Orci & Kurtzman To Produce ‘Vampire Chronicles’ Movies For Universal | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Orci & Kurtzman To Produce ‘Vampire Chronicles’ Movies For Universal August 7, 2014

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Orci/Kurtzman,Sci-Fi , trackback

deltarising

Roberto Orci is still at work with co-writers Patrick McKay and J.D. Payne on the script for the next Star Trek film, slated for 2016. But he has also added a couple of new movie projects as producer to his slate. TrekMovie has confirmed reports that Orci is teaming up with long-time writing/producing partner Alex Kurtzman to reboot the Anne Rice Vampire Chronicles series as well as The Mummy. More details below.

Orci and Kurtzman Making Monsters For Universal

TrekMovie has independently confirmed reports in The Wrap and Deadline that Universal has aquired the rights to the Vampire Chronicles series from author Anne Rice and that Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman are attached as producers along with Brian Grazer. Universal has also recently tapped Kurtzman to direct a revitalization of The Mummy series, and Orci is also on board that project as a producer.

News of Orci and Kurtzman’s collaboration on these Universal monster movies has some outlets wondering how this fits with the long-time partners’ recent announcement to work separately on movie projects. For example after collaborating on Star Trek Into Darkness and The Amazing Spider-man 2, Kurtzman is working solo on future Spidey movies, while Orci is focused on the Trek franchise.

TrekMovie has confirmed that this solo work for the pair is related to developing new film projects. The Universal deals for The Mummy and Vampire Chronicles have been in the works for a long time and so Orci and Kurtzman are sticking together for those. Kurtzman and Orci’s K/O Paper Products production company is also still developing new TV projects, such as the hacker-drama Scorpions coming to CBS this fall.

Comments

1. CmdrR - August 7, 2014

“Orci is focused on the Trek franchise…”
For what? 5 minutes per week?
Star Trek 3 … just in time to celebrate 50 years of Spock’s Brain.

I love vintage Anne Rice (who also did a Mummy story and the wonderful Witching Hour books) but Orci needs to choose priorities or he will always make formulaic, disposable films like STID.

2. windelkin - August 7, 2014

I agree, they both need to focus on fewer projects. Too many irons in the proverbial fire hurts the quality. I’m hoping the new Trekmovie gets made before any of this stuff gets going, but I wouldn’t be surprised if they try to juggle it all.

3. boborci - August 7, 2014

CmdrR

I would hope that merely moments after your comment, the fact that I have responded indicates my commitment to trek..

There are no other websites where I am commenting on any other projects.

Right;)?

4. boborci - August 7, 2014

windkelkin

You should also understand that we have a vibrant company full of great partners. We don’t do everything ourselves.

5. Hat Rick - August 7, 2014

Let’s make sure history never forgets the name, [INSERT NAME OF NEXT TREK MOVIE HERE].

6. Trip - August 7, 2014

Star Trek Extinction?

7. Finnigan - August 7, 2014

#4 Will these vampires have “magic blood” as well?

8. Trip - August 7, 2014

#7 Remember, Spidey has “magic blood” too!

9. Caesar - August 7, 2014

Good, let ‘em ruin that franchise instead.

10. windelkin - August 7, 2014

Wow! Thanks for responding, Mr. Orci, and it does say a lot about your interest. You given me faith that you can pull off a great exploration/adventure/mystery tale worthy of the name Star Trek. Don’t let us down!

11. Data - August 7, 2014

Bob,
We appreciate your immediate replies, but this is what happened to JJ and STID.
He got busy in his own other projects, there was a 4 year gap, all the new audience earned for ST 2009 went to drains..
ofcourse there was this irrational STID story on top of it.

All that we (the fans) need is a “Star Trek” movie which stands for what it stood for – “to explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and civilization and to bodly go where no one has gone before”

12. Harry Ballz - August 7, 2014

Bob Orci

After Star Trek Into Darkness stunk up the place, and I mean really bad, I’m sure you understand our trepidation.

13. Vultan - August 7, 2014

Prepare to hear the tale of the immortal Roberto Von Schlockmeister, forever cursed, doomed to walk the Earth in search of established intellectual property, not wholly within one franchise or another.

On these boards, he is legend.

14. Endeavour crew - August 7, 2014

Not to throw a monkey wrench into the whole are you focused on Trek enough or not- have you ever thought of cameoing in an ST film?

15. Harry Ballz - August 7, 2014

I notice Bob Orci isn’t willing to provide an answer “merely moments after your comment” for my pointing out how bad Star Trek Into Darkness was at post # 12.

Yes, unlikely he will respond, as it’s pretty hard to defend pure crap.

16. Dr Beckett - August 7, 2014

I’ve been a huge fan of the Vampire Chronicles since the 80s, so this is very promising news Indeed! Anne Rice has created such a detailed and rich world that I hope the movies would do justice to.

The last big screen adaptation, Queen of the Damned, crammed 2 massive novels into 90 odd minutes, sacrificing alot of the core essence of the stories and characters. Interview with the Vampire though was a pretty good adaptation and still is one of our all time vampire flicks ;)

On a side note, the Queen of the Damned film had the most amazing soundtrack which still makes regular appearances on my playlists!

17. pilotfred - August 8, 2014

at this stage I am not excepting much from the trek movies, the only good thing that come out of the film’s is the comics

18. ironhyde - August 8, 2014

boborci — Thanks for your effort demonstrating your commitment to Trek. I like that :)

Also interesting to see more work from you. Looking forward to it.

19. Lt. Dakin - August 8, 2014

So, when Star Trek 2009 came out, everyone was an up and coming talent. Now Star Trek is being made by some of the most sought after talent in Hollywood, both behind and in front of the camera.

I am not complaining!

20. Lt. Dakin - August 8, 2014

And absolutely thank you for your commitment, boborci.

21. Disinvited - August 8, 2014

# 7. Finnigan – August 7, 2014

“Will these vampires have “magic blood” as well?”

Not it the traditional meaning of your query, but they will drink it.

22. dswynne - August 8, 2014

@15 (Harry Ballz): boborci doesn’t respond to rude commentators. If you didn’t like STiD, you don’t use ‘colorful’ rhetoric to make the point.

23. John - August 8, 2014

Omg! More vampire stuff?? The market is flooded with it

24. Mad Mann - August 8, 2014

I am just glad that Anthony Pascale is back at trekmovie. I’m not sure what happened, or if he ever left and just worked behind the scenes, but I am glad he is writing articles again. I always liked his straight-shootin style.

Back to topic: I never got into the Anne Rice novels. I gave them a shot, and I was bored by the Pittt/Cruise movie. But, who knows, maybe this new one will be better? Eh, doubtful….

25. crazydaystrom - August 8, 2014

I just want good Trek for the 50th. sigh

26. Cygnus-X1 - August 8, 2014

21. Disinvited – August 8, 2014

Nicely done.

27. CmdrR - August 8, 2014

boborci –

Yes, thank you for responding.
You understand, I’m sure, that:

a) We’re Trekkies; we kvetch
b) We REALLY want Trek 3 to be a home run!

Beyond that, I have said before and I will state again: I believe you and the rest of the team possess all of the tools and skills it takes to make great films. I also understand that it’s a risk to try something different in a Hollywood that rewards conformity and punishes free thinkers.

Risk… is what it’s all about. We WANT to see your masterpiece. Go for it, please. Characters, a NEW story, lighter on the cgi and fistfights.

Good luck! We will be watching.

28. TrekRules - August 8, 2014

Maks sense – the vampire genre has been worked over so much recently, might as well bring these 2 on to really kill it off. The fans will love it though – it will look familiar without any real insight.

29. LogicalLeopard - August 8, 2014

15. Harry Ballz – August 7, 2014
I notice Bob Orci isn’t willing to provide an answer “merely moments after your comment” for my pointing out how bad Star Trek Into Darkness was at post # 12.

Yes, unlikely he will respond, as it’s pretty hard to defend pure crap.

****************************

Or…….

1) Orci possibly doesn’t spend all day hanging out on the computer, but pops in, makes a comment, and then pops out. Like many of us do when we’re busy with our lives.

2) Orci probably isn’t going to respond to a person who doesn’t offer criticism, but an insult, like referring to something they worked hard on and liked as something that “stunk up the place, and I mean, really bad.”

3) Orci probably doesn’t think any good conversation will ever occur with a grown man (or minor, possibly) who uses the moniker “Harry Ballz”

All of those are valid theories.

30. Son of Jello - August 8, 2014

I’m doing this and doing that, you know just hanging around telling people all the stuff I’v got my hand in. Go for coffee eat lunch and then tell everyone all the new ideas I came up for movie plots while eating lunch on my own. Like a vampire movie you know its my style staying behind the curve and thinking inside the box.

And the twist is werewolves I’ll put werewolves in it and they can be teenagers and one teenager is a wolf and one is a vampire and they are in love but there mortal enemies. Man I’m a genius I could stretch that out over 4 trekmovie articles. Wow now I have my own franchise doing nothing but saying Im gonna.

Gonna what bob? what exactly are you doing?

31. Son of Jello - August 8, 2014

“Paper Products production company”

couldn’t have said it better myself.

32. Son of Jello - August 8, 2014

Wait I have a new idea out of my lunch box “Hackers’ I will do a movie about Hackers no one has done that before.

Wait where did everybody go………………. :(

33. Phil - August 8, 2014

Come on now…show me any random production company where they just do one project at a time. Spielberg seems to have his name on a third of everything on the big and small screen, no one believes he’s actually working on all those projects. Of all thing things to get worked up over, this really is near the bottom of the list….

34. Ahmed - August 8, 2014

@ 3. boborci – August 7, 2014

“the fact that I have responded indicates my commitment to trek..”

I don’t see how responding to an online comment, without giving any real new information, is an indication of his commitment to Trek!

In any case, he is not writing the “Vampire Chronicles”, just producing it.

Since Anthony is back, perhaps Bob can do an interview for Trekmovie to give us an update on the project.

35. Picard, Jean-Luc - August 8, 2014

I don’t care that Orci is producing other things.

The trouble I’m having is that well, what the hell is going on with the Star Trek franchise? Why isn’t CBS and Paramount being a little more aggressive with it?

I see this amazing franchise and its potential being squandered at every opportunity.

Why isn’t there a TV show in development?

Why isn’t there more continuity, more synergy between Abrams Star Trek and classic Star Trek?

Why is it that there seems to be such a reliance on OLD Star Trek?

Why is it that there’s been no animated series?

Why isn’t there more merchandise?

Why isn’t the Star Trek franchise more active?

What I’m seeing from my standpoint is a franchise torn in two without the necessary leadership to bring any kind of focus to the brand. We’ve got CBS seemingly willing to milk only the classic stuff through a mess of licenses, grabbing any licence willing to take on Star Trek without any cross over merchandise between the new current Star Trek’s with the old. Have these studios learnt nothing from Marvel and DC?

Why isn’t Abrams Star Trek being given the priority? I mean I love TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY and ENT and I believe that they should all be remastered for Blu-Ray and I believe that there should be products out there for fans of those shows but my god! Why isn’t there more being done with the current Star Trek? And why aren’t the two more joined up?

Why aren’t CBS exploiting the huge leap in popularity for geek culture with the likes of The Big Bang Theory by producing a new TV show?

It angers me so much that when we’re seeing the likes of Warner Bro’s getting their act together seemingly with DC and the juggernaut that is Marvel and Star Wars powering on with these huge far fetched plans in place… Star Trek is languishing, crippled because of it’s owners not being able to see the potential in it.

Orci going off to do something else is just another example of how poorly managed Star Trek has become. One of these studios needs to make a move otherwise Star Trek is always going to be something we remember fondly rather than look forward to.

Someone needs to get a grip.

36. Picard, Jean-Luc - August 8, 2014

Also why is there so much fear surrounding Star Trek? As if it were this troubled, unlikeable franchise?

Lets see a bit more confidence in the brand, it’s amazing, it’s not some inspired yet crippled little show canceled after only 79 episodes anymore, it’s this multi-billion dollar franchise with its potential dying every year!

37. James - August 8, 2014

@Bob Orci – I for one love the new movies, so long as the new film continues in a similar vein – I’m one happy trekkie.

38. Phil - August 8, 2014

@35. Well, the short answer still seems to be that CBS and Paramount don’t want to play in the same sandbox. As long as there is sniping among management, expect dysfunction to continue.

39. Thorny - August 8, 2014

Bob… are you concerned that maybe the “vampire mania” wave has crested and you’re catching a dying fad? After all, “Vampire Academy” flopped earlier this year, “Vampire Diaries” is fading fast, and “The Originals” (both on The CW) is languishing with low ratings even by CW standards. Several other supernatural-themed movies have flopped in the last two or three years as well, such as “Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter”, “Mortal Instruments” and “Beautiful Creatures” (also based on popular books.) It really seems to me that the public has had its fill of vampires.

By the way, I loved Into Darkness. I thought the ending should have been more “Space Seed” than “Wrath of Khan”, but I loved it anyway.

40. Phil - August 8, 2014

Zombies seem to be the flavor of the day, at the moment, though the public can be fickle. Was also under the impression that Anne Rice was through with the vampires since she rediscovered her faith.

A bit of trivia, from right here in Riverside, CA….
American author Anne Rice, who’s famous works include Interview with a Vampire, so enjoyed the (Mission) Inn on her many visits, she incorporated it into her 2009 best-seller Angel Time. The book, much of which was written in the exquisite Amistad Suite, is the first in Rice’s Songs of the Seraphim series, which tells the story of Toby O’Dare, an assassin with a tragic past, who uses The Mission Inn as his refuge.

41. TUP - August 8, 2014

no, Bob, what would demonstrate your commitment to Trek would be a film all Trekkies can be proud of, not that mess that was STID. Paying lip service to a few fans on a message board is not a sign of committment. Geez.

42. CsMisi - August 8, 2014

Well, I’m pretty sick of Vampire movies, so I will pass on this one.

43. VOODOO - August 8, 2014

Give Bob Orci a break. We have no idea what his schedule + the teams schedule that he works with is like. It’s total conjecture on the part of posters who claim that Orci is spread to thin.

It seems logical to me that the man would want to make his directing debut a memorable one. I simply don’t believe that he would mail in such a huge opprortunity so he can focus on other projects.

All this negativity about ST from its fans sucks. Let’s not forget that this franchise was dead + buried before ST 09 arrived and much of the credit of the series revival can be attributed to Bob Orci + the rest of the creative team who made ST relevant again. For those of you who are wishing for the “glory days” of Enterprise + Voyager to return (by glory days I mean ST having no audience + no longer being relevant) GET OVER IT. Those days are luckily behind us.

Those same fans also have to understand that the modern movie audience in general prefers action oriented Sci/fi to slow philosophical (I think they have done a good balance of the two) driven films like TMP…The goal here was to get people back in the theartre’s + excited about ST again…MISSION COMPLETE!!!

44. Harry Ballz - August 8, 2014

For those of you who thought I was insulting to Bob Orci…..keep in mind, with Bob currently juggling 697 different projects, I know he has a short attention span, so I figured I better get right to the point. He doesn’t have the time to read through any lengthy discourse.

45. Ahmed - August 8, 2014

@44. Harry Ballz

” with Bob currently juggling 697 different projects”

My sources telling me that Bob is working on 666 different projects :)

46. CmdrR - August 8, 2014

40 – Phil – Anne Rice quit religion again.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/30/anne-rice-i-quit-christia_n_665110.html

47. CmdrR - August 8, 2014

Vampire is Orci’s 666th project? The devil you say!

48. Anthony Pascale - August 8, 2014

Warning for trolling to Harry Ballz

and to everyone else, everyone who visits here, be they famous or not so famous are to be treated with respect. We are all fans and all in this together. This isn’t the kind of site with ugly flaming. If you want to do that, go somewhere else.

Thank you

The Management

49. Phil - August 8, 2014

@46 Easy come, easy go. My familiarity with Ms. Rice only extends to her presence at the Inn, where I do grab dinner with the family from time to time….

50. Danpaine - August 8, 2014

I’m looking forward to seeing what these guys do with The Mummy, wondering if it’ll be actually creepy, or goofy. Interested in seeing if they can produce some real horror for these Universal reboots.

Not to be a wet blanket, but I’m not too hopeful about it. Perhaps though, along with the next Trek, I’ll be pleasantly surprised.

51. Disinvited - August 8, 2014

#35. Picard, Jean-Luc – August 8, 2014

Phil is right. The long story is as they say in the pantalones business: Les Moonves is a tentpole. He has long fancied himself to be destined to be a major movie studio head and ever since he set his sights on Paramount there’s been a trail of corporate career corpses with their blood on his hands as he pursued that end. But as Meyer wrote in his rewrite of the script to THE WRATH OF KHAN: Like a poor marksman he kept missing the mark on his ascendance to mogul-hood.

For the nonce, he’s willing to play nice with Brad Grey. Business is Business. But the moment some poor performing movie production(s) dips Paramount’s balance sheets: watch him pounce. Meanwhile he’s content to play movie box office roulette with CBS’ budget motion picture wing’s 50 million dollar stakes hoping for a PARANORMAL that’ll allow it and him to go large.

# 40. Phil – August 8, 2014

” American author Anne Rice, who’s famous works include Interview with a Vampire, so enjoyed the (Mission) Inn on her many visits, she incorporated it into her 2009 best-seller Angel Time. ” — Phil

I was wondering how Riverside knocked NY and LA off the Forbes’ top ten coolest places in the US list.

52. Corylea - August 8, 2014

It might be fun to see Zachary Quinto as a vampire; I bet he could do a great job. As long as we’re having Trek/Rice crossovers, maybe Mr. Orci could add that one. ;-)

53. AJ - August 8, 2014

Bob, I think we’re all just hoping you’ll really keep your eye on the ball with this next one. It’s pretty darn important.

54. star trackie - August 8, 2014

#12 “After Star Trek Into Darkness stunk up the place, and I mean really bad, I’m sure you understand our trepidation.”

YOUR trepidation. Just because your panties are in a wad over a some ill-perceived “faults” with the film doesn’t mean the rest of the world is floating on your boat. Less generalizations in your rants, please.

55. Who cares - August 8, 2014

Uggh, my god I hate Anne Rice, the only thing that makes her garbage better than Twilight is that her vampires don’t sparkle, otherwise it is equally schlock.

56. Mike Barnett - August 8, 2014

Has anyone noticed that whenever Bob Orci posts, the negatrons wake up and pounce on Orci/JJ/STID/nuTrek with their negative comments? It seems to be a fairly consistent pattern.

57. Craiger - August 8, 2014

I think the main critics of STID is that it was basically just redoing TWOK. Then why did they bother to create a new timeline? Didn’t they say they created a new timeline so they could tell new stories? If they didn’t care about new stories, then they should have just done a complete reboot without changing the timeline. They wouldn’t have to worry about making the fans of the original Trek mad anyway because the original Trek would still be their anyway redoing the timeline or not. The could have just shown the Trek reboot along side the original.

The first film could have been Kirk and crew at the Academy. The Second one their first assignments and the final one Kirk and crew getting the Enterprise.

58. Craiger - August 8, 2014

Forgot to add I liked the first movie.

59. Who cares - August 8, 2014

@Craiger. STID is in no way a remake or redo of TWOK, that is a silly and incorrect complait of people who did not actually watch the movie.

60. Craiger - August 8, 2014

I guess maybe I should have not said a complete remake of TWOK and it had elements of TWOK in it. Their was Khan still being unfrozen from the Botany Bay and the same death scene except its reversed. Spock yelling Khan instead of Kirk.

61. Ahmed - August 8, 2014

@59. Who cares

“STID is in no way a remake or redo of TWOK”

I guess the reactor scene was taken from a SW movie, right ? And Khan was actually an alien from Planet X & has nothing to do with TWOK!

62. Mike Barnett - August 8, 2014

61. Ahmed
OK, that was about 5 minutes of the movie. What about the rest of STID?

63. Ahmed - August 8, 2014

@62. Mike Barnett

The entire movie was about Khan, a character that we already met twice. There was no need to bring him back at all, it is a new universe after all.

64. Finnigan - August 8, 2014

Boo hoo. Being critical of how bad STID was is not being disrespectful or insulting. Many of us just felt it was a poor movie that was terribly written and directed. Let’s stop with the political correctness where we worry more about people’s feelings than we do about the quality and reality of what is finally presented. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Nobody’s opinions should be censored or repressed. I am sure Mr. Orci is a big boy and can handle the criticism.

65. Mike Barnett - August 8, 2014

63. Ahmed

If they kept his name as John Harrison, then what about the rest of the movie? Which parts are a ripoff of TWOK?

66. Ahmed - August 8, 2014

@65. Mike Barnett

“If they kept his name as John Harrison”

I’m not going to engage in a hypothetical situation, the character that we met in STID was Khan. A genetically engineered superhuman from the past seeking revenge & Kirk trying to stop him, sounds familiar?

67. Trip - August 8, 2014

STD was basically a reference fest and a “connect the dots” mentality between set pieces. Personally, I thought the references were a bit overkill – especially the “reversed” death scene and scream. It was very distracting and took me out of the film at that point. Obviously, newer fans won’t think much of it. I didn’t have any issue of Khan being used (or being a white British man either).

I thought 2009 had a fine balance of references. There weren’t many references that were blatantly “homaged” as they were in STD.

It would be nice if the 50th anniversary movie would function more like 2009 did, regarding references, but also have an original story (no more “ode to vengeance” please). I’m seeing news tidbits that the film is planning to be more “original” and exploring “deep space.” I’m hoping this (and other criticisms) won’t be treated in such a smart-ass manner as Kirk being promoted too fast was dealt with in STD.

I’m cautiously optimistic (as many “famous and not so famous” people feel) about this upcoming Trek film. I’m also going in with little to no expectations, as to not be as disappointed as I was with STD.

68. Mike Barnett - August 8, 2014

66. Ahmed
Keep his name as John Harrison/Khan. What scenes – other than the reactor scene – were a ripoff of TWOK?

69. Son of Jello - August 8, 2014

43. VOODOO – August 8, 2014

MISSION COMPLETE!!!

That’s where we live (the fans) all that effort and hype and there is no real point to the final product. Why do people get so defensive about their work when the point of the exercise is to get people in a room just to see if you can do it. There is nothing in there the but a feeling of accomplishment for the producers and that has nothing to do with the audience.

But getting bob a good name with studios that’s the goel that’s why his projects are so dated and incomplete bob dosn’t make movies he makes product. And I think he should be reminded that not giving a sh-t will never make you popular with anyone.

70. Ahmed - August 8, 2014

@68. Mike Barnett

Read #66, you have many elements taken from TWOK, add that to the reactor scene, the dumb Khan scream & you end up with a movie trying to imitate TWOK & TUC while you are at it.

71. Cygnus-X1 - August 8, 2014

43. VOODOO – August 8, 2014

All this negativity about ST from its fans sucks.

You know what else sucks? That Trek has been sold out to the generic “foreign market,” the constituents of which don’t particularly care for Trek. And that when people remark to today that they like “Star Trek,” I have to ask for clarification, because the “Star Trek” of the past 5 years has been something culturally/philosophically/artistically inferior, on a fundamental level, to what “Star Trek” has been and meant in the past. That also sucks.

Let’s not forget that this franchise was dead + buried before ST 09 arrived…

Actually, let’s do forget that, because it’s a common misconception. There was a Trek movie subsequent to Nemesis greenlit back in 2005 that was scrapped and then restarted due to the CBS/Paramount issue. Trek was never “dead and buried”: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/26/movies/26itzk.html?pagewanted=all

…and much of the credit of the series revival can be attributed to Bob Orci + the rest of the creative team who made ST relevant again.

“Relevant?” Sorry, but BR Trek is not “relevant” in any way other than economically. It’s certainly not culturally relevant, which is what people usually mean when they refer to a movie as “relevant.” And Trek has not been “revived” but rather re-sold to a different market, i.e. the aforementioned foreign market that likes more action and less Trek. Whether this is attributable to the foreign market watching Trek movies with subtitles and wanting less dialogue to read is not entirely known, but I believe that to be a good guess.

For those of you who are wishing for the “glory days” of Enterprise + Voyager to return (by glory days I mean ST having no audience + no longer being relevant) GET OVER IT. Those days are luckily behind us.

Yeah, I haven’t seen anyone remark that they’re pining specifically for a return to the “glory days” of Voyager and Enterprise, so why don’t we dispense with that straw man as well. However, it should be noted that Enterprise averaged over 3 million viewers just in the US, and that was the all-time low for the franchise.

Those same fans also have to understand that the modern movie audience in general prefers action oriented Sci/fi to slow philosophical (I think they have done a good balance of the two) driven films like TMP…The goal here was to get people back in the theartre’s + excited about ST again…MISSION COMPLETE!!!

Sure, if the “mission” was to tailor Trek to a market of people who don’t like Trek. Hooray! Sell-out complete! What a valiant effort! I can’t believe that so many people aren’t more appreciative of Bob Orci and Bad Robot!

The “hater” haters might consider that there are quite valid reasons for people not to appreciate what has become of Trek in the BR/Orci era, and that the “haters” are not telling the BR fans not to express their fondness for BR Trek. They just happen to not share your appreciation.

72. Keachick (Rose) - August 8, 2014

Neither Bob Orci, K/O Paper Products or Bad Robot are responsible for providing Trek merchandise. That is the call of the franchise owners, Paramount and CBS. When Bad Robot did try to do some merchandising, JJ Abrams production company got stopped.

Bob Orci, Patrick McKay and PJ Payne are writers contracted by Paramount to write the next Star Trek film story. Bob Orci is also one of the producers and most likely this new film’s director. Bad Robot is the production company, owned by JJ Abrams (also producer), contracted to make the film. None of these individuals own any part of Star Trek. They have contracted by the actual owner to do specific tasks, which is what they are going about doing as I write this.

Merchandising etc is not Bob Orci’s call nor should it be.

I have been coming here for more than four years and this is what I have learned. Please, Bob, correct me if I am wrong in any of what I have written above. I can recognize the names of other posters who have been here as long, if not longer, so therefore it is unacceptable that a poster should be calling out Bob Orci or any of the Bad Robot for something they have no control over now or ever.

73. Harry Ballz - August 8, 2014

@71 Cygnus X-1

Nice! That’s how I feel, I just didn’t take the time to express myself. Thanks!

74. Cygnus-X1 - August 8, 2014

P.S.

And another argument that I don’t get is the one touting the impressive revenue figures from the BR Trek movies.

Unless I’m a Viacom shareholder or upper management at Paramount Pictures with a bonus tied to profits, why the hell would I be happy about profits per se? I’m a Trekkie. And a movie buff. I care about Trek and movies. Not how rich other people are getting by making movies that I don’t like.

It’s like if there were a restaurant serving delicious organic grass-fed filet mignon at a reasonable price, and said restaurant had a change in management the end result of which that restaurant’s famous organic grass-fed filet mignon being replaced with fake imitation processed baloney substitute. And patrons of the restaurant cheered the restaurant’s doubled profits! “Hooray for more money for the restaurant!”

And one guy in the back asks, “Uh, why should I be happy that the restaurant is making more money if I don’t like their food and don’t want to patronize them?”

75. Craiger - August 8, 2014

Paramount put Trek back on the scene in 09. However Paramount squandered it by delaying the sequel. Any new fans it got they probably wondered what happened to the next Trek? They probably thought Paramount thought Trek 09 didn’t do all that great and they weren’t doing a sequel so they lost all interest in Trek.

76. Keachick (Rose) - August 8, 2014

I think that the story told in STID is relevant for today. However, the way the film is made, it does require a certain patience to see and hear what is being actually alluded to, despite the pace/action.

One aspect I got from this film was how virtues like Trust can be interpreted or misinterpreted. Another is that a leader or captain can and does set a particular tone, a standard of behaviour and this is what gets passed down in obvious and in more subtle ways.

At the beginning of the film, it seemed daft, to me, that Captain Kirk would lie (mostly by omission) about what he ordered and what happened at Nibiru. It was so out of character for either Jim Kirks (prime and alt. universes).

However, as the film progressed, it became clear that this alt. Kirk found himself in a Starfleet environment where a certain level of dishonesty and deceit was how one got along and even ahead. This came from Admiral Marcus himself, who clearly saw Kirk and the Enterprise as “collateral damage” (as Dr Peter Weller put it), yet was not about to tell Kirk that fact. I mean, who wants to be collateral damage or treated as if they were trash? This appeared to be the usual “modis operandi” that Admiral Marcus applied to situations and he was also the boss.

No, Admiral Marcus probably was not lying about the Klingon threat and the need to be ready and able to defend the earth and the Federation. However, it was the way he went about doing things that is highly questionable. He deceived everyone as to the true identity of John Harrison. He threatened and bullied JH/Khan with the lives of Khan’s family/crew. His hypocrisy became evident later when he was happy to throw Kirk back to the Academy for lying and disobeying a current interpretation of the prime directive, yet had no qualms about lying and not following proper Starfleet protocols when it suited him. This kind of behaviour would surely not go unnoticed, especially it was the normal way for Admiral Marcus.

Finally, Kirk tried to cover up the fact that his orders made it possible for a world and its people not get enveloped by a big volcano and then save his first officer from certain death and in the process, got seen briefly by some of the Nibiruns…

Admiral Marcus tried to cover up the fact that the new torpedoes he gave Kirk actually had people inside them, and ordered Kirk to fire on Kronos in order to kill John Harrison (terrorist) and in so doing pre-empt a bloody war with the Klingons…

This is what STID was about – Starfleet’s leader was a dark and Kirk and co. represented a little light, which darkness cannot abide…

77. Keachick (Rose) - August 8, 2014

Re #72 – Apologies. The writer’s name is JD Payne.

78. Disinvited - August 8, 2014

#72. Keachick (Rose) – August 8, 2014

I think if you look back at the trials and tribulations Gene Roddenberry had with corporate in getting Trek on the air, you will find that his approach was to use STAR TREK as a wrapping to give the corporation apparently what it wanted while telling the more relevant tales that absolutely would not be allowed on said corporate’s stage in a more straight-forward drama.

BR has the first half of the equation in regards to Trek movies more than adequately mastered, surpassing even Roddenberry’s own attempt to appease corporate in that venue. But where BR is failing Trek is they haven’t anything brave or avant-garde with the story in transcending the corporate blinders.

Perhaps I could put that another way: BR is more than capable of blinding Paramount with science but they don’t.

79. Keachick (Rose) - August 8, 2014

I have never believed that Star Trek was ever about blinding anyone “with science”. I always thought it had more to do with the human journey of discovery, whether it be of other worlds and what life there may be or about discovering and dealing with the realities of our humanity in a positive way.

80. Phil - August 8, 2014

@74. Pretty weak analogy. Management hasn’t changed, and they are still serving beef. A better analogy would be that the new manager made some changes to the menu. The filet mignon has been replaced with a tri-tip. For the most part the change in the menu was greeted warmly, but a few customers could not accept the change, and tried unsuccessfully to convince the remaining clientele that anything that wasn’t filet mignon was just hot dogs. Some people like filet mignon, some like tri-tip, and some like hot dogs.

81. boborci - August 8, 2014

66 avoiding! Mike is right!

82. Ahmed - August 8, 2014

@ 80. boborci – August 8, 2014

“66 avoiding!”

lol,

Are you still working on “Sagittarius A” or is it in development hell ?

btw, loved the Klingon joke on this week’s episode of Matador.

83. OMNI - August 8, 2014

Oh great, yet another franchise for these guys to ruin. Just great.

84. Disinvited - August 8, 2014

# 80. Phil – August 8, 2014

“Pretty weak analogy. Management hasn’t changed…” — Phil

Sorry to say but beginning in 2005 and finalized in 2006 the management most certainly DID change. That’s what killed the previous Trek movie that was in the tubes ready to launch with a completed script turned in on time but shelved as the new regime’s Gail Berman NIHed and pursued JJ and his BR.

We can’t compare an unmade movie with a made one but a comparison of their first draft scripts might be possible.

85. Disinvited - August 8, 2014

# 26. Cygnus-X1 – August 8, 2014

” Nicely done.” — Cygnus-X1

Obrigado.

86. Jonboc - August 8, 2014

#64 “Many of us just felt it was a poor movie that was terribly written and directed.”

Actually, in the scheme of things…that”scheme” being worldwide enjoyment and acceptance of the film, there are really, very, very few of you. But, by all means, roll your squeaky wheel all you want, I don’t think you’re going to get any oil.

87. Disinvited - August 8, 2014

#85. Jonboc – August 8, 2014

Whatever you imagine the disparity in the numbers to be, I have yet to hear a reasonable explanation for why JJ feels that the competition from such a minority threatens his merchandising plans to the extent that a consistent theme emerges in that his licensed toys don’t sell and get pulled from production, his licensed Video games sales go nowhere, and his licensed novels’ printing and marketing get quashed.

Clearly, however insignificant you think the rest of Trek fans are, they can’t be as insignificant as you surmise for how else do you explain JJ’s assertion that his merchandizing can’t stand the competition of their being serviced and his demands that he have the monopoly?

It can’t be his weak argument that consumers are “confused” as a rising tide raises all boats. If BR popularity increased the demand for Trek merchandise then his licensed stuff would have sold just as well as any other random merchandise with “Trek” slapped on it. But it didn’t. In fact, the only explanation for the lack of its sales is that consumers were actively avoiding it. But how can that be if everyone worldwide loves it without reservation? How does your interpretation of the numbers account for this?

88. Red Dead Ryan - August 8, 2014

Cygnus,

Perhaps the real question you should be asking yourself is:

“Why am I paying to see the BR movies when I have been hating on them since before 2009?”

You, Ahmed, and other whiners here will be among the first in line to see the next movie, just as you guys went and saw the last two movies during the opening weekend. I guarantee it!

89. Mr. ATOZ - August 8, 2014

I’m not a huge fan of reboots (way too may of them these days), but I’m intrigued by a Mummy movie. As long as it has no association with the Brendan Fraser movies, I’m all in for some good ole’ monster movies. Lay off the effects and make them scary!

I agree with some of the people here. The vampire/zombie market is a little oversaturated.

I’m hoping that the Guardians of the Galaxy success (and the anticipation for Star Wars) brings a renewed interest in sci-fi movies. Love to see Trek 3 get a big opening!

90. Harry Ballz - August 8, 2014

The people here criticizing STID aren’t saying the movie didn’t make money. They aren’t saying everybody hated it, because a lot of people obviously enjoyed it.

If someone truly is a movie buff, having read all the books on screenwriting, taken many film courses and watched thousands of various movies in their life, well, then they may just hate STID because, IN THEIR OPINION, it’s a truly bad movie.

You may strongly disagree, but that doesn’t change the fact that STID is badly written.

And, hey, I’m a HUGE fan of Benedict Cumberbatch. When it was announced he was in STID, I was thrilled. Then I saw the movie. What a waste of a great talent.

91. Keachick (Rose) - August 8, 2014

I often refer to STID’s Khan as Harrison/Khan because that is who he was known to be by the alternate universe people. This Khan’s life was substantially changed in other obvious ways as well.

There was a lot that was different from TWOK. Not even the reactor scene was a total copy. The name “Khan” was screamed at a different time by a different person for a different reason in STID than in TWOK. That should be obvious to anyone who has seen both movies and paid attention.

92. Trip - August 9, 2014

#91 Perhaps “Khan Harrison” would be a more ideal name. That is how I have viewed Cumberbatch’s character.

93. Oscar - August 9, 2014

Orci, amigo, can you invent some new? Your movies an tv shows are pure cut and glue…no original stuff. Reharsed things…
And, sorry, but, your commitment with ST? Oh, c’mon is only a job for you…
The commitment is ours, fans pay for st, you earn bucks…
Un saludo.

94. Oscar - August 9, 2014

Voodoo,
ST 09 and ST into darkness are a couple of Michael Bay standard blockbusters, but overrated…
Orci will make the same thing…ST needs and deserves better. And Orci can not give it.
Sad, but with ST and the guardians of the Galaxy this GIJOE TREK is not necesary.
Paramount should reboot this mindless gijoe trek. The prototype should be Interstellar…

Orci, november, Interstellar, see and cry

95. Phil - August 9, 2014

@94. Boy, are you going to be in for a surprise if Interstellar ends up being a dud….

96. Finnigan - August 9, 2014

#86 I am not interested in your “oil”. I just grow tired of opinions of those who were disappointed with NuTrek being characterized as attacks or as being the actions of trolls. There is a low tolerance of anything perceived as being “negative” on this site an others. As I stated, it appears that there is more concern about someone having their feelings hurt than there is in pointing-out the obvious flaws and short-comings of the movies. The rage against the “Nutrek detractors” is obvious and is usually the actions of the fanbois who believe that Abrams and Orci can do no wrong. Sure the film might be popular to a general audience as an action/adventure slugfest, but that’s NOT Trek to many of us. You can discount the number of people that are disappointed all you want but many of us are the folks who supported Trek back when there was no Trek in the period of time between TOS and STTMP.

I am curious what Gene Roddenberry and Gene L. Coon would have to say about NuTrek. IMO it is a departure from what Trek was back in the day with respect to the message, the characters, and the content. I welcome your’s and other’s opinions, I just ask that those of us with concerns and criticism also be given the same consideration.

97. boborci - August 9, 2014

p & m & I wrote,”fade out” yesterday on first draft. things are moving.

98. Trip - August 9, 2014

So it sounds like we are still on a first draft?… No wonder why the studio has yet to read the script…

99. Thorny - August 9, 2014

“Interstellar” looks like it might be a lot closer to “The Prestige” than “The Dark Knight” though. Lots of hype for a so-so movie.

100. Finnigan - August 9, 2014

Why was my latest posting removed? I did not violate any terms. Is censorship really the way things are going to be on this site? Disappointing.

101. Finnigan - August 9, 2014

Disregard my post #100, the posting appeared late for some reason. My apologies to the site staff.

102. Ahmed - August 9, 2014

@88. Red Dead Ryan

I said before that I will see ST16 in theater when it come out, no surprise there. If it was a really good movie, then I will see it two or three times like I did with ST09 & other sci-fi movies. If on the other hand, it was as bad as STID, then there will be no need to see it again.

Do you know that people have the right to express different opinions than the one you’re holding ? Calling the ones who disagree with you “whiners”, only shows how small-minded you are.

103. Ahmed - August 9, 2014

@ 97. Trip – August 9, 2014

“So it sounds like we are still on a first draft?… No wonder why the studio has yet to read the script…”

No rush, 2016 is far far away /S

104. Harry Ballz - August 9, 2014

@103 Ahmed “far far away”

I saw what you did there, Ahmed.

What are you trying to do, start your own star wars?

:>)

105. Anthony Pascale - August 9, 2014

RE: post-Nemesis greenlit Star Trek film/star Trek Dead
At the studio exec level the franchise was in an indefinite hiatus after NEMESIS, with more TNG movies definitely off the table. There was a producer who had a production deal with Paramount that used their own development budget to get a script written by Erik Jendresen, but that never had significant studio support. I have read the script and it was pretty good but it never had traction and after Brad Grey took over, it was totally dead. It took another Paramount exec to reach out to Alex Kurtzman while Kurtzman, Orci and Abrams were making MI3 to get Trek going again. And it took Abrams’ pull with the studio to make it a big deal. Abrams made it his first project and he could have done anything he wanted as he was being perused by multiple studios at the time.

If not Abrams maybe Paramount would have found another A-list team who had a workable idea and maybe Paramount would have funded it and maybe that team would have made their first Trek film a hit, it is possible. We will never know. But we do know that Abrams and team did successfully work with Paramount to put Star Trek back on the front burner in a big way and it worked.

Just looking at how other franchises have fared, it is not hard to imagine it going a different way (and not a good way).

106. boborci - August 9, 2014

98. correct. the studio gets a draft when I give it to them. get it?

107. Marja - August 9, 2014

5 HatRick Let’s make sure history never forgets the name, [INSERT NAME OF NEXT TREK MOVIE HERE].

And [if no one has already said this] let’s hope history remembers it for the right reasons … unlike STV,TFF.

108. Disinvited - August 9, 2014

# 105. Anthony Pascale – August 9, 2014

“There was a producer who had a production deal with Paramount that used their own development budget to get a script written by Erik Jendresen, but that never had significant studio support.” — Anthony Pascale

When you say that, which studio are you talking about: pre-split, post split or both?

Or are you are saying that SciFi Wire’s reporting that the Jendresen’s movie had the support of Paramount co-president David DeLine, who was later replaced by Gail Berman in the split, was wrong? Or is that DeLine is not considered as significant as Berman who herself was later canned?

http://web.archive.org/web/20070804012239/http://syfyportal.com/news.php?id=2489

109. Marja - August 9, 2014

36 Picard, JL, Also why is there so much fear surrounding Star Trek? As if it were this troubled, unlikeable franchise? … Lets see a bit more confidence in the brand, it’s amazing, it’s not some inspired yet crippled little show canceled after only 79 episodes anymore, it’s this multi-billion dollar franchise with its potential dying every year!

Hear, hear! I am, however, reminded of the NBC exec’s discussions with Roddenberry, saying they thought the show seemed “too intellectual,” and that they perhaps wanted to aim more for the “Lost in Space” crowd and Trek would not appeal to a mass audience.

I worry about the studio greed factor — will Paramount demand they “dumb down” the movie in anticipation of East Asian audiences’ desire for less science, “more emotion and more action” [and massive amounts of box office profits]? I really don’t get it, unless the mass audience in these countries are “working stiffs” and not the “educated” crowd” …???

… and I find that hard to believe with the worldwide appeal of the Harry Potter series. Maybe HP movies really sell b/c of a generation of parents who’ve read worldwide translations and are reading them to their kids?

@Bob Orci, I’m all for authentic, well-founded emotion, of course [including Spock and Uhura]!

110. Trip - August 9, 2014

@Ahmed #103 Well, we can wait another 4 years… /s

@Bob #106 Got it. Just wanted to make sure you get it.

111. Oscar - August 9, 2014

Boborci, Pascale…
Sorry, but they turned ST into Gijoe Trek and this was not the only solution, it was the easiest…if the most important thing was the money, they should have take Michael Bay to helm ST…
And you say it worked…Beh, The guardians of the galaxy works…Marvel crashed august record with a bunch of Very low profil characters…because the guardians are nothing in the Marvel universe…
Nu trek is a blind alley and you know…CBS rejects it.
And ST is not only movies, in fact movies are expendables in ST, tv shows, that’ s the butter .
Interstellar will be what ST 2009 should have been. And it will earn more money than STID…

112. Craiger - August 9, 2014

This is interesting news. Maybe a new Trek TV series?

http://www.engadget.com/2014/08/09/cbs-making-online-shows/

113. Mikey1091 - August 9, 2014

MORE movies about vampires? Like True Blood and all the others weren’t enough? Sorry guys, but I have no interest in the vampire thing. I do, however, wish both Orci and Kurtzman good luck.

114. Disinvited - August 9, 2014

No wonder:

http://web.archive.org/web/20070804012239/http://syfyportal.com/news.php?id=2489

I couldn’t find DeLine. Most other sources report his name as Donald DeLine.

According to Brian J. Robb, who was managing editor of the UK’s THE OFFICIAL STAR TREK MAGAZINE for ten years:

http://books.google.com/books?id=YvwwdLVO8t4C&pg=PT139&lpg=PT139

“Jendresen’s script had stong support from CBS Paramount studio president Donald DeLine…” — Brian J. Robb

115. Phil - August 9, 2014

@111. Oscar, we have had this conversation before – as much as you hate to admit it, this incarnation of Trek isn’t a blind alley. Hard attractions are being built, themed in this version of the Trek universe – it’s hard to imagine that hundreds of millions of dollars are bring poured into attractions that are about to have the plug pulled.

And, please, don’t go there about the studio’s pandering to a foreign audience. It continues to be insulting and degrading when a handful of people continue to malign the foreign market as only being capable of understanding bright, shiny objects…..

116. Son of Jello - August 9, 2014

97. boborci – August 9, 2014

Another badly written script with no new ideas. Does it start with a scene where Uhura breaks a nail and get angry with spock for not careing Or do you go strait in to Cpt Kirk shouting at something. How long into the movie until we see a the big bad ship. Is it anything other than a Brand Name slapped onto a poor script so you don’t have to bother doing anything that would involve originality or thought of anything other than boobs, big ship and a lot of shouting.

Why don’t you slowly step away from the franchises and see how long you last without the safety net of vampires, power rangers and ST.

117. Ahmed - August 9, 2014

@115. Phil

“And, please, don’t go there about the studio’s pandering to a foreign audience.”

Phil, you may not accept that, but it is a common knowledge that foreign markets are changing the way Hollywood is making movies these days.

Plot Change: Foreign Forces Transform Hollywood Films
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052748704913304575371394036766312

Hollywood Is Now Making Films For Foreign Markets, And Their Taste In Movies Is Awful
http://www.businessinsider.com/hollywood-is-making-films-for-foreign-markets-2012-9

There are more articles out there that you check & see how the Chinese market in particular is changing Hollywood. Just see how Transformers 4 made over $300 million in just 17 days in China to understand the kind of movies they like!

118. Ahmed - August 9, 2014

@104. Harry Ballz

LOL

119. Ahmed - August 9, 2014

@ 110. Trip – August 9, 2014

“Well, we can wait another 4 years… /s”

That’s the spirit! :-)

In all seriousness, there are plenty of movies coming out this year & the next couple years to fill our need while we are waiting for ST13.

From Interstellar & Star Wars movies to Marvel, DC movies & Jupiter Ascending. Even Babylon 5 is coming back in 2016.

120. Disinvited - August 9, 2014

#117. Ahmed – August 9, 2014

FWIW, I’ve traced the change in Paramount’s Trek market focus to this at the end of March 2000:

http://articles.latimes.com/2000/mar/31/entertainment/ca-14409/2

“As for the notion the franchise is tiring, McCluggage [then Paramount Television Group Chairman] pointed out its international popularity continues to grow, luring in new generations of viewers around the world.” –” Is ‘Star Trek’ Reaching the Final Frontier?”, March 31, 2000|BRIAN LOWRY | LA TIMES STAFF WRITER

Also, it’s taking me awhile to slog through it but as best as I can determine at this time in my investigation of it, worldwide copyright has not had the benefit of the Disney sponsored extensions that we have in the US. If I read it right, Trek’s copyright for most of the worldwide market that Paramount plan’s to exploit expires at the 50th anniversary. While it isn’t impossible to make profit off of public domain properties, it definitely complicates the marketing, and if BR thought they couldn’t make money in a pond with CBS licensed stuff wait’ll they see how crowded it gets with the P.D. stuff.

I acknowledge that I have not determined this with certainty as this interpreting of international law is no small feat. And I look forward to being brought up to speed by those more experienced with these laws and legal proceedings.

121. Trip - August 9, 2014

@119 Ahmed

Remember when we used to get movies about every 2 years? Can anyone remember when we used to be explorers?

Honestly, after ST 2009, I was REALLY excited for a sequel because I thoroughly enjoyed the film. I was bummed when the sequel got pushed back a year (I think because of too many projects or something). Thought maybe the extra year would help polish up the film a bit…

I ended up getting early screening tickets (a pricey investment, mind you) only for the release date to be bumped up a day, making the whole idea of early screening pretty much irrelevant, because I could have just waited about 4 hours to see it at midnight on Thursday at a cheaper price. I got an exclusive glow-in-the-dark(ness) poster, but I still felt a bit cheated by both the “early screening” tickets and the film itself (there were a few fun moments, but those were heavily trumped with the “I’ve seen this before” feeling).

Needless to say, if there is any type of the same promotion again for the next film, I’m going to wait – maybe get some early screening reviews too. However, yes, there will be plenty of other films to fill the need while we wait 2-4 years for Star Trek: Lucky 13.

122. Jack - August 9, 2014

Bob. If I were your counsellor (picture me in a bodysuit and black contacts), I’d tell you to stay away from comments sections everywhere — no reading, no commenting. Everybody loses in these exchanges.

Who cares if fans like you? Or dislike you? You don’t need validation from us. We come here to gripe and ourselves feel superior about this one little thing (they/we know Trek better than everyone else, including you) and facts, reason and rational arguments won’t make one damned bit of difference.

Just make a movie you’re proud of — something you’d love to watch. I know it’s more complicated than that, but — I was watching TOS on Netflix this weekend (and reading Zack Handlen’s reviews at the AVClub) and I realized that the best Trek was all in the first season, before they were worried about cannon, continuity and what fans liked. Sure,there were a few classics second-season, but if Trek had ended after season 1, it still would have been an incredible contribution to TV and pop culture. We wouldn’t have Pon Farr, Andorians or Quatloo jokes, but that would be about it.

Also note, few of those first season episodes were allegories. Few followed the Kirk/Spock/McCoy formula as precisely as in later seasons, and there was little-to-no exploring for the sake of exploring. My point? They told great stories, established a rich universe but didn’t get mired in it, and they didn’t give a crap about fans (or about reaching dummies at home).

Tell your own first season story. Forget about us for now. Find a new hobby so you stay off of damned comment boards where nothing will ever be good enough, by definition. Your movie will get promoted without us. We will go see it anyway. And Anthony’s site will do just fine with a total blackout from the Orci camp…

123. Cygnus-X1 - August 10, 2014

105. Anthony Pascale – August 9, 2014

How do you reconcile your account of the pre-ST09 politics with the contents of the NY Times article that I posted and the contents of the article posted by 108. Disinvited – August 9, 2014? And what is the source of your information? Is it an impartial source or is it someone who might have an interest in portraying JJ Abrams, BR et al as “the saviors of Trek?”

From this: http://web.archive.org/web/20070804012239/http://syfyportal.com/news.php?id=2489

“By the time the script [STAR TREK: THE BEGINNING] was delivered, DeLine was gone and new personnel were in place. And since the project moved into the inactive status, it was easy for others with connections to Hollywood to declare the project dead, even if it really wasn’t, Jendersen said.”

105. Anthony Pascale – August 9, 2014

If not Abrams maybe Paramount would have found another A-list team who had a workable idea and maybe Paramount would have funded it and maybe that team would have made their first Trek film a hit, it is possible. We will never know.

And if I die today, I’ll never know whether the sun would have risen tomorrow, but there’s still every reason to believe that it would have. Again from this: http://web.archive.org/web/20070804012239/http://syfyportal.com/news.php?id=2489

“It’s not necessarily that Gail Berman and company aren’t interested in Jendresen’s idea [STAR TREK: THE BEGINNING]. They are just trying to evaluate the future of Paramount’s MOST PROFITABLE FRANCHISE [emphasis added] of the last 40 years, and what the next step could be. Paramount could opt for a whole different approach, or officials there could very well re-explore the movie trilogy concept that has been proposed by Jendresen.”

This whole JJ as savior of Trek storyline and the events at Paramount leading up to it get interestinger and interestinger each time that this issue is discussed. Was Paramount going to just decide not to make any more money off of its most valuable property? Not likely. Jendersen’s Star Trek: Beginnings Trilogy idea sounds compelling and appears to be yet another cost of JJ, BR et al having been hired.

105. Anthony Pascale – August 9, 2014

It took another Paramount exec to reach out to Alex Kurtzman while Kurtzman, Orci and Abrams were making MI3 to get Trek going again

This all sounds like nothing more than Hollywood politics. Kurtzman had a contact at Paramount, so he and his associates got the job instead of Jendersen or whomever someone else at Paramount might have wanted to hire. Jendersen got a bad bounce with his patron, DeLine, having been replaced. And Kurtzman had a connection at the studio. So instead of a compelling trilogy about the evolution of the United Federation of Planets, we got two stories about…what are the BR movies about, again?…revenge, kinda, I guess. So, right…we got two meaningless revenge stories.

But we do know that Abrams and team did successfully work with Paramount to put Star Trek back on the front burner in a big way and it worked.

Yeah, but they changed the most important elements of Trek in the process.
I’ll take a smaller, better written, lower-budget movie that looks and feels and thinks like Trek over what BR has done to it. It’s not even a close call.

Just looking at how other franchises have fared, it is not hard to imagine it going a different way (and not a good way).

I’m finding it pretty easy to imagine Trek having gone a much better way. With all of the talent in Hollywood, there are so many possibilities.

I’m just not buying the whole JJ-as-Trek-savior line. It sounds like spin. And even if it bore out somehow to be true, it’d be no consolation to fans who don’t like what he’s turned Trek into.

124. Cygnus-X1 - August 10, 2014

88. Red Dead Ryan – August 8, 2014

Cygnus, Perhaps the real question you should be asking yourself is:
“Why am I paying to see the BR movies when I have been hating on them since before 2009?”

Well, half of your question is valid and the other half comprises a false premise.

I have not been “hating on” the BR movies since before 2009.

I was totally open to the ST09 premise as described by Bob Orci here in…I think he first told us about it in 2007. I was very excited about the new movie in every possible way. I updated my FB page with photos of the cast as they were revealed and talked up the new movie quite a bit. I found it odd and a bit troubling that the guy in charge of making the movie (JJ Abrams) had no experience in sci-fi or in any project that seemed relevant, but I gave him the benefit of the doubt. I really didn’t criticize any of the decisions made in the making of that movie. In those days, I was happy to just read the news for the most part and see how it all turned out. And I took 3 non-Trek-fan friends to see it with me opening weekend.

ST09 was a fun movie in the theater, but it didn’t sit well with me after a few home viewings. Something was really off about the movie, and I was having a hard time discerning the nature of the problem that I had with it. I was still open and cautiously optimistic about STID, though I found it somewhat vexing that Bob would never admit to the validity of any substantive criticisms of ST09. But again, I gave him the benefit of the doubt with respect to STID. And that’s the end of the benefit of my doubt. Now I speak my mind. I feel that I’ve been fair-minded and earned that right.

So, why would I pay to see BR Trek 3? That’s a good question, and I can’t honestly tell you at this moment that I’m going to. I feel ripped-off that I paid to see ST09 and STID. I’m going to want to know what Orci has done in the name of Trek with regard to the next movie, so that might be enough for me to pay to see it once in the theater. Then again, if it looks like an unmitigated travesty from the trailer and the reviews, then maybe I won’t pay to see it in the theater.

125. Cygnus-X1 - August 10, 2014

122. Jack – August 9, 2014

You said a couple of days ago that all of the suggestions made by posters here are bad per se. And now you indict everyone here as having a dubious motive for their comments.

You might consider speaking only on behalf of yourself instead of stereotyping and drawing hasty generalizations about everyone here.

126. Son of Jello - August 10, 2014

122. Jack – August 9, 2014

Don’t encourage the guy to work in a vacume Its that kind of thinking that makes the disconnect in the first place. That’s the idea that creates the “us and them” environment. He (bob) is not working on an individual project he is not coming to the table with his own new or fresh ideas. Bob is looking to make money from a franchise which is not his own work and he is not above being criticised or being held accountable for doing a crap job of it.

Bob is not telling his own story he is providing product for financial gain. What he does is not art or creativity in any definition. It is a financial arrangement between himself and the people paying him and as he is yet to create anything from within himself that does already come pre packaged from another era” vampires, power ranger, ST the list goes on”.

Bob doesn’t need validation from fans? Don’t be stupid everyone needs validation for what they do, that’s why we do things we do.

127. Oscar - August 10, 2014

115.
Yes, it is a blind alley. ST2016, will be the last nu trek movie. Wait and see.

128. Who cares - August 10, 2014

@Oscar. You lost all chance of being taken seriously when you made multiple statements that fans of the reboot movies were not “real Trek fans”. Some of us have been Trek fans since the 70s and are fans of the new films as well as the old. You do not get to decide who is or is not a fan. That is nothing but naked hubris.

129. Lemingsworth Bint - August 10, 2014

@105

Thanks for the clarification. We regulars here have known for some time that he will argue anything, anything at all, to make it seem like the Prime universe is still viable and the new universe has accomplished nothing.

He really, really, really wants all that canon back. That’s been clear from day one.

130. dmduncan - August 10, 2014

Watched Guardians of the Galaxy yesterday and enjoyed it whole bunches.

Loved the raccoon. In SF he is considered an “uplifted” animal.

I really liked the crazy chances it took, and for the most part the movie worked.

It out Star Trek’d Star Trek in giving the audience new worlds and things to look at.

And a word on the villain, Ronan: That’s an example of how you properly do a very powerful villain. He wasn’t, as so often we see in Star Trek, a character or race built up in words how powerful he is/ they are, only to be easily beaten by the show’s heroes.

No single individual in that movie could have beaten Ronan except, possibly, Thanos.

Zoey Saldana was curiously lovely as the green girl. In still photos, not so much, but where the character’s personality comes out in moving and speaking images, she was endearing. And she did NOT have a small part, by the way. She was a central character.

And Chris Pratt? I actually think he may have made a better Kirk than Chris Pine.

131. DangerousDac - August 10, 2014

@boborci Great to hear the first draft is finished. It’s the Borg, right? :P

132. Trip - August 10, 2014

@131 DangerousDac

The first draft is not finished – it is still being worked. A “fade out” was added recently, probably after the 2 minutes of productions logos to introduce the film.

133. Harry Ballz - August 10, 2014

I’m glad “the committee” could agree on using the term “fade out” to finish the script.

It probably took three meetings to decide THAT!

134. boborci - August 10, 2014

Jack

probably good advice. will try

135. Disinvited - August 10, 2014

123. Cygnus-X1 – August 10, 2014

And a year later SyFy reiterated:

https://web.archive.org/web/20070804012239/http://www.syfyportal.com/pagetogether.php?id=3391&page=1

“His storyline, which involved Kirk’s great-grandfather, Tiberius Chase, was the center of a planned trilogy that was excitedly approved by then Paramount president Donald DeLine. However, weeks after the new Star Trek script was commissioned, DeLine was ousted and replaced with Gail Berman, and from there, Paramount decided to take an entirely different route in one of its most coveted franchises.” — “Jendresen: Rebooting ‘Star Trek XI’ Will Not Be A Picnic”, By MICHAEL HINMAN, SyFy Portal, Mar-12-2007

as did Jendreson who also firmly asserted:

”Whenever there’s a regime change at a studio, it’s inevitable that projects in development under the auspices of an outgoing regime are tabled or shelved by the incoming regime. When they got this script, the whole concept, the creative choice had been made by DeLine in the previous regime, and invariably, there’s a certain bias against anything that has been developed by someone else.

Despite popular belief (and what the former executive producer himself said), Star Trek torchbearer Rick Berman had absolutely nothing to do with “Star Trek: The Beginning,”” — Erik Jendreson

136. Oscar - August 10, 2014

128.
Quoting Shakespeare:
«words, words, words,»
CBS is not interested in a nu trek tv series. This is the point: they are relaunching TOS: novels, photonovels ,comics…but they are not interested in nu trek stuff…
2+2=4
Wait and see, my friend seminola.

The guardians of the galaxy is making more money than Transformers…
Ha…

137. Who cares - August 10, 2014

@Oscar. Was there an actual response to anything I said in there? Doesn’t look like it to me, looks like some disjointed sentence fragments that add up to nothing.

138. Oscar - August 10, 2014

Read twice, amigo.

139. Tom - August 10, 2014

134 boborci

AWW Bob
I thought you liked it here?

140. Randall Williams - August 10, 2014

Bob Orci

I will paraphrase something which may help you not “feed the trolls” and
haters on this site so that they can bait you.

“Who is the bigger fool? The fool who speaks or the fool who listens?”

141. Cygnus-X1 - August 10, 2014

129. Lemingsworth Bint – August 10, 2014

@105 Thanks for the clarification. We regulars here have known for some time that he will argue anything, anything at all, to make it seem like the Prime universe is still viable and the new universe has accomplished nothing.

He really, really, really wants all that canon back. That’s been clear from day one

Who are you referring to here as willing to “argue anything” and “really really wanting canon back?”

142. dmduncan - August 10, 2014

You see Benicio Del Toro as The Collector in GOTG and you wonder why he turned down the role of Khan? I wonder if he just didn’t want to follow Ricardo Montalban’s portrayal?

143. dmduncan - August 10, 2014

122. Jack – August 9, 2014

Don’t listen to the fans, Jack? But…if he doesn’t listen to the fans, how can he listen to your advice? And if he listens to your advice, how can he not listen to the fans…?

Illogical…illogical…please explain…PLEASE EXPLAIN….

144. B Kramer - August 10, 2014

122 Jack you remind of someone banned from here.

145. Cygnus-X1 - August 10, 2014

135. Disinvited – August 10, 2014

OK, that looks like a pretty solid confirmation of why Star Trek: The Beginning was scrapped—because Don DeLine was replaced by Gail Berman.

So, to summarize the events:

(1) Some time prior to January, 2005. Paramount co-President Don DeLine supports and advocates for Jendersen’s Star Trek: The Beginning screenplay.

(2) January, 2005. Gail Berman replaces Don DeLine as President of Paramount.

(3) 2005. Gail Berman gets agreement from CBS Pres./CEO Les Moonves on 18 months to start production on a new Trek film in order to get CBS’s licensing cooperation on the merchandise related to the movie.

(4) 2005. Gail Berman scraps Star Trek: The Beginning and starts looking for a different approach (presumably one not related to the previous, DeLine “regime”) to a new Trek movie.

(5) First quarter 2006. Gail Berman approaches JJ Abrams about making the new Trek movie.

Unless I am missing something here, it seems that the real “savior” of Trek was Gail Berman, who saved the franchise from going in the direction of fleshing out the evolution of the United Federation of Planets, the Romulan War, and the ancestral lineage of James T. Kirk over the course of a three-film trilogy.

What BR has done with Trek has been so much more compelling than all of that boring “Trekkie” stuff. Feder-what? Feder-BORING is more like it. Romulan War…James Kirk’s ancestry…three-film arc…SNOOZE!!

146. Harry Ballz - August 10, 2014

I haven’t seen Guardians of the Galaxy, but from what I gather, it has more than it’s fair share of humour to it.

Now that it’s making a gazillion dollars, other studios will, of course, follow suit, like lemmings to the slaughter.

Oh, great, this means that Paramount will now insist on FUNNY being the theme to the next movie.

Looks like the story will be about an alien species, that look just like humpback whales, who are looking for God.

&%#$*^@!!!

147. Cygnus-X1 - August 10, 2014

And just to be clear, since I got sidetracked by the “hater” haters…

I’ve never said that there aren’t things to like about the BR movies. I’ve droned on quite a bit about the things that I do like about those movies. Yes, even STID. I actually like the Alt Universe premise. Never had any problems with that as a concept for a set of Trek movies.

But, on the whole, the BR movies are not satisfying. They’re shallow, superficial action movies ornamented with Trek accoutrements. The characters are one-dimensional and hollow. The themes are practically non-existent. The plots are overly contrived and inadequately explained. The science is bad. And the movies are cut together at double-speed so that you won’t have time to question the badness and things in the movies that don’t make sense. These movies don’t hold up well over repeat viewings, and they significantly depart from the traditional spirit and sensibilities of Trek.

And this would all be perfectly acceptable, if only these movies were not being sold as Trek. If BR had invented a brand new action-movie franchise not related in any way to the names and likenesses of Star Trek, I wouldn’t feel ripped-off by the their two movies. I’d have gone in with different expectations and just enjoyed the sugar-cereal action movies for the fleeting enjoyment that they offer on a Saturday evening.

The more that I think about the characters and the plots, however, the worse those movies get. And that’s a major problem. And despite attempts by some here to marginalize opinions critical of BR Trek, there are just too many articles out there, too many bloggers, too many pro reviews, too many fans (and fan protests), and even some Trek veterans complaining about the same set of issues in the BR movies for the “they’re just a few nonconforming malcontents” marginalization argument to work.

I have friends who like the BR movies. I don’t “hate” them, obviously. And neither do I tell them not to like what they like. And I don’t tell anyone here not to talk about what they like in the BR movies or otherwise. Perhaps the “hater” haters could return the favor.

148. Red Dead Ryan - August 10, 2014

“Guardians Of The Galaxy” was great. Yeah, Chris Pratt was awesome, as was the rest of the cast. It was a whole lot of fun.

The movie felt like the best parts of “Star Trek”, “Star Wars”, and “Firefly/”Serentiy” all wrapped up in one big, delicious sci-fi burrito.

Looking forward to the sequel.

149. Vultan - August 10, 2014

#143

Oh my, is that smoke coming out of your head?

150. Keachick (Rose) - August 10, 2014

As far as I know Jack has never been banned from this site because there has NEVER been any reason for that to happen. Frankly, I see Jack as being one of the more reasonable and saner commentators.

Yes, Jack has given some good advice. However, Bob Orci only comments very occasionally and usually in the form that is more synonymous with text messaging or tweets. He’s a busy man…:) and he is. I would not like to see Bob Orci disappear altogether from this site.
—————————————————————————————————-Sure, there are problems with BR ST films, but I do think that the problems have been taken out of all proportion and seen as major rather than minor ones that could be easily corrected in the next film. These films are a product of our present day culture, where impatience and not allowing ourselves the benefits of simply seeing time pass without becoming overly anxious and aggravated, has become how we operate for the most part. Look at how anxious, impatient and angry people become about if or when the next Star Trek will start its principle photography. The rumours, the talk, has been that filming will begin in the spring of 2015, yet look at some of the comments above. Look at the harassment that Bob Orci is receiving from some.

Our culture values the strides made in technology and some are impatient that certain developments are not happening fast enough, for example, in the areas of space travel. Well, the technological achievements in the making of film has gone ahead and the film makers want nothing better than to make full use of these technologies. Who wouldn’t? Hence Transformers et al… This is a phase and many, including me, are not always that comfortable with it.

The makers of this Star Trek have used the latest film making techniques (which has everything to do with (computer) science and engineering). The apparent fast pace and level of action is all about this. Unfortunately, this can leave little room for “more emotion”(William Shatner). The appropriate use of the latest film making techniques is a balancing act and is still something that many film makers need to get a proper handle on. Hopefully, Bob Orci and co. will manage to bring this about with the third movie.

STID does have a story – one that is quite straight forward and alludes to some interesting moral/ethical conundrums and offers particular solutions, which are debatable in themselves.

It is also a case of not getting side-tracked by *irrelevancies* like the fact that there are some new tech developments like transwarp beaming, cold fusion devices etc mentioned in the film. These are neither here nor there. All technologies represent a means to an end.

As I often said with Star Trek (2009) on another site and even more so with STID, it really is a case of Watch, Listen and Pay Attention.

151. Keachick (Rose) - August 10, 2014

Chris Pratt looks OK but a little too bland, even boring.

Chris Pine has more distinctive and pleasant features, especially when he is not bearded, which is how we see him most of the time these days. I thought CP looked really good in the Into the Woods still – distinctive and lovely.

152. Jonboc - August 10, 2014

#87. “But it didn’t. In fact, the only explanation for the lack of its sales is that consumers were actively avoiding it. But how can that be if everyone worldwide loves it without reservation? ”

You proceed on the false assumption that everyone who enjoys the movie wants to actively purchase merchandise and loves to read novels. I have family members and friends who are huge TOS fans…watched it first run…watched the reruns…watched all the movies…LOVED it! But They never bought so much as a TOS button or a magnet. They’ve also never turned the page of a Trek novel and never will. The majority of worldwide fans, who loved the JJ’s 2 Trek movies, are exactly THAT kind of fan. They will forget about it until the next one.
To “avoid” something, you have to have a desire for it to begin with. I love 24… but I don’t own any 24 related merchandise and I never will. But if another season comes to pass, I’ll be there, front and center.

153. Oscar - August 10, 2014

150
Hamlet:
«words, words,words»
STID is an awful movie , a mindless piece of action ,an anti star trek film…and it is the prototype of shameful cut and glue movie. More, a ludicrous pseudo super heroes film.
Maybe you should read some good books if you think this piece of null has some deep speech. It is pure gijoe.
Nu trekers and their revisionism
Delenda est Carthago.

154. Vultan - August 10, 2014

#151

Those male models also occasionally act.
No lie. Look it up.

155. dmduncan - August 10, 2014

Loved the soundtrack to GOTG too. “Hooked on a Feeling.” What a great song.

156. Keachick (Rose) - August 10, 2014

Yes indeed. Chris Pine is talented and versatile, but he is an actor first and foremost and is venturing into the heady world of writing and producing as well.

157. Keachick (Rose) - August 10, 2014

What, Oscar? Me read a book when I have your words, the same words with little in variation, to read over and over and over so as to keep me on the right track as to how things *truly* are, according to the one, the only Oscar…gosh, it’s more than I handle right now…

158. Jonboc - August 10, 2014

Thank goodness Oscar is here to constantly remind us, ad nauseam, how much he dislikes Bad Robot, Orci and the Targ they rode in on! Not sure what I would do if I read a discourse with Bob Orci that didn’t include Oscar’s oh-so-familiar prattle.

159. Disinvited - August 10, 2014

# 152. Jonboc – August 10, 2014

” You proceed on the false assumption that everyone who enjoys the movie wants to actively purchase merchandise and loves to read novels.” — Jonboc

If so, then I am in good company as JJ, himself asserted that his merchandise plans were based on said false assumptions.

But thanks for explaining why Paramount and JJ have painted themselves into an interesting corner by attracting precisely the wrong type of fans who can not possibly be counted on by corporate to generate the same aftermarket revenue streams as Paramount of yore came to rely upon.

160. Disinvited - August 10, 2014

# 155. dmduncan – August 10, 2014

” Loved the soundtrack to GOTG too. “Hooked on a Feeling.” What a great song.” — dmduncan

Haven’t seen it yet but for me, that would hang on whether or not it includes the original “A-OO-Ga-cha-ga” chorus.

161. Quality Controller - August 10, 2014

Star Trek, Universal Monsters, Ann Rices’s Vampire Chronicles… Is nothing sacred enough to remain out of the clutches of Orci and his pals? I don’t wish to be mean, and I am delighted that he is so successful, even having wriote and produced such movies as STID and Transformers. It’s amazing that the work just still keeps coming in.

The movies being made in Hollywood these days are mostly dross, and he has much to answer for, although I primarily blame the execs, who have an obvious lack of vision, as well as a lack of courage to employ other people, with bolder, imaginative talents, than Orci and his mates. I lament the lost magnificence of writing, acting, direction and quality of 70′s cinema.

Yesterday, I rewatched STID just to give it a second chance. The dialogue where Khan is having a natter with Kirk at his cell… I couldn’t help but laugh.It amazes me that STID’s storyline was the best they could come up with from a playbox so vast and full of endless potentials as Star Trek.

Anyway, Orci is a lucky fellow.

162. dmduncan - August 10, 2014

160. Disinvited – August 10, 2014

Well GOTG does use Blue Swede’s version, so yes. I now produce, among other interesting things, concerts for a living, and one of those happened to be BJ Thomas, who was the original singer of that song. His version doesn’t have the “OOGACHAKA,” but it does have an equally noteworthy SITAR, and except for the missing “OOGACHAKA,” I think his version is superior in every other respect.

Still…one cannot underestimate the importance of the oogachaka.

163. dmduncan - August 10, 2014

Prior to GOTG, I would not have imagined Chris Pratt as Kirk based on anything else he had done. But this was the first time I saw him play a SF hero-type, and in that mold he would clearly make a good Kirk. He even looks more like Shatner than Pine does.

164. Keachick (Rose) - August 10, 2014

The reality is that Chris Pine was cast to play the alternate universe (Captain) James Kirk and, as William Shatner says, all is fine with the Captain Fine.

I am sure other actors could play these characters as well as the ones already cast, but I am not much concerned with who they might be or why. We have a wonderful cast – Pine, Quinto, Urban, Saldana, Pegg, Cho and Yelchin and they are all need, and indeed deserve, our respect and encouragement.

165. Disinvited - August 11, 2014

#161. dmduncan – August 10, 2014

I have a love/hate relationship with it. Sometimes I’m in the mood and others not. Thank God, for BJ when I’m not.

166. Jonboc - August 11, 2014

# 159 “But thanks for explaining why Paramount and JJ have painted themselves into an interesting corner by attracting precisely the wrong type of fans who can not possibly be counted on by corporate to generate the same aftermarket revenue streams as Paramount of yore came to rely upon.”

There’s no corner. CBS will continue to rake in revenue on TOS merchandise, as the studios always have, and with Bad Robot Trek, Paramount will continue to rake in unparalleled box-office returns that they could have only dreamed of in days yore. It’s a win-win scenario…no Kobayashi Maru here.

167. Curious Cadet - August 11, 2014

@130. dmduncan,
“And Chris Pratt? I actually think he may have made a better Kirk than Chris Pine.”

I agree. He even looks more like Kirk than Pine. But that’s all superficial. My biggest problem is with Pine himself. He’s kind of vanilla now. When they first cast him and I realized he was the same actor that had played Darwin Tremor in Smokin’ Aces, a performance I absolutely loved, I was intrigued. But along with Kirk and everything else I’ve seen him do since, he falls flat. His work seems stale and rehearsed. In fact I even wonder if his sudden and lackluster promotion to leading man changed his work ethic somewhat. Perhaps he’s trying so hard to fit this “George Clooney” mold that he’s stopped pushing the limits of his craft? Whatever the explanation, I think Chris Pratt would have ultimately been the better choice. Physically, he looks much more like what I would expect a real Kirk to look like, getting into shape for GOTG in a way Pine did not for STID (taking the Shatner approach to fitness I guess). Even Quinto seemingly took it more seriously. Hopefully Pine will hit the gym more before the next film, so we can get a bit more of classic torn-shirt Kirk on the 5 year mission.

If not for GOTG, I would say Pratt would be primed (no pun intended) to replace Pine after the next movie (CP, CP — audiences wouldn’t know the difference), but as the star of a blockbuster Marvel franchise, he’ likely going to cost Paramount a lot more than Pine when that time comes. And who knows, perhaps that’s exactly what Star Trek needs, spend a little more money on a real movie star and box office draw cast in the lead.

168. Who cares - August 11, 2014

@Oscar. First, don’t call me amigo. Second, your comment at #136 was addressed at my comment #128. My comment at 128 was about one thing only, the nearly irreversible damage you have done to your credibility with your arrogant statements about who is or is not a “real” Trek fan.

Now you could have responded in a meaningful way, and said you were sorry for making such comments, and acknowledged that you were out of line for saying such things. You could have put together a comment that at least expressed a complete idea. Instead you post some incomprehensible tripe that at best seems like you were trying to write some kind of mutant poem, and at worst seems like you were incapable of comprehending my comment, especially when you start talking about Guardians of the Galaxy, which I never mentioned.

169. Dr Beckett - August 11, 2014

Yeesh, anytime boborci comments on any topic on this site it inevitably turns into another STID bashing\what-bob-should-do-for-the-next-trek-movie spiral. This article is about the Vampire Chronicles… is staying on topic too much to ask for??

170. Disinvited - August 11, 2014

# 165. Jonboc – August 11, 2014

” There’s no corner. CBS will continue to rake in revenue on TOS merchandise, as the studios always have, and with Bad Robot Trek, Paramount will continue to rake in unparalleled box-office returns that they could have only dreamed of in days yore. It’s a win-win scenario.” — Jonboc

You are confused about the current state of affairs. In 2005, Paramount and CBS split with the divorce finalized in 2006. Paramount and JJ do not share in CBS’ aftermarket Trek revenue streams. They have to generate their own for which you acknowledge there are no customers. And whether you understand this or not: generation of after theatrical run revenue streams are essential to all blockbuster capitalization and ultimate profit realizations.

Think of it this way: being divorced from CBS started Paramount’s movie Trek off in a deficit situation – they were divorced from a very big cushion they’ve been able to rely on for decades. Record, for Trek, B.O. can help to alleviate that somewhat but after adjusting for inflation it isn’t as big as it seems. This is why JJ spoke up about it. His expectations were higher but the merchandizing failed to deliver.

It seems clear this likely was a factor in his jumping ship after saying his loyalty would prevent him from so doing — that and the fact that he knew studios generally look for production cost savings by a third movie to further maximize profits anyway. That is what was so seductive to them in going with an untried director and for JJ in reconsidering and moving on as divorcing himself from the equation allowed immediate cost savings to be realized.

Movie Trek obviously must be doing well enough for Paramount to try again, but Trek, for it, is in danger of being marginalized by any other equivalent B.O. performing film in their quiver that can provide for them the added oomph that, as you have already have explained, BR Trek can not.

171. Disinvited - August 11, 2014

#168. Dr Beckett – August 11, 2014

“This article is about the Vampire Chronicles… is staying on topic too much to ask for??” — Dr Beckett

On a site called TREKMOVIE.com somehow I doubt that it was ever intended that all that would be discussed is bloodsuckers?

I think expecting the discussion to run more on how bloodsuckers effect the next Trek is a more realistic expectation than what you appear to be advocating?

172. Phil - August 11, 2014

@167. No, there was no response there. I think the guy is simply trying to goad Bob into a outburst, and that isn’t likely.

173. Phil - August 11, 2014

@127. Oscar, you refuse to answer the question – new amusement attractions ARE being built, themed around the current version. NuTrek, as you put it, is being immortalized in steel and concrete. Yet, as you put it, Trek, being a blind alley, why would developers put tens of millions of dollars (okay, probably Euros) into properties that they will have to shut down in a year to remodel – as you continue to contend todays Trek is a mistake that goes away in 24 months?

174. Ahmed - August 11, 2014

@ 169. Dr Beckett – August 11, 2014

“Yeesh, anytime boborci comments on any topic on this site it inevitably turns into another STID bashing\what-bob-should-do-for-the-next-trek-movie spiral.”

Or you could stop whining & turns the thread into STID circlejerk/Bob is never, ever wrong lovefeast; if you want!

No one is stopping you, it is called freedom of speech.

175. Danpaine - August 11, 2014

Bob Orci, if you’re still monitoring this thread (and, judging from some of the comments here I’d fully understand if you’re not), I was wondering your take on the show Almost Human, and it’s cancellation?

I personally loved it and was incredibly saddened to hear it wasn’t getting renewed. Thought the chemistry between Urban and Ealy was perfect, the writing tight, the stories compelling, the production values spot on. I think Fox dropped the ball big-time on that one.

Just wondering your take on that since you’re a fellow sci-fi fan. Looking forward to Sleepy Hollow starting up again, by the way.

176. Marja - August 11, 2014

167, Curious, Pine did not [get into shape] for STID (taking the Shatner approach to fitness I guess). Even Quinto seemingly took it more seriously. Hopefully Pine will hit the gym more before the next film, so we can get a bit more of classic torn-shirt Kirk on the 5 year mission.

My impression from interviews — and from looking at the man himself — is that Pine is naturally slender and had to gain muscle [thus weight] to play Kirk. Have a look at him on one of the talk shows. He does not normally have overly developed abs [either of the muscular or fatty variety]. He’s also built differently from Shatner — our TOS captain is three inches shorter and a little more “barrel-chested” — even in his glory days in TOS.

Quinto put on muscle for the second film and is noticeably larger around the middle in STiD than he was in the first movie.

I can’t say I agree about Pratt — I loved him in GotG but don’t think he has quite the gravitas to play Kirk [a gravitas I expect to see in Trek3]. I don’t really share your opinion on Pine/Kirk as far as the “vanilla” factor. I’ll reserve judgement until I see Pine in Trek3. I’ll admit his young Jack Ryan was sorta “vanilla” but the character is.

As young Jack Ryan, Pine shows quick-wittedness, determination, grit and so on, but the character of young Jack Ryan is rather vanilla, isn’t he? He hasn’t had twenty-plus years in the CIA. He hasn’t had all the experiences and wisdom, nor world-weariness, Harrison Ford reflected in his performances in “Patriot Games” and “Clear and Present Danger.”

177. Cygnus-X1 - August 11, 2014

170. Disinvited – August 11, 2014

Let me see if I’m following you here…

CBS made a licensing deal with Paramount for the BR Trek movies, right?

But, you’re saying, the BR Trek movies have been marketed in a way that does not foster demand for their merchandizing.

And, you think that the lack of merch revenue flowing to BR might have served as motivation for JJ to move onto Star Wars.

178. Marja - August 11, 2014

155 Duncan and 160 dmduncan, I hated some of those songs for a long time because they got SOOOO VERY much airplay in my glory days. But it was fun to hear them again in GotG, especially applied with ‘Starlord’s’ smirky personality. That silly “OOO-Gah-cha-ka” has been going thru my mind for a month now. But I don’t mind nearly so much as I did in the ’80s! It’s kind of fun. Welcome to the ’80s, those of you who are kids.

162 duncan, part of the reason I disliked Blue Swede’s version was because I adored the BJ Thomas version!

179. Marja - August 11, 2014

175 Danpaine, I agree. I loved “Almost Human” — I would love to have seen Lili Taylor’s character either better developed [she was very bland -- the caricature of the crusty senior police officer] or replaced by another woman character, but other than that, I liked it.

FOX indeed dropped the ball. But they have a pretty bad reputation for that. One word — “Firefly.”

CURSE THEM!!!

The other refreshing thing about “Almost Human” was the lack of a Dire Mythology running behind all the episodes. I like “Continuum” [on Netflix] but the Mythology and certain evil characters are wearing really, really thin, and I’m not sure I’ll finish the series.

Does anyone here think these series echo some video games where the higher your level in the game the more information you get?

Or do you think it’s an echo of the “X-Files” thing?

I think it leads to a lot of crazy plot and character reversals and painting-into-corners [like "Heroes"] and as a viewer I find it rather a pain in the butt.

180. Marja - August 11, 2014

122 Jack I realized that the best Trek was all in the first season, before they were worried about cannon, continuity and what fans liked. Sure,there were a few classics second-season, but if Trek had ended after season 1, it still would have been an incredible contribution to TV and pop culture. We wouldn’t have Pon Farr, Andorians or Quatloo jokes, but that would be about it.

We wouldn’t have “Doomsday Machine,” “Immunity Syndrome,” “Ultimate Computer,” three of the best episodes of the series as a whole, nor would we have the Vulcan-rich “Amok Time” or “Journey to Babel.” “Friday’s Child” started strongly with its examination of culture, but devolved halfway through. In all of these episodes Kirk is well-written [espeically "Doomsday Machine"] and more is revealed about Spock. I for one would really miss them. And TOS Season 1 had its share of duds.

181. Disinvited - August 11, 2014

#177. Cygnus-X1 – August 11, 2014

I’m not sure it’s the marketing. All I know is that they don’t seem to have attracted the generic youthful group with large disposable incomes to spend on all things BR Trek that they set out to conquer. Their audience seems to be discriminating and going TOS in that respect. This makes me believe that it is an indication that their audience is skewing older than they are letting on.

Either that or their art department with JJ’s input managed to pull an across the board Edsel in that they’ve managed to producing things interesting enough to look at but no one wants to bother to won?

182. Marja - August 11, 2014

69 Son of Jello bob dosn’t make movies he makes product.

ANY blockbuster movie writer/producer is making product.

You will find very few character-driven dramas outside the “indie movie” arena.
———————————————————————————————————-
87 Disinvited competition from such a minority threatens his merchandising plans to the extent that a consistent theme emerges in that his licensed toys don’t sell and get pulled from production, his licensed Video games sales go nowhere, and his licensed novels’ printing and marketing get quashed.

CBS threatened Bad Robot’s merchandising plans. That’s why licensed toys were pulled from production. The licensed videogame, alas, sucked, and I don’t know about the licensed novels, but it makes me sad.

183. Disinvited - August 11, 2014

#181. Disinvited – August 11, 2014

This:

“Either that or their art department with JJ’s input managed to pull an across the board Edsel in that they’ve managed to producing things interesting enough to look at but no one wants to bother to won?”

should be:

Either that or their art department with JJ’s input managed to pull an across the board Edsel in that they’ve managed to end up producing things interesting enough to look at but no one wants to bother to own.

184. Marja - August 11, 2014

123 Cygnus, I’ll take a smaller, better written, lower-budget movie that looks and feels and thinks like Trek over what BR has done to it. It’s not even a close call.

It’d be nice if they could produce “Trek” as more of an indie-type, character-driven, science fiction-driven project but since Paramount owns it, I doubt they’d have any motive to do it, as it wouldn’t be a moneymaker. Which we know is their “paramount” motivation. Whether we are ClassicTrek or new fans[or both, in my case], we must always remember, as Woody Allen said, “It’s show business, not show FRIEND.

185. Marja - August 11, 2014

96 Finnigan, I stated, it appears that there is more concern about someone having their feelings hurt than there is in pointing-out the obvious flaws and short-comings of the movies. The rage against the “Nutrek detractors” is obvious

I become angry when I am addressed as if I am an idiot for liking NuTrek [despite its flaws]. I become resentful when people get on my case because they, the All-Knowing [who apparently own the TOS characters, at least in their minds] feel attacked by my appreciation of the new and my questioning of their constant carping about the new characterizations.

I don’t resent so much the ClassicTrek lovers who are willing to discuss our differences in a rational way, but when they take it personally so do I. Unlike some, I restrain myself from attacking back.

186. Disinvited - August 11, 2014

# 182. Marja – August 11, 2014

” CBS threatened Bad Robot’s merchandising plans. That’s why licensed toys were pulled from production. The licensed videogame, alas, sucked, and I don’t know about the licensed novels, but it makes me sad.” — Marja

I’m aware of BR’s CBS threat claim, but how is that possible if the market CBS is servicing is not worth being addressed as Paramount/BR keeps asserting?

If they’ve indeed attracted hordes of new young people who can’t tell the difference making random Trek merchandise purchases, this would have created a rising tide which would have benefited all merchandising parties. And I remind you, JJ didn’t announce the cessation of BR merchandising plans until looooong after the 2009 BR toy manufacturer (not JJ) pulled the planned November Christmas shopping rollout because their merchandise wasn’t moving, i.e. buyers of Trek merchandise were actively “avoiding” making purchases of their wares.

187. Marja - August 11, 2014

130 dmduncan, Maybe that’s why I enjoyed “GotG” so much — come to think of it it does remind me of “Firefly”!
——————————————————————————————————–
147 Cygnus [re NuTrek] The characters are one-dimensional and hollow.

Well, I disagree with you on the characters, but you know that already ;-) … except the “villains” Nero and Khan. Khan could have been so good if he’d been Harrison, a good Starfleet officer fighting Section 31 from within. That would have been infinitely more interesting than cramming Khan in there.

Agree with your “bad science” assertions.

188. Cygnus-X1 - August 11, 2014

181. Disinvited – August 11, 2014

It also seems reasonable that any lack of interest in BR Trek merch might be due to those movies being made and deliberately marketed specifically to non-Trek-fans. The “broader” audience that the BR movies have picked up isn’t as passionate about them because the movies were designed to appeal to people who don’t like Trek. BR Trek 3 will be just another action movie to these people. They’re not going to buy stuff to commemorate this movie any more than they’d buy stuff to commemorate Iron Man 3 or Spidey 2.

189. Cygnus-X1 - August 11, 2014

182. Marja – August 11, 2014

“69 Son of Jello bob dosn’t make movies he makes product.”

ANY blockbuster movie writer/producer is making product.

I think what he means is that BR Trek is more prescriptive than Trek movies have been in the past. With TWOK, STIII, STIV, STV…one got the sense that the people who wrote and directed those movies had something to say and wanted to tell a story that they cared about and weren’t just cooking by recipe to such a degree as with the BR movies—foreign market wants more action, love interest, more emotion, less sci-fi, etc….

190. Cygnus-X1 - August 11, 2014

184. Marja – August 11, 2014

It’d be nice if they could produce “Trek” as more of an indie-type, character-driven, science fiction-driven project but since Paramount owns it, I doubt they’d have any motive to do it, as it wouldn’t be a moneymaker.

I think there’s a happy medium to be found in between those two extreme ends of the spectrum. Looking back, the TOS movies were much closer to that happy medium. At their best, they had mainstream appeal but held onto their TOS heart and spirit—an entertaining story but also a meaningful one. STIV had a pretty simple premise, was very entertaining, and sold very well, but the whole movie was centered around the important, if simple, theme of conservation.

“To hunt a species to extinction is not logical.”

“Who ever said the human race was logical?”

191. Marja - August 11, 2014

JMO, To my mind most merchandise is aimed squarely at fannish collectors of same. They buy it, leave it in the box, and sell it later for bongo bucks. It doesn’t appeal to me. I like the occasional novel and art books/comic book. I respect the builders or assemblers of starship models. These involve more creative talent and effort than designing and stamping out millions of plastic products. But, I emphasise, JMO.

192. B Kramer - August 11, 2014

180 Marja I personally, prefer S2 over S1.

193. Marja - August 11, 2014

186, Disinvited, I think it was a matter of BR insisting that it retain a certain percentage of profits on their Trek merchandise, in opposition to CBS’s assertion that it deserved more in licensing fees. But I’m not as well-versed in this history as you are.

Just sayin’. I would enjoy some NuTrek novels. Lots of ground to fill and the comics don’t quite do the trick. There could def be much better science fiction Trek in novels.

194. Cygnus-X1 - August 11, 2014

P.S.

And I were Paramount, I’d be concerned about the long-term effect that the BR Trek movies will have on the franchise. I think there’s reason to believe that they could weaken the long-term value of the property if they keep turning off their most loyal and passionate fan base to the degree that the BR movies are doing. The new fans aren’t as vested in the franchise, and the BR movies willnot hold up as well over time as the TOS movies did. They just won’t. And that means less long-term value, less nostalgic cache and a hit to the Trek reputation. We might well be witnessing this debasing of the Trek brand presently with the lack of interest in BR Trek merch.

195. Who cares - August 11, 2014

@Cygnus. If you really believe what you just said I feel sorry for you, if you turn off your computer and go outside I am sure you will realize things aren’t really that bad, especially not out here in the real world.

196. Who cares - August 11, 2014

PS. My children absolutely love their fleet of Kre-O Trek ships, I even managed to get them a Kre-O TOS Enterprise with the pre-order for the 360 game.

197. Phil - August 11, 2014

@194. Really….the only thing missing from your novel length missives on the horrors of Bar Robot Trek is the surgeon generals warning

SURGEON GENERAL WARNING: Exposure To Bad Robot Star Trek Can Cause Cancers Of The Eyes, Ears, and Brain, Even If You Do Not Use Original Trek. Secondary Effects Include Severe Dementia, Suicidal Thoughts, and Permanent Impotence. Prolonged Exposure May Result in Death, or Unexplained Cannibalistic Urges.

Good lord, go smell some flowers or something….

198. B Kramer - August 11, 2014

196 Now that sounds like something somebody who doesn’t turn off his computer or go does. Fess up you really play with the toys. ;^)

199. B Kramer - August 11, 2014

“…or go outside…”

200. Phil - August 11, 2014

@194. If Trek could survive the third season of TOS, Enterprise and Generations, I suspect it’s long term viability isn’t going to harmed by Bad Robot running the franchise for a while.

201. Cygnus-X1 - August 11, 2014

195. Who cares – August 11, 2014
197. Phil – August 11, 2014

Your sympathy for my plight is touching, fellas.

But, I was opining on what Disinvited posted regarding lack of interest in BR Trek merch. If you two oracles of sensibility have some relevant information about that issue, then why don’t you go ahead and share it with us delusional basement-dwellers.

202. Disinvited - August 11, 2014

#188. Cygnus-X1 – August 11, 2014

What you propose is reasonable: that they so successfully marketed to non-fans that the ardent longtime fans they expected would buy all their merch with no marketing needed failed to realize that they needed to show up.

But this fails to explain why BR personally felt the need to quash their already announced spin-off novels because they felt that it might dilute their reservoir of future movie story possibilities? If they knew all along that their film was being marketed to moviegoers who didn’t particularly like Trek or could not get over its “nerd” factor, how could they come to the conclusion that novels they already OKed could possibly have any effect on their scripts with regards to who was reasonably expected to show up at the theater given their goals?

#193. Marja – August 11, 2014

You have to remember that their first effort was in the can and ready for a December 2008 release. This means all the merchandising and the licensing required was all wrapped and ready to go before Paramount bumped up the release date giving all parties involved more than enough time to effectively launch their wares.

No matter what excuse BR latter gave for scuttling STID’s merchandising in the US, it’s not as if it could possibly have had any effect on the 2009 already planned, executed and failed merchandising. Potential buyers of 2009 BR’s dolls, phaser, etc. weren’t picking up the boxes, looking at the information near the UPC symbol, and sputtering, “BAD ROBOT ONLY GETS TEN PERCENT! I CAN’T BUY THIS!”

203. Keachick (Rose) - August 11, 2014

Marja is right about Chris Pine and the actor does hit the gym on a regular basis. His exercise workout schedule can be quite gruelling, which is probably one of the reasons why he has been able to land parts like playing Jack Ryan or his latest character in a movie The Finest Hours, which is about to start filming. It is certainly not the only reason though, not by a long shot.

The studio tried to make Pine look more like Shatner, so he was put on a diet and exercise regime which caused him to bulk up unnaturally. Not a good idea. Chris Pine does not have the same body shape as Shatner, so the process was just stupid and possibly even a bit dangerous.

Playing Kirk is not just about having the right body shape or eye colour (ie Shatner’s). It is far more than that. Chris PINE has what it takes and always has had, despite what others or even he might have thought. Katie Abrams (JJ’s wife) saw it, and did I.

204. Marja - August 11, 2014

189 Cygnus, STII, III and IV were not in the vein of today’s “Blockbusters” … that is what I meant. The “Summer Blockbuster” phenomenon really began its ascendance in the 2000s, to the regret of filmmakers like Steven Spielberg [ironically enough, he has now spoken out about the negatives of this system of business]. Now they are huge investments with huge expected returns, and driven for the most part by market research. To some extent each must follow the “Save the Cat!” formula or not be greenlighted by the studios.

This is part of the reason I dearly wish Trek would be released during the holiday season vice the summer. It wouldn’t have to be so formulaic re: relentless action. [Sorry Bob Orci. I know you squeeze in as much character development as you can.]

205. Marja - August 11, 2014

202 Disinvited BR personally felt the need to quash their already announced spin-off novels because they felt that it might dilute their reservoir of future movie story possibilities

Dammit. I really wanted some novels set in the AltVerse. What does this mean, they felt there were too few story ideas out there? How short-sighted and stupid that is, when you consider the vast number of science fiction possibilities! In the good ol’ days of TOS, there were a goodly number of quality science fiction Trek books written by Hambly, Duane, McIntyre, and others. DAMMIT, BR!

206. Marja - August 11, 2014

200 Phil, I agree wholeheartedly, although I really liked “Enterprise” on my Netflix binge-watch of several weeks. The minor characters lost out [as on TOS] and the uniforms sucked, but other than that I thought it was really really good, with very few “stinkers” among the episodes.

207. Keachick (Rose) - August 11, 2014

#167 – “My biggest problem is with Pine himself. He’s kind of vanilla now. When they first cast him and I realized he was the same actor that had played Darwin Tremor in Smokin’ Aces, a performance I absolutely loved, I was intrigued. But along with Kirk and everything else I’ve seen him do since, he falls flat. His work seems stale and rehearsed.”

I do not know what you think you were expecting. James Kirk is no Darwin Tremor – just saying. When Chris Pine was being considered for the role of Kirk, the casting people (and JJ Abrams) saw what Chris’s work had been so far. He played similar characters – Nicholas Deveraux (Princess Diaries 2), Danny Valdeseque (Blind Dating), Jake Hardin (Just My Luck) and the exception, Darwin Tremor (Smokin’ Aces). What they saw was that this actor had versatility, who was able to not only play interesting good guys, but also an interesting bad guy. Most of Chris’s characters have been nice guys up until and including Star Trek.

“vanilla” – oh dear, there’s another word to add to the list of putdowns of people (fictional or otherwise) who manage to levitate up toward being OK/good as opposed to those who gravitate down toward being not so OK or even bastards.

Chris has played a variety of characters since the two Star Treks – Brian (Carriers), Bo Barrett (Bottle Shock – based on an actual living person), Will Colson (Unstoppable – based on an actual living person) etc. His latest work (The Finest Hours) will involve playing the part of another actual person…

http://imagizer.imageshack.com/img901/5731/y8BYNb.jpg

“Going over these details again and again has made me grateful that I was able to meet many of the people involved in the rescue in which 84 lives were at stake and 70 were saved, 32 of them by Bernie Webber and his small crew in the wooden 36500, the Coast Guard vessel that made it through treacherous waves at the Chatham bar. Richard Livesey was one of the crewmen with Bernie whom I was able to meet and interview in person. I felt he had been kind of forgotten, that none of his neighbors knew what he had done. Nobody had asked him about it in years.”

208. Cygnus-X1 - August 11, 2014

202. Disinvited – August 11, 2014

But this fails to explain why BR personally felt the need to quash their already announced spin-off novels because they felt that it might dilute their reservoir of future movie story possibilities?

Is that the reason that BR gave for scrapping their spin-off novels? That they would use up to many good ideas that could go into their movies?

My guess as to their rationale for the novels was that they figured they could have it both ways, which has been a somewhat consistent thread throughout BR’s approach to Trek since pre-production of ST09:

They make movies for non-Trek fans, but then Bob Orci went out to do fan outreach to get the Trekkies on board. They set their movies in an alternate universe in order to split from Trek canon, but then throw in a bunch of Easter eggs and canon references to get Trekkies excited. It only makes sense that BR expected their “all-inclusive” strategy to work and thus Trekkies would naturally buy up the BR Trek books and merch while non-Trek-fans filled out the attendance rolls overseas. The foreign market did their part—STID made more money from the foreign market than domestically—but apparently the Trekkies have not shown enough interest in BR Trek books and merch.

209. Cygnus-X1 - August 11, 2014

204. Marja – August 11, 2014

189 Cygnus, STII, III and IV were not in the vein of today’s “Blockbusters” … that is what I meant. The “Summer Blockbuster” phenomenon really began its ascendance in the 2000s, to the regret of filmmakers like Steven Spielberg [ironically enough, he has now spoken out about the negatives of this system of business]. Now they are huge investments with huge expected returns, and driven for the most part by market research.

Well, I agree with you.

One of the major problems affecting the quality of BR Trek is the new Hollywood big studio business model—to paraphrase Damon Lindelof, If you’re spending $200 million on the movie, planet Earth has to be threatened as part of the story.

But, I’m not making excuses for Paramount’s new business model. If they’re only interested in their bottom line, then we can only hope that their bottom line suffers so that they’ll consider reverting back to a more balanced and holistic approach to filmmaking.

210. dmduncan - August 11, 2014

167. Curious Cadet – August 11, 2014

Pratt’s closer resemblance to Shatner would only be superficial if that were the sole reason he got cast as Kirk. While Pratt’s Peter Quill is not an equivalent to Kirk, there’s enough in the performance to show what would have been (and yet may be, I do hope) an excellent actor / role match.

And I was, oddly, thinking exactly the same thing as you about Pine. In Smokin’ Aces he had this wonderful role where he was…ACTING. And damn! The man was GOOD.

But since Kirk he’s just been playing the same swaggering role which, I think, is really much closer to his personality. I think he got the role of Kirk because he naturally has a Kirk-like swagger, and that has made him settle into the same kind of portrayal in each role.

That works for Eastwood, but I miss what I saw in Smokin’ Aces.

211. dmduncan - August 11, 2014

178. Marja – August 11, 2014

I actually did not know that there were two versions of that song at all and that BJ was the original singer of it. So when I was listening to him belt that one out I was wondering where the oogachaka was. And when I heard the song in the movie was by Blue Swede I was like “No it’s not. That’s BJ Thomas!” So I JUST found out since GOTG that the oogachaka was from a different version of the song.

But hey, having listened to them both now, I think BJ has the better voice.

And he still sounds great, by the way!

212. Keachick (Rose) - August 11, 2014

If Pine has a natural Kirk-like swagger that people see/say that William Shatner imbued this character with, then surely Chris Pine is the perfect man, a natural, to play the part of Kirk.

With This Means War, there were a couple of lines in that movie alluding to the Kirk character, like Tuck referring to FDR (CP) as “Captain Horney Pants!…” It also had a subtle satirical feel to it and I really think that they were having fun making it. This film belongs in the romantic comedy/action genre.

Of course, this alt. Kirk could have done a Darwin Tremor seduction sequence – as in, present hairy armpits…ref: Smokin’ Aces – lift scene – lift doors open, the Tremor brothers are in lift, Darwin sees pretty woman and so presents armpits… I am not sure but I think that is what gets the title of the “armpit pourn” scene…LOL!

But really, Darwin’s energy and focus is not like that of James T Kirk’s in any universe.

I have to agree, though, that Chris Pine’s performance in that movie was a standout and helped make it successful.

213. Keachick (Rose) - August 11, 2014

OT – Just now – watching Al Jazeera News here on TV -

Actor Robin Williams was found dead in his home. Sheriff says it looks like an apparent suicide.

RIP Robin Williams

214. dmduncan - August 11, 2014

@212:

I’m not syaing Pine is a bad Kirk. He makes an excellent Kirk. I didn’t like the treatment the character got in STiD but that is not Pine’s doing.

What I’m saying is that Pratt would have made, and may in some other version yet make, an equally good Kirk.

215. Dee - lvs moonsurface - August 11, 2014

#167. Curious Cadet

If you were someone really “curious” would not have said so much nonsense about Chris Pine, you would have known better about it.

Starting with the physical preparation he made to play Kirk, Chris talked about it in almost every interview he gave during the promotion of Into Darkness, his trainer also commented about it.

And about … “Perhaps he’s trying so hard to fit this “George Clooney” mold that he’s stopped pushing the limits of his craft?”…. GOSH, I can even feel from where the poison come from, so give me a break!

ummmmm … patience is required!

216. Dee - lvs moonsurface - August 12, 2014

Btw, Chris Pine w/ his trainer at the time of preparation for ‘Into Darkness’.

http://imagizer.imageshack.com/img633/9650/1nuhpV.jpg

217. Keachick (Rose) - August 12, 2014

Dee – Nice picture of Chris. What’s not to like? About to start that drooling – better stop now…:)

218. captain spock - August 12, 2014

who cares to let u know that some of us true fans have been watching trek sence 1966 like myself ,
what would i like in star trek:13 , is no more frekin Khan , Bob, do the right thing & do this one for the fans not just for movie goer”s please .origonal no rehash-es from a movie or trek episolds from any of the series, something origonal new..an true exploration of the final fronter..

219. Who cares - August 12, 2014

@ Cygnus. My point, which you apparently chose to ignore, is that despite the so called lack of interest in BR Trek merch that you are making such drama about Trek is both selling more merch than in years and has more merch coming out than in years.

There have been more Trek themed products released in the last 2 years than in the decade before that and there were literally dozens of new ones announced at STLV and over the few months before that.

You sit here and write these essay length posts about the “damage” Bad Robot is doing to the franchise when in fact it is more profitable now than it has been since the 1980s.

BTW, the problem with the Xbox game was not BR, it was the game developer and Paramount’s marketing person, who was fired a few months back, specifically because of the problems with the game.

220. Who cares - August 12, 2014

@218 If I had been born in 66 I would have been watching, but I was born in 77, and I have been watching Trek ever since, not sure what you think a true fan is but it sounds awfully close to saying that someone else is not a “real” Trek fan, and nobody gets to do that. Nobody is any more of a “true” Trek fan than anyone else, no matter what they think, period.

221. Disinvited - August 12, 2014

# 208. Cygnus-X1 – August 11, 2014

” Is that the reason that BR gave for scrapping their spin-off novels? That they would use up to[o] many good ideas that could go into their movies? — Cygnus-X1

Well, Bob Orci said he and his writing team at the time had nothing to do with it, but we have seen that he is not always privy to JJ’s upper echelon musings.

I have some training and experience in library science via college education and volunteering so I dug through publisher’s journals, catalogs, librarian threads, etc. at the time the story broke, and I came across some information that said this decision was battled against by the publisher, that it came from higher up CBS executives who claimed to have gotten the request to quash the works from outside.

Here’s Trek Movie’s reporting on it:

http://trekmovie.com/2010/03/01/exclusive-interview-cbs-products-vp-van-citters-discusses-future-of-star-trek-books-merchandise-attractions-more/

“It was decided that the upcoming sequel is best served by having JJ [Abrams] and his team tell the stories of what happens next for these characters. That doesn’t mean we wont have stories taking place in this timeline, and that doesn’t necessarily mean we wont have stories taking place in the alternate timeline before the next movie is released. ” — John Van Citters, CBS Licensing VP of Product Development

”According to Van Citters, CBS, Pocket Books and Bad Robot are currently working together on a plan for books tied to the movie universe. As for the four books that have already been written, Van Citters noted that their status is “on hold” and there was still no determination on when we will see them.” — A Pascale

So you tell me, if everyone’s now working together, where are those 4 Abramverse spin-off books? As surely by now, with STID out and done, those 4 novels are now set in the Abramverse past as I presume Pike is alive in all of them?

222. Disinvited - August 12, 2014

# 208. Cygnus-X1 – August 11, 2014

http://trekmovie.com/2010/03/03/young-adult-starfleet-academy-star-trek-movie-tie-in-books-coming-in-november/

“These new Academy books will be set during the events of the movie, and therefore will not risk stepping on the toes of JJ Abrams and his team as they craft the Star Trek sequel set for a June 29, 2012 release.” — A Pascale

223. Disinvited - August 12, 2014

# 208. Cygnus-X1 – August 11, 2014

Either someone’s asleep at the switch at Simon and Schuster”s Young Adult division:

http://series.simonandschuster.com/Star-Trek-Starfleet-Academy

“Star Trek: Starfleet Academy

The voyages of the classic Enterprise, featuring Kirk, Spock, McCoy from the first TV series and the first six movies, set in the 23rd century.” — Simon & Schuster

or its the best example of “don’t judge a book by its cover” that I’ve ever seen.

224. Cygnus-X1 - August 12, 2014

219. Who cares – August 12, 2014

I’m not ignoring your point; it’s just not related to what I was saying.

I wasn’t talking about Trek merch on the whole. I was talking about BR merch.

And you’re not understanding the point about short-term profits at the expense of long-term damage to a brand. It happens.

Yes, BR Trek is making money with its movies now. The point is that these short-term profits are being made by marketing Trek to a fundamentally different market segment. This isn’t my opinion, but a fact that has turned up several times in articles posted here. STID made more money from the foreign market than it did from the domestic market.

My opinion is that the new market segment that Trek is being marketed to with BR Trek is not going to be nearly as loyal or passionate as, or pay long-term dividends like, the market segment that BR Trek is intentionally being marketed away from, i.e. Trek-fans. And the lack of interest in BR merch seems like it might be symptomatic of the shift in marketing.

Any business needs new customers to continue thriving. A movie franchise is no different. And the new customers that BR Trek is picking up aren’t like the old customers. Trek is just another action movie to them, like Iron Man or Spidey. They’re not going to be buying up These Are the Voyages and other merch like the long-time fans. And, not only will there be the effect of new fans not being long-term fans, but also the effect of long-term fans being put off by the BR movies.

If BR represents the future of Trek, the likes of me are likely to get fed up and lose interest in any future Trek, and I won’t particularly want to support (or even know about) the franchise going forward. Basically, Trek to us will be a franchise of the past. As though it was discontinued in 2005.

It’s not “drama.” It’s just my opinion on the plausible implications of current business trends for the future of the franchise. I already see the brand changing. When people in their 20s and early 30s tell me today that they “like Star Trek,” I have to ask them, “do you mean the new ones, or…?” Often they do mean the new ones and they don’t care about traditional Trek. But, neither are they particularly passionate about BR Trek. They’re very popcorny about the issue, if I can coin a phrase. It’s literally just a movie to them, no more meaningful or important than any other comic-book or action movie. And if this type of fan continues to supplant the loyal, passionate fans of the past, it’s hard not to see implications for the brand long-term.

225. Cygnus-X1 - August 12, 2014

221. Disinvited – August 12, 2014

So you tell me, if everyone’s now working together, where are those 4 Abramverse spin-off books?

Good question.

226. Who cares - August 13, 2014

@Cygnus. I disagree with you, with everything you have said, about BR, about Trek, about what kind of people newer fans are, especially since the newer fans are the ones driving Trek to the position of being top streaming content as they get into the older Trek stuff on Netflix after watching the BR movies, just like my best friend who used to ridicule me for being a Trek fan and who can now have hours long Trek discussions with me.

I find your whole argument to be pessimistic without cause or reason, and I am a very pessimistic person. Were there problems in the area of Trek merch? Yes there have been, CBS blocked the new timeline novels as the articles linked above show, Paramount also had problems with SVP of Worldwide Marketing and Consumer Products Brian Miller directly related to Trek which lead to his departure from Paramount. Bad Robot has done nothing except produce 2 financially successful and overall well reviewed films. Any “damage” to the franchise is coming from Paramount and CBS and their various fumbles, not from BR which does not produce or even approve Trek merch.

Do we need a new Trek TV series? You bet your a– we do, but sadly that will not happen with the Trek hating Les Moonves in charge at CBS, so support the franchise in the forms we can get it, whether that is David Mack’s newest novel, IDW’s spread of Trek comic book titles, Trek toys for your kids, dvd/blu ray collections, licensed Trek clothing, bobble heads, flash discs, etc. Hopefully for my kids soon there will be some Sesame Street Trek toys as the Muppet version of Captain Kirk has recently made his first appearance on the show, which has had at least 4 decades to work Trek into the show and didn’t until now.

I look forward to the next film, and the next after that, and the next after that, and so on. I hope the franchise never ends. Now if you will excuse me my 5 year old is asking if she can watch the Star trek cartoon, think I will play Yesteryear for her.

227. Disinvited - August 13, 2014

# 226. Who cares – August 13, 2014

” BR which does not produce or even approve Trek merch. ” — Who cares

You are just plain wrong there. All active Trek productions have had veto power over anything based on their creations. And I don’t even know why I have to remind you that Orci is involved with the production of the comics.

Just look at Susan Sackett and Roddenberry archivist Richard Arnold:

http://fanlore.org/wiki/Interstat/Issues_131-140

“For a time, Susan Sackett, Mr. Roddenberry’s Executive Assistant, was the Paramount reader (she was the approving authority when YESTERDAY’S SON was submitted, for example)…” — Ann Crispin

“In many ways his [Richard Arnold's] job was to ensure that any new Trek (scripts for the movies and Next Gen or manuscripts for the novels) was in keeping with Trek lore.” — Star Trek Action Group No.103

228. star trackie - August 13, 2014

I read that JJ wanted a merchandise, marketing assault on all fronts to build the franchise but was blindsided by CBS who wouldn’t cease production of TOS merchandise, even after focus groups showed a confusion between the two, which concerned JJ, who wanted to have a unified front building the new crew and their universe on merchandise, web series etc.
When he hit the roadblock he was pissed. Then he went to Star Wars, where he WILL be allowed to build the franchise as he intended to do with Trek. In the years ahead, just sit back and watch Star Wars grow and witness what could have been. I love TOS and I dig the new movies, and the residual effects of successful new movies, which is continued interest in the old. That’s one way they keep their relevance. Trek had the chance to really be a continuing presence, and CBS blew it so they could keep putting Shatner on coasters and beer openers. Sad.

229. Cygnus-X1 - August 13, 2014

226. Who cares – August 13, 2014

I disagree with you, with everything you have said, about BR, about Trek, about what kind of people newer fans are, especially since the newer fans are the ones driving Trek to the position of being top streaming content as they get into the older Trek stuff on Netflix after watching the BR movies just like my best friend who used to ridicule me for being a Trek fan and who can now have hours long Trek discussions with me.

Yeah? Does your best friend reside in Russia, China or South America?

If not, then his viewership might not be relevant in terms of the shift in marketing for BR Trek that I was referring to. So, that’s one potential problem with your reasoning.

Another potential problem with your reasoning is that we know that BR Trek was intentionally tailored to appeal to viewers who’d been exposed to pre-BR Trek and didn’t like it. So, if your friend now likes pre-BR Trek, that’s another suggestion that he might be not part of the market segment that I was referring to.

I suppose it’s possible that the BR movies caused him to re-think his dislike of the old stuff, but that seems like a bit much to presume and doesn’t really make sense in terms of marketing—why tailor and market 7-Up to people who don’t like Cola if you think they’re persuadable to buy Cola after you’ve gotten them to try 7-Up? You wouldn’t. I was talking about a specific, delineated marketing strategy and the plausible ramifications thereof—again, in terms of likely trends. Of course there will be outliers that don’t fit the trends.

I’m happy for you and your friend that you can now have discussions about Trek, but he doesn’t seem necessarily representative of the viewership or marketing strategy that I was referring to. I’m sure there are some people who might get turned on to the older Trek from BR Trek, especially if they’re young and just haven’t “discovered” the old stuff yet. It’s bound to happen. There are all sorts of effects that one might call attention to, but that doesn’t necessarily make them marketing trends based on documented marketing strategy by Paramount. If you have some data linking BR Trek to increasing viewership of older Trek on Netflix, I’d be interested in seeing that. There’s no particular reason that I can think of as to why viewership of old Trek on Netflix should be taken as a consequence of the BR movies.

As for the merch issue, ask Disinvited about that. He’s the one who found and posted the info.

230. Disinvited - August 13, 2014

# 228. star trackie – August 13, 2014

” I read that JJ wanted a merchandise, marketing assault on all fronts to build the franchise but was blindsided by CBS who wouldn’t cease production of TOS merchandise, even after focus groups showed a confusion between the two, which concerned JJ, who wanted to have a unified front building the new crew and their universe on merchandise, web series etc.” — star trackie

Look that’s what has been claimed. But that’s not how we do business here in the U.S.A. We use a little thing here called the free market and competition.

What JJ’s complaining about is having to deal with that because he wrongly concludes that his 2009′s merchandizing failures are due to “confusion” in the market place and that the solution is to award him an unwarranted Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Enterprise, Phaser, etc. monopoly in STID merchandising.

This is Business & Marketing 101 stuff. They way for his merchandising plans to succeed is to provide a better product and make his brand clearly identifiable in that regard as being superior. NOT try to clear the shelvess of all possible competition so that he can continue to license what Trek consumers clearly believe are inferior products. And I say that because his “confusion” argument doesn’t hold water.

One thing we seem to be in agreement here is that Trek merchandising in general is enjoying a boom in sales. If this “confusion” argument of JJ’s is real, it cuts both ways. If people wanting to buy Bad Robot merch can’t tell the difference between it and the old stuff then there are just as likely as many new (via ongoing series TV syndication, Netflix, etc.) ToS merch consumers confused and making mistakes on the other side of the aisle — not to mention members of my generation with vision problems but I digress. The point is these confusions should be meaningless if BR’s Trek is indeed creating a rising tide in all Trek merch sales then BR’s stuff should be swept up in it too. Everybody should be making money.

But JJ asking for a monopoly gives the notion that’s something’s wrong, and it can’t be “confusion”. For his stuff to NOT make money in this rising tide of Trek purchases, his potential consumers can’t be confused. They have to be clearly identifying the BR licensed stuff and for some reason finding them consistently deficient in some way and choosing NOT to purchase them in numbers that are severely effecting his plans in those regards.

Besides, he couldn’t possibly be serious about his proposition to clear the shelves to give him an exclusive Trek monopoly. Surely he HAS to realize how many merchandising likeness contracts were negotiated and renegotiated with the previous actors just to get the film franchise through its early decades to GENERATIONS which lead to his. There’d be lawsuits and injunctions flying all over the place with Harlan Ellison himself leading the fray, if CBS ever tried to seriously accommodate JJ in this.

No, it is just a rather feeble attempt on his part to scapegoat and make excuses for a very real and serious problem his Trek brand has on the retail shelves.

For his sake, I hope Bob Orci in ascending to the directorship and who has had some success with the comics will be allowed to address and fix whatever taint it is that JJ has allowed to fall upon his merchandise licenses.

And I am cautiously optimistic that if this merchandise malaise is something that has somehow infected JJ’s Trek merch via his films that Bob will have it excised by his premier.

231. wi-kiry-lan - August 14, 2014

Don’t know how those hacks keeping getting movie jobs but I love the magic blood jokes at Orci’s expense.

232. Jonboc - August 14, 2014

231 “Don’t know how those hacks keeping getting movie jobs but I love the magic blood jokes at Orci’s expense.”

Simple. Because alot more people liked the movie than didn’t like the movies.

233. star trackie - August 15, 2014

#230 “They have to be clearly identifying the BR licensed stuff and for some reason finding them consistently deficient in some way and choosing NOT to purchase them in numbers that are severely effecting his plans in those regards.”

I don’t think it was a matter of the consumer/fan finding them deficient. I think it was simply poor marketing decisions. They were targeting children…and that’s about it. A few Halloween costumes. Some waffles. I mean, really?
Aside from the Mego days, when kids actually played with Trek toys, the toy lines have been aimed at collectors and collectors are a finicky bunch. They should have never expected the new Trek toy line to be strong. Where they really failed was blocking the novels. THat is where the adventures stay relevant in between the movies. You have to build the brand first. Keep the new fans engaged with comics and books. Get an animated series on cartoon network with the new crew…THEN you release the toys for the kids.
I think JJ knew exactly how to market his new universe but just wasn’t given the chance. What didn’t sell was, indeed, due to lack of interest, but the lack of interest, I think, was due to the type of merchandise available, not a shunning of Trek. I think it just wasn’t the right product for the right people.

234. Disinvited - August 15, 2014

# 233. star trackie – August 15, 2014

” I think it just wasn’t the right product for the right people.” — star trackie

I have to say that when I said “deficient for some reason” I meant to elicit the breadth of response that included yours, i.e. I didn’t mean to imply all the BR branded stuff fell apart.

The most successfully merchandized Trek movie was TMP but it was rated G. BR’s movies are PG-13.

Marja and I both believe STID would have done a lot better B.O. in the U.S. if it hadn’t been so poorly marketed here.

Your contention that JJ has problems in his marketing has merit. I don’t know if that’s all there is to it, but I hope he has the good sense to let the Disney marketeers [sic] handle his SW and to sit back and learn from them.

235. Disinvited - August 15, 2014

# 233. star trackie – August 15, 2014

Another point to your assertion: They pulled the adult novels based in the Abramverse and then put YA based only at the academy before the Enterprise out. And did you see the Simon&Schuster blurb I quoted from their web site basically claiming they aren’t Abramverse based?

I mean that supports your point right there. JJ’s person in charge of his licenses should have seen that about 4 books ago and demanded a fix.

236. star trackie - August 15, 2014

#235 “And did you see the Simon&Schuster blurb I quoted from their web site basically claiming they aren’t Abramverse based?”

I did indeed. Agreed that it takes a fairly, “hands-off” approach to allow something like that to happen. No excuse. He may have had too many irons in the fire, but that’s really no excuse as there should be people in place to take care of such things. Sloppy. And yes, Disney is no slouch in marketing. JJ would be well served to sit back and observe.

237. wi-kiry-lan - August 15, 2014

IF jj-trek merchandise doesn’t sell it’s not that surprising…though I suspect it sells well enough. the movies are marketed to minimally interested people that only want to see explosions and kill some time. this isn’t your father’s trek merchandise buyers

238. Who cares - August 16, 2014

@Cygnus. My friend lives in rural South Dakota, just like me. He has directly stated that he is watching the older Trek’s now because of the BR movies.

He is not alone in this, not only have dozens of our acquaintances also become interested in Trek after the 2009 film, but many of them have also gotten interested in science fiction in general.

So if the ratio of new fans to old fans is similar in urban areas to that in rural areas like where I live than every older Trek fans is balanced by at least a dozen new fans. This means the total numbers of Trek fans, old and new, has taken a major jump, which will affect Trek viewership numbers from any source, be that Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Prime, BBC America, whatever the source they watch Trek on there are simply more of us now. Even if only 50 percent of the newer fans give old Trek a chance the effect on total viewer numbers cannot be denied.

239. Cygnus-X1 - August 16, 2014

238. Who cares – August 16, 2014

I find it hard to believe that the two BR movies, which are much more akin to comic-book/action movies than to sci-fi, would somehow be gateways to new fans getting into science fiction. That makes no sense to me, unless we’re talking about very young, inexperienced people, or people who have no access to anything sci-fi, and the BR movies are the first that they’ve ever been exposed to a movie set in outer space. The BR movies were tailored to appeal to people who don’t like sci-fi and don’t like Trek. It makes no sense to me that people who dislike Trek because it’s—too slow, too science-y, too much technobabble—whatever the reasons, would have a change of heart brought on by a movie that was tailored to omit the aspects of Trek that they don’t like.

Anyway, we’ll have to agree to disagree.

240. Who cares - August 16, 2014

PS. Just to clarify, when I said rural SD I meant community size of 90k, you may consider that semi-urban, I do not, having lived in both Las Vegas and Detroit in the past.

241. Who cares - August 16, 2014

@Cygnus. I am a lifelong lover of Science Fiction, I have mentioned before that I read Andre Norton as a child (still do), I also read Asimov, Clarke, Heinlein, Niven, Pournell, and many many more. I do not find the BR movies to be “sci-fi deficient” in any way, any more than all the wildly inaccurate science in the older Trek material made it less sci-fi. Blatantly unscientific ideas about hiding ships in nebulas or over a planet’s magnetic poles, which could never ever work and was known to be impossible before it was used as a plot device in Trek.

My friend, who never got closer to sci-fi than Alien v Predator, has now watched Gravity, and enjoyed it more than I did, since my mind shrieks about the bs Clooney death scene. Again, he is not alone, you can be pessimistic about the young Trek fans of today if you want, I will not be.

242. Keachick (Rose) - August 16, 2014

What some of the TOS episodes showed were far more fantastical than anything that was shown in the two BR movies. In fact, I have read that some people actually working in the various science fields find these two new movies more scientifically based than other Star Treks.

Why would JJ and co. go about alienating fans, as some people seem to suggest? That is counter-productive and idiotic.

The only thing that is different is the upping of the pace and there being less dialogue and good quieter moments, along with less exposition (not that there was necessarily much in TOS, because of the inability to explain many of the absurdities in these).

The characters are simply younger with the main character having a different backstory from his prime counterpart, which goes to make this series interesting and different. After all, there is no good reason to simply repeat what has already been done verbatim, and that is what BR Trek provides, some things the same, other things different and events that occurred in the prime TOS universe but now are told in another way, with a twist and a turn (eg Kirk saving the ship by going into the reactor instead of Spock ref: TWOK).

I want to see new places and people in the third movie. This alternate universe must have areas that none of the prime universe characters (which include spin off series) have not discovered yet…

Let this nuKirk and his crew finds these and let some of it be good, ie genuinely beautiful. What about it, Bob Orci and you two young writers? Can your hearts not *see* it at all? This kea needs to take wing and soar with love and inspiration. Can you make this happen for me, at least?

243. Disinvited - August 16, 2014

# 242. Keachick (Rose) – August 16, 2014

” Why would JJ and co. go about alienating fans, as some people seem to suggest? That is counter-productive and idiotic. ” — Keachick (Rose)

In the reporting I saw, he said because nuParamount insisted. This is consistent with the history of movie studios doing some pretty inane things because of their marketing superstitions.

244. Cygnus-X1 - August 16, 2014

241. Who cares – August 16, 2014

I thought Gravity was great.

As Neil DeGrasse Tyson has famously pointed out, it’s not a perfect movie in terms of scientific accuracy. But it’s pretty damned close—much more accurate than any other science fiction movie in recent memory.

The issue regarding scientific accuracy as relating to the BR movies is not just about an esoteric technical issue here and there. It’s about the lack of thoughtfulness about science and the technological conceits of the movies. And it’s also about very simple science that the movies get wrong, which implies that Abrams & co. didn’t bother spending a few thousand bucks on a science consultant for their $150 and $190 million dollar movies, which says something about their artistic values and sensibilities as filmmakers vis-a-vis the artistic values and sensibilities of, for example, the TOS and TNG tv shows, which were famous for having permanent scientific advisers on staff and inspiring many fans—and many now-famous people, such as astronauts and scientists—to get into science.

I recently posted a clip in the chat thread where Neil DeGrasse Tyson talks about the inventor of the MRI—a very widespread medical device today. This inventor was a physicist with no prior interest in the medical field who was inspired by TOS to devote his life to inventing a device along the lines of the tricorder (a tech conceit invented by the writers and producers of TOS). There are many such stories, and the reason why is that TOS (and TNG) were very thoughtful about science and technology. The BR movies are largely the opposite.

The one thoughtful bit of science in either of the BR movies has been the MWI time-travel device in ST09, which was poorly explained and weakly explored in the movie, but Orci’s extra-cinematic explanation revealed that he’d actually put good thought into that scientific conceit. However, the other side of the scale—the bad science and thoughtless tech in the BR movies—is much more massive and leaves the stronger impression on those of us who care about such things, as you’ll see if you read reviews critical of those movies.

And bad science/thoughtless tech is just one area of complaint that people have about the BR movies, btw. It’s not as though most people who don’t like the BR movies feel that way just because of this one issue. Rather it’s many issues, many problems, all piled up.

245. Keachick (Rose) - August 16, 2014

Science questions –

Is it possible that we might develop a technology that could stop volcanic eruptions and render the volcano dormant (at a variant level)? What could its delivery system be?

Lots of people around the world are living near dormant volcanoes, which can become active (which is why they are dormant). People in NZ ski on three volcanoes which tend to grumble a lot and in the 90′s were anything but dormant.

Gotta go again. More questions later

246. Disinvited - August 16, 2014

# 245. Keachick (Rose) – August 16, 2014

” Is it possible that we might develop a technology that could stop volcanic eruptions and render the volcano dormant (at a variant level)?” — Keachick (hRose)

It could come to pass, but the problem with capping a supervolcano to save some sentient lifeforms is if you do that with planet whose core is active enough to form supervolcanoes in the first place then it’s likely only a temporary fix, i.e. the pressure only going to build up and threaten their civilization from somewhere else on the planet in finding a release.

This was a cogent issue Meyer brought up in TWOK by having Khan voice his anger at Kirk never having followed up. If I remember the ending of SPACE SEED correctly Kirk expressed his intentions to use his Captain’s Discretion to setup Khan on the planet and NOT notify Starfleet for the standard resolution of incarceration so as to give Khan a chance to form a world of his own free of interference from Kirk’s civilization.

And again in STID as in TWOK, young Kirk fully intended to make the same mistake with possibly merely delayed consequences on not telling anyone so that the results of his actions could be monitored to see if it continued to have a beneficial effect without unintended or merely superficially delayed consequences.

247. Jonoc - August 16, 2014

#244 “There are many such stories, and the reason why is that TOS (and TNG) were very thoughtful about science and technology. The BR movies are largely the opposite.”

To be fair, you are trying to make a comparison between two 2-hour films and, literally, hundreds of hours on television. tI can’t be done rationally. I can easily pick out 4 episodes of TOS or TNG that also fail to offer up “thoughtful” science and technology.

248. Cygnus-X1 - August 16, 2014

245. Keachick (Rose) – August 16, 2014
246. Disinvited – August 16, 2014

Yeah, volcanoes are basically release valves for the hot magma in the Earth’s mantle to escape through. If you look at the Hawaiian island chain, for example, you can see how they formed as the crust shifted Westward over the “hot spot” where the magma was prone to shoot up through the crust. An island would form from the hot magma shooting up and then solidifying. Gradually, plate tectonics shifted the island Westward so that it was no longer over the hotspot. This is what caused the island to stop growing. A new island would then form, just to the East of the aforementioned island. And when plate tectonics had shifted that island Westward so that it was no longer over the hot spot, it too would stop growing. And so on.

If you put something into a volcano, say to reinforce the crust in order to prevent magma from shooting up through that particular spot in the Earth’s crust, the magma would just come up somewhere else, probably nearby but maybe not. It’d be a roll of the dice. Maybe you’d get lucky and a volcano would form somewhere that was less of a problem. Or maybe it shoots up through someone’s home or in the middle of a city. In order to sort of engineer the volcano so that it would form somewhere harmless, you’d need to have data about the structure of the Earth’s crust and convection patterns in the Earth’s mantle. It might be possible, by analyzing all of that data, to sort of “steer” the formation of the volcano to a more convenient area. But trying to engineer the natural forces of the Earth like that, on such a massive scale, seems problematic at best. Seems like it would be much more efficient and effective to just predict hotspots and volcano formation, and plan around it.

249. Cygnus-X1 - August 17, 2014

245. Keachick (Rose) – August 16, 2014

I posted a detailed answer to your question and now it’s gone.

250. Curious Cadet - August 17, 2014

@244 Cygnus-X1,
“The one thoughtful bit of science in either of the BR movies has been the MWI time-travel device in ST09, which was poorly explained and weakly explored in the movie, but Orci’s extra-cinematic explanation revealed that he’d actually put good thought into that scientific conceit.”

Orci definitely put good thought into his explanation, and one really has to admire his dedication to get out on his road tour to sell it to what was at times an angry mob.

I don’t know if you are aware, but I believe first drafts of the script had time travel working much as it always had; in other words, O&K reset the timeline, wiping out the Prime timeline. Someone who’s read it would have to speak to whether the TNG elements were present or not.

So it seems that the QM-MWI explanation might have been a last minute marketing scramble to avoid the bad PR that would have resulted once the faithful got wind of this blasphemous turn of events. I even wonder if the prequel comic’s TNG elements were further evidence of this effort to win over the hardcore zealots, in much the same way Paramount felt Generations was necessary — but essentially false advertising.

In many ways it feels like a retcon with the onscreen evidence reduced to parsing a single word or two. There is no evidence of the TNG cast being involved in Prime Spock’s efforts to save the Romulans, in fact the evidence points to no involvement at all.

So while I give Orci credit for coming up with QM-MWI, it seems to me the reason it wasn’t explored in the film might be one of simply having written the script before the idea needed to occurred to anyone.

251. Cygnus-X1 - August 17, 2014

248. Curious Cadet – August 17, 2014

Interesting.

Where did you get that info about the MWI time-travel device being a last minute inclusion?

It’s a bit shocking to me that their first draft involved wiping out the entire timeline. That seems incredibly arrogant.

252. Keachick (Rose) - August 17, 2014

#250 – This sounds like conjecture on your part. Since Paramount/Bad Robot have appeared to be secretive about what any story is going to be about etc until near the time of the film’s release, how would anyone be able to get their hands on these initial drafts ever, especially given the controversial nature of such?

253. Disinvited - August 17, 2014

# 250. Curious Cadet – August 17, 2014

” So it seems that the QM-MWI explanation might have been a last minute marketing scramble to avoid the bad PR that would have resulted once the faithful got wind of this blasphemous turn of events.” — Curious Cadet

Or/and it would have been consistent with JJ’s later publicly asserted view that he needed a Trek monopoly to make the real money off of his Trek. However, it is a safe bet that CBS vetoed any attempts in that direction as JJ also lamented in his assertion.

254. Disinvited - August 17, 2014

#252. Keachick (Rose) – August 17, 2014

You are wrong about this draft scripts were released after the film’s run:

http://www.imsdb.com/scripts/Star-Trek.html

Know I don’t know if that’s the draft CC’s referring to, but it should offer clues as to what direction the time travel was taking on November of 2007.

255. Keachick (Rose) - August 17, 2014

Thank you, Cygnus-X1. So I take it that you do not think that it would be possible to have technology that could do what this (incorrectly named) “cold fusion” device was shown to do in STID.

I think you are probably right, given what is known about volcanoes and associated geothermal activity etc. This device sits more within the realm of science fantasy than any other.

However, I am not sure that the writers were too concerned with the accuracy or otherwise of the futuristic *science* being presented, but with the ethical/moral implications of use of any technology that one might have, ie whether such technology should be used at all, and if it is used, just what circumstances can allow for its use. That is what the Nibiru situation and the prime directive issue was about. The actual science/technology was incidental.

The problem is that some people get too engrossed with this speculative futuristic “science/technology” and its validity, that other issues of greater importance get ignored or misunderstood.

Disinvited – I was asking about the actual *science/technology* shown in the films, not about their ethical or other uses.

The other issue has to do with the transwarp beaming idea and how it was used in STID. I agree that it was not that well explained (perhaps, because it was another absurdity not unlike that often shown in the TV TOS series that could not be easily/rationally explained), but, simply having Scotty say, “…and now we have a madman *BUNNY hopping across the galaxy…” would have been more instructive and valid dialogue.

However, once again, the part that gets me the most is how many people in the audiences have reacted to the mention of this new technology still in its experimental stage within the Star Trek realm and not been *fully tested* (either universe). To suddenly conclude that because of this new transwarp beaming ability, there would be no need for starships, and then to berate the writers as many have done over the last five years, is not reasonable at all. It is plain stupid and often nasty to boot. I think that would have to be dumber than anything the writers have presented so far. This is the dumber calling the writers dumb…sigh…

* Three people using the method does not make for a genuine test. One nearly died and the other, Harrison, obviously made it to his final destination (or did he?). We have no idea what problems he may have encountered on the way using this portable transwarp beaming device that he had made for this own PERSONAL use. The only thing we needed to know, though, was that this terrorist was now hiding out on Kronos.

256. Keachick (Rose) - August 17, 2014

I meant to say something about *BUNNY. Has anyone watched a rabbit move about, as in hopping about while grazing or when it is really moving? I have – both domesticated pets and wild rabbits. Even a smallish rabbit can cover quite a distance with one hop if it wants to move quickly.

257. Disinvited - August 17, 2014

#255. Keachick (Rose) – August 17, 2014

I for one disagree with this whole notion that transwarp beaming would totally eliminate the need for ships.

Yes it would redefine the duties of starships as they wouldn’t be needed to taxi and ferry sentient beings about the planets except for ceremonial purposes. But as orbital platforms and islands in vast areas of desolate space they would still be needed for exploration and observational science.

And besides, I have already pointed out long ago in the first series episode, THAT WHICH SURVIVES, they had the Enterprise transported 990.7 light-years away in a blink and it took the entire episode (11 hours their time) to get back by warp after Spock deduced the ship had been subjected to a powerful transporter that put the ship back together out of phase which was why they were initially unable to successfully repair some damage a Losira android caused.

Which is why a transwarp transporter engine could become just another way for ships to get around.

258. Curious Cadet - August 17, 2014

@254. Disinvited,
“Know I don’t know if that’s the draft CC’s referring to”

I don’t either. I just recall it being discussed on another thread and being quite surprised to find that was the case. I do recall someone posted a link then too. Unfortunately, I’m too lazy to go looking for it these days. I’ve noticed TM site searches through Google are a lot less productive than they used to be though …

259. Curious Cadet - August 17, 2014

@257. Disinvited,
“Which is why a transwarp transporter engine could become just another way for ships to get around.”

I agree this is the most likely application. People could go through one by one like Stargate, but why if everyone needed could just be transported en masse. But it doesn’t necessarily need to be a space ship. It could also be building, or a shuttle. Send a drone to an unknown planet like Stargate, gather intel, send whatever is most appropriate. Perhaps a submarine … Oh wait, the Enterprise IS a submarine.

The problem here is it’s too soon. Even in TNG they discuss subspace transport (which is essentially what this is) in the episode where the Ferengi kidnap Picards “son”. Even then it is considered theoretical and dangerous. The fact we already have it in the era of TOS is ridiculous, and undermines a certain amount of potential drama, or demands explanation otherwise. If one man can be transported across the galaxy with a device the size of an overnight bag (developed in a years time I might add), what feats are they going to be capable of when next we meet the intrepid crew of the Enterprise? Yes it’s all fiction, and they can write anything they want, but once they open Pandora’s box, they have deal with what comes out. And transwarp beaming is too easy. Recall on Niburu that in order to hide the Enterprise underwater, they had to defeat the transporter technology, and once again limit it to force the Enterprise to break the Prime Directive as well. Now they have to come up with reasons to prevent the ever so convenient transwarp beaming technology form being used. It’s just bad for business in my opinion.

260. Disinvited - August 17, 2014

#259. Curious Cadet – August 17, 2014

It is a puzzlement. If you look at the draft script I dug up even in that they had Scotty voicing an excuse for why his transwarp transporting could not be used to get Kirk and Spock on the Narada at Earth. I give them credit for trying to address the issue but his excuse was that he didn’t know exactly where the Narada would be. Really? And how exactly did he determine where Enterprise would be on its warp out to the Laurentian System? But I digress, my point is they knew transwarp beaming was going to be a problem when they had to come up with that and yet they still decided to stick with it.

My point is only that once they made that commitment to put it in, you’d think they’d at least try to be a little more creative in using it to be part of the action, but instead they make it a detour that has to be excused out.

And it creates sensibility problems. For example, Marcus never had any reason to give Kirk the advanced torpedoes or sabotage the E in the first place. He could have just sent Kirk after Khan and then transwarp transported the torpedoes to blow every last one of them, Khan included, up. According to Marcus they were untraceable so no one would know what took out the E. The Klingons would find Federation starship bits in their sector to blame for the untraceable explosions on their planet’s surface. Marcus would have his war.

261. Cygnus-X1 - August 17, 2014

255. Keachick (Rose) – August 17, 2014

So I take it that you do not think that it would be possible to have technology that could do what this (incorrectly named) “cold fusion” device was shown to do in STID.

Well, that’s actually another good point.

The “cold fusion” tech conceit in STID actually fails on three distinct levels: (1) Firstly, as has been discussed, it doesn’t explain what would prevent the magma from simply shooting through the planet’s crust somewhere else, perhaps very nearby; (2) Secondly, “cold fusion” was actually a hypothetical technology for producing nuclear energy at room temperature, not for turning things “cold;” and, (3) Thirdly, cold fusion was a dud, anyway. It didn’t work.

262. Cygnus-X1 - August 17, 2014

255. Keachick (Rose) – August 17, 2014

Whether or not a technology might someday be developed to prevent and/or change the location of volcano eruptions, I don’t know. I can’t think of how it might be done, but if someone is going to invent such a technology for the purposes of science-fiction, they should at least put some thought into how it might work. The BR guys didn’t even bother to check “cold fusion” on Wikipedia. The “supernova threatening the entire galaxy” in ST09 is another unforced error. If they’d cared enough to spend a few thousand bucks on a science consultant for their $190 million dollar movie, the expert would certainly not have let such simple mistakes into the movie.

By contrast, TOS had a shoestring budget—I mean, the TOS budget was so tight that the crew’s uniforms can be seen coming apart at the seams by the second or third season—but they still cared enough to spend money for a full-time science consultant on staff. It’s indicative of the values and sensibilities of GR and his producers. And it’s part of the reason why TOS had such an impact on Western culture and inspired so many people to get into science and become famous inventors and astronauts and scientists and so forth.

263. Keachick (Rose) - August 17, 2014

#260 – “He could have just sent Kirk after Khan and then transwarp transported the torpedoes to blow every last one of them, Khan included, up.”

This is what I mean in my previous post. You are alluding to this transwarp beaming to suddenly being able to do stuff that has not been indicated in these new films. What we saw was on one occasion two men were beamed onto a ship going at warp from a stationary location and another instance of one man using a portable device to transwarp beam himself to another planet. He also did this from a stationary location.

However, what you are talking about is the ability to transwarp beam multiple objects over great distances. Would Marcus also be travelling at warp? This is very new technology that clearly has not been fully tested and yet here you assume that what suggest is also possible.

Only two out of the three transwarp beamings could be considered really successful. Those are not good odds. It is not that the introduction to this alternate universe is necessarily too early, only what some people think that, because of its mere presence, it should be able to do. It is the critics who are being pre-emptive here and then calling out the writers for something they have done or suggested.

264. Disinvited - August 18, 2014

# 263. Keachick (Rose) – August 17, 2014

” However, what you are talking about is the ability to transwarp beam multiple objects over great distances.” — Keachick (Rose)

And you are forgetting that the Enterprise has multiple transporters each known to be capable of at transwarp beaming at least 2 at a time even if we ignore that they are probably more capable than the little shuttle’s one. Also, in regards to margins of error they have 72 untraceable torpedoes, more than enough to dispatch Khan and have enough leftover to damage E enough for the Klingons to do a war starting finish of whatever survives the initial blasts if by someway they were not enough to finish the E outright.

But even if we try to imagine the worst of worst-case transwarp beaming scenarios possible, each of the torpedoes are capable of locking on a target and traveling through space at a long distance to deliver their payload so Marcus only has to get them in the general vicinity to be able to use them effectively towards his ends.

265. Keachick (Rose) - August 18, 2014

The Enterprise has no such transporters capable of transwarp beaming. They are standard transporters. Kirk and Scotty were beamed into the environmental engineering section. Kirk rematerializes next to a large drum and Scotty into a water recycling pipe where he nearly drowned.

I think you are getting a bit ahead of what the writers have shown this Enterprise to have.

Also remember that Scotty had his transwarp beaming calculations confiscated and no doubt ordered to cease all experimental work on this new technology. This is why Scotty was so angry when he found out that this John Harrison has got hold of his computations and used them to construct a personal transwarp beaming device as a getaway means after he had fired on SFHQ.

This technology was not in general use.

266. Disinvited - August 18, 2014

# 265. Keachick (Rose) – August 18, 2014

” The Enterprise has no such transporters…”

I was building on what the draft script of 2007′s having Scotty say he could use the Enterprise transporters to transwarp beam them to the Narada except he doesn’t know where the Narada is.

But even ignoring that you aren’t being fair. If Scotty could use the most rinky dink almost falling apart shuttle’s transporter to get them on the E, why would the state of the art E’s transporters be an impediment to using the technique?

267. Keachick (Rose) - August 18, 2014

Using a draft script? What about the actual movie itself – the director’s final cut?

It was actually prime Spock who was primarily responsible for making the transporters on the old shuttle work, because he had been able to study prime Scotty’s computations and saw how they worked in practice. nuScotty had not been able to solve the problems at this stage and even though the penny dropped when Spock showed him the solution, he still would not have had enough to go over the finer details the way that Spock had been able to. The young Scotty had a good deal of help from an experienced older scientist very familiar with the engineering of 23rd and 24th century transporter systems.

I conclude that the shuttle’s transporter could only have the power to do this once and it took a bit of jerry rigging and several crossed fingers, in that what Spock did to the transporters could actually work at all, It is interesting to note that prime Spock and Keenser did not join Kirk and Scotty a bit later. It may well be a case of the Enterprise being out of range by the time Spock and Keenser were ready to transport and/or because Spock could not get the mechanism to work one more time…

268. Disinvited - August 18, 2014

# 267. Keachick (Rose) – August 18, 2014

” Using a draft script? What about the actual movie itself – the director’s final cut?”

You are losing focus. This particular line of narrative investigation was started by your own assertion that using draft scripts to investigate the narrative development could only be conjecture because they never ever could possibly be available when in fact they were.

I prove one does indeed exist and it shows the writers consistently use awkward means as used in their 2nd movie to get transwarp transporting out of the way rather than build on something they consciously chose to put in, and you go off on a tangent about what JJ chose to cut out.

“This sounds like conjecture on your part. Since Paramount/Bad Robot have appeared to be secretive about what any story is going to be about etc until near the time of the film’s release, how would anyone be able to get their hands on these initial drafts ever, especially given the controversial nature of such?” — Keachick (Rose)

269. Disinvited - August 18, 2014

# 267. Keachick (Rose) – August 18, 2014

Also whether or not Enterprise’s transporters are capable of transwarp beaming is ultimately irrelevant in regards to Marcus using it as we know the existence of the portable transwarp transporter means Marcus has access to a functioning version of the technology. And how silly would he have to be to NOT make Vengeance’s brand new state of the art transporters capable of it?

270. Keachick (Rose) - August 18, 2014

Disinvited – I am not the one losing focus here. Mentioning draft scripts and their contents is losing focus.

The only yardstick I use for commenting is what I am shown in the director’s final cut (which, incidentally, JJ Abrams – director, said that they are) which is what was released in the cinemas for general public viewing. I do not regard anything else, including deleted scenes, as being relevant to any discussion.

Perhaps the Vengeance’s transporters were capable of transwarp beaming, but this is not what the movie was showing, therefore it is not particularly relevant to the discussion. Marcus wanted Kirk, the Enterprise, Khan and crew destroyed by the Klingons and have their destruction be an excuse to go to war. It was a gamble on Marcus’s part and one that he lost, because he did not fully understand what actually makes Kirk and Spock tick, not really.

Another aspect of showing the capacity of this new transwarp/beaming technology means that Marcus shows his hand to both ally and enemy. This was not the right time from a strategic standpoint. Marcus was all about getting the upper hand and keeping it.

271. Disinvited - August 18, 2014

# 270. Keachick (Rose) – August 18, 2014

” Another aspect of showing the capacity of this new transwarp/beaming technology means that Marcus shows his hand to both ally and enemy.” — Keachick (Rose)

But, unfortunately for Marcus, Khan has already let the cat literally out of the bag. Also, it unclear to me how his using transwarp beaming to deliver “untraceable” torpedoes tips his hands to anyone. If they are untraceable how is anyone able to trace that transwarp transporting was used to deliver them to their lock on and seek targets launch points? No one is going to know what they were, let alone how they got there.

272. Disinvited - August 18, 2014

# 270. Keachick (Rose) – August 18, 2014

” The only yardstick I use for commenting is what I am shown in the director’s final cut…” — Keachick (Rose)

But the conversation, as I understood it when I entered it, is how writer’s write and NOT how director’s direct.

It’s fine that that’s what you want to talk about but you injected yourself into a discussion about how the draft scripts evolved when apparently you have no interest in the topic beyond being a doubting Thomas that such things as draft scripts exist so that there could be no conjecture in such a discussion?

273. Keachick (Rose) - August 18, 2014

Good grief. The draft scripts got mentioned and I was curious. I did not think that these drafts were within the public domain but obviously I was wrong.

It is all very well to discuss how scripts evolve etc, but when it comes to discussing the actual movie, then what becomes what is referred to as the “director’s cut”, ie what the audiences see at the cinemas, is the only valid subject to discuss. Everything else becomes moot.

As we know, JJ Abrams as director, made the final decision as to what was to be shown and told and what wasn’t, despite what other writers, producers, actors et al may have thought. I think that is how it works.

Bob Orci – Please, can you confirm and should we all linger in darkness and doubt?

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