probably going to move anyway to avoid BvS)

heres how Late 2016 looks so far:

November
• Trolls (Fox) – 11/4
• Untitled 2016 Event Project (Uni.) – 11/4
• Fantastic Beasts and Where To Find Them (WB) – 11/18
• Untitled Disney Animation (Nov. 2016) (BV) – 11/23

December
• Alvin and the Chipmunks 4 (Fox) – 12/16
• Untitled Star Wars (BV) – 12/16
• Untitled Illumination Entertainment (2016) (Uni.) – 12/21

Plus theres the small matter of Avatar 2.

If SW7 is moved to May 2016 then the planned Untitled SW would no doubt move to 2017(maybe May to coincide with the 40th ann) so maybe ST3 could slot in 12/16.

However if SW7 remains December 2015 ST3 will probably go for the 5/20 slot.

Also if they release ST3 in May they could get the DVD out for Sept for the 50th

It all depends on if SW7 gets moved or not. if it doesn’t ST3 = May. If it does ST3 = Nov or Dec

8. Optimistic Doodle - July 7, 2014

Whatever, as long as they continue to make Star Trek movies! For all we know, Star Trek 3 may be the last one…

9. Disinvited - July 7, 2014

All the late night news including Disney owned ABC are reporting that Ford’s injury will necessitate a filming delay that Disney spokespeople have been quick to point out will not effect its scheduled release date.

Much hay has been made of supposed reputable surveys indicating this or that of the general public’s view of STAR TREK. well here’s something from The Authorized Biography of William Shatner: SHATNER: WHERE NO MAN

http://www.beyondspock.de/interviews/print/shatner_where_no_man.php

“…another independent study of the general public conducted by sampling techniques and reaching more than one thousand people was reported by STAR TREK fans in an ad in the Hollywood trade papers appealing to Paramount:

80% of the general public said they would see a new STAR TREK movie if it had Shatner and Nimoy, but only 40% said they would see it if either Shatner or Nimoy were not in it. (And many added that at most they would see it once, while if both were in it most would expect to see it several times.)” — Sondra Marshk and Myrna Culbreath, SHATNER: WHERE NO MAN, Chapter 8 ‘Kirk Meets Spock: The Spark’

10. Cygnus-X1 - July 7, 2014

The bottom line is not aesthetics, or creativity, or craft, although the notion that studios don’t care about quality isn’t true. They do, but they have to make money. That’s the bottom line for a corporation, and it always will be.

An informative article, and I enjoyed it, but I’m tired of hearing this line of reasoning about the poor, struggling studios needing to make money.

The studios have always made money, or they’d not have stayed in business. Money may always have been the bottom line, but I don’t think that it’s always been the only line. Which is what seems to be now, and shamelessly so.

There used to be a sense of studios wanting to put out some meaningful films once a year or so as a point of pride, to compete for Oscars and keep the brand name respectable. These days, the major studios seem as dispassionate about their investments as a hedge-fund manager. If the foreign market wants a movie about turd sandwiches tomorrow, by God that’s what the studios are going to make tomorrow. And plenty of them.

11. Cygnus-X1 - July 7, 2014

And even the action movies used to be more respectable. They used to be much more balanced with drama, comic relief sequences, and have a “theme.” Today, it’s wall-to-wall action and I can’t tell you what the movie was about the next day. And don’t bother dismissing my complaint as mere get off my lawn curmudgeonliness, because I’m just not having it. The overall caliber of movies has declined in the 21st Century.

12. DIGINON - July 7, 2014

@9. Disinvited: The book you are quoting is from 1979. Shatner and Nimoy may have been the deciding factors for Star Trek’s success back then. That time is long gone.
I’m not even sure it would make much of a difference with the general public if they swapped out all the characters and just made a generic scifi action film that happens to be set in the Star Trek universe.

13. Jonboc - July 7, 2014

I bet the release will be in May, followed by a DVD release along with a parade of sales on existing Trek DVDs, the week of September 8th.

14. Hat Rick - July 7, 2014

Very comprehensive analysis on the part of the author — kudos.

A May 2016 release date, which seems the earliest reasonable possibility, means that there will be a seven year gap between ST(2009) and ST(2016). Until the Abrams movies, the average time it took to release any three Star Trek movies was four or five years. The release dates of STII through STIV took place within about four years, and STIV had the most impressive box office of any ST movie until ST(2009).

It seems to me that we are dragging out the timeframe, for whatever reason, for the release of these new movies to such an extent that whatever audience goodwill the previous film created is diminished.

Some of the most successful movies from a box office standpoint, such as Iron Man, were released with only a two-year gap between films. Counting “The Avengers” as an Iron Man movie, four Iron Man films were released between 2008 and 2013, a period of five years.

Star Trek is losing momentum unnecessarily each time a new film is released. This might have been because of calendar issues, or not, but somehow, somewhere down the line, executives have forgotten that time is a great eraser of memories and, in summer blockbusters, possibly goodwill.

15. Disinvited - July 7, 2014

#12. DIGINON – July 7, 2014

It’s important because TMP which set the mold as far as big budget Trek was concerned, has been claimed in these parts to have been a niche market and that Trek has never been successfully marketed to the general public worldwide before. This establishes that the general public at that time was more than familiar with Trek and willing to pay for the Kirk/Spock dynamic on screen.

And I hear people like yourself making claims, but no one is making a cogent argument as to how successfully marketing to a worldwide market with its mish-mash of cultures in 1979 is vastly different than doing the same in 2016.

16. Admiral_Bumblebee - July 7, 2014

The next movie should start something like this:

Space.
We hear the beeping sound of the sonar of space ship.
Voiceover: “Computerlog of the Starship Enterprise. Stardate 61362.3, Captain Data. We are enroute to the planet Vulcan to take Ambassador Picard back to his duties after taking part in a conference on Deep Space Nine…”
Then a big Enterprise F comes into view…

And then an epic adventure begins that spans both universes and sees the return of not only Picard, Data and maybe Riker but also the JJ-verse crew and the return of Prime Spock an a resurrected Prime Kirk – who could be the main villain in the movie.

17. Mr. Zoom - July 7, 2014

Um, I don’t remember ANY Trek films being released in October (at least in the United States). TVH was released November 26, 1986; First Contact, November 22, 1996. Generations was also a November release. TMP, TUC, Insurrection and Nemesis were December releases.

You sure you didn’t confuse October with November?

18. RaveOnEd - July 7, 2014

From what I see, the only real area for 2016 as of now with no real gigantic competition would be in June, 2016, either early or mid month. With what’s set in that timeframe, Star Trek could make a killing.

19. Capt_Crash74 - July 7, 2014

The studio could easily slide in it on May 20th if they are that hard up on a summer release….that is 2-weeks after Captain America 3 and Batman/Superman film.

I see no issues there.

However, I understand that Trek fans want that September release – but it really is a bad time to do, if you want old and new Trek fans to see it, then the Fri/Sat/Sun weekend is all the time there is to see it.
Schools (secondary and colleges) are back in full swing by September – and for a huge production as Trek…. there is no holiday in and around September or a true monetary incentive to move it that late – Summer’s officially over by September anyways.

20. TrekMadeMeWonder - July 7, 2014

I voted the same as you, Harry.

21. El Chup - July 7, 2014

Really it should be the week of Sept 8th. I know it’s not blockbuster season, but just as a one off. Mind you, that would presume that the film would be a great ride of nostalgia and tribute to 50 years of Trek. I think I can say now that after viewing Into Darkness the next picture will not remotely rise to those expectations, not with Orci in charge. Shame. I would have liked a Skyfall or Day of the Doctor for the franchise I have supported for my entire life. That’s how you do a 50th.

22. TUP - July 7, 2014

Counter programming eh? Star Trek will get eaten alive by Marvel and DC in May.

23. TrekRules - July 7, 2014

Does it matter? If the film is good, it will make money whenever it is released. Wouldn’t release it the same weekend as a DC or Marvel film but really, who cares if September is usually bad – a good movie will draw an audience. Now if we can just get a good movie…

24. Picard, Jean-Luc - July 7, 2014

Who cares about Star Wars…

Regardless of what that film does, I think the best slot for Star Trek 3 is April. First big movie of the year.

Look how well Cap 2 did. Even releasing earlier like the Lego Movie… That did huge business.

I HATE all this worry over Star Trek, what is wrong with us?? Star Trek is a huge deal and doesn’t need to worry about Star Wars or any of the other movies coming in 2016.

Each will need their space to perform to the best of their abilities and I say April for Trek.

25. T'Cal - July 7, 2014

16. Admiral_Bumblebee – July 7, 2014
The next movie should start something like this:

Space.
We hear the beeping sound of the sonar of space ship.
Voiceover: “Computerlog of the Starship Enterprise. Stardate 61362.3, Captain Data. We are enroute to the planet Vulcan to take Ambassador Picard back to his duties after taking part in a conference on Deep Space Nine…”
Then a big Enterprise F comes into view…

And then an epic adventure begins that spans both universes and sees the return of not only Picard, Data and maybe Riker but also the JJ-verse crew and the return of Prime Spock an a resurrected Prime Kirk – who could be the main villain in the movie.

I share your enthusiasm for TNG but I would much rather see it return to TV as a miniseries for the 50th anniversary with a tie in to the Abramsverse films a la Marvel films and Agents of SHIELD. TNG is much more successful on TV for me.

26. Elias Javalis - July 7, 2014

24,

he,he – I Agree!:)

27. star trackie - July 7, 2014

#21 ” I would have liked a Skyfall or Day of the Doctor for the franchise I have supported for my entire life.”

I thought Skyfall was so disappointing. Little hints of things they should have got right but missed the mark. Mainly the villain. And destroying the classic Aston Martin. Killing M. Bond is so dreadfully serious now. The style, the suave, the gadgets, the amazing stunts, everything that was signature Bond was missing. Now it’s just another Bourne movie. Bond has lost it’s unique identity and is now run-of-the-mill and that is it’s ultimate sin. That’s no way to celebrate the 50th anniversary I my book. As long as Trek continues to remember it’s roots, as it has in the last two movies, we’ll be just fine.

28. Phil - July 7, 2014

Late third, early fourth quarter is fine by me. I’m fairly certain that if Trek 3 gets sandwiched amongst better known properties, it’s going to be buried, even in the unlikely event Orci creates the greatest sci-fi movie ever. And I still don’t want a release anywhere near Avatar 2.

Harrison Ford is only delaying production a couple of weeks….but as Ford’s injury was originally reported as a sprained ankle, when in fact he was being airlifted off set, we have no way of knowing when production will restart until it restarts…

29. Ahmed - July 7, 2014

@14. Hat Rick

“Star Trek is losing momentum unnecessarily each time a new film is released.”

Agreed that ST is losing momentum big time, but not just because of calendar issues, but also the fact that BR team are masters in the arts of procrastination!

ST09 was delayed from December 2008 to May 2009
STID was delayed from June 2012 to May 2013

In any event, there is no way that Paramount will release the movie in May 2016 against Superman, X-Men & Captain America. April, June or August seems to be the best options so far.

30. TrekMadeMeWonder - July 7, 2014

29. Ahmed

Perhaps they paid BR too much and they just got lazy.

31. TrekMadeMeWonder - July 7, 2014

9. Disinvited

Not too biased.

32. Red Dead Ryan - July 7, 2014

Releasing the movie in May 2016 would be dumb. It’s already crowded. It’s going to be the most jam-packed May release period in history. Not only do you have the blockbusters, there are always the underdog, sleeper hit comedies that take big bites out of the box office pie. June/July look to be busy as well, as their will no doubt be more big movies announced for that summer, like a possible “Fast & Furious 8″. I don’t know if 2016 is going to be feasible. I would say 2017 could be more likely.

33. Yanks - July 7, 2014

It will be interesting.

I wonder if they will consider the ST Vegas Con (in August) when determining a release date?

We all remember how well STID was received…

34. Thorny - July 7, 2014

May 2009 and May 2013 were crowded, too. That didn’t stop Paramount from releasing Trek movies in those months. Remember how Trek ’09 nearly beat “Angels vs. Demons” in its second weekend?

Besides, either DC or Marvel will blink, either CA3 and BvS will move, probably to the Jun 24 date. (They’d better blink soon before Transformers 5 takes that date.)

35. star trackie - July 7, 2014

Trek can stand the heat, it’s proven that already with the last two movies. Trek has “legs’ as they say and even with seemingly top-notch competition, it will still survive just fine. The studio will not miss the opportunity of marketing this movie for the 2016 50th anniversary of TOS.

36. star trackie - July 7, 2014

#22 “Star Trek will get eaten alive by Marvel and DC in May.”

Nah. Trek had no problem dispatching Wolverine and it will have no problem with Spidey or Batman and Superman. It will have to divide the tickets at first, but Trek will stay in the theaters longer and enjoy more repeat business. No worries.

37. Khan 2.0 - July 7, 2014

@34 yes May 2009 ST went up against Wolverine (XMen 4 at the time), Angels&Demons (Da Vinci 2) ,and Terminator 4 (starring Bale post TDK)

and ST blew them all away domestically and ww only lost out to A&D.

STID had to compete with IM3, F&F6, HO3, & Gatsby and did well beating HO and Gatsby..

That..being..said….BatmanvSuperman & XMA will be the most dangerous adversaries Star Trek has ever faced.

38. Marja - July 7, 2014

7 Khan! 2.0, “Also if they release ST3 in May they could get the DVD out for Sept for the 50th” …

“Yessssss [rubbing hands with greedy glee, as perhaps a Paramount executive might] … those Trek fans will buy the DVD, the Special Shatner/Nimoy DVD we’re planning* … the special re-release of the BluRay DVD set we just released in Summer 2014 — now in Infrared DVD*!! … and [fill in the product] … and [fill in other products] …

“BWAAAHHAHAHAhaaaa, our Star Trekkie marketing power is mighty in 2016″ [twirling moustaches]

*ONLY IN JOKE. Don’t start a rumor off of this.

39. CmdrR - July 7, 2014

Holy Hortas, can Hollywood overthink things or what??

Just tell a good story and release the film when it’s ready — any time in 2016.

40. Marja - July 7, 2014

As for “Universal R-rated comedy,” coming out May 13, 2016,I think I’ve seen repeated previews for that movie. That and “Sausage Party.” ;-)

I wonder how popular “Angry Birds” will be, as I’ve seen no Tshirts or other AB merchandise being worn/shown lately. Isn’t it “over”? And what a stupid concept. But I said that about the Lego movie too.

Release date could be April 8th [if that's a Thursday] — six months before the 50th Anniversary — but that’s probably too arcane. Only the most devoted Trekfans would even know that.

A Spring 2014 release fits with their previous pattern and will allow them to market the very hell out of any DVDs or other tie-in products for September’s 50th ST Anniversary.
——————————————————————————————–
I love her joke about Orci’s flame-proof suit, LOL. Maybe he can use Spock’s volcano suit ….
——————————————————————————————–
11 Cygnus, “get offa my lawn!” You may find this of interest. I read it and said, “EXACTLY!” Now I enjoy the humor in Marvel movies, and the attractive actors, but they [and Man of Steel] all sort of blend together in my mind.

These SFX spectaculars [I'm not just pointing fingers at Marvel, "Man of Steel" fits this too] keep trying to top themselves [MORE explosions! MORE death-defying leaps! MORE cities razed!] and are beginning to bore with their sameness.

http://filmschoolrejects.com/features/marvel-movies-look-visual-guide.php
———————————————————————————————-

33 Yanks, yes, good points, and they’d dang well better not forget ComiCon that year either.

41. Michael Hall - July 7, 2014

“The studio will not miss the opportunity of marketing this movie for the 2016 50th anniversary of TOS.”

Personally, I’m far from convinced of this. The last two films, if anything, were anxious to distance themselves from TOS’s legacy (relax, “This isn’t your father’s Star Trek,” now go chug a brew), so why would the studio want to even mention an anniversary date that highlights the age of the property and is of importance only to those who will see it at least once without being prodded in any event, and thus are not the audience the film is being pitched to?

42. NuFan - July 7, 2014

“the only goal for the studio is getting those people back into the theater”

That rules out the truefans, so not September. My guess is June or December, depending on Star Wars.

43. TrekMadeMeWonder - July 7, 2014

If Trek misses the 50th, it will be because there is no Trek in production on TV.

Perhaps it will be OK to meet Trek’s REAL 50th – in 2019.

After all. Star Trek is mainly about the movies these days, right TrekMovie?

44. TrekMadeMeWonder - July 7, 2014

Oh wait, that would be the 40th (Since, STTMP).

45. Eric Cheung - July 7, 2014

Going by the chart in the article, I wonder if releasing the film on Thursday, September 8th, 2016 would actually do the film some favors.

Maybe by lowering the expectations, and even the budget, they could be slightly more niche-y and have a story that isn’t as reliant on the cliches of Hollywood blockbusters as the last several have been. Maybe it could be more like a problem-solving movie instead of one about blowing stuff up. I finally got a chance to see Europa Report. That was pretty cool. I’d add that to my usual list of films I think should influence a Star Trek film (alongside Close Encounters, ET, Star Trek IV, The Abyss, Contact, Master and Commander, Gravity).

46. Keachick (Rose) - July 7, 2014

I think that May is more likely to be the release date for the third movie and be in keeping with the first two. Whether it is the best time – not so sure.

September 8, 2016 is still a good option, even though it does seem a bad time financially for movies released then. However, the fact that the whole of 2016 would be Star Trek’s 50th anniversary, and needs to be organized with various events, that are affordable, if not free, and 2016 being advertised as being the year of Star Trek, 50 years on, starting now – releasing the film when there is less competition coming from the other big blockbusters to get “bums on seats” might work in Star Trek 3’s favour.

It could be seen as the ultimate film to end the Summer film season – leave the best till last and a great way of starting the new semester, etc, spreading hope and warmth that continues to shower northern hemisphere folk through the cold, dark winter months…

Also a great way to bring in the Spring/Summer season downunder.

Who knows – perhaps the theme and story of the next movie might allude to this

Just musing here, without trying to repeat anything I have read here or elsewhere.

Marja – As soon as I read the writer’s comment about the fan-retardant suit, I immediately thought of Spock’s volcano suit, although I suspect it might need to be made of even tougher stuff, given the harshness of many a fan.

47. Check the Circuit - July 7, 2014

Marvel/Disney just proved that you can buck trends. They released Captain America 2 in early April. They sort of got the whole summer movie season off to an early start. It was a risky move but it turned out to be good for them and for summer box office in general.

What did Cap 2 make? Something like $700MM+ worldwide? I think it might still be the highest grossing movie of the year so far. And the character (on his own) wasn’t a guaranteed big draw.

But you know what? They made a GREAT movie and marketed it well. Win!

Do those two things…and launch Star Trek 3 in April.

48. Trekboi - July 7, 2014

Definantly May.

Anyone who thinks anything else is ignorant of the reality of release seasons/dates & wallowing in nostalgia.
The movie would be the focus of marketing then the DVD/Bluray could be the centrepiece of the September celebrations/releases.

Star Trek 6 the 25th anniversary movie was not released in September.
September would be Death at the box office, anyone pushing for a September release is oblivious to reality & just living in their own world where Star Trek is made just for them.

49. Cygnus-X1 - July 7, 2014

40. Marja – July 7, 2014

The homogeneity of the comic-book movies is as much an issue for me as anything else. If there was only one movie that was like that, it wouldn’t bother me at all. But the flood of them seem indicative of the studios being run more as mindless, soulless factories these days. If one is good, ALL is better.

And, it fits perfectly with what that studio exec (wish I could remember her name) said about the studios being like chickens with their heads cut off since their DVD revenues dried up. Apparently they’ve gone into auto pilot mode and are just greenlighting clones of whatever has worked in the past.

And I seriously hope that people get tired of them while the studios have dozens of them in various stages of production. The fact that they’ve greenlighted these things through 2028 tells you better than anything else how creatively and entrepreneurially bankrupt they’ve become. Although, there will be a new crop of 10 year olds every year for whom these kind of movies are new, and they obviously won’t know what they’re missing in terms of quality. I really liked Battle Beyond the Stars when I was a kid; I just watched it again recently for the first time since then, and I was shocked at how stupid and shamelessly derivative it is. It’s basically just a collection of every sci-fi movie cliche and device from the good sci-fi movies which preceded it, all stitched together around an unbelievably insipid premise.

So, what do I know. Maybe the formula will keep working for decades to come. More Spiderman, Superman and Batman reboots, Transformers 12, 13, 14, 15….

50. Hat Rick - July 7, 2014

Thanks, Ahmed, for your comment agreeing with me about the lengthy delays between ST(2009) and ST(2016).

Of course, I remain optimistic that things will unfold as they should, as a certain Vulcan science-officer-turned-diplomat once said.

There was a long delay between ST:NEM (2002) and ST(2009) that had many Trek fans on pins and needs. I remember being very disappointed by the box office for ST:NEM some time after I saw it, although of course I still liked it (and still do). Box office affects my thinking about the movie only to the extent that it gives me pause as to whether it could have been better — assuming the wisdom of the commons. Box office is, of course, never determinative of my opinions on the artistic or related merits of any movie.

Seven years is a long time. My first postings on TrekMovie.com were around the time that TrekMovie itself was established, when it became clear that a Star Trek movie was definitely in the works. So that must have been around 2007 or so. I well remember posting “spy” photos of on-location filming for ST(2009) at California State University, Northridge in 2008; they’re still available on this site.

The 2002-2009 drought as made more tolerable by the fact that ST:ENT was still on the air, until 2005. Now there are no more new ST TV productions.

As I search my memory for those days of yore, it seems to me, then, that the interminable drought of good news regarding a new Trek movie — viz., 2002 and 2007 or so — is still far less than the the timespan between ST(2009) and ST(2016), and, indeed, only a year or so longer than the mini-drought we had between ST(2009) and STID (four years).

I think that, beyond a certain length of time (say, two years), the passage of time itself makes the passage of time more onerous; that is, each month of delay is comparatively more significant than the month immediately prior.

If there is to be another four-year delay between any two Trek movies from now on, I’m not sure I could really handle it very well. I’m not sure how I was able to handle the delay between ST(2009) and STID.

If ST(2016) does not do well in the box office, then I think we may see another drought, which I, for one, do not welcome. Quite to the contrary.

51. Hat Rick - July 7, 2014

Clarification: Just checked and TrekMovie.com was established, as The Trek XI Report, on July 15, 2006. (Wikipedia.) I can’t remember if I posted as early as 2006 on this site.

52. Marja - July 7, 2014

I certainly hope we won’t have to wait FOUR FECKING YEARS for the next movie. I have been wondering about JJ’s commitment to SWars and thinking about his company Bad Robot which has a considerable stake in Trek. Surely HE wouldn’t want to sabotage Trek by opening in competition with SWars7 … but what about Disney. :-(

Make It NOT So.

53. Disinvited - July 7, 2014

#31. TrekMadeMeWonder – July 7, 2014

Which one?

1. Disney’s estimation on the delay’s effect.

2. Paramount studio execs’ decision that they didn’t like Roddenberry and would monkey the numbers (echoing a move earlier done by NBC in years prior) to couch a success as a failure so as to avoid having to share the wealth with a bonus of not having to deal with him again by giving an excuse to boot him.

3. Fan financiers’ of the survey?

54. Disinvited - July 7, 2014

#52. Marja – July 7, 2014

If we are going to be pessimistic, why not do it in a way that will allow a little joy? BR is expending all its procrastination mojo on Disney, which will not only allow their Trek do be done in plenty of time, but in plenty of time to fill SW7’s gaping exhibition theater hole.

55. Hat Rick - July 7, 2014

@Marja, 52,

Agreed. None of us are getting any younger. I gave Paramount and Abrams the benefit of the doubt when the delay for STID was extended for a year, but in retrospect, that’s all I’m really willing to do right now. If there is a substantial delay, I’m going to commit myself to be unhappy. Right now, as I think about it, I’m not exactly thrilled to have to wait until May, 2016 for ST(2016). That’s three years — count ‘em — three — between movies. Not two, not two-and-a-half, but three. If they could release three ST movies in four years, as I mentioned in one of my above postings, why is it that we have to wait for three years for two movies? Why did they waste an entire year between 2013 and now on bureaucratic futzing around?

According to a more traditional schedule, we should expect a movie in 2015, two years after ST(2013). In fact, according to the comics-superheroes schedule, by 2015 they should already be filming ST(2017).

But we all know that that’s not going to happen, and in fact the sequel to ST(2016) is far from certain to occur. Just think: If it does, it may not be released until 2019 or 2020 (or later), around a decade from the first Abrams movie. To put this in perspective, that’s enough time for fans not yet born in 2009 to develop an interest in Trek, and lose it completely just in time for that sequel.

And obviously, I hate to break it to anyone, but no one of any age is getting any younger, and every year it gets harder and harder to build up enthusiasm for a sequel that may yet be delayed.

56. Khan 2.0 - July 7, 2014

I remember the origins of TMcom as well…mustve been 2006 or 07 I found this place and there were rumours of a new movie…a reboot of somekind….a Star Trek Begins type movie about Kirk/Spock….would it be a prequel or a reboot?…then we got the early teaser poster of the TOS style badge logo all but confirming an in-canon prequel….would it be like the lost Trek VI Starfleet Academy movie? sort of but not just the academy years, the untold maiden voyage of the Ent (like the Enterprise The First Adventure novel of the DC Annual #1)…..then the news that JJ Abrams would be directing it after he was just producing it. a big deal director whod just come off the last Mission Impossible!… then the bombshell that Nimoy would be involved and not just in a wraparound talking to the cadets about the past type deal but in it in a time travel way interacting with the young crew…that itd be more like a Back to the Future or Terminator movie than traditional Trek…then all the casting news – Quinto 1st – great choice,..the Stargate dude as Scotty?! OK..no wait its Pegg! WTF? its not a comedy!…Karl Urban as Bones? shouldnt he have been Kirk?…but who for Kirk? no one knew how theyd get a Kirk!… whod be Pike? (Capt Pike was gonna be in it!) Cruise? no its JFK!…would Russel Crowe be the villain (it was crazy such big names being linked to Trek and even getting asked about it in interviews) no it was Bana (still a pretty name for Trek)

57. Ahmed - July 7, 2014

@55. Hat Rick

” Why did they waste an entire year between 2013 and now on bureaucratic futzing around? ”

They wasted an entire year looking for a director , and at the end, they hired someone from within !!

58. Vger23 - July 7, 2014

1. No frigging way they’d release the movie in September. About 1/32 of their target market would even know the significance of that date…let alone care.

2. Star Trek has competed strong against the lame comic book movies in the past. This wouldn’t need to be any different. Trek is different enough and attractive enough to do well in the face of some competition.

3. I don’t think you’re going to see competition from Star Wars. That said, if it DOES get pushed to May…I think you’ll see Trek adjust to avoid having two “outer space” franchises head-to-head.

I do agree with those who say that movies in the 21st Century are lower in story telling quality. But, that’s the differences in the generations. The target audiences are people who were raised on fast-paced video games and instant gratification. It’s not a criticism…it’s just a fact. Movie studios do market research just like any other company producing a product. That research (“what do the people want”) dictates the types of movies being made. Right new, for the most part, pace and action are king over substance and character.

59. TrekMadeMeWonder - July 7, 2014

53. Disinvited

I was responding to what Shatner “put in his book,” as per your post at #9.

60. Ahmed - July 7, 2014

52. Marja – July 7, 2014

“I have been wondering about JJ’s commitment to SWars and thinking about his company Bad Robot which has a considerable stake in Trek. Surely HE wouldn’t want to sabotage Trek by opening in competition with SWars7 ”

Absolutely, it is not like he jumped ship for SW 7 in the middle of promoting STID or something, right ? !!

61. captain spock - July 7, 2014

acorrding to this artical their will not be any change in the date of the release of star wars episold 7 to may of 2016

http://makingstarwars.net/2014/06/delays-star-wars-episode-vii-production/

62. Hat Rick - July 7, 2014

For anyone interested in seeing an unusual view of Starfleet Academy as depicted in ST(2009), you can click on my name in this post, as I’ve linked it to my website which I haven’t updated in quite a while. Two of the photos are found at the May 24 and May 31 blog entries.

63. Disinvited - July 7, 2014

#59. TrekMadeMeWonder – July 7, 2014

Danke.

64. DonDonP1 - July 7, 2014

Fascinating. I’m cool with whatever month in 2016 that “Star Trek XIII” would be released. As for Disney’s “Star Wars Episode VII,” that film will be released on December 18th, the Friday before Christmas in 2015, despite the two-week hiatus in the middle of production. If Disney decides to rescheduled “Episode VII” release for December 25th, Christmas Day in 2015, I am totally cool with that.

65. Disinvited - July 7, 2014

#60. Ahmed – July 7, 2014

I’ll never forget when JJ was on Disney’s JIMMY KIMMEL LIVE! to promote STID just after the jump. He totally let them hijack the STID promotion interview.to focus on SW. I mean they had f**king William Shatner in the audience heckling JJ in a running gag, but what were his lines???: Begging JJ for a role in STAR WARS!

It was funny but I kept thinking “C’mon JJ, one of the greatest pitchmen in our times and you can’t slip him a few thou to get your Trek movie a little more promotion instead of buried in all of this?

I was just absurd how willing he was to talk to his STAR WARS overlords about that instead of what he knew needed to be done.

66. Ahmed - July 7, 2014

@65. Disinvited

I want Abrams to make the best SW movie, he is the best guy for that job, but part of me is delighted that Disney is giving him such a hard time & not bending to his wishes like Paramount did.

67. Ahmed - July 7, 2014

After watching the second episode of the new Damon Lindelof show “The Leftovers”, I’m really glad that he is NOT writing the new Trek movie.

IMO “The Leftovers” is the worst HBO show ever, with its uninteresting characters, the melodrama & terrible dialogue. It was was boring as hell, I barely finished the two episodes.

Last night episode was partly about the mystery of the missing bagels, I kid you not.

We should be thankful that Bob & the new fresh guys are the ones writing the movie!

68. boborci - July 7, 2014

release dates are a form of vodoo. What I mean is that there is no science behind it. So after worrying about release dates for a while, I no longer do. our only job as supporters of any movie is to hope and work for the movie to be good.

interesting article, though.

69. B Kramer - July 7, 2014

Bob O. posted this on his twitter account (get a load of the red shirt :^):

“Not going to get into the Federation until we behave better ; )”

https://twitter.com/realboborci/status/485853077920960513
(RT-ed on the TM twitter account as well).

Interesting, make of it what you will. ST is of course, mentioned too.

70. B Kramer - July 7, 2014

Sorry Bob,

Didn’t see your post ’till after I posted.
I enjoyed that twitter post and good luck.

May the for…er….may the Great Bird of the Galaxy
bless your endeavors.

All the best.

71. Kev - July 7, 2014

fan-retardant flame suit? Maybe Orchi should do like QT did with Pulp Fiction and disconnect for awhile and head off to amsterdam for awhile.

as it may help his thought process and movie making skills to give it a break away from the hollywood pressure.

72. Kev - July 7, 2014

FYI I liked into darkness save for what happened with Bruce Greenwood ( should have brought him back with the blood) and Khan wasnt very Khan ish.

he’s supposed to have an ego, this one was more of a vulcan than a superhuman megaman that made the original so much fun.

and also the logistic and logic problems, dear god the logic problems lol

but those could have been ironed out with a few more drafts.

73. Harry Ballz - July 7, 2014

@68 boborci “our only job as supporters of any movie is to hope and work for the movie to be good”

Oh, I see, your goal is for the movie to be “good”?

Gee, Bob, some of us here were hoping for GREAT.

74. boborci - July 7, 2014

72. dear god?

ok. one round of logic problems. bring up your one biggest logic problem. lets see how logic applies. offer expires in one hour.

75. Ahmed - July 7, 2014

@ 68. boborci – July 7, 2014

“release dates are a form of vodoo.”

I guess that Marvel hired legion of Houngans to take care of their release dates :-)

76. Harry Ballz - July 7, 2014

@74 boborci “your one biggest logic problem…..offer expires in one hour”

Okay, how about explaining the Kirk death scene when you hadn’t earned the emotional investment from the audience to pull such a ham-fisted stunt?

I give you two hours for you and your valiant crew.

77. B Kramer - July 7, 2014

A little levity all:

Logic is a little tweeting bird chirping in meadow. Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers which smell bad.

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

78. Ahmed - July 7, 2014

How about the illogical Starfleet promotions. At the beginning of the movie, Kirk is the captain, then he loses his rank & Pike takes over. Pike dies & Kirk is back as the captain, all that in the first 30 minutes or something!

79. Ahmed - July 7, 2014

@boborci,

People talked & argued about these issues a million time. Perhaps it is best to focus on the next movie & what is happening there, rather than beating a dead horse.

80. B Kramer - July 7, 2014

Take it easy guys, we just got Bob back on twitter and there’s a lot of pressure on him to deliver the goods. We’ve been through this in the past lets look to the future and hope for the best.

81. Ahmed - July 7, 2014

@80. B Kramer

” We’ve been through this in the past lets look to the future and hope for the best.”

Agreed.

82. Hat Rick - July 7, 2014

@B Kramer, 77,

Not that this was your intention, but something of that speech always reminds me of Baudelaire’s “Les Fleurs du mal.” I think there is something to be said for the contrast between the bright and beautiful Federation of Starfleet and the very unpretty reality that the Abrams movies depict for those outside fhe Federation. In ST(2009), Nero’s horrifyingly unkempt ship was a useful contrast to the sheer niceness of Federation vessels such as the Enterprise.

This leads me to the thought that perhaps we give short shrift to the quasi-realism we see in Abrams movies, exclusively within the Trek cinematic pantheon — short of STIV: TVH.

TVH was an extreme success because it gave us 1986 San Francisco. It emphasized that Star Trek wasn’t just about some fantasy universe — it was (supposedly) about us. ST(2009) did that too, with its location shooting — the Iowa scenes, for example. Or “Starfleet Academy,” which was actually a California university campus and the Long Beach City Hall.

Abrams’ Trek succeeded because it established first contact with its audience, just as TVH made Kirk and Co.’s adventures part of our world.

ST(2009) also succeeded because it was good at distilling truth from the spoken word alone. Some of the most successful films from an artistic standpoint take place primarily within four walls (e.g., Judgment at Nuremberg (1961)) without any need for pyrotechnics. Cadet Kirk’s abbreviated trial, for example, set the tone for the movie because it gave the rest of the movie an important part of the overall theme.

An emotional intensity that arises from stakes set in the real world and heightened by dialogue about a meaningful subject can elevate the feel of an entire movie.

As I previously mentioned ST:NEM, I’d have to admit that there were no scenes in ST:NEM that did either of the above. No scene connected NEM with the real world, and the location shoot featuring Picard in a futuristic jeep seems out of place. The conversations between Picard and Shinzon on the Enterprise-D and elsewhere lacked that certain sparkle that draw audiences into a movie. ST:NEM largely failed to connect with its audience for these and other reasons.

It’s not an easy task to find the right way, the right words, the right characterizations, the right dialogue, to connect with audiences, and particularly worldwide audiences. But a sense of the zeitgeist is certainly a prerequisite. Just as Man of Steel connected with a more morally ambivalent audience that preferred to see Superman as an alien first, and an American second or third, so, too, the next movie must contain themes that directly speak to the viewers in ways that they find truthful, albeit for reasons even they may not know.

Socrates famously said that the unexamined life is not worth living. In the end, for Trek, the meaningless movie is not a movie worth making. (Except, perhaps, for the accountants.)

83. Marja - July 8, 2014

54, Disinvited, Yes! Let’s do! Although I have a feeling Disney haven’t much patience for that kind of messing about.

60, Ahmed, LOL, ya got me there!

65 Dis, yes, I was amused and horrified by turns. I think in the script Shatner should have been reminding JJ what movie he was actually there to promote. Like holding up a big sign that said STAR TREK with the big badge /\ on it. Kimmel’s a Trek fan, at least I thought so.

@boborci: Love the shirt. Think you should maybe wear the Vulcano suit tho.

84. Cygnus-X1 - July 8, 2014

74. boborci – July 7, 2014

72. dear god? ok. one round of logic problems. bring up your one biggest logic problem. lets see how logic applies. offer expires in one hour.

But that’s a good half of what we’ve been doing at this site since STID came out—talking about the logic problems and the other problems with the writing.

(1) Why doesn’t McCoy think to try the blood of one of Khan’s 72 buddies that he has handy? In fact, he even had one of the Augments out of his cryo-chamber so that they could put dead Kirk in it.

(2) If Marcus’s goal after Khan escapes is to eliminate Khan and his 72 buddies, and Marcus isn’t a complete idiot, then why doesn’t Marcus just kill the 72 Augments as they lie slumbering in their cryo-chambers?

Instead, Marcus risks his entire mission, all he’s worked for—starting a war with the Klingons, eliminating the one guy (Khan) who can incriminate him (and is well motivated to do so)—for what? For shits & giggles, to see if he can kill Khan + the 72 Augments all at once with a needlessly risky and convoluted plan that relies on, among other uncertainties, the hope that Kirk follows his orders to the letter and doesn’t look inside the MYSTERIOUS SECRET TORPEDOES ON HIS SHIP.

Marcus is supposed to be something of a sociopath—a cunning strategist, cold and calculating—and for no reason, other than a sinister mustache twirl and to get the characters where you wanted them to be in the plot, Marcus needlessly risks his entire mission; and his mission actually fails precisely because his mustache-twirling payback scheme was so needlessly convoluted and risky! It’s like a cartoon where the jailor puts the key to the jail cell on a table within reach of the prisoners.

(3) Spock is willing to die for the Prime Directive in the volcano, but the whole reason that he’s in the volcano to begin with is because he’s violating the Prime Directive by trying to interfere in the natural development of the Niburan culture—trying to save them from their volcanic fate.

We can keep going….

85. Cygnus-X1 - July 8, 2014

74. boborci – July 7, 2014

Bob, honestly, I don’t understand how you can not be at least familiar with the common complaints about your work. Your surprise at the issue of logic problems being so emphatically complained about reminds me of the infamous interview where Tim Russert asks President GW Bush if the Iraq War was a war of choice or a war of necessity. And Bush is totally nonplussed in reaction to the question—he’s clearly never thought about the most hotly debated and controversial issue of his own presidency. Come on, man!

86. Keachick (Rose) - July 8, 2014

#85 – “but the whole reason that he’s in the volcano to begin with is because he’s violating the Prime Directive by trying to interfere in the natural development of the Niburan culture—trying to save them from their volcanic fate.”

How does the annihilation of a people due to a massive volcanic eruption allow for the natural development of the Nibirun culture? No interference of any kind means non-development, which is not quite the same as natural development.

This was clearly about how they interpreted the tenets of the Prime Directive and this was the problem for Kirk, Spock and co, mainly because they were there at Nibiru and not somewhere else and they had the technology to stop the volcano, which could allow the culture to continue along whatever course it was going on…This was the conundrum that faced these characters – if and what to do and how to do it.

Similar issues face us today, particularly with regard to advances in medical technology. We don’t call it prime directive, but it is about whether one should allow nature to go its course, but then we need to ask just what is that natural course, given what medicine can do to sustain life in ways that would not have been possible even 50 years ago…

I find it curious that no one (as far as I know) has brought up this, in relation to the whole so-called prime directive/non-interference notion.

What does it actually mean – in practice, now and in any Star Trek future? When is “breaking it” not really breaking it and when is “not breaking it” end up breaking something more important perhaps?

Maybe some might understand what I mean, but given recent exchanges, I am not holding my breath…

87. Disinvited - July 8, 2014

#74. boborci – July 7, 2014

I’ve never really heard a good explanation of how the Vulcan civilization got around the inability to resolve the truth or falseness of conjectures such as, “This sentence is a lie.”, in committing their entire culture to logic.

88. james - July 8, 2014

@BobOrci

Wishing you well on the next movie!

I really enjoyed Star Trek Into Darkness.

Honestly, I think it’s nice that you try to interact with the fans here, but the Trek Movie message boards can be brutal. I know Ron Moore stopped reading such sites because it affected his work and made him doubt himself.

My advice – stick to your guns, make the movie that you want to see, put your vision up there on the screen. And for gods sake don’t listen to us fans. Some of the crazies (like me) would want to bring back old Shatner back for an encore!

89. Hat Rick - July 8, 2014

@Keachick, 86,

Further supporting what you say, Kirk in TOS violated the Prime Directive all the time, so what Kirk did in STID is really not so unusual for Trek. Kirk seems to believe there are things more important than what is protected by the Prime Directive (whatever the reasoning behind it).

However, it’s highly possible that the PD exists because of a restriction on the nature of human knowledge. It’s there to prevent humanity from pretending to be a god by playing god. For all we know, there could have been a secondary species that would have evolved on Nibiru that would have benefited from the extinction of the one that Spock saved in STID, much in the same way that human beings evolved from smaller mammals that took over the ecological niches vacated when the sauropods were rendered extinct.

90. pilotfred - July 8, 2014

to be fair its not the prime time line anyway yes i am glad it going to be 2016 however the date is unimportant,now however if they were to do some tv then the date would be important,i would to see a TV film showing how star trek got started and the history have a star trek reunion of the original cast and spin offs maybe do a tv movie where all the cast are in it now that would be fun

91. boborci - July 8, 2014

I was asking 72.

92. star trackie - July 8, 2014

#76 “Okay, how about explaining the Kirk death scene when you hadn’t earned the emotional investment from the audience to pull such a ham-fisted stunt?”

Sorry, Harry, that persepctive is purely subjective, nothing to do with logic. Just sayin’. :)

93. star trackie - July 8, 2014

hmm. Well, I see Kev @ 72 never offered any specifics to his broad generalization. lol Typical.

94. Keachick (Rose) - July 8, 2014

#91 – I guess your offer has expired…

So typical of many posters around here unfortunately

95. Disinvited - July 8, 2014

#72. Kev – July 7, 2014

Use a Life Line.!

96. Disinvited - July 8, 2014

#94. Keachick (Rose) – July 8, 2014

Is it every really that simple? If Kev’s isp is routed through satellites that are experiencing time dilations it could take 25 years for us to catch up to his reply. I know there’s time moderation feels like its going through that satellite….

97. Mad Mann - July 8, 2014

Bob, just don’t go there. It’s not worth it. You’ll just get yourself in trouble again.

Anyway, interesting article. I think release dates area big deal. Look at Ender’s Game. That movie could have done much better if not released in early November. I wonder who picked that release date? Hmmm.

I think That Cap 3 will be pushed up and come out in April, since that worked very well for Cap 2 this year. May will become uncluttered and that May 20th date looks great.

98. TrekMadeMeWonder - July 8, 2014

He’ll be back (I say with Terminator sunglasses on).

Did bob ask for STiD plot holes?

One of the annoying things I saw in STiD was when the Enterprise was warping back to earth and they were fired on by the Vengence and they were forced to drop out of warp into normal space.

Why would the Enterprises chief navigator send a starship directly toward the Earth at such a high velocity?

Would it not make sense to steer the starship on a course close to the planet, on a course that would not destroy the ship and crew if they lost power on that trajectory and collided – with the planet!?

Seems like a no brainer.

However, in your defense boborci. The starships did battle while they appeared to race toward the Earth. That may have changed their trajectory some, but it still seems finny to me that they ended up directly over SF HQ.

Take the Navigator’s Pledge next time:

As navigator I will never warp from across the galaxy on a course aimed DIRECTLY toward a planet. Seems funny to me with those big impulse engines that the Enterprise would need to Warp in and out so close to the Earth. I would think a Warp engine failure so close to the Earth would be any navigator’s most worrisome nightmare.

Perhaps that’s why you put it in, but it seemed like sense drama.
Drama must make sense when following a good tale.

Still STiD did not annoy me as much on my forth viewing a year later. So kudos. Like a good wine, Trek should always get better with repeated viewings. Thanks, Bob!

99. B Kramer - July 8, 2014

Bob,

Make sure there aren’t too many plot holes in the next one (there’s always are a few at best). Otherwise the fans will be Khan and you will be Kirk, and they will bug the you know what out of you for all eternity. ;^)

LLAP

100. Spock's Bangs - July 8, 2014

#84. ” Spock is willing to die for the Prime Directive in the volcano, but the whole reason that he’s in the volcano to begin with is because he’s violating the Prime Directive by trying to interfere in the natural development of the Niburan culture—trying to save them from their volcanic fate.”

Spock wasn’t sacrificing himself for the Prime Directive, he was doing his job, under orders, with no expectation of dying. It was an unexpected chain of regrettable circumstances and Spock knew he may die and accepted it. All of your, supposed, lapses in logic are completely explainable. Just because you, or others here, don’t understand a scene’s plausibility, doesn’t make it wrong.

FACT!!

101. Mike Barnett - July 8, 2014

You know, STID/ST09 has been talked to death – especially by our long-winded friends on this site. I’m glad @boborci isn’t engaging in many of the discussions because it’s ‘a no-win scenario.” I think it’s similar to politics and religion, in that most people are set in their ways and there’s likely no argument that can be made to have them switch to a different view.

102. Khan 2.0 - July 8, 2014

boborci if ur reading. please bring back Patrick Stewart somehow. you cant let XMen get away with using his talents again and not Trek!

103. TrekMadeMeWonder - July 8, 2014

boborci if your’re reading this. Please bring back Patrick Stewart somehow and make him admit onscreen that wearing a dress in Next Gen was a bad idea!

; )

104. boborci - July 8, 2014

97. Mad Mann – July 8, 2014

Don’t disagree that release dates are a big deal. Just saying — they’re like earthquakes. Science behind them not super predictable.

105. Tom - July 8, 2014

Positive word of mouth , good marketing coinciding with a favorable release date= $$. Sometimes these factore can overcome poor published reviews. Having a great movie helps.

106. Tom - July 8, 2014

I know i’m off the correct thread (tired of scrolling down) . How cool for Bob and team if they include Shatner. They get to write what would be one of the most memorable scenes in Trek history. Who wouldn’t want to write the last scenes for Prime Kirk and Spock( although Moore and Braga struggled). Just writing the dialogue would be so cool knowing this is the finale for these legendary characters. To have that combined with the great reboot cast is just awesome. So to get back on thread, it is great no matter what the release date!!

Have fun Bob!!

107. Ahmed - July 8, 2014

@101. Mike Barnett – July 8, 2014

“You know, STID/ST09 has been talked to death – especially by our long-winded friends on this site. I’m glad @boborci isn’t engaging in many of the discussions because it’s ‘a no-win scenario.””

But Bob was the one asking/daring #72 to prove that STID has issues!

Maybe I’m wrong but it looks like Bob doesn’t even consider the possibility that his last movie has issues.

108. NuFan - July 8, 2014

Do you have a release preference, Bob? Also, tell them not to release it foreign first. We knew the whole movie a week before it came out.

109. Ahmed - July 8, 2014

@ 108. NuFan – July 8, 2014

“Also, tell them not to release it foreign first. We knew the whole movie a week before it came out.”

I second that, if it is possible release it worldwide in the same day/week.

110. star trackie - July 8, 2014

107 “Maybe I’m wrong but it looks like Bob doesn’t even consider the possibility that his last movie has issues.”

The thing is, a movie only has a problem if the viewer considers it to be a problem and that fluctuates from viewer to viewer. For every fanatic who has a problem with ‘red matter’ there are hundreds who don’t. It’s only a problem if it bothers you. Khan was British and that bothers some. Didn’t bother me in the least. So all this jibber-jabber about the horrific “problems” JJ-Trek suffers, is just that, a rather silly merry-go-round that just spins round and round and round, and never takes you anywhere.

111. Ahmed - July 8, 2014

@110. star trackie

“The thing is, a movie only has a problem if the viewer considers it to be a problem and that fluctuates from viewer to viewer”

Can we agree that there is nothing perfect in this world, let alone a summer movie ?

If filmmakers start to think that their movies are perfect & there is no need for improvements, even little ones, then they are delusional.

112. Sunfell - July 8, 2014

May? December? September? I don’t care. If you make it, we’ll stuff the theaters to see it. And, if it really -is- good- more than once.

113. Keachick (Rose) - July 8, 2014

Just because Bob asks a poster what that poster considers are problems of logic within the movie does not necessarily mean that Bob himself considers the movie perfect and there is no need for improvements. He simply wanted to know what exactly Kev considered a problem and why. We are all awaiting a reply to Bob’s question. As Bob reiterated, he was asking KEV, not everyone else.

Often actors, writers and others can be the harshest critics of all when it comes to critiquing their own work in hindsight. However, they are not going to reveal their own misgivings they may have about this or that scene was written, what might have worked better etc and certainly not on a site like this, where there are always so many bared teeth.

114. Keachick (Rose) - July 8, 2014

#96 – Well, there is that…:)

115. Cygnus-X1 - July 8, 2014

100. Spock’s Bangs – July 8, 2014

What you said makes no sense. Either you’re not familiar with the scene in question or you don’t understand what I said about it.

116. Xorn - July 8, 2014

Well if we are putting out ideas for the ext Star Trek movie. I vote “Star Trek to the Unknown”. It has an air of mystery and if Bob Orci is honest about the crew going on exploration missions then it would make sense. Hopefully he can take clues from Mass Effect and Stargate: Universe on how to make good exploration movies without making them so boring like the motion picture.

117. Cygnus-X1 - July 8, 2014

91. boborci – July 8, 2014

I was asking 72.

Does 72 have some special ability to perceive logic problems in movies that the rest of us lack? Or, are you expecting that he’ll give you a lame example that you can easily refute?

Either the internal logic of the movie makes sense or it doesn’t. Given the number of people here, bloggers and critics who have pointed out the exact, same problems in your movie, at the very minimum you could acknowledge that you need to work on clarity for the next movie, if not the actual logic respecting the characters and the plot.

I don’t have any expectation that someone in your position should listen to my complaints about your work, but what about all your going on about us being “the most listened to fans?” Was that just PR or what? It doesn’t seem like you’re really listening to the criticism if you’re not aware of the common complaints. And what does that bode for the next movie?

118. Cygnus-X1 - July 8, 2014

89. Hat Rick – July 8, 2014

“The Prime Directive, also known as Starfleet General Order 1 or the Non-Interference Directive, was the embodiment of one of Starfleet’s most important ethical principles: noninterference with other cultures and civilizations. At its core was the philosophical concept that covered personnel should refrain from interfering in the natural, unassisted, development of societies, even if such interference was well-intentioned.” [emphasis added]

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Prime_Directive

119. Cygnus-X1 - July 8, 2014

101. Mike Barnett – July 8, 2014

You know, STID/ST09 has been talked to death – especially by our long-winded friends on this site. I’m glad @boborci isn’t engaging in many of the discussions because it’s ‘a no-win scenario.” I think it’s similar to politics and religion, in that most people are set in their ways and there’s likely no argument that can be made to have them switch to a different view.

It’s only a no-win scenario if you’re 100% satisfied with STID and believe that any improvement upon it is simply impossible. And, honestly, if that’s your opinion, then we’re not going to meet minds much when discussing the movie.

But, that’s not the opinion of a great many fans, bloggers and professional critics. STID wasn’t voted “worst Trek movie” at the Convention last year for no reason. Yes, it was a relatively small contingent there protesting, but to stereotype all of them and all of us “long-winded friends” here (not to mention all of the bloggers and professional film critics who’ve expressed the same problems with the movie) as simply intransigent is neither accurate nor fair.

Speaking for myself, I’m delighted whenever somebody here teaches me something that I didn’t know…so long as they’re not a total d*ck about it (and even then I appreciate having gained the knowledge, though I don’t go out of my way to express it). I’ve learned quite a bit from all of the analysis here, not just about STID but in general. The discussion on STIII, for example, helped me understand and better define all of the problems that I’ve had with that movie and cleared some of them up a bit.

So, perhaps we can avoid the pitfall of stereotyping everyone who is unable to not see problems with STID as a stubborn, intransigent hater.

120. Ahmed - July 8, 2014

Brazil 0 – Germany 6 !!
What an insane game

121. B Kramer - July 8, 2014

Brazil 1, Germany 7 final.
Unbelievable.

122. Keachick (Rose) - July 8, 2014

#118 – Kirk and Spock were stopping a volcano from destroying a race, perhaps even a world, because they were there (as opposed to being somewhere else) and had a means. They did not do anything to assist these people in any way, other than to allow them to live longer than they would have done. Perhaps, it could be equally argued, that by not doing anything when they had the means, would negatively impact on the natural, unassisted development of Nibiru.

If everything had gone according to plan, the people would not have known anything. This is what Spock referred to as “Vulcans embrace technicality”.

This comes back to the other concept – that of what Destiny, Fate and what they mean.

It does beg the question of whether we should be heading into space, because our very presence might constitute “interference” (whether it be well-intentioned or not) – violation of the prime directive.

For example, how might an innocent new Federation space station built at the edges of… impact on a life form like my nulis, who have been traversing that part of space for as long as, without anyone on the space station needing to do absolutely anything. Starships, space stations require energy and leave trace amounts behind – tachyon or whatever tech(nobabble words) particles behind which are supposedly harmless, but not necessarily to the nulis, space faring organic beings who may have a particular sensitivity (allergic reaction?), at first subtle, but does become more problematical as time goes on.

Should the Federation and Starfleet abandon the station, give up on exploration of that region (which has always been nuli space for aeons), even though so much could be learned, planets may have wonderful precious metal and mineral reserves, which would not necessarily be harmed through judicious mining and other positives to be gained from Starfleet remaining in that part of space?

How does one define violation of the prime directive in this context?

I am not sure many here have given this much thought at all actually… to be able to call out the writers on how they wrote those Nibiru scenes. Not at all…

123. Ahmed - July 8, 2014

@ 121. B Kramer – July 8, 2014

“Brazil 1, Germany 7 final.
Unbelievable.”

It was a devastating game for Brazil.

124. Mad Mann - July 8, 2014

104. boborci – July 8, 2014

Well, I remember you polling the twitters about when families would enjoy a movie the most, and we said November. Sorry about that.

If the science behind release dates are not exact, then why not just forget logic for a moment, and do what “feels” right. Release your Trek 3 in September 2016.

125. Cygnus-X1 - July 8, 2014

123. Ahmed – July 8, 2014

Awesome.

126. Disinvited - July 8, 2014

#124. Mad Mann – July 8, 2014

It’s not his call, for one thing. Paramount reserves and executes the right to release it when it feels that its voodoo gods are appeased.

Not that workers can’t do things such as tossing their sabots into the works if they feel equally superstitious about a date that Paramount has ordained, but it’s a delicate balance that must be maintained.

127. Ahmed - July 8, 2014

@boborci

Thoughts?

http://thedissolve.com/features/one-year-later/591-one-year-later-star-trek-into-darkness/

128. John in Canada, eh? - July 8, 2014

An interesting article.

Whenever the movie comes out, I hope Paramount does what “Doctor Who” did for its 50th anniversary last year, and release a web episode on or around the anniversary date. While it was only 6 minutes long, it was a glorious little mini-movie for the fans.

129. Cygnus-X1 - July 8, 2014

127. Ahmed – July 8, 2014

Good article. Well written.

And, gosh, so many of the observations in it seem so familiar even though I’ve only just now read this article for the first time….

But, apparently we’re all dolts.

I’m a dolt. The guy who wrote this article (Matt Singer) is a dolt. Everyone here and every blogger and critic who’s noticed the same problems with STID is a dolt. Even Damon Lindelof, cited in the article as having his own problems with STID, is a dolt. Everyone is a dolt except for Roberto Orci, who is obviously much smarter than all of us, or else we wouldn’t have been confused by his story. (The fact that STID is confusing is proof that it’s good.)

“Star Trek Into Darkness is so fast-paced, it actually outruns its own logic problems, another reason why it received such an unusual combination of initial positive reviews and subsequent negative buzz. They only started to see the plot holes after thinking about it, watching it again, or reading the criticism that slowly started to cohere around the film. This movie is the cinematic equivalent of a Big Mac box: bright, colorful, carefully designed, and intended to be discarded after a single use, without any consideration whatsoever.”

“…the film’s cavalier attitude toward the franchise’s history (and its un-Trek-like action-first, science-second approach)…”

Friggin’ exactly.

130. Gorn Warrior - July 8, 2014

Don’t forget that Disney is readying spin-off Star Wars films for the years between Episodes. One will likely come out in 2016 or 2017, potentially competing with Trek

131. Jonboc - July 8, 2014

#129. “I’m a dolt.”

132. Mike Barnett - July 8, 2014

129. Cygnus-X1
“Everyone is a dolt except for Roberto Orci, who is obviously much smarter than all of us, or else we wouldn’t have been confused by his story”

Well, he got the directors gig for a $200 million dollar feature with no previous credited director experience – so he is obviously smarter than all of us.

133. Red Dead Ryan - July 8, 2014

#129. Cygnus-X1

“I’m a dolt”

Glad to see you’re no longer in denial about yourself! :-)

134. Cygnus-X1 - July 9, 2014

132. Mike Barnett – July 8, 2014

Well, he got the directors gig for a $200 million dollar feature with no previous credited director experience – so he is obviously smarter than all of us.

Yeah, and Michael Bay’s been getting a lot of work also.

They should offer classes to help us understand their brilliant movies.

The film visionaries of our time.

135. Cygnus-X1 - July 9, 2014

131. Jonboc – July 8, 2014
133. Red Dead Ryan – July 8, 2014

Thirty Helens Agree:

“Great minds think alike!”

“But fools seldom differ.”

136. YARN - July 9, 2014

Does Orci have experience directing films or TV?

Will the director of photography (or someone else) chaperone him through the process?

Is the studio saving money this way (2-for1)?

137. Cervantes - July 9, 2014

@ 127 Ahmed –

That was an interesting article on STID. It’s closing paragraph made me realise that apart from hoping that the next ‘NU-Trek’ movie is great, that it also makes sense if you go to watch it more than once…

138. boborci - July 9, 2014

what do all the recent articles say about the movies that came out a year ago? just curious.

139. Curious Cadet - July 9, 2014

@41. Michael Hall,
“why would the studio want to even mention an anniversary date that highlights the age of the property and is of importance only to those who will see it at least once without being prodded in any event, and thus are not the audience the film is being pitched to?”

I agree with this. I don’t think Paramount is he least bit interested in pointing out to their target audience (i.e. non-Trek fans), with which they hope to build a re-branded franchise, the original geek-tainted baggage the property brings along with it.

The only reason for Paramount to do this is to mend fences with CBS to help them continue to sell TOS merchandise, perhaps with concessions made during the films release to sell Nu-Trek merchandise.

140. Mike Barnett - July 9, 2014

134. Cygnus-X1
“They should offer classes to help us understand their brilliant movies.”

For the record, I’m not a big fan of Michael Bay’s movies – and I’ll reserve judgement on Orci until I see his directorial debut in 2016.

I couldn’t find any classes for you but I did find this recent article which explains today’s reality in the film business:
http://www.vox.com/2014/7/6/5873099/transformers-4-is-a-master-class-in-economics

141. Curious Cadet - July 9, 2014

@89. Hat Rick,
“it’s highly possible that the PD exists because of a restriction on the nature of human knowledge. It’s there to prevent humanity from pretending to be a god by playing god.”

This.

That’s why Spock is behaving totally illogically here. What if the Federation was around when the Chicxulub comet impacted with the earth causing the dinosaurs to become extinct? What if they diverted the comet and allowed dinosaurs to continue to evolve. Humans likely might not have ever evolved.

No human alive today would have thought that was a good idea, so why think changing the natural course of events on a planet in order to save a primitive species is a good thing? It’s not.

That’s why the Prime Directive specifics no contact until a species has the means to control its own destiny. Warp technology then being the benchmark suggesting a technological ability to alter cataclysmic events, or at least escape them, which would otherwise render them extinct.

142. Curious Cadet - July 9, 2014

@100. Spock’s Bangs,
“Spock wasn’t sacrificing himself for the Prime Directive, he was doing his job, under orders”

No he wasn’t. There’s nothing in the movie that suggests this was an order he was given. Indeed there’s more to suggest this was his idea, and he volunteered to do it because he knew how dangerous it was and there was a likelihood he might die in the process.

The implication is that he did this because he felt such a great need to violate the prime directive to save a planet marked for extinction, while at the same time professing to uphold it for the saved civilization.

If anybody didn’t think his out, it was Orci.

143. boborci - July 9, 2014

142 quick note on Prime D.

I interpret to mean that “cultural” interference is prohibited. The NY times best seller “Spock’s World” posits that The Vulcans saved earth from an asteroid early in the 20th century, and they did so without violating the pD because humanity didn’t know, thus their “culture” was unaffected.

As such, Spock, in STID attempts to save a world without their knowledge. Which is why he argues with Kirk.

144. boborci - July 9, 2014

142. Or, in other words, maybe I thought about it a little bit;)

145. Eat Me - July 9, 2014

@119/Cygnus. It was not a small contingent as you put it, it was 100 people out of 12000 present, and millions of total Trek fans. That doesn’t even qualify as a vocal minority, it is an statistical outlier, nothing more, and most of the people who participated in this “vote” didn’t even bother to watch the movie first, and the entire group was handpicked to be JJ haters, its horsesh-t.

146. TrekMadeMeWonder - July 9, 2014

132. Mike Barnett

As Mike put it, You are smart, but I can’t help but think that opportunity had its hand in play, as well. But probably, mostly because you are smart – and creative!

147. Mike Barnett - July 9, 2014

145. TrekMadeMeWonder
I’m sure there was a bit of luck or voodoo involved ;-) The stars started to align in his favor when JJ jumped to the Dark Side.

148. boborci - July 9, 2014

145. For sure! Can anyone think of the appropriate Woody Allen quote About the secret to life?

149. Trekboi - July 9, 2014

144. boborci – July 9, 2014

Thanks for coming back to the site, I know you are not going to say anything much about the next film yet & I know I am off topic but Is there anyway you can at least get One Line in the movie to show there are
GAY people in the 23rd century?

Please, I want to see that we are a part of Gene Roddenberry’s Star Trek Universe- that we have a place in that future not a problem that was fixed along the way.

We don’t need a Pink Enterprise leading a Galactic Gay pride Parade just one throw-away one line about somebody’s same sex partner, even if it’s part of a joke.

PLEASE.

150. Trekboi - July 9, 2014

147. boborci – July 9, 2014

Sorry if I am out of line with my question but this subject of no Gays in Star Trek has bothered me for about 20 YEARS!

151. Tom - July 9, 2014

147 boborci

“Don’t mess with Mia Farrow”

152. Red Dead Ryan - July 9, 2014

Michael Bay movies attract a huge audience, which means that more movies like “Transformers” get made. So unless or until blockbuster fatigue sets in in a big way that substantially drags down profits, you’ll continue to see movies like Bay’s being greenlit and produced. Sitting here and whining about it does no good.

If you don’t like what the studios are serving, vote with your wallet.

153. Mike Barnett - July 9, 2014

147. boborci – July 9, 2014

Is it something like: “80% of success is just showing up”

154. Ahmed - July 9, 2014

@ 146. Mike Barnett – July 9, 2014

“I’m sure there was a bit of luck or voodoo involved ;-)”

Don’t forget the magic blood! That is the reason why Bob is good…at….everything :-)

155. Trekboi - July 9, 2014

Seriously?

You deleted my Question to boborci?

HOW DARE you censor the comments/questions on this site based on your personal views.

I did not swear, yell, insult or do anything to justify removing my post.
Bob didn’t have to answer but to silence a fans voice based on your own predjudice?

156. Trekboi - July 9, 2014

Now my posts/Question is back- WTF?

157. Trekboi - July 9, 2014

I guess it doesn’t matter anyway.
Bob doesn’t want to answer any real questions.

Just banter to look like he is in with the fans :(

158. boborci - July 9, 2014

mike

Yeah!

159. Ahmed - July 9, 2014

@152. Trekboi

I don’t know how long you have been on this site, but this is a common problem around here. It happened to me couple times in the past.

As you can see from the note above the comment box, it mention that comments might disappears sometime. Just wait & it will come back.

“NOTE: Your comment may need approval from a moderator, please be patient if your comment disappears as soon as you post it, it will reappear as soon as it is approved. “

160. Ahmed - July 9, 2014

@boborci

Did you read the article at # 127 ?

Generally speaking, do you read reviews even when they criticize your movies ?

161. Mike Barnett - July 9, 2014

I’ve successfully living that way my whole life and I’m happy to say my two young adult children have picked that up from me and it’s worked well for them too.

Do I win anything? :-)

162. Mike Barnett - July 9, 2014

158. Mike Barnett was meant for boborci.

163. boborci - July 9, 2014

157
will answer your question if you answer mine. Can you point me to other articles about all the movies that came out last year?

164. Ahmed - July 9, 2014

@ 163. boborci – July 9, 2014

“will answer your question if you answer mine. Can you point me to other articles about all the movies that came out last year?”

What this has to do with a review about your own movie? Unless you think that you are being singled out & unfairly targeted by critics or something!!

Anyhow, here are some recent reviews about the some of movies that came out last year:

One Year Later: Man Of Steel
http://thedissolve.com/features/one-year-later/632-one-year-later-man-of-steel/

World War Z
http://moviepilot.com/posts/2014/06/15/review-world-war-z-2013–2-1515069?lt_source=external,manual#!bbFCQX

Iron Man 3
https://yearlatereviews.wordpress.com/2014/05/03/iron-man-3/

Gravity
http://www.popmatters.com/review/179352-the-metaphysics-of-isolation-gravity/

165. Pensive's Wetness - July 9, 2014

why do they need to stop production on Star Wars? Is Han Solo in that many scenes in the movie?

166. Cygnus-X1 - July 9, 2014

140. Mike Barnett – July 9, 2014

Yes, well, thank you for the article. But, I’m not really confused about why Michael Bay (or Bob Orci/BR) make the kinds of movies that they make.

I know that they make money. But the studio making money doesn’t do anything for me if the product that I’ve paid them for is a lemon. In the 1980s, studios realized that they could make more money by having more nudity and sex scenes in their movies. There’s any number of ways that you can make money by pandering to people. The movies of Bay and BR pander not with nudity but with titillating visuals and action sequences. BR takes it a step further with shallow, arbitrary emotionalism.

167. Cygnus-X1 - July 9, 2014

145. Eat Me – July 9, 2014

most of the people who participated in this “vote” didn’t even bother to watch the movie first, and the entire group was handpicked to be JJ haters, its horsesh-t.

I wasn’t there, so I don’t know. All I know is what I’ve read from other peoples’ accounts. But your version of the events seems bizarre. One hundred people at a Star Trek convention who hadn’t bothered to watch the Trek movie that they were voting on and were “hand-picked” just to be JJ-haters? The typical convention attendee can quote Trek material liberally, and yet these 100 hadn’t even seen STID once?

And they were “hand-picked” by whom? The National Committee for the Propagation of Reasonless Hatred Toward JJ Abrams?

If the BR Trek movies are good, why bother going to such trouble to express hatred for them? Because Haters gonna hate? There just happened to be a group of 100 mindless irrational people willing to be recruited by the aforementioned committee to express hatred for JJ Abrams for no particular reason?

Whatever the case, it doesn’t really matter, as there’s no shortage of negative fan and critical opinion about the BR movies apart from the poll in question. And I happen to know for a fact that I and my friends have not been recruited by the aforementioned committee.

One of us…One of us…

P.S. Not that I rank STID as “the worst” Trek movie of all time. That title I give to Generations.

168. Cygnus-X1 - July 9, 2014

138. boborci – July 9, 2014

what do all the recent articles say about the movies that came out a year ago? just curious.

Look into it if you’re curious.

163. boborci – July 9, 2014

will answer your question if you answer mine. Can you point me to other articles about all the movies that came out last year?

Yes, there’s a website called “Google.” If you go there, you can search for the articles that you’re looking for on the World Wide Web.

169. NuFan - July 9, 2014

Ahmed/Cygnus-X1 sure is a sore loser.

170. Ahmed - July 9, 2014

@ 163. boborci

Would you like to know more ?

Elysium

http://mightymega.com/2014/06/12/everything-wrong-with-elysium-in-under-12-minutes/

Thor – The Dark World

http://cephuscorner.jadedragononline.com/belated-review-thor-dark-world-2013/

171. Mike Barnett - July 9, 2014

168. Cygnus-X1
“Yes, there’s a website called “Google.” If you go there, you can search for the articles that you’re looking for on the World Wide Web.”

Wow, that’s fresh humor you got going there. You’re obviously a smart guy, but every once in a while your posts go down towards moron territory.

172. Cygnus-X1 - July 9, 2014

143. boborci – July 9, 2014

142 quick note on Prime D. I interpret to mean that “cultural” interference is prohibited. The NY times best seller “Spock’s World” posits that The Vulcans saved earth from an asteroid early in the 20th century, and they did so without violating the pD because humanity didn’t know, thus their “culture” was unaffected. As such, Spock, in STID attempts to save a world without their knowledge. Which is why he argues with Kirk.

Hey, interesting extracurricular tie-in to a non-canon source a year after the movie has come out, with many articles and complaints having been written and posted about the issue since. Maybe take another week and search for something to explain the magic blood issues and other logic problems that I and others have mentioned. (Maybe quantum entanglement can explain them all?)

144. boborci – July 9, 2014

142. Or, in other words, maybe I thought about it a little bit;)

Bob, you’re the king of the ex post facto explanations.

But that is interesting interpretation of the Prime Directive that you’re now referencing. We could easily debate the issue, given this phrase in the PD: …the natural, unassisted, development of societies… Does saving a society from the harm of a volcano which might render that society extinct constitute “assistance?” It does seem like assistance. And assistance that utilizes very advanced technology, at that.

Too bad there was absolutely nothing about this interpretation in your movie. Yet another missed opportunity for some substance.

173. Cygnus-X1 - July 9, 2014

171. Mike Barnett – July 9, 2014

Well, I’m sorry that you don’t find it funny. But it’s funny to me.

My only point is that Bob has a habit of addressing these types of issues by challenging the person raising the issue to some sort of feat, like “pitch me the movie.” I don’t see how asking people to show him articles about other movies is any kind of an explanation for the issues raised with regard to his movie.

174. Ahmed - July 9, 2014

@173. Cygnus-X1

” I don’t see how asking people to show him articles about other movies is any kind of an explanation for the issues raised with regard to his movie.”

Yeah, that was a bit weird. Perhaps he thought that STID was unfairly targeted by critics, why else would they review it & point to its problems a year later, right ?

But guess what, STID wasn’t the only movie from last year that people went back to a year later to review it.

175. Cygnus-X1 - July 9, 2014

174. Ahmed – July 9, 2014

Perhaps he thought that STID was unfairly targeted by critics, why else would they review it & point to its problems a year later, right ?

And the Matt Singer article that you posted gives the exact explanation for why it’s tended to be that way with STID.

176. Ahmed - July 9, 2014

The marketing people at Paramount should include the following items with Star Trek: The Compendium as supplemental reading:

Star Trek: Countdown to Darkness
Star Trek After Darkness
Star Trek: Khan
Spock’s World
TBD

177. Cygnus-X1 - July 9, 2014

150. Trekboi – July 9, 2014

147. boborci – July 9, 2014; Sorry if I am out of line with my question but this subject of no Gays in Star Trek has bothered me for about 20 YEARS!

They did a lesbian story in DS9 Rejoined (4×10). Even had Dax and Lenara kiss.

And TNG did an even broader gay story with The Outcast (5×17).

How much more do you want? Should every ethnic, religious, sexual, etc… background get a character? Trek has been a proponent of and leader in diversity, tolerance and social progress since the very first episode of TOS. There’s never been Trek character who shares my personal ethnic background, but I don’t take that as some sort of slight against me. I don’t need a Trek character shoe-horned in to make me feel validated as a person.

Maybe be a bit less self-centered and consider the larger picture.

178. Cygnus-X1 - July 9, 2014

150. Trekboi – July 9, 2014

P.S.

And for an idea of what it’s like shoe-horning in gay characters for the sake of having gay characters, watch Star Trek Phase 2, Blood and Fire: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QtifyhPScCw

There’s good stuff in that episode, but the gay romance for the sake of gay romance is a drag on the episode and does not work. A great story that happens to involve gay characters is still a great story. A story that has nothing to say other than “Look, gay characters!” is not a great story.

179. Disinvited - July 9, 2014

#172. Cygnus-X1 – July 9, 2014

Bob should be given his due as to his owning enough Trek novels to form a virtual Library of Alexandria of Trek Literature. There’s been enough interviews where his co-workers as well as himself have alluded to it.

I even recall some allusion to them being readily accessible from his bedroom which makes me wonder at how incredibly tolerant his spouse is to allow him to line the walls with them.

180. Gary Makin - July 9, 2014

May 20 should be fine. Though the last X-Men movie was huge, the new Trek films were bigger than the previous three X-Men franchise flicks.

181. Cygnus-X1 - July 9, 2014

179. Disinvited – July 9, 2014

Bob should be given his due as to his owning enough Trek novels to form a virtual Library of Alexandria of Trek Literature. There’s been enough interviews where his co-workers as well as himself have alluded to it.

Fair enough. He read the Trek novel (which is still non-canon), liked its interpretation of the Prime Directive, and chose not to include it in the movie.
Not very enlightening for those of us watching the actual movie and noticing the logic problem relating to Spock’s motivations vis-a-vis the Prime Directive.

182. Cygnus-X1 - July 9, 2014

143. boborci – July 9, 2014

P.S. TNG Pen Pals (2×15) specifically deals with the Prime Directive as it relates to a situation almost identical to the one in your movie. Data makes contact with a little girl down on a planet whose geological instability threatens her and her society. When Data first asks Picard if they can intervene to prevent the catastrophe, Picard responds, “Violate the Prime Directive?”

The issue eventually turns on the fact that the girl later asks Data for help as he’s about to terminate all further communications with her per Picard’s orders.

Given that this bit of canon would seem to contradict and trump the interpretation from the non-canon Trek novel (which far fewer people than are familiar with TNG would have read, anyway), it should be clear why people watching STID would notice a problem relating to Spock’s decisions.

So, the original point stands. Spock’s attitude about the Prime Directive is a logic problem in STID.

183. Keachick (Rose) - July 9, 2014

“No human alive today would have thought that was a good idea, so why think changing the natural course of events on a planet in order to save a primitive species is a good thing? It’s not. ”

Wow, such damnable hubris. This kind of all too common thinking could be the death of us all yet…

According to the Prime Directive, it seems that it is OK to make contact with an advanced species and even help save their butts, should the need arise… but not alright to do the same, or even do something that is so much less intrusive, if the species is deemed “primitive”. What kind of shit is that?

Kirk and Spock and crew made a decision, given the technologies they had to work with, which was in line with their consciences. It was a risk, but they were not prepared to hide behind PD to cover for what could be seen as moral ineptitude and laziness.

The point of these scenes – what to do when you are actually there and have the means to do something? Should you or shouldn’t you? Kirk and Spock (with the obvious support of subordinates – what’s the bet that Bones/McCoy was very adamant something needed to be done and fast) did what was needed.

If they had no technology that could stop the volcano from erupting, all they could do was to watch much of this world go kablooey and take measurements, but that was not their situation.

God, I feel I am having to repeat the obvious all the time…oh dear…sigh…

I don’t know what Bob Orci and co’s views are. This is just how I interpreted these scenes, from the beginning, although it does seem that Bob and I are in agreement. Logical!

184. Keachick (Rose) - July 9, 2014

In that TNG episode, the planet was saved due to technology that Picard’s Enterprise had. Dr Crusher was able to perform a technique that erases the specific memories of the little girl that related to her interactions with Data and what followed…

We saw where the little girl woke up in her bed and pleased to see that the serious seismic disturbances had stopped, and she was none the wiser…

Now, if there was a way to erase those few Nibiruns’ memories of seeing two strange men running away and a big flying bird, but clearly that was not possible in this instance. Frankly, there was actually little or no harm done in reality…

Hindsight is always wonderful and so are crystal balls…

185. Keachick (Rose) - July 9, 2014

Frankly, it is hardly a difficult incident to portray – include a male gay/female lesbian couple gently doing what *Uhura did with Spock after the two of them had returned safely from Kronos (STID), something like that…

What say you, Bob? Doable?

Trekboi – if such a very brief, but engaging, interlude is presented, be prepared for people making stupid and crude comments, like “gays sucking face” and similar. Some people can be so rude and dumb!

*Gosh – ZQ is so tall and ZS is so short…just saying.

186. Disinvited - July 9, 2014

#182. Cygnus-X1 – July 9, 2014

Your PEN PAL is only sound if you can reasonably argue that the Prime Directive was perfect at its inception and did not evolve over time. And even if the exact words remained constant up through TNG, there’s plenty of ground to argue that the various “generations” that inherited it didn’t strictly interpret the breadth of the scope of situations covered by it in exactly the same manner.

In the first series it was definitely more “spirit of the directive” than Picard’s strict “letter of the directive” approach in TNG.

187. Ahmed - July 9, 2014

@184. Keachick (Rose)

“Frankly, there was actually little or no harm done in reality…”

Except for the part where they accidentally created a new religion in which the primitives are now worshiping the Enterprise as their new God!

No harm indeed!!

188. Cygnus-X1 - July 9, 2014

185. Disinvited – July 9, 2014

Your PEN PAL is only sound if you can reasonably argue that the Prime Directive was perfect at its inception and did not evolve over time.

We can’t intelligently discuss that kind of speculation. We can only discuss what’s in the movie and the implications thereof. And there’s nothing in the movie about the Prime Directive having been different in the past.

STID is based upon Star Trek. The movie is premised upon the Trek characters and their backstories (variations thereupon) for a very specific reason and intent: to cash in on the rich and world renowned legacy of Trek.

In for a penny, in for a pound. They refer to “the Prime Directive” in STID, and that means that they have to explain what “the Prime Directive” is, unless they’re relying upon canon.

Don’t fall into the trap of doing the writers’ job for them. It’s their job to present ideas and tell a story, not give you an confusing, incomplete novel with 50 blank pages in it and expect you to invent backstories and explanations for the things about their story that don’t make sense.

The original point challenged by Orci was that there are severe logic problems in STID. I listed a few of them. One was the volcano incident vis-a-vis the Prime Directive. Orci’s response was that he’d read a non-canon Trek novel, which had a non-canon interpretation of the Prime Directive, which he didn’t even reference in the movie at all, much less deal with in a thoughtful manner (like in the aforementioned TNG Pen Pals)

The original point stands.

189. Disinvited - July 9, 2014

#180. Gary Makin – July 9, 2014

There’s no way 2009 STAR TREK’s $385,680,446 is bigger than the worldwide take of X-MEN:THE LAST STAND’S $459,359,555

190. Keachick (Rose) - July 9, 2014

What religion? This is almost as silly as saying that transwarp beaming means that starships are not needed anymore, but then again, lot of people argue that as well.

Re the above comment – people – think about it, if you dare…

Let me know if you need help…[rolls eyes]

191. Ahmed - July 9, 2014

@ 190. Keachick (Rose) – July 9, 2014

“What religion? This is almost as silly as saying that transwarp beaming means that starships are not needed anymore”

My mistake, I guess that you was too busy thinking about Pine’s blue eyes that you forget about that scene at the end of the first act!

“The Nibirans are shocked when they see the Enterprise rising out of the ocean and above the volcano. [..] The native Nibirans begin to worship an image of the Enterprise they have drawn in the soil, accepting it as their new deity.”

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Star_Trek_Into_Darkness#Act_One

And in case your memory is having problems, here is the clip.

Star Trek Into Darkness ; Prime Directive

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrREn6mjr54

I should have known better & not engage with you in a conversation!

rolls eyes, my a$$!

192. Disinvited - July 9, 2014

#191. Ahmed – July 9, 2014

Hey, it’s not a religion until after 365 days have transpired and we return to discover the Nibirans holding their first STAR TREK Convention — THEN it’s a religion!

193. Ahmed - July 9, 2014

192. Disinvited

LOL

194. Ralph Pinheiro - July 9, 2014

Mr. Bob Orci.

Would you tell us if all runs according to plan? Like scriptwriting, casting, shooting.

195. Disinvited - July 9, 2014

#194. Ralph Pinheiro – July 9, 2014

Let me get this straight: you expect a member of Bad Robot, an organization that couldn’t find the logic to give a straight answer as to whether or not Khan was in their movie prior to its release, to find a logic where they’ll give a straight answer as to whether or not everything’s going to hell?

196. Mike Barnett - July 9, 2014

195. Disinvited

Bob isn’t an employee of BR – he only works with them on projects such as Star Trek. Also, a couple weeks ago Bob did tell us not to worry about the next movie, that all is well. I’m paraphrasing, but it was something like that.

192. Disinvited

LOL

197. Ahmed - July 9, 2014

@195. Disinvited

I think that Bob doesn’t believe in the whole mystery box crap. As a writer, producer & director, he has more control this time around, so maybe we will get some answers & not wait till the opening night!

Just maybe.

198. Jonboc - July 9, 2014

Do you guys think you’re being clever with all of your negative conversation and endless prattle, endlessly bashing BR and trying to bait Orci? Really? You’re neither clever nor entertaining, in act you’re way too transparent. It’s amazing…Orci appears, in any given thread, and the tired bitching session soon follows…and then dominates the thread. We get it..Orci is around…he reads all the posts, so he has to see your bitch and whine-fest…you get a kick out of it…we get it, already.

Quit obsessing over it and give it a rest.

199. B Kramer - July 9, 2014

JB they aren’t doing anything wrong. I think their posts are pretty thoughtful for the most part. It’s a chat board to exchange thoughts and ideas with respect re ST not censorship or ridicule or butt kissing or spinning because one doesn’t agree. The same questions were asked and the same issues arose again. It’s not the end of the world. I personally prefer to look to the next one but to each his own.

Regards

200. Cygnus-X1 - July 10, 2014

198. Jonboc – July 9, 2014

Yeah, there’s no conspiracy against Bob Orci.

And if he read all of the posts here, then he’d have been familiar with the complaints about STID that have been mentioned and analyzed in great detail here repeatedly over the past year. And, in my opinion, he’d be better equipped to sidestep some of the problems with the last two BR movies if he read all of the posts here and the critical articles that we’ve referenced herein.

So, why don’t you try contributing something of substance to the discussion instead of just sniping at the people who don’t share your views.

201. Disinvited - July 10, 2014

#196. Mike Barnett – July 9, 2014

Thanks for clarifying that. I think I may have connected several stories that I came across at the same time that may have no connections:

1. Bad Robot has internships

2. Mckay and Payne are a part of the Bad Robot team.

3. K/O Paper products exit movie biz..

trekmovie.com/2014/06/30/trek-3-writers-interviewed-say-jj-is-still-guiding-light/#comment-5222030

“Patrick McKay and J.D. Payne are part of BR team.” – Ahmed

https://cinema.usc.edu/jobboard/news/IPO%20Newsletter%203-14-12_roljnlhk.pdf

“The Bad Robot Internship Program is open to both students and graduates of USC. While the primary business focus of Bad Robot is film and television development and production, we encourage students of all artistic persuasions to apply for consideration. Our summer internship begins in early June and continues for approximately three months. Students will be expected to work between 16-32 hours per week. The summer internship is open to current USC students and recent graduates within one year. Students who are receiving course credit for their participation in the Bad Robot Internship Program are not paid, while those who are either graduates or who are not receiving course credit are paid on an hourly basis. Because our fall and spring programs are full-time (50 hrs/wk), they are intended primarily for recent graduates of USC. Students wishing to apply for consideration to the Bad Robot Internship Program must meet the following criteria: Currently possess or have graduated with a 3.5 GPA, Submit recommendation letters from at least two faculty members, Submit a 200-word personal statement indicating why they are interested in interning at Bad Robot and what contributions they can make to the company. Be able to share a portfolio of creative work that can be viewed online. Candidates selected to participate in the Bad Robot Internship Program will receive invaluable exposure to the inner workings of a high-profile production company. Additionally, they will participate in a variety of artistic endeavors unrelated to film and television, including silk screening, dark room photography, sculpting and typesetting.
Candidates who meet the criteria specified above should submit their resume, recommendation letters, personal statement and links to their creative work to jobs@badrobot.com. The deadline for applying for all 2012 internship programs is March 30, 2012.”

To wit: I was under the impression M&P were BR interns that had moved up the food chain and Bob was given a position to wrangle them.

202. Cygnus-X1 - July 10, 2014

200. Disinvited – July 10, 2014

So, what’s the verdict?

McCay & Payne are BR staff writers while Orci is an independent contractor?

203. Ahmed - July 10, 2014

Orci’s new show ‘Matador’ gets renewed for season 2 before season 1 even airs!

=============
El Rey’s ‘Matador’ Renewed for Season 2 Ahead of Series Premiere

http://variety.com/2014/tv/news/el-rey-matador-renewed-season-2-1201260639/

=============

“Matador” premieres Tuesday, July 15 at 9 p.m. ET/PT on El Rey.

Congratulations, Bob!

204. Ahmed - July 10, 2014

‘Matador’ Co-Creator Roberto Orci Talks About New Heroes and Growing Up Bicultural

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8jaTRo81UI

205. Keachick (Rose) - July 10, 2014

Ahmed – “My mistake, I guess that you was too busy thinking about Pine’s blue eyes that you forget about that scene at the end of the first act!”

I certainly have not forgotten the scene at the end, with the Nibiruns drawing a picture of the Enterprise on the ground. Your own projection of what you think I have been doing is a negative distraction from the subject matter under discussion. You were being unnecessarily personal and have used what you know about me as a way to put me down, denigrate and distract. Not only nasty but stupid as well.

I have made no mention of Pine’s blue eyes in any of these later threads, so you can cut it out. What’s more, what if I have? What has that got to do with the discussion about the possibility of the Nibiruns getting a new religion simply because they got a brief sighting of what exactly?

206. Keachick (Rose) - July 10, 2014

Keachick (on IMDb STID message board) – “How does seeing a starship makes the Nibiruns less “unique”? What makes them unique is how they might interpret the brief sighting of this vessel. I cannot see how the culture would be more irrevocably tainted by this than by some other force. Apart from seeing two strange men wearing grey clothing and a starship emerging from the ocean and flying off, there was nothing that would cause a major change in the direction that their culture might be heading in. There was no context to these brief sightings other than the volcano no longer spewing forth, which is what exactly… If Kirk and McCoy had dropped off, eg the Ten Commandments in Nibirun language, then that would be a definite violation of the Prime Directive because of the obvious influence these words could have on how the culture might change, develop etc.

What is known though, is that if the volcano had got its way, the Nibiruns would be *uniquely” extinct.”

Another poster in response – “we are shown that they now worship the Enterprise as an idol. They are no longer developing in a bubble, and their worship had presumably shifted from the scroll to the Enterprise. Considering they’re a seemingly very religious society, that’s a pretty big deal.”

Keachick – “There is no context – they see themselves being lead away from and they see a strange vessel fly into the heavens and the volcano stop – that’s it. Although, at the time, it would be a sensational event, but after a while, without there being any other information relating to these sightings, it would become something more akin to myth and legend. The scroll no doubt contained some kind of relatable story, parable, set of rules, ethics, precepts, prayers that helped guide the people’s understanding and conduct. Nothing that they briefly saw of the Enterprise provided that. They would refer back to their scroll and whatever other texts they might have, as they did do prior to the sighting, by default.

If Kirk and McCoy had left, for example, a copy of the Ten Commandments, the Genesis creation story and promise of another visitation by the people in the metal flying bird, in the Nibirun language, then that would indeed constitute a genuine violation of the prime directive.

Simply stopping a volcano and then flying off is not telling the people how to live their lives, what to believe or think. They were already doing that irrespective…”

My own thoughts put into my own words, without reliance on links etc.

This is my explanation, FWIW.

207. Ahmed - July 10, 2014

@205. Keachick (Rose)

FYI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrzXLYA_e6E

208. Who cares - July 10, 2014

@Keachick. The entire point of the scene with the Nibirans was to show the dangers of cultural contamination. The Nibirans, who had been pursuing Kirk and McCoy for the express purpose of regaining their holy scroll immediately discarded it at the sight of the Enterprise and started worshiping the mysterious thing that just saved them all from the volcano, remember they watched their temple annihilated by lava.

209. Ahmed - July 10, 2014

@208. Who cares

Precisely. When Kirk hangs the sacred scroll off a tree, the Nibirans stop chasing him & kneel down in front of their scroll. Later, after they see the Enterprise, they are awestruck by it & we see them sketching an image of the E in the dirt & they all kneel down for their new God, completely discarding their sacred scroll.

It is not a complicated scene, they didn’t draw the image for their arts class assignment after all!

210. Chris Roberts - July 10, 2014

Shoot me. I think the opening scenes involving the Prime Directive were handled well. Of all the things that get criticised, this doesn’t immediately spring to mind. It was a great start to the film, and captured the spirit of Star Trek. They walked a fine line. There’s the fun approach the original show would take to non-interference. While clearly still managing to spark the kind of debate you’d get from 45 minutes of dull seriousness and speechifying set in the 24th Century.

211. Who cares - July 10, 2014

@Ahmed, Something I actually forgot to mention was that due to Spock’s actions what the Nibirans witnessed was basically this, some stranger steals their holy scroll, they chase, they recover the scroll as the stranger escapes, they see their temple destroyed by the volcano, the volcano continues to smoke and belch fireballs, then the Enterprise rises from the ocean and flies towards the volcano, which suddenly stops smoking and the eruption is over, never to begin again.

Quite obviously this strange flying object is the chariot of the mysterious new god who brought them away from danger by stealing the scroll before ending the threat of the volcano forever. This new god also must naturally reside in the oceans, and have some trickster/thief aspects.

The upside of this religion is that it is highly unlikely to ever develop a “virgin sacrifice to appease volcano gods”, which is something Kirk would approve of.

212. dmduncan - July 10, 2014

Best point from that article:

“Sometimes the twists come so fast they barely have time to register before they’re negated, like Kirk’s lightning-fast demotions and re-promotions. In the first 33 minutes of the film, Kirk holds four different ranks: He’s the captain on Nibiru during the cold-open chase scene, but gets sent “back to the Academy” by an unseen tribunal in the next debriefing scene with Bruce Greenwood’s Admiral Pike. Two scenes later, he’s drowning his sorrows at a bar when Pike shows up and makes him his first officer on the Enterprise; two scenes after that, Admiral Marcus gives him back the Enterprise and his captaincy to go kill Khan. All of these are huge, life-changing moments in Kirk’s life—or at least they would be, if the movie spent even a minute or two contemplating them.”

Yes.

ST.09 has a good balance of fast action that also produces emotional reactions in me. In STiD they decided to juice the throttle even more, and they lost what emotion they might have got out of some of the things they tried to do.

The lesson that should be learned here is that if you want people to feel something rather than wanting to temporarily dazzle them with bright lights, you have to think and write on a different level that speaks more slowly to people’s emotions.

You can’t get the idea across in a flash and expect people to have the same reaction to it that they would have if the idea was the conclusion of a lengthy set up.

They seemed to think that packing in more improperly treated STUFF would make STiD more powerful, when it just looked like they were covering up the weakness of what they had.

In other news, I hear The Leftovers sucks. But I can’t tell if that’s a biased opinion from people who hate anything with the faintest whiff of Christian ideology, because Damon Lindelof is co-creating it, or because it really does suck.

213. Ahmed - July 10, 2014

@211. Who cares

“The upside of this religion is that it is highly unlikely to ever develop a “virgin sacrifice to appease volcano gods”, which is something Kirk would approve of.”

Now this is what I would call looking at glass half full :-)

214. Who cares - July 10, 2014

@Ahmed. Thought of one more wrinkle to this one. Kirk had better hope that the scroll he stole wasn’t from a religion that followed other-dimensional energy beings like the Bajoran Prophets or Kirk could be in serious trouble down the road. They might just take his usurping their followers personally.

215. Ahmed - July 10, 2014

@212. dmduncan

“In other news, I hear The Leftovers sucks. But I can’t tell if that’s a biased opinion from people who hate anything with the faintest whiff of Christian ideology, because Damon Lindelof is co-creating it, or because it really does suck.”

I made a comment about it upthread

===================

67. Ahmed – July 7, 2014

After watching the second episode of the new Damon Lindelof show “The Leftovers”, I’m really glad that he is NOT writing the new Trek movie.

IMO “The Leftovers” is the worst HBO show ever, with its uninteresting characters, the melodrama & terrible dialogue. It was was boring as hell, I barely finished the two episodes.

Last night episode was partly about the mystery of the missing bagels, I kid you not.
===================

The series in a nutshell is basically hours of unending grief, hopelessness & characters saying cryptic $hit.

The Leftovers sucks big time, but you don’t have to take my word for it, watch the first two episode & see for yourself.

216. Ahmed - July 10, 2014

@214. Who cares

LOL

217. dmduncan - July 10, 2014

215. Ahmed – July 10, 2014

Frakkin Lindelof. Nah, I don’t want to waste my time. And the idea is one that, in principle, I like.

218. Disinvited - July 10, 2014

#214. Who cares – July 10, 2014

LOL. But not going to happen in the BR universe as its time rules doesn’t accommodate the Bajoran Prophets’ Time traveling.

219. Mike Barnett - July 10, 2014

212. dmduncan
The Leftovers was terrible. If it was on one of the networks it would have been canceled by now.

220. Who cares - July 10, 2014

@Disinvited. Well over in the IDW line Q is about to take Kirk to DS9 (after Q had an argument with the Prime timeline’s Ambassador Picard) so I wouldn’t count the Prophets completely out just yet. After all Orci is the guy overseeing the IDW Trek line. It is somewhat strange seeing DeLancie’s face next to Pine’s but it does make me wish it could happen like that on the big screen.

Also though it doesn’t have to be the Prophets, there were several primitive worlds seen on various Trek’s that worshiped an energy being or advanced AI, Nibiru could easily be one such planet, and this entity, whether a computer like Landru or an energy being like the Prophets, could theoretically have a problem with Kirk after the events seen.

221. Cygnus-X1 - July 10, 2014

212. dmduncan – July 10, 2014

I agree with everything except for the bit about The Leftovers.

I haven’t seen The Leftovers and don’t know what it is.

222. Cygnus-X1 - July 10, 2014

But the comments here are enough to dissuade me from going out of my way to watch “The Leftovers.”

Ironically, one good thing that has happened in entertainment over the past decade is that “cable TV shows” have gotten super good. BSG, Mad Men, Breaking Bad, Louie, Shameless, House of Cards… It’s like there’s an inverse relationship between quality in movies and quality in “TV shows.”

As movies have gotten more superficial, shallow and formulaic, cable TV shows have gotten deeper, richer, more meaningful, more sophisticated and more compelling. I’ve watched Mad Men twice all the way through, for example, and not only does it hold up well on repeat viewings, but it’s such rich, multilayered content that I got almost as many fresh thoughts and experiences out of it the second time through.

223. Ahmed - July 10, 2014

@ 221. Cygnus-X1 – July 10, 2014

“I haven’t seen The Leftovers and don’t know what it is.”

It is a new HBO series by Lindelof based on a novel about the disappearance of 2% of the world population in a rapture like event!

Lindelof said in interviews that he will NOT provides answer to the big mystery & that the show is about the characters & their reactions.

Lack of answers to the main mystery is problematic but not a serious one if the characters are interesting. But after two long episodes, none of the characters were engaging in any meaningful way & the show just drags and drags and nothing happens. I gave up & removed the show from my DVR playlist.

But Lindelof did gave us answer to the mystery of the missing bagels, I will give him that !

224. Mike Barnett - July 10, 2014

What the heck?
http://collider.com/star-trek-3-script-roberto-orci/

225. Mike Barnett - July 10, 2014

Bob Orci:
Now I get why Paramount hasn’t released a “press release.”

226. Ahmed - July 10, 2014

Very interesting interview with Bob.

=========================

Roberto Orci Talks STAR TREK 3; Says Paramount Hasn’t Seen the Script Yet, Unconfirmed as Director Until Given the Greenlight

Our own Christina Radish recently got the chance to speak with Orci in anticipation of his TV series Matador (which has already been picked up for a second season) during the TCA Press Tour, and Orci gave an update on Star Trek 3’s progress, saying Paramount has yet to sign off on the script, adding that he’s not necessarily confirmed as the director until the film gets the greenlight.

When asked whether he’s feeling the pressure of taking the Star Trek director reins, Orci was quick to point out that he hasn’t officially signed on to that position just yet:

“Well, I don’t want to count my chickens before they hatch. The studio has yet to even read the script. I’m in the middle of writing it, with the talented team of [John D.] Payne and [Patrick] McKay. They are true Star Trek fans, as well. So, I can’t even think anything about the future until I give them a script and they greenlight it. Until that happens, everything else is just a rumor.”

Though two separate trades reported that Orci will be directing Trek 3, maybe he doesn’t want to confirm the news until the studio has signed off on his script. Or maybe him getting to direct Trek is contigent on how Paramount reacts to the script that he puts together. For now, Orci says he just feels pressure as a screenwriter:

“If I’m lucky enough that Paramount loves the script and that we go forward, it’ll be because I have loved Star Trek for so long and the idea of having seen one of the best guys in the business direct two of them already, and to have seen it from the vantage point of a producer too, I know where a lot of the challenges are and where a lot of the fun is. If we’re lucky enough that everything goes right, then I’ll start to feel the pressure.”

http://collider.com/star-trek-3-script-roberto-orci/

=========================

So Bob is NOT confirmed as a director yet, WTF!

227. Ahmed - July 10, 2014

@224. Mike Barnett

“What the heck?”

My reaction as well! I mean, are you kidding me!

228. Keachick (Rose) - July 10, 2014

Religions do not start in a vacuum. If you believe that a whole new religion and way of life could take over a people after just one strange sighting and cessation of a volcanic eruption, then you are clearly way more simplistic and superstitious than even I could believe.

Volcanic eruptions can die down/cease all by themselves as well.

I have watched the entire first act many times and I am very familiar with what happened. No need to post irrelevant links/videos, unless they are somehow for your benefit…I just can’t help myself [rolls eyes again].

229. Ahmed - July 10, 2014

@228. Keachick (Rose)

“Religions do not start in a vacuum. If you believe that a whole new religion and way of life could take over a people after just one strange sighting and cessation of a volcanic eruption, then you are clearly way more simplistic and superstitious than even I could believe.”

Thanks for your Palinesque words of wisdom!

230. Keachick (Rose) - July 11, 2014

Quit your insulting sarcasm – this just means that you have no adequate answer to my comments. Unfortunately, this is nothing new with you, Ahmed.

231. Curious Cadet - July 11, 2014

@209. Ahmed,
“they all kneel down for their new God, completely discarding their sacred scroll.”

Yes EXACTLY. This is what Orci intended. I just saw an excellent TNG episode the other day (who watches the watchers) that deals with this exact scenario, in which you see a not so primitive race in which one man, who presumes he was brought back to life by “the Picard” and begins laying the foundation in his society for worship of a supernatural being. Even the most intelligent among them turns out not to completely understand that Picard is just a man, not a God. If nothing else canon informs us of the dangers of this kind of cultural contamination, religious or otherwise. It’s foolish to argue against so obvious an intention.

But stopping the volcano from destroying all life on the planet is my bigger problem than corrupting the indigenous culture which was slated to be extinguished anyway. The TNG example was of a culture who had left behind the worship of supernatural beings accidentally being rekindled, the Nibiru people were just exchanging one supernatural idol worship for another. The bigger issue is that the natural cycle of evolution on that planet was interrupted by the Enterprise. For all we know there was a species of intelligent rodent that the Nibiru people were cruel to, which were destined to survive the extinction event, just as our own ancestors survived the one that killed the dinosaurs on Earth — an event had Spock and Kirk stopped would have meant the human race would have never evolved.

So Orci, Kirk and Spock were all playing God here. And that’s a bigger problem than a little cultural contamination.

232. Ahmed - July 11, 2014

@ 230. Keachick (Rose)

Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn!

Anyone who watched that scene will come up with just one conclusion, that the Enterprise crew created a new religion by showing that massive alien ship to the natives. Just see the way they were treating their sacred scroll at the beginning of the first act & at the end.

The fact that you are not getting this means that either you are too dumb to comprehend this simple scene or too arrogant to admit that you made a mistake. Either way, a Palinesque attitude.

I will leave you now, so that you can see Nibiru from your home!

233. Who cares - July 11, 2014

@Keachick. Pretty much every single religion on Earth was started by the actions of one man, whether that man was Budda, Mohammed, Jesus, or David Koresh. In Native American religions there is a great sacred beast called a Thunderbird, known to all of the North American tribes. A number of modern Natives believe it is possible that the Thunderbirds were alien spacecraft. This is REAL LIFE information, I have heard this theory from my own mother among other sources.

Finally, while volcanic eruptions may stop by themselves sometimes this does not happen often. No one who actually watched the scene can really think that the Nibirans could think the volcano stopping was unconnected to the strange sky beast (Enterprise), period, it rose from the ocean and flew into the mouth of the volcano (line of sight to beam up Spock) and only after that did the volcano stop, for a primitive people it as clear as day that this was a god’s actions. BTW this is a bigger scale miracle that anything Jesus is credited with and he has been worshipped for over 2 thousand years. Loaves and Fishes, making the blind see? Don’t hold a candle to making the fire mountain stop.

Now I am done trying to explain this to you.

234. Cygnus-X1 - July 11, 2014

231. Curious Cadet – July 11, 2014

For all we know there was a species of intelligent rodent that the Nibiru people were cruel to, which were destined to survive the extinction event, just as our own ancestors survived the one that killed the dinosaurs on Earth — an event had Spock and Kirk stopped would have meant the human race would have never evolved.

Excellent point.

And it gets to the heart of the purpose of the Prime Directive—a self-check against Star Fleet individuals playing God with the awesome technological power at their disposal. As Picard put it in the aforementioned Pen Pals:

“You see, the Prime Directive has many different functions, not the least of which is to protect us. To prevent us from allowing our emotions to overwhelm our judgement.”

Of course, Alt Spock has been written as a character whose emotions regularly overwhelm his judgment, so I suppose it’s consistent with his character to have violated the Prime Directive initially by deciding to intervene in the natural evolution on Niburu. It’s when he finds religion, so to speak, inside the volcano and suddenly decides that strict adherence to the Prime Directive is more important than his own life that the logic problem appears.

235. Cygnus-X1 - July 11, 2014

P.S.

And having Alt Spock find religion inside the volcano might’ve been an interesting way to play the scene. I’m not saying that it’s an ideal way to play the scene, but at least it would have offered some explanation for Spock’s sudden change in attitude about the Prime Directive. Instead, of course, there is no explanation offered. Maybe we’re meant to apply the line from Kirk about Spock from STIV:

GILLIAN: What, is he just gonna hang around the bushes while we eat?!?

KIRK: It’s his way.

236. Disinvited - July 11, 2014

#235. Cygnus-X1 – July 11, 2014

Yep. But now let’s get back to the introduction of Q. Having Q introduced kind of turns the Prime Directive on its head. Ultimately, it doesn’t matter how stalwartly the Federation adheres to it, they have a 5th level civilization orders of magnitude ahead that doesn’t have a Prime Directive, doesn’t see the need for it and undoes what ever good The Federation’s PD serves at the flick of a wrist.

The Q are a big problem and I’ve never really heard of the Federation in any of the series in which they appear formulate some plan of action to deal with their contaminations of the “natural” order.

237. Keachick (Rose) - July 11, 2014

“For all we know there was a species of intelligent rodent that the Nibiru people were cruel to, which were destined to survive the extinction event, just as our own ancestors survived the one that killed the dinosaurs on Earth — an event had Spock and Kirk stopped would have meant the human race would have never evolved.”

All moot, just supposition.

Now I am done trying to explain anything more to any of you. Just because others have also repeated the same does not necessarily make it the only view or even the correct one.

“I don’t know what I am *supposed* to do. I only know what I can do now” – James T Kirk.

238. Keachick (Rose) - July 11, 2014

#233 – “Pretty much every single religion on Earth was started by the actions of one man, whether that man was Budda, Mohammed, Jesus, or David Koresh. In Native American religions there is a great sacred beast called a Thunderbird, known to all of the North American tribes. A number of modern Natives believe it is possible that the Thunderbirds were alien spacecraft. This is REAL LIFE information”

Incorrect. These people were born into a culture where certain ideas were already in existence or expected by the people of the time. The Buddha was born into the Hindu warrior caste and also known as Shakyamuni. He already did various Hindu meditational practices, yoga etc. It was, in fact, within one of these practices that he had his first awakening. In other words, the man who became known the Buddha happened within an already established context. He evolved beyond the confines of the prevalent cultural and religious ideas and understanding.

The same is true of Jesus. He was also born within an already established cultural and religious context and grew up as other Jewish boys at the time, just as Siddhartha Gautama/Shakyamuni Buddha did.

Whether the sacred beast, the thunderbird, was an alien spaceship is debatable. As the Enterprise might become for the Nibiruns, it has become a part of myth and legend, an important part. However, the sun (an extraterrestrial object) has also been the object of worship, but the sun makes a regular appearance and cannot help but have a genuine impact on the ongoing thinking, behaviour, because of its very nature and the ongoing impact it has on life on earth, eg whether crops fail or not etc, unlike that of fleeting view of a starship Enterprise or starship thunderbird.

Certainly the drawing of what we know to be the starship Enterprise may become part of their symbolism, but it cannot be more than that. There is no real context, other than it representing powerful forces capable of stopping a volcano.

Of course, volcanoes die down of their own accord. We have three such volcanoes in NZ, the largest being Mt Ruapehu. It is the most active of the three. All three make great skiing mountains, when they are not rumbling or spewing out fire, brimstone, ash. One of those mountains has proven itself to be noisy, hot and smelly, at least once this century, yet right now, there are no doubt people braving the weather and possibly/probably skiing on all three as I write this.

Look, I am trying to explain again what has been apparent to me from the start. No doubt, once again, a pointless task…:(

* The winter weather here at the moment is not good. Lots of rain, snow, high winds, nasty southerlies and major flooding in Northland.

239. Cygnus-X1 - July 11, 2014

236. Disinvited – July 11, 2014

I never liked Q and could have done without him altogether. I liked John DeLancie and found him a good choice for the role, but I just didn’t think that the character fit well in Trek.

He was too much like a comic book character—like Mxyztplk, but without any vulnerability. In the Q episodes, it was pretty much anything goes. And characters who can do literally anything aren’t interesting and weaken the believability of the whole setting.

240. dmduncan - July 11, 2014

223. Ahmed – July 10, 2014

Lack of answers to the main mystery is problematic but not a serious one if the characters are interesting. But after two long episodes, none of the characters were engaging in any meaningful way & the show just drags and drags and nothing happens. I gave up & removed the show from my DVR playlist.

***

Yeah, never do a series on the boring people who got left behind.

241. Harry Ballz - July 11, 2014

@240 dmduncan “never do a series on the boring people who got left behind”

I would think the people who were left behind are the FUN ones, with the BORING ones having ascended.

But, that’s just me.

242. Curious Cadet - July 12, 2014

@239. Cygnus-X,
“In the Q episodes, it was pretty much anything goes. And characters who can do literally anything aren’t interesting and weaken the believability of the whole setting.”

Yup. And that’s the problem with transwarp transporters, magic blood, red matter, et al. It’s lazy writing. What I find absolutely astounding about Q is that Rodenberry created him as a catalyst from day one of TNG.

Another point about such characters is that the stories involving them are quite often predictable and boring. Q snaps his fingers and everything that just happened over the last 40 minutes is reset.

Q was the ultimate narrator of the obvious: “humans are so arrogant, Picard, did you really think you could save that planet?”. I prefer my stories with a little more subtlety, where I’m not hammered over the head by the lesson the writers want me to learn.

Of course this is all only my subjective opinion (for some reason some visitors here require that disclaimer to be posted lest it be confused as fact, so it’s no surprise they are also Q fans).

It’s interesting that the dedicated Q thread only has 38 comments. It says something about how many of the visitors to this site are interested in the character and makes me wonder if it’s reflective of the overall Trek fan base.

243. Who cares - July 14, 2014

@Keachick. The only pointless thing here is expecting you to have a intelligent comment that makes sense in any way about any subject. You are completely and totally wrong in your statements about religions, while I have actually studied the histories of various religions and have been doing so for a very long time. I also live on the edge of the Yellowstone Super-volcano and I witnessed the eruption of Mt. St. Helens, these facts have also lead me to learn about volcanos.

244. TUP - July 15, 2014

I didnt mind the Leftovers but I agree that it does seem to be about nothing. I an not sure I trust Lindelof after I sat through Lost and those idiots admitted they created plot points with no idea how they intended to resolve them. Talk about irresponsible writing. I cant believe a writer gets another job after that admission.

If Leftovers was network TV I likely wouldnt bother as I’d assume it would be cancelled. But being HBO, I’m willing to give it a shot. At the very least, we should get a resolution. I also dig that it’s not subkect to censorship so characters get to act “normal” by swearing etc. Now show us some explicit sex scenes and it gets an extra star from me.

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