Bruce Greenwood Cast In ABC Pilot “The River” + Trek Producers Have 5 Pilots In Production

It is pilot seasons in Hollywood, with actors all scrambling for roles. One Star Trek star who has nabbed a big one is Bruce Greenwood, aka Captain (now Admiral) Pike from Star Trek 2009 who has signed on to the ABC drama The River. He is the only star from the new movie lined up for the next TV season, but the Star Trek creative team have a few projects in the pipeline.  


Greenwood lands pilot

According to the Hollywood Reporter, actor Bruce Greenwood (Pike from the 2009 Star Trek film) has joined the cast of the ABC drama pilot The River. The show centers on a group of friends and family searching the Amazon river for a famed adventurer who has gone missing. Greenwood has been cast to play Emmet Cole, the lost adventurer.

It is unknown if Greenwood will be returning for the 2012 Star Trek sequel, but if The River gets picked up and Greenwood is a regular or recurring character, then Paramount would likely have to work something out with DreamWorks TV & ABC to schedule him for the Star Trek sequel, which should be going into production by late summer.

Star Trek producers big pilot season

In addition to Greenwood, the creative team behind Star Trek also have a number of pilots currently in contention. Star Trek producers (and Bad Robot cohorts) JJ Abrams and Brian Burk has three drama pilots in development: Odd Jobs at NBC, Alcatraz at FOX, and Person of Interest at CBS. And the Trek producer-writing team of Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman have two pilot projects in the works (through their KO Paper Products): Exit Strategy at Locke and Key, both at FOX. If any of those get picked up, they would likely also be in production at the same time as the Star Trek sequel, plus all four Trek producers are hoping that FOX will order another season of their sci-fi series Fringe and CBS is expected to order another season of Orci & Kurtzman’s Hawaii Five-0. For his part, after six seasons overseeing Lost, the fifth member of Star Trek’s ‘supreme court’ Damon Lindelof seems to be taking a break from TV, for now.

POLL: More Pike in Star Trek 2012

In the past Bruce Greenwood has indicated he is up for more Star Trek, although he is hoping the can go without the chair. Do you want to see Pike back in the sequel?


Bruce Greenwood as Admiral Christopher Pike in Star Trek 2009
– could he be back in the 2012 sequel


Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Bruce Greenwood was awesome as Captain Pike in the movie. He brought humanity to a character that was not very likeable in the Cage. I found myself secretly happy the character got injured and was stuck i the hi-tech hoverchair. His inability to speak was also a good thing as it stopped Pike from bitching like he did in the scene with the doctor in the Cage. This rendition of Captain Pike is a heroic character rivaling that of Kirk. I would like to see him in the movie, perhaps he gets into some sort of trouble and Kirk and the Enterprise are assigned to find him, kicking some buttox in the process. That would be awesome in my opinion.

I hope as well that Christopher Pike will appear somewhere in the sequel. Bruce Greenwood was just so awesome as Pike. I feel like he’s 8th member of the ensemble team that is Star Trek.

This Pike was definitely the better one. He brought warmth and gravitas, a calming, mature presence. With most of the Enterprise being young cadet types, he could be a mentor, and maybe drive plots too. And they can use someone on their side when Kirk WILL get into trouble with the higher ups.

I don’t want him being super “I’m gonna save the day” since that is Kirk’s job, but I’d like for Pike to be the one covering Jim’s behind, at the same time risking his status as an admiral.

I see that the poll is neck and neck at the moment on whether Pike should have a minor or major role, and it seems that, so far, almost everyone wants Greenwood/Pike back. Yes, Yes, Yes!

I think his screentime/role should not be large, but perhaps a pivotal scene where Pike’s input has an important impact on outcomes, whatever they might be. I agree with Areli.

I think yes :) Pike, Bruce Greenwood was amazing

Oh hell yes, more Pike! Bruce Greenwood was awesome!

Open the movie with Pike in command of Starfleet, giving twelve captains their marching orders to take the twelve Constitution class starships out on their Five Year Missions.

Bruce Greenwood is one Hell of an Actor. I want him in Trek 12 and would be very Interested in seeing him in his new show. Hope it all works out.

More Pike! More Pike! More Pike! More Pike! More Pike! More Pike! More Pike!

I voted for large role in sequel. Bruce Greenwood portrayed the mentor aspect perfectly. His gravitas help keep the film grounded and believable.

Prefer the new Pike over the Jefferey Hunter version.

I’d like to see Pike again in the next movie, but I think it’s Kirk’s turn to command the “Enterprise” now. Completely.

10. Red Dead Ryan:

Yes, I definitely prefer Greenwood over Jeffrey Hunter. Hunter just looked constantly like he wanted to beat somebody’s head in.

Pike is a huge mentor-role for Kirk. I’d like to see more of that !

I agree, Pike was a great character in the movie. I think he has to guide Kirk some more.

He’s like a father mentor role for Kirk hopefully he will be in the sequel but let the young Captain deal with things and mature into the guy we all know and love

I would kinda suspect that if Pike comes back, it’ll be in the coveted role of ‘character who gets killed off in the sequel.’ Not that I want that, but I’m just sayin’… It’s the sequel. Somebody’s gonna die!!!!

“8. Thorny – March 5, 2011

Open the movie with Pike in command of Starfleet, giving twelve captains their marching orders to take the twelve Constitution class starships out on their Five Year Missions.”

That would be awesome.

#10 Red Dead Ryan—

Totally Agree!! More Pike! More Pike! More Pike! More Pike! More Pike!!!!!

I LOVED the character and Bruce was amazing!!! I’ll be so bitterly disappointed if Pike isn’t there. Of course I voted for a big role–at least as big as in the 2009 movie—but I WANT TO SEE HIM THERE!!!

Also—-absolutely NO killing him off!! Kill off someone else if you must!

I’m excited about Bruce getting cast in The River but it shouldn’t interfere with his filming of Star Trek. Good going Bruce!!!

Bruce Greenwood was one of the undoubted highlights of Star Trek 2009 for me.

I’d love to see him tackle Christopher Pike the way Jeffrey Hunter did, if he ever appears again… in the sequel (or a TV show set in the Prime Universe someday). More of the darker anti-hero, unsure of himself, with the weight of command resting heavily on his shoulders.

Would love to see a series in the prime universe with Greenwood as Capt Pike. Have it set just a year or so before the Cage Ep. Then go from there. Would be a great show.

I, for one, do not see a reason to compare Jeff Hunter to Greenwood. I see them essentially as the same character.

Both Pikes were portayed successfully as having that incredible gravitas, as if the world were weighing on the character’s shoulders. I could see Greenwood playing Pike in “The Cage” and going through the exact same repertoire of attempts to escape the Talosians.

But we didn’t. We saw him as Captain of the Enterprise and a mentor to Kirk in a universe that either spared him the need to visit Rigel and Talos IV, or before those events actually occur.

Bruce Greenwood deserves to be in the new film, however they manage to do it. He’s a father-figure to Kirk (perhaps replacing Spock from TOS “Menagerie” in the new universe), and his Pike is pure Starfleet perfection.

18. (to be absolutely clear) Not that Greenwood just all sweetness and light in the film. Maybe it’s my age (ST09 being the first time the crew were younger than me) but he brought a dignified gravitas to the Captain’s chair. He should find a way back to that, like Kirk did, even if it can’t be on the Enterprise.

Obviously it’s just a question of screentime and you can’t realistically run the gamut of different aspects of a character’s personality, when the story dictates you get Kirk into the Academy, before steering the Enterprise straight into a crisis, with little time to think about it.

YEs of course we need more PIke, I always felt something was left out years ago before the Pilot episode was released and we only had bit’s and pieces from the Menagerie.

Just a nitpick that does still slightly bother me… connected to Pike actually.

During the scene Pike first meets Kirk, his description of the Federation is all wrong. He’s really describing Starfleet isn’t he?

Even then, the wording of “an armada of planets” is akward. You can’t have an armada of planets… it’s a group sure enough and they move. But planets orbit their stars and could never move together in a formation. That’s the Death Star isn’t it!

The Federation is an alliance of worlds. Starfleet their armada used for exploration, scientific and defence purposes.

Maybe I’m being a pedant. But you know…

Correction… Awkward.

McCoy: “Must you be so blasted pedantic about this!”
Spock: “I’m not Doctor. I’m simply trying to point out the error.”
McCoy: “And I’m simply trying to stop you giving us a lecture on the whole subject!”


Christopher, I agree. He’s describing Starfleet.

Greenwood was fantastic as Pike. I don’t care how he’s in sequel, just put him in it!

OK, it’s agreed. No matter what anyone thinks of the movie… we LOVE Pike.


Agreed!! WE LOVE PIKE!!

Just put him in the sequel!!

It seems that although we all prefer the originals over the new cast when it comes the main seven but when it comes to Pike most prefer Bruce Greenwood over Jeffrey Hunter.

Now on this one i can understand, I loved Bruce Greenwood in the new movie and he was another of the best actors in the new movie.

Because Jeffrey Hunter only played him in The Cage I think the character was more open to interpretation than the others.

I would say Jeff Hunter probably comes across a little stiffer and Bruce had a more warmer father figure towards Kirk.

I also see Pike, in The Cage, as a prototype to Jean Luc Picard. He was more cerebral and more of a thinker.

Besides in The Cage we were presented with a Pike who was thinking about resigning tdue to the stress of the last mission, where as the Greenwood take is different. So playing the Pikes in two different mindsets probably means that the two should not be compared with one another.

By the way I voted for Pike to return

Wow. If the folks here think that Hunter’s Pike was a hard case, wait’ll they see Colin Cunningham’s (and director David Gerrold’s) take on the character in the New Voyages’ episode “Origins.”

Agreed about Greenwood’s performance, a fine piece of work from an actor I’ve always admired. Anyone who can make a line about the Federation being a “peace-keeping armada” sound almost reasonable definitely has my respect. :-)

I want him back… just as long as he has a large, hairy sidekick.

“Punch it.”


But don’t forget the different mind state meant Hunter’s Pike was a bit more stern.

23… Pike didn’t say “Armada of planets”. He said Starfleet is “a scientific and peacekeeping armada” or something along those lines.

Actually what he said was “(The Federation is) a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada. It’s important.” No, it’s stupid.

34. Pike asks Kirk “You know what the Federation is, right?”

Before getting it wrong… (from my old school p.o.v. anyhow!)

Who knows? Maybe in the sequel, the Enterprise will get into serious trouble and an armada of planets will suddenly drop out of warp, to save them! :p

Hey, nothing’s perfect. Even the lonely Squire of Gothos liked bowling the odd planet for the Enterprise to dodge.

I think Pike got the Federation and Starfleet mixed up in his dialogue in that scene.

No; Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman got the Federation and Starfleet mixed up in the dialogue for that scene. Pike was just following their orders.


Cause I thought Starfleet was the Exploaration and defence arm of the Federation.

34. No, actually. You’re right. He doesn’t say planets. I don’t know where I got that from. Probably because it’s linked in my head to United Federation of Planets. Then to suddenly throw the word “armada” in there, which basically another word for fleet… it just sounds wrong.

What he describes as being the Federation, actually applies more to Starfleet. I’ve never really thought of those two names as interchangable. Usually the only time it happens, is dialogue from a race outside looking in. The Klingons. The Romulans. All that lot chop and change Federation and Starfleet. But if you were inside the organisation, you’d probably take a bit more pride in being part of Starfleet and that your bosses are the Federation.

I think he used the term that the Federation was a peacekeeping armada.

That time William Shatner said “Get a life”, he presumably was actually
speaking directly to me!


I have just watched the scene again and here is what Pike said to Kirk:
“You understand what the Federation is? It is a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada.”

I cracked up laughing when I first heard those words on 8 May 2009 when I saw the movie for the first time. I don’t know whether it was a Freudian slip on the writers’ part (and was not picked up by the director/producers etc – LOL) or what. However, there are two things wrong with the wording –

1) Pike wanted Kirk to join Starfleet, which has spaceships and stuff. The Federation stands for the United Federation of Planets, a governmental body, a bureaucracy, which oversees more than Starfleet.

2) More importantly here is the use of the word “armada”. An armada is a fleet of attacking warships (as in Spanish Armada). An aggressive, attacking (offensive) fleet, whose purpose is to engage in war, can hardly be called peacekeeping and humanitarian. It is a contradiction in terms.
The reason why I and other family members laughed (sadly) is that, whether the writers realised or intended it or not, it seemed to quite adequately describe current US foreign policy, ie its worrying contradictory nature, at least, as seen and understood by non-Americans.

The smart-ass that no doubt many of you see me as being does remind you that I actually raised this point quite a while back on this site and on another board, the IMDb Star Trek (2009) more than a year ago. It is sad that some of you have only now picked up the gaff/Freudian slip/whatever.

43. Thank you for explaining my issue about a billion times more precise than I ever could. Hopefully my remaining brain cell won’t have died between now and 2012!

I bet there’s an old post of mine kicking about here, and over at TrekBBS from several years ago.

The sloppiness of referring to the Federation as a “peacekeeping and humanitarian armada” reminded me in a nice way of early Star Trek episodes where the writers couldn’t decide on who Kirk was working for: The United Earth Space Probe Agency?

45. Star Trek Enterprise did a nice tribute to that, in a great seal found on the floor of a conference room at Starfleet HQ. At the start of “Demons” and throughout “Terra Prime”.

So presumably STARFLEET began life as the UESPA (perhaps back when they launching just probes like the Friendship One and exploring places at less than Warp 2). A global successor to NASA. Then changing to Starfleet, first as a United Earth organization and then a Federation one.

“An aggressive, attacking (offensive) fleet, whose purpose is to engage in war, can hardly be called peacekeeping and humanitarian. It is a contradiction in terms.
The reason why I and other family members laughed (sadly) is that, whether the writers realised or intended it or not, it seemed to quite adequately describe current US foreign policy, ie its worrying contradictory nature, at least, as seen and understood by non-Americans.”

Excellent point. Aside from the sloppiness of using the Federation to refer to functions which in the Trek universe properly belong to Starfleet, there was always something that bothered me about the use of the word “armada” that I never quite put my finger on, and you articulated it very well.

Armada, simply means a massive fleet of ships, and that’s true, the Federation employs peacekeeping-and-humanitarian goals ‘through’ Starfleet; the Federation’s task force, the primary mission being to explore new worlds and seek to expand the Federation with new races who may be given the chance to apply if they meet certain requirements, such as technological advancement.

DS9 is all warfare but it made sense, when the Federation/Starfleet began exploring the Gamma Quadrant they encountered the Dominion who were a much older and ruthless organization, and equally powerful. No one’s willing to give up power, or even share it.

So I think if there’s war in ST12 it has to make sense. Conflicts of interest ‘can’ happen, more than just a power struggle it can be ideological or it even a matter of survival. In the case of Borg, they weren’t there to negotiate, just assimilate and that’s why the plot was brilliant. It would be nice to see a war that has a deeper meaning to it, taking a page from past Trek is always a good idea.

I don’t see how they can make a movie WITHOUT Bruce Greenwood as Captain Pike.
Kirk is still just a cocky mid-shipman. He’s got no business commanding a starship (except in an emergency situation.) The Admiralty would have to be either extremely desperate or on drugs to give Kirk command of the Enterprise at this point.
Besides Bruce Greenwood is so right for the part. So in control. I trust him. I admire him. I like him.
I mean, did anyone see Chris Pike in “Unstoppable?” Was I the only one who was bored with his performance? The middle-aged and bloated Denzel Washington was more interesting. Heck, the redneck guy with the pickup truck was more interesting than Pine. From a practical standpoint I just don’t see how this “kid” can carry a picture. Even with Quinto, et al.

P.S. To anyone who thinks that Jeff Hunter would have been boring as Captain Kirk, I would recommend viewing his first starring role, also based on a C.S. Forester book, “Sailor of the King.”
A pilot is a poor way to judge what the show would be like in production. Just look at Nimoy’s Spock. You would never guess what an effect he would have on American culture based on what we see of him in the pilot.

OK, my turn. I’ve been a Trek fan all my life having pestered my mother to let me stay up and watch the first episode when it aired, and every other episode till it went off.

But I have to say, fan I may be of the original, JJ hit the spot with the latest movie. I loved the characters.Pike, Kirk, Spoke etc. Infact what brings me here is my search for info on the next movie. Things have been quiet for a while and I’d like to see more of the new Star Trek universe.

We’re in the 21st century and this is a fitting version for our time.

Its time to let go of Shatner and Nemoy Talk of Jeff Hunter is a waste of time and effort. The man died more than half a century ago (which gave Shatner a go), he’s hardly going to reprise his role.

There’s a new folk law in town and it is good. Trek can grow and mature independent of the small screen.

Any Trek for TV should be unrelated to the movies. Mixing them dilutes both products.

The grandure that JJ brought to Star Trek has never been realised by any other director and should be maintained. We need more of it. And SOON.