Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

UPDATE!! Nimoy In 'Another' STAR TREK Movie??

Merrick again...

Here's the relevant snippet of Nimoy's appearance on CNN, courtesy of an Aint It Cool News reader 'Lost In South Florida'.  


I've also received some compelling independent confirmation that Nimoy is 'absolutely' in the new film...working more details which I'll share with you should / when they come through.  




Merrick here...


So I was just playing back my HD DVR recording of today's Enterprise/747 flyover of New York City.  

At one point in its coverage, the CNN posse on the ground in NYC rounded up Leonard Nimoy for a quick discussion about the vehicle's arrival.  Throughout the piece, the CNN gang could barely control their Geekitude.  In their final moments of discussion with Mr. Nimoy...unable to restrain themselves any longer...they went there...trumpeting the "new" STAR TREK movie (presumably referring to J.J. Abrams' 2009 picture), and asking if we'd see him "in another STAR TREK movie?"

Without missing a beat, Nimoy replied with the briefest "Umm..." and in no uncertain terms said "We're talking.  We're talking."  

Now, it's entirely feasible I've missed something somewhere along the way, but this is the first I've heard of the notion...and the a cursory Google query didn't turn up any evidence to suggest this news is 'out there' yet.  His comment seems to have gone by generally unnoticed and unrecognized, but here it is for us to mull now.  It should be noted that earlier in the year, Nimoy Tweeted about visiting the set of the new movie - although this certainly isn't (necessarily) an indicator of a fuller involvement with the project.  

Will Nimoy be returning as Spock in Abrams' still-in-production STAR TREK sequel?  Or is he potentially orbiting yet another TREK film?  More as we know more...

P.S. If anyone out there has the ability to locate & grab this snippet (audio or video) & can present it here for embed, drop me a line.  'Twould be much appreciated. 


--- follow Merrick on Twitter ! ---

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Maybe something that ties in to the end of the last one. But I can't see him having a major part. That wouldn't make sense, to me, anyway.

  • April 27, 2012, 11:19 p.m. CST

    He was one of the best things about the first one

    by AnarchyWorldsEnd

    Destracted me from the completely non-sensical plot.

  • April 27, 2012, 11:21 p.m. CST

    as cool as he is...

    by mojination

    his ice planet segment shat me to tears. it stopped the movie fuckin dead.

  • April 27, 2012, 11:21 p.m. CST

    He'll only do it if they have more lens-flares

    by Raptor Jesus

    And breweries. And ridiculous plots with humongous plot holes. And a really ugly version of the Enterprise. So yeah, he'll be in it.

  • April 27, 2012, 11:24 p.m. CST

    I agree with the last three comments

    by Jaka

    Even though they contradict each other. <p> He was the best thing about ST2009, even though the movie is crap. <p> I actually thought Karl Urban did a good job, too.

  • April 27, 2012, 11:32 p.m. CST

    Sure, let us do all the work for you.

    by JuanSanchez

  • April 27, 2012, 11:32 p.m. CST

    He will be in it just try to get more asses in seats

    by Rupee88

    He really isn't needed but they tend to not want to cut anyone out of a sequel..maybe it's a Hollywood thing or maybe it's because they like to give people what they already had. But I bet he returns for a cameo.

  • April 27, 2012, 11:35 p.m. CST

    It was a darn good movie and Nimoy is always an added welcome.

    by kbarber29

  • April 27, 2012, 11:41 p.m. CST

    You fucking losers shitting on the new star trek movie need to chill out

    by Herewereyouwish

    That was the best summer movie of the year. Jesus, what did you want, a retelling of wrath of khan?

  • April 27, 2012, 11:45 p.m. CST

    Where is AssPickleLives anyway?

    by DrMorbius

  • April 27, 2012, 11:52 p.m. CST

    I still want the Shatner...

    by The Dum Guy

    Have him pop up with the Men in Black or some shit, I don't care, make it work.

  • April 27, 2012, 11:52 p.m. CST


    by LethargicJ

    If he comes back I hope he gets a better set of dentures so I can actually understand what he's saying.

  • April 27, 2012, 11:54 p.m. CST

    I thought there was already a pic of him on set

    by John Brown

    in costume?

  • April 27, 2012, 11:54 p.m. CST

    Nimoy was a bright spot

    by nyj_et

    in an otherwise dreadful movie. That said, if he's back, I'm in.

  • April 28, 2012, 12:02 a.m. CST

    who didn't like the new Star Trek movie? it was fantastic!

    by antonphd

  • April 28, 2012, 12:03 a.m. CST


    by Merrick

    A few months ago pics were released showing Nimoy filming scenes for an Abrams era TREK movie. The official line is that these were actually leftover images from the making of the 2009 movie, which were Tweeted by the film's producers (indeed, many such pics did originate from the filmmakers' Twitter accounts).

  • April 28, 2012, 12:17 a.m. CST

    Anyone bitching about "lens flairs," STILL, should have their balls...

    by MisterManReturns

    ...ripped painfully from the body. It is now a douche bag comment.

  • April 28, 2012, 12:18 a.m. CST

    Training wheels need to come off.

    by 3774

    Kirk in Generations: guaranteed asses-in-seats training wheels. Spock in NuTrek: guaranteed asses-in-seats training wheels. Here's a guide to a decent new movie: First, invest in sets. Skip the brewery. It's sad when TOS engineering was actually better. Second, avoid the horrible plot-holes. You could have navigated V'ger through them. Third, try know...EXPLORING STRANGE NEW WORLDS. Lose the training wheels. It just reminds us of all the times it was done so much better.

  • April 28, 2012, 12:24 a.m. CST

    Now that I look closely at that pic

    by John Brown

    It's from the first one. My bad.

  • April 28, 2012, 12:35 a.m. CST

    How about Lens FLARES?

    by Kai_Mah'gra

    That's still fair game, right? I don't know what Lens "flairs" are, but they sound painful. You should get that looked at. Either that or it's something FABULOUS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • April 28, 2012, 12:38 a.m. CST

    RebooTrek is unsalvageable.

    by Bedknobs and Boomsticks

  • April 28, 2012, 12:46 a.m. CST

    Trekkies hated JJ Trek because....

    by spire_walk

    ...It was too much action, 'splosions, and lens flare, and not enough socialist circle jerk pajama parties like their red diaper baby (google red diaper baby) asses came to love in TNG, Voyager, and Enterprise. Oh yeah, and it fucked with Trek Canon, like it was sacred script. Real serious shit right there. I've watched a LOT of Trek over the years. There's good and bad, and by the end of Enterprise it was fucking flatlining. This is the problem with a lot of Trekkies, they won't fucking admit that it wasted away and died. Paramount didn't have a fucking clue on how to resurrect it. The TOS cast was too fucking old, the aging TNG cast were phoning it in on the last two movies and cashing their paychecks... Paramount wasn't going to give DS9, Voyager, or especially Enterprise a shot at the big screen. What did that leave? Think of all the directors in Hollywood who could have gotten a hold of the franchise and buried it forever. You can fucking forget all the super directors like QT, Spielburg, Cameron, whatever... they're not going to do it. They would have gotten a shot at it by now if they had wanted to a long time ago. You're not going to get your edgy, indie directors or cult movie icons because Paramount isn't going to let some dude like Cronenberg anywhere near a fucking Borg for fear of what he might make Data do to it sexually or even his take on a transporter room mishap. That leaves the director slush pile. There are some good guys in there for sure, but there's a lot of SHIT. For every guy like Whedon, you have Brett Ratner or Brian Singer or some other douche. And if you can think of all the godawful movies made in the past 5-10 years, one of those fuckers could have been the Trek director. We got JJ Abrams, and when you consider we could have had Michael Bay, you should be thanking yourself. He's not going to make the next space opera that rivals Wrath of Khan, but no one's done that in 20 years. And, to be honest, Trek movies have not been very good for a long, long time. What JJ did was bring back the franchise and made a movie that although isn't on the tWoK level, it was better than ST 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, & 9. People said it was turning Star Trek into Star Wars, and if that was the case, it was a fuck ton better than SW Episodes I, II, and III. So Trekkies, for the love of Spock, get over yourselves. Paramount never listened to your whining when they were raping the franchise, and weren't really listening when they picked JJ to helm the reboot. You could have gotten something much worse with McG or Bay's name stamped on the hull of the Enterprise.

  • April 28, 2012, 12:50 a.m. CST

    it's over

    by livetwice

    I am reminded of the words of Professor Henry Jones Sr. in Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade. In the final scene he is pulling Indy out of the abyss while the younger Jones tries desperately to reach down and grab the Holy Grail: "Indiana....let it go". The same wisdom applies to the cast of the original Star Trek.

  • I liked the 2009 Trek. I still would prefer someone invent a youth potion so that we can get the living cast back together for another few decades of movies...but lacking that, it was our best option. I felt that Sulu was miscast in the new movie, and Quinto makes a decent Spock but cannot ever quite look or sound like Nimoy. Oh well. Still enjoyed it for what it was. So, I'm all for Nimoy returning as many times as he possibly can at 81. God...WHY can't people just live longer? 100 years is simply no long enough to live...and not nearly enough Nimoy or Shatner. Other creatures on Earth can live 200+ years...some trees can live for thousands...yet we live a paultry 75-100. Time is so unkind to us...if only worthy people like Leonard got an extra hundred or so. That aside...yeah. Please do, Leonard. Please do. And for the love of all that is good and just in the universe, SOMEONE get Shatner into the movie SOMEHOW. I know he died. But this is an alternate timeline, and via a little time travel or something young Kirk could meet older, fatter Kirk. It's Star Trek - things like that are hardly unusual. Why Kirk? Well...Generations just ended his life in a very abrupt and unsatisfying way. It wasn't an epic enough end to befit Captan James Tiberius Kirk - covered with some rocks on some dustball planet? Hell no. He should go out, I don't know, off the top of my head, having everyone beam off of the ship and manually steering the Enterprise (because autopilot is broken or something) into an enemy vessel, saving the entirety of Starfleet in the process while yelling something akin to his famed "KHAAAAAAANN" line. Or better - Kirk becomes pure energy and explores the galaxy for all eternity. Goes where no man has gone before. Bangs what no man has banged before. The Kirk way. Plus, imagine the cash (and rivers geek-spooge)resulting from seeing the two of them on screen together again. DO IT, ABRAMS.

  • It works with Nimoy because his character is a Vulcan and we know they live exceptionally long lives. Geriatric Kirk is a TERRIBLE idea.

  • April 28, 2012, 12:59 a.m. CST

    the videogame?

    by NotMalcolmReed

    maybe if there's an original spock skin option he'll be doing the voice.

  • April 28, 2012, 1:03 a.m. CST

    Nimoy and FRINGE

    by Squashua

    Wasn't he in a cameo in last week's FRINGE, or did they just use his likeness since he was in amber? They keep name-dropping William Bell, like he's going to be the villain in the next season or something. Thought Nimoy swore off acting.

  • April 28, 2012, 1:04 a.m. CST

    Why is this surprising?

    by ravenink

    Spock "Prime" was a character in the 2009 movie. He didn't die, he didn't vanish and there's no real reason why he shouldn't be there. The notion that someone else (other than Abrams) is making a Star Trek movie that is NOT Star Trek 2, is freaking insane. It's also quite lazy speculation. Is Merrick high?

  • April 28, 2012, 1:15 a.m. CST

    A fuller involvement?

    by David_Denmans_Beard

    I can't run a scenario in my mind that has anyone actually talking like that. I'm less the "write the way English professors expect you to" and more "write the way you speak" but come on, there's shit that's believable and shit that just crosses into nonsensical garbage. Also, for a guy retired from acting, Nimoy is surprisingly finding a lot of work to act (voice acting not included). If only Connery were so easily persuaded.

  • April 28, 2012, 1:19 a.m. CST

    Screw you old farts, I don't want Spock back. I want …

    by veteran_of_mu

    Picard. And I want him as Locutus with a galaxy full of cubes at his back. And I want him defeated with the help of Jeri Ryan. Nude but for baby oil and lens flares. Actually, I'll supply the lens flares …

  • April 28, 2012, 1:22 a.m. CST

    Abrams ripped off lens flare and chase cam from

    by Bedknobs and Boomsticks

    Firefly/Serenity. Pretty sure he named dropped the 'Verse series as inspiration. Whedon said in the disc commentary that he utilized lens flare in Firefly because he wanted it to resemble a gritty 70's TV series.

  • April 28, 2012, 1:35 a.m. CST

    More shaky camera work and lens flare?

    by MajorFrontbum

    JJ Abrams really needs to mature as a film maker. Shaky camera work and lens flare does not make a good movie. It's annoying, it's off putting and it's just fucking stupid. Buy the cunt a tripod for his birthday, or stop making movies.

  • April 28, 2012, 1:36 a.m. CST

    Nimoy and Greenwood added maturity and wisdom

    by smudgewhat

    To the new Trek. I loved it, and their presences, especially Nimoy. If he wants to add to the story of shepherding the remaining Vulcans it's all fine bye.

  • April 28, 2012, 1:36 a.m. CST me

    by smudgewhat

  • April 28, 2012, 1:39 a.m. CST

    Also this movie needs a fucking classic Kirk drop kick

    by smudgewhat

    I'm not remotely joking. Make it fucking so. Honor Shat with a flying drop.

  • April 28, 2012, 2:03 a.m. CST

    Just give Nemoy the whole fucking movie!

    by Crooooooow

    Make the plot about old Spock trying to repair the damage done to the timeline.

  • April 28, 2012, 2:08 a.m. CST

    Best idea so far

    by GWARHOL

    Just give Nemoy the whole fucking movie!

  • April 28, 2012, 2:11 a.m. CST


    by berserkrl

    <<That leaves the director slush pile.>> Don't you mean the Slusho pile?

  • April 28, 2012, 2:12 a.m. CST

    @spire_walk - argh

    by berserkrl

    quote:: That leaves the director slush pile. ::unquote Don't you mean the Slusho pile?

  • and my guess is they filmed that scene at the same time he was filming... .... the season finale of Fringe! If anything could get Nimoy back on the small screen - it's his good Star Trek pal JJ Abrams! I truly think Nimoy will reprise his William Bell character one last time in the season finale of Fringe - woohoo! I would also bet that Walter sets off the amber to stop Bell who looked to be trying to get away in 4x19! I have no idea if any of this is correct - but I am *really* looking forward to finding out if it is!

  • April 28, 2012, 2:57 a.m. CST

    Why The Shat could be in it

    by Darthshellers

    Although Kirk died in a really lame way in Generations, it is feasible to assume that in this new timeline, Kirk DOESN'T die in such a way. So why not have him in as a framing device or something?

  • April 28, 2012, 3:54 a.m. CST

    Old farts? That's rich

    by wcolbert

    I'm in my 20's...but i guess preferring TOS makes me an "old fart"? K then. And yeah...TNG is now 25 years old. Not exactly a spring chicken if you rememer watching that when it first aired.

  • I really wish they weren't bringing Khan back.

  • ...anyone who bitches about Abrams Trek doesn't know how lucky they are. Trek was DEAD. It hadn't breathed an interesting breath since First Contact. Abrams gave it CPR and, despite some bad humour, his movie was fun, entertaining, accessible, and free of the po-faced 'what does it mean to be human' shite that plagued DS9, Voyager and Enterprise. DS9 had its moments, but the other two were fucking wretched.

  • April 28, 2012, 5:15 a.m. CST

    Amen - EVERYONE here should read spire_walk's post - 100% correct!

    by irishraidersfan

  • April 28, 2012, 5:31 a.m. CST

    spire_walk speaks the truth

    by Composite_Beppo

    Give that fellow a TOS phaser autographed by Shatner and Nimoy - his rant rocks.

  • April 28, 2012, 5:38 a.m. CST


    by jasper Stillwell

    Spot on, my friend. I've been watching Trek since the very early days. If anyone thinks that the bulk of what has been produced since TOS is 'quality' then they need to think again about what that term actually means. Trek should be a fun, energetic, exciting and engaging space-Western, all whilst attached to incredibly cool sci-fi ideas. The latter tendency towards ponderous, po-faced, am-dram pretention produced an awful lot of barely-competent, quite dreary films and television, most of which would barely past muster in any other context. Abrams gave this whole thing a massive shot in the arm. Its like people moaning about the fact that Bond films are no longer like the ones from the 1970s. If you like those so much, go and watch them, they're there, they've been done - move on. (On a personal note that drill sequence in the last Trek movie looked exactly like the kind of things you'd see on the cover of one of those Gold Key comics from the late 1960s. It was precisely the kind of image you always wanted to see on the show but knew that Roddenberry could never have scraped the money or talent together to pull off). Trek should be fun. They kind of forgot all about that.

  • April 28, 2012, 6:23 a.m. CST

    ''we have a old spock''

    by vulturess

    old spock kicks gorn army ass.

  • April 28, 2012, 6:43 a.m. CST

    Okay, Cumberbach IS playing Khan

    by Adam

    No if's, and's, or but's about it. They wanted Benicio but he wanted too much money so they went to the FAR superior actor Benedict Cumberbach. Bet the ranch on it

  • check comments 13 & 14

  • April 28, 2012, 7:29 a.m. CST

    Nimbly said he wouldn't return for one reason:

    by BoyNamedSue

    It wouldn't be fair to Zach Quinto....and I take him at his word. Let whatever happened to Spock Prime be a mystery.

  • I've been approached for man-on-the-street type opinion bits before. Not being famous, I can afford to be less polite, I always tell them to "Fuck off!"

  • April 28, 2012, 7:29 a.m. CST

    darthshellers - why that means Shat can't be in it.

    by theyreflockingthisway

    Obviously Kirk doesn't die in such a way in this universe because that future has not been written yet. However that future Kirk would be the future version of the Kirk from the 2009 film wheras the future Spock is from the original timeline universe. The great thing about this new timeline is we can start over without disrespecting the originals. If Shatner comes in as the future version of 2009 Kirk then it takes away any sense of peril - we'll know Kirk will live to be an old man. No threat from any danger in any of the films. As the Spock in that time line is an alternate universe Spock, 2009 Spock can still die whilst his older version can still live. It's very different.

  • April 28, 2012, 7:32 a.m. CST

    The new film was better than anything before it

    by NightArrows

    And I, for the most part, love the other films. The new one was outstanding. If another one causes all the old, fat, smelly, greasy, whiny trek fans to off them self all at once? Even better. Fucking losers.

  • April 28, 2012, 7:38 a.m. CST


    by NightArrows

    What made Trek "special" depends on the person watching it. It's not one singularly defined element. Trek has been a pathetic bloated laughable mess for a long time. A new direction with a movie kick-started with some vigor is what was needed. And you're right, lots of dusty old content for you to peruse.

  • April 28, 2012, 7:48 a.m. CST


    by Dlgothv

    Damn, I do agree with you buddy. I thoroughly enjoyed this new Trek film, much more than any movie before it. While Kahn was a fun film, it aged terribly, and I still don't understand all the reverence for it. I loved the TNG series when it first premiered, but as it progressed, and the Borg became the villain week after week, it grew really stale. Looking forward to the new movie...

  • April 28, 2012, 7:52 a.m. CST

    The last Trek was a shitpile

    by kwisatzhaderach

    Abrams is just a money-grabbing corporate whore and as for Kurtzman and Orci... well, what can you say? Their filmography says it all: The Island, Mission Impossible 3, Transformers, Star Trek, Transformers 2, Cowboys and Aliens. Anybody that thinks any of those films was well-written needs their head examined.

  • April 28, 2012, 7:54 a.m. CST


    by kwisatzhaderach

    The reverence for Khan comes from it being brilliantly written and directed, with, you know, actual THEMES and RESONANCE, two words Kurtzman and Orci clearly have yet to come across.

  • April 28, 2012, 8:13 a.m. CST

    the people who seem to defend nutrek the most

    by JAMF

    are the self-described 'long time trek fans' who can't stop telling us how shit trek is. what a surprise. maybe trek was never for you in the first place? maybe you should've stopped watching years ago? TNG/DS9 > any nutrek bullshit by a country mile. yes VOY and ENT were a bit rubbish but that's because they were trying to cater to morons like you who only care about 'splosions and titties' nutrek is the final stage of the dumbing down process of trek - VOY > ENT > NUTREK - yet you claim it's the best trek in years??? that says it all.

  • Dumbin' it down, speedin' it up. NU TREK!

  • Oh, right: Democratic governor, and not Texas. Got it.

  • I was hoping the next one they'd say it was all a dream. Spock wakes up and is all mom you're alive! I'm in Kansas and there's toto. That's right Marty Spock. You're alive and well in good old 1985. The fact that Vulcan was destroyed is pretty much the main reason this Trek crew sucks. They have failed where no crew has failed before. They let billions of vulcans die. These are the voyages of the losers.

  • April 28, 2012, 8:48 a.m. CST

    Nero is the worst idea since the face-lift guys

    by UltraTron

  • April 28, 2012, 8:48 a.m. CST

    Unlike some of the other Star Trek movies...

    by vezner2007

    the last one hasn't gotten better with age. Every time I try to watch it I feel more and more annoyed with the camera work, the story, and the acting. In short, I'm starting to hate it and I couldn't really care less about the next one. Star Trek, IMO, died with "Enterprise" and I don't think it's coming back.

  • April 28, 2012, 8:49 a.m. CST

    cumberbach is playing- *spoilers*

    by vulturess

    spoilers-- shemp. (shemp prime not available.) /spoilers.

  • April 28, 2012, 8:50 a.m. CST

    These talkbacks remind me of that one Onion article

    by AlexDK

    "Early reviews are calling it a delightful action adventure movie" "No wonder the fans feel betrayed here"

  • Usually movies grow on you but this one just keeps widening the plot holes and un-cinematic nature. And for fuck's sake there's a midget in a rubber suit. But I agree it is better than 2 or 3 of the next gen films. I like generations for one reason- Picard's kids. They are HIS kids. Love that. In the end it's the same with Kirk and Picard. The enterprise was their love, life and purpose. There is no female interest for these 2. Just want to scream at Picard- fuck Beverly! You guys are both just aging! Who else is there to fuck on that ship! Just fuck!!!!

  • April 28, 2012, 9:12 a.m. CST

    Here's why I hated Abrams' Trek

    by Grammaton Cleric Binks

    First, yes as many point out he destroyed the canon. Literally anything that happened in the Trek universe never did as he hit the giant reset button. That aside, I can't abide by stupidity. There's suspension of disbelief, then there's stupidity. Tell me where in any military they will take some cadet, who's not even done with school, be so thinned out that they fill all the ships with these cadets, send them off to battle, then take one of them, who didn't want to be in school in the first place, then after one mission promote him about five ranks to immediately put him in command of the flagship of the greatest fleet ever in existence.

  • April 28, 2012, 9:23 a.m. CST

    Ultratron, Generations also sucked, and here's why:

    by Grammaton Cleric Binks

    So he can leave the vortex, field, cloud, whatever the fuck it was at any point. The idea was that you wouldn't want to leave. Anyway he decides to leave. Fine. He finds Kirk, and decides to take on McDowell just when he's about to launch the weapon. Gee, how about stepping out on his own shortly after McDowell boards the Enterprise. "Yoo hoo, Mr. Worf. Take him to the brig." The end.

  • ...anybody know anything about that?

  • April 28, 2012, 9:52 a.m. CST

    grammaton cleric bale:

    by UltraTron

    Yes but it introduced us to the Nexus. A dimensional ribbon capable of transcending time, converting thoughts into matter- basically god and heaven wrapped up in a little ribbon. Not that you'll ever see it again. It now rests in the pile of throwaway plot devices that includes the whale probe, pepto bismal Klingon blood(cause red blood they used to have is scary colored?), the entire nanite civilization that Wesley spawned, Q(absent generations movie where they battle Q), wide-beam phasers(tos had the ability to stun a crowd of thousands-illuminating the need to ever see a pchoo,pchoo gun-fight. But they would need to write something to fill the pchoo, pchoo space), Vger and countless technological advances they already have that they never think to use because it might interfere with simple do-dah story writing. Examples of this are legion: Geordie falls down a hole right next to Riker and Worf. Poof! They can't find him. Don't even bother to check their cellphones or scan for his life form or anything. Well we can't find him. Let's just beam back up. I could go on with how inferior their locator tech is compared to ours in 2012 but the point is no matter what plot device is ever introduced- It will always be forgotten to facilitate whatever stupid story the next guy who wanders into the room writes.

  • April 28, 2012, 9:54 a.m. CST

    Neu-Trek is enjoyable...but it doesn't make sense...and isn't "Trek".

    by conspiracy

    It's a good time...and I enjoy it for what it is. But, I also understand it is a film aimed and designed for the 21st century crowd; those unthinking masses who believe everything on TV and don't see the issue with texting and talking during a film. Most Modern Sci-Fi film viewers don't want to think too much...they want spectacle, they want sizzle, and honestly you can't throw too much at them or their already strained intellects will simply collapse under the weight of too much character development or story. Just make it pretty, make it exciting, throw in some unnaturally attractive people and they'll lap it up. I don't blame the film makers for what we are seeing at the theater, it is their JOB to make products that will sell and what you see is just a reflection of what people want; I blame US for allowing society to fall to such a level that Pissing Robots, inane, illogical plot points, and a few pretty faces/tits can produce Billion Dollar franchises.

  • April 28, 2012, 9:56 a.m. CST

    uh, i stand corrected.

    by OptimusBob

  • April 28, 2012, 9:57 a.m. CST

    Who cares?

    by Brian Hopper

    Most trekkers are just waiting out these three Abrams Shit Trek movies until Paramount comes to its goddamned senses and puts Star Trek (normal universe, not Abrams' shitverse) back on TV.

  • April 28, 2012, 9:58 a.m. CST

    And if Nimoy DOES show up in this thing....

    by conspiracy

    ...all I want to know is was my story about Roberto and JJ blackmailing him into it with Blow and under aged hookers just a lucky guess, or the catalyst for it?

  • April 28, 2012, 9:59 a.m. CST

    Trek09 is a dividing line between...

    by Detached

    ...people who understand what good writing is and what it isn't. JJ Trek does have its moments, but overall, it's just a popcorn movie. Nothing more. Some airhead movies age fairly well. Not this one. The plot holes are so immense, you send the (actual) Sixth Fleet through them. Yes, most movies have a plot hole here or there. This movie literally depended on them. And none of this has anything to do with "canon." The basic idea of rebooting via a new timeline is fine- in fact, it may be the best way to do it. No problem there. But that still means the rest of the script should be done right. This one wasn't. If you want to check your brain at the door, sure, you could go for Kiddie Trek- because it is a kiddie (popcorn) film. And there's a place for even that, at times. But again, it depends on a properly written (not even necessarily well-written) script. Again, that film had a few moments, but overall, that script constantly insults viewers' intelligence.

  • How can you explain this? Also Robocop got to eat his own shit when Caine ripped out his digestive tract. How does it taste?!- said the child from next generation. Where was society then I ask you?

  • April 28, 2012, 10:11 a.m. CST

    You never see a Vulan get splattered. I guess green food coloring is too expensive.

    by Grammaton Cleric Binks

    I think the only time Nimoy bled was when he was whipped by the Nazis in TOS. I don't think Kirk got a hit slice in during the mating battle, but I could be wrong.

  • It would be great if Nimoy is in this one also.

  • April 28, 2012, 10:20 a.m. CST

    Ultra...those were plot points.

    by conspiracy

    The tortured Robots showed Jaba was ruthless and viewed robots as disposable helped put our "Heros" C3PO and R2-D2 in perceived peril..."would they get out unscathed"? I think you mean Robocop 2. But I do not remember that scene. However...I could see where the film maker is simply trying to convey the twisted depravity of the Antagonist. I have no problem with Shock and Awe on screen if it serves a it helps define a character, situation or propel the story forward. Like Sonnys death in Godfather...gratuitous...but necessary to help define the Characters of Michael and Vito, and frame what was to come next. What I refer too are things like Transformers urinating on someone/something (yeah...that makes sense), going from Cadet to Captain in a few hours, or even not really explaining the motivations for characters it seems to be enough to give cursory paper thin reasons for the WHY...and then get right to the CGI explosions.

  • April 28, 2012, 10:36 a.m. CST

    I thought he stated that he was done with the character

    by Logan_1973

    He said something to that effect in one of the Extras on the blu-ray, if memory serves.

  • April 28, 2012, 10:39 a.m. CST

    Star Trek sucks remake TJ Hooker

    by edwardpenishands

    Don't even getting me started on the boring PC faggotry that was Next Gen.

  • April 28, 2012, 10:41 a.m. CST

    Nimoy rules

    by mulscul

    Nimoy is the best thing in Trek, and IF JJ or someone had what Nimoy considered a "good idea" or something "worth considering" then I would bet he would indeed consider it. My hope is that he comes back even for a small cameo. And would love to see a Nimoy Shatner scene in some way!!!! Come on...for a Trek anniversary.

  • April 28, 2012, 10:43 a.m. CST

    by the way...I heard him say that too!!!

    by mulscul

    At the very least, I don't think he would have said that out of the blue. Whether he is in Trek again or seems to me that someone, JJ or someone else, has at least talked to him.

  • April 28, 2012, 10:47 a.m. CST

    And another thing...JJ did NOT erase all the original canon

    by Logan_1973

    The presence of Old Spock confirms that the original timeline DID happen. It's an alternate reality, not the one and only. Doc Brown's chalkboard-diagram in BTF II is exactly the time-travel theory that JJ used.

  • April 28, 2012, 11:08 a.m. CST

    They're going to need him at least one last time in FRINGE

    by tangcameo

    They keep referencing him so bloody much lately.

  • April 28, 2012, 11:09 a.m. CST

    They'll have to have him on FRINGE at least one last time

    by tangcameo

    They've been referencing Bell so bloody much lately.

  • April 28, 2012, 11:41 a.m. CST

    Agreed Logan_1973...There is no reason to complain about canon...

    by conspiracy

    ...Where is Bob, I want to ask him the reasons for the Spock/Uhura "romance" (although I think we ALL know the reason...demographics). That is perhaps the most Illogical thing Spock could have done...getting involved with a subordinate; and we've already seen that it has compromised his objectivity. Perhaps the film makers feel today's audience is incapable of connecting to, or would otherwise reject the more Subtle, nuanced emotional conflict so often seen in Nimoy Spock; and need it writ large.

  • April 28, 2012, 11:44 a.m. CST

    I can't take those IMPOSTERS playing Kirk and Spock.


    There's only 1 Captain Kirk....which is Shatner And only 1 Spock.....which of course is Nimoy.

  • April 28, 2012, 11:46 a.m. CST

    Chris Pine looks fuck all like Shatner.


    The whole thing is fuckin ridiculous and should never have been done.

  • April 28, 2012, 11:53 a.m. CST

    Can't believe the hate in the last few dozen comments

    by theyreflockingthisway

    I thought the last Star Trek film was fantastic. I really enjoyed it and so did so many others - I can't see where you're coming from with this. Lens flare? Really? That ruined an exceptionally good film for you? To be honest, all that gave me was a feeling of "new" - I'm not sure if that was the intention, but I can't say I found it distracting. It was just the style they were going for and saw past it. I kind of enjoy most Star Trek anyway. I can't say I'm a Trekkie by any means, but I've seen most of the series when they've been repeated on TV from the original through to Enterprise. I thought this movie was light years ahead of most of those and on par with others. I'd have never have thought of it as inferior. But I suppose this is the internet and if people arn't arguing about which version of Star Trek is better then we're using it wrong.

  • April 28, 2012, 11:58 a.m. CST

    @smudgewhat - I was just admiring Kirk's fighting style the other day

    by Crimson Dynamo

    the flying drop kick is great, and the other great move is when he kinda jumps in the air and delivers the double karate chops to the side of his opponent's neck

  • April 28, 2012, 11:59 a.m. CST

    Loved 2009 Trek...

    by Tarch

    ...despite the significant flaws in the first film. Was the villian bad? Yes, from the casting on. Was the whole outdoor part of the ice planet a total misfire? Heck yeah. Did they go just a bit too far with the old Trek nods (like the warp core explosions)? Yup. But did they get *everything* right in actually rebooting the TOS universe? Hell yes! The Enterprise casting was total genius, their characters were perfection, the ship looked like a quadrillion bucks, and the emotional sweep of the piece was involving, convincing and breathtaking. I could even buy in to Simon Pegg, whom I normally hate and was the original that they'd taken the most liberties with. Was I thrilled that they eliminate Vulcan? Nope, and the 'red matter' idea was imprudent as well. But the part that matters in moving forward - the actual part that moves to the next film - was so, so very good.

  • April 28, 2012, 12:06 p.m. CST

    I'd rather see Shatner or Nimoy in another film than these imposters.


    And I don't care if they're in their 80s. They're the real deal.

  • that makes the most sense to me.

  • April 28, 2012, 12:19 p.m. CST

    It is obvious who Cumberbatch is playing:

    by Chris Moody

    Tolian Soran. He tangles with the crew of everyone's favorite starship...and is thereby prevented from later messin' with the Nexus. some way (perhaps during first experience in the timelessness and inter-time/space/dimension/timeline qualities of the Nexus)...Tolian Soran is defeated and OT Kirk is saved. Final scenes: Kirk and Spock sharing a Romulan ale and a pair of Terakian slave girls on the bridge of the NCC 1701-B. You heard it here first, peeps.

  • April 28, 2012, 12:23 p.m. CST

    Pretty much why everybody laughs at Trekkies.

    by Perigee

    I started watching TOS back in the early 70's as a kid - I sat at dinner with one leg out from under the table, so I could rocket off to the tube and not miss a second. And that was about 40 years ago, on the dot. Now, Flash Gordon - the original, Buster Crabbe version - showed up on screens in 1934. And, although I may have been a little self-absorbed, I don't remember a bunch of bearded, chubby old farts wearing leotards wailing about the fact that Di Laurentis' 1980 version wasn't "true" to the original, or didn't star Buster Crabbe, or wasn't taking the source material seriously enough. It's not because all the old "Flash Gordon" fans were already dead - it was because all the old "Flash Gordon" fans realized what Trekkies don't seem to be able to grasp - The new film wasn't FOR them. It was for their kids, or grandkids. The graybeards were invited to take it or leave it. And it was cool by them. And here we have all this dissension by Trekkies who think that they are still seven, sitting in their Donrus tee-shirts, not giving a damn that time, styles, and entertainment has moved on without them. Waah! Its not the REAL Kirk and Spock! Waah! Its not Picard and Data! Waah! It's not The Flounders and Rubberman! Waah! It's not Kate Mulgrew and The Wooden Indian! Really. That's all a little pathetic. It's not yours. It's your kid's "Star Trek". And the one after this version will be your grandkid's "Star Trek". And instead of just accepting that none of it is a clone of your - and my - kiddy obsession and enjoying the longevity of Our shared mythology, people go apeshit. It's bizarre and immature. Leave it grow. Let it continue past us. Appreciate the fact that it is our legacy, and even if it's not what We want, it is healthy, strong and loved. "Star Trek" has become American Mythology. That's just amazing. And we all have a part of making that happen. NuTrek is our child - and if it's brasher than we'd like, less intellectual than we'd want, less focused than we hoped for... it doesn't change it's pedigree. And, in time, it will have a child of it's own. Trust me on this - I've been watching it happen for 40 years now.

  • April 28, 2012, 12:26 p.m. CST

    Bad Robot's plants are very active today...

    by Brian Hopper

    ... 'It was a darn good movie and Nimoy is always an added welcome.' ... 'I thought the last Star Trek film was fantastic.' ... 'I am a huge Star Trek fan (Trekkie/Trekker) and I loved JJ's take on the franchise!!!' That's the best you PR drones can do?

  • April 28, 2012, 12:30 p.m. CST

    The CATCH 22 of STAR TREK film making:

    by Chris Moody

    Most of the original movies needed (and deserved) a $200 Million budget -- but would hardly recuperate the cost due to limited fan interest. Of course, the rolls would have to be recast anyway. The hardcore Trekkies would still have been bitched and moaned from round the Moons of Nibia, and round the Antares Maelstrom, and round perdition's flames simply because the rolls were recast. Obviously, they would have argued that "no one could replace Fatner, Nimoy, DeForest, Takei, etc...

  • Anybody who trash talks the social commentary that has been the backbone of Star Trek is a categorical moron. Don't bother responding to such trolling. Star Trek has *always* been built on social commentary at its genesis, and has always reached its greatest potential when focusing on such. How many TOS episodes had classic literature quotes as titles, to act as pretext for the messages? Wrath of Khan was the crowning achievement because it wrapped itself around philosophical questions of aging, existential purpose and revenge. It's a re-telling of Moby Dick, with starships instead of whaling ships. Most of the movies failed (particularly TNG movies), because they tried to turn aging morality-play characters into action stars. The action should only serve to advance complex philosophical stories that ask questions of the human experience; that's the entire point of Star Trek. When you completely divorce that from the action, and settle for a movie that's 'shiny, loud and fast', and nothing more then that, it's no longer Star Trek. It's an action movie wearing a Star Trek Halloween costume. And with things such as lazy sets and bad writing that literally rely on plot-holes, it's like kicking the concept in the stomach while it's already lying on the ground.

  • April 28, 2012, 12:34 p.m. CST

    *SPOILER* Footage from STAR TREK XII...

    by Chris Moody

  • April 28, 2012, 12:37 p.m. CST

    Most amusing part of the CNN footage...

    by TheSecondQuest

    ...was that the headline tag ID'd him as "Leonard Nimoy: Former Enterprise Commander".

  • April 28, 2012, 12:43 p.m. CST

    @ pink_apocalypse

    by Perigee

    I wouldn't disagree with your points - however, there is a question of evolution. If we were to condemn any of the Trek versions on their failures, then TNG - Wish Granting Space Jellyfish. "I sense Great Joy!!" GONE. TNG had time to find their footing - let's face it, nearly the entire first and second seasons were horrific. NuTrek is in a bind because they don't have the advantage of multiple episodes a year to hone. At this rate, they get "an episode" every four years. Which is Incredibly Gruesome. The question you have to ask is - Was Trek09 Worse than TNGS01E01? VOYS01E01?DS9S01E01?ENTS01E01?

  • April 28, 2012, 12:49 p.m. CST

    Invalid argument. Google 'false equivalency'.

    by 3774

    They didn't spend a couple of years and millions upon millions of dollars on each episode. Some episodes are bound to stumble. There's no excuse to not get a movie done right.

  • The timetravel plot and lack of continuity to other Trek properties make it so they could interweave the entire Trek universe! Logic is overrated, bring on the absurdist Trek!! Shat, Pofessor X, and the whole gang raking it in Avengers style!!! And yes, more Nimoy.

  • April 28, 2012, 12:54 p.m. CST

    Not Some Episodes. Pilot Episodes. Proof of Concept.

    by Perigee

    I don't think there's any question that the money of ST09 isn't on the screen - which makes your reply disingenuous. And - you can certainly blame Roddenberry - I don't think TNGS01E01 was anything less than the production company wanted it to be. It wasn't a rushed, mid-season production story. It was exactly what Roddenberry wanted. And it was a misfire. And millions upon millions of dollars would not have made Wish Granting Joyful Space Jellyfish any better.

  • April 28, 2012, 12:55 p.m. CST

    Time travel aside, Abrams screwed up the Spock/Uhura thing because

    by Grammaton Cleric Binks

    Spock was already betrhothed to the chick on Vulcan. He never had any desire for anyone else until that was purged from him after sort of killing Kirk. There were also some TOS series where he was under alien influence. So the idea of him and Uhura getting it on was utter crap.

  • April 28, 2012, 12:56 p.m. CST

    If Captain D-Day comes along, resets everything right, and says my bad

    by Grammaton Cleric Binks

    then I'll possibly see the next one.

  • April 28, 2012, 12:56 p.m. CST


    by spire_walk

  • April 28, 2012, 12:56 p.m. CST

    Was Trek09 Worse than TNGS01E01? VOYS01E01?DS9S01E01?ENTS01E01?

    by Brian Hopper


  • April 28, 2012, 12:59 p.m. CST

    harry_cox - yes I have seen Alien ...

    by theyreflockingthisway

    I love Alien, one of my all time favourite movies. However I love this too and they're both completely different movies. Can a haunting and claustrophobic sci fi and an fun adventurous sci fi not co-exist? You're sounding like you want every movie set in space to be like Alien, and I know that can't be true. The fact is there's nothing you can say that'll make me dislike this Star Trek. You can point out films you think are superior, and I may agree like with Alien, but that won't go back in time and stop me from liking what I think is one of the better Trek movies. And I wouldn't call the script lazy - I think it did exceptionally well in creating a Star Trek story that is fun and interesting to people new to the series. It brought back the original crew, showing something we haven't seen before and without messing with anything that went before it. You say not to get you started on the whys so I won't - it's pointless anyway. You can point out character flaws, plot holes - whatever you like. The fact will still remain I enjoyed. Hell, just for you, I'll just say I think it's the best Star Trek that's ever been made. Oh yes, I said it.

  • April 28, 2012, 12:59 p.m. CST

    spire_walk: er yes??

    by Grammaton Cleric Binks

  • April 28, 2012, 1:06 p.m. CST

    those who say older fans just don't want a reboot are dead wrong

    by Detached

    I've known since the mid-90s there were plans to eventually reboot TOS. Never had a problem with it. Even had some of my own ideas for it. Let's repeat it again for those can't Get It: the problem is BAD WRITING. Some of it was even shaky for a popcorn movie, but for a respected sf franchise, it was inexcusable. Personally, I think they should let the whole thing die, and actually (gasp!!!!) come up with something new, but Paramount knows this is a moneymaker. I guess they figure they don't even have to do a good movie to make those $$ either.

  • April 28, 2012, 1:07 p.m. CST

    By "another" I was hoping for non-JJ Trek.

    by kabong

    I'd love to see competing visions go head to head in theatres. <p> Same for James Bond, Sherlock Holmes, Tarzan . . .

  • April 28, 2012, 1:08 p.m. CST

    grammaton: Spock/Uhura TOS

    by spire_walk

    TOS is Canon sometimes and sometimes it isn't. Wrath of Khan took a couple of liberties of its own, for instance having Chekov and Khan meet for the first time, only for Khan to say, "I never forget a face...Chekov." Enterprise NCC-1701 was supposed to be the first Enterprise. Yet the series Enterprise had an earlier starship Enterprise. Klingons did not have head ridges in TOS. Heck they looked different in the Star Trek: TMP. Only, what, 17 years later? Romulans and Vulcans look the same in TOS, yet in TNG/DS9/VOY they all have forehead differences around their brows. Bottom line, 1960s Trek boxes you into a corner if you try to be faithful to it.

  • Your argument hinges on the assumption that Abrams 'gets it'. He clearly didn't. Will he realize his mistake? Who knows. It was a generic crowd-pleaser, but a wildly off-the-mark misfire in relation to the essence of Star Trek.

  • No problem with that. Everybody doesn't have to like Star Trek. And everybody doesn't have to like Star Trek 2009. They can make the movie, but they shouldn't be upset because people don't think much of it. Or buy the merchandise. Or read the books. Or like the ship. Never take anything seriously that's shown in a place where they sell candy in the lobby (read that somewhere).

  • April 28, 2012, 1:16 p.m. CST

    JJ puts his arms around Orci and K in bed and says,

    by kabong

    Let's do it again. <p> That's Hollyweird.

  • April 28, 2012, 1:26 p.m. CST

    Canon Fans

    by SuperTrekkie

    Are not Star Trek fans at all. TPTB will never take them seriously.

  • April 28, 2012, 1:28 p.m. CST

    generic anti-JJ Trek comment:

    by Jeremy Jar Binks

    mumble mumble dumbed it down mumble mumble lens flares mumble too fun too fast mumble mumble 90210 teen hate plot hole mumble. Something lens flares something something.

  • April 28, 2012, 1:30 p.m. CST

    spire_walk, the way I look at it is Trek is canon, and Abrams' Trek is outside that.

    by Grammaton Cleric Binks

    Enterprise explains the Klingon head ridges, or lack thereof. Actually DS9 eludes to the problem when Sisko and crew go back in time. As far as the Khan thing goes you can always say he was on the ship in season 1, just never got any screen time. As far as the first Enterprise, remember Enterprise the series was set before the founding of, and actually conluded with the founding of the United Federation of Planets. You may have me on the Vulcan/Klingon thing, but aestetics are minor compared with changing someone's personality.

  • April 28, 2012, 1:36 p.m. CST

    lens flare

    by Tasteflex

    I'm an insider on this project and I happen to know the villian of the next "Star Trek" is a giant lens flare. JJ Abrams snack on my balls!

  • April 28, 2012, 1:36 p.m. CST

    I'd really love to see Two Takes Frakes get his hands on a reboot.

    by Grammaton Cleric Binks

  • April 28, 2012, 1:41 p.m. CST

    Want to see Trek the way it should be done? It's on youtube now

    by Raptor Jesus

    Go search for 'Cats in Space'. Sure, it's funny, it's cats in spaceships. But look at the set design, the artwork, and particularly watch the end credits. See how easy it is to recreate the 'look and feel' of the TOS Universe? We need a weekly show with a new ship, set the same time as the original series.

  • April 28, 2012, 1:44 p.m. CST

    @ grammaton cleric binks:

    by Chris Moody

    The point that he is trying to make is that they had to MAKE UP some "canon" to explain away a plot discrepancy. Klingons have ridges because the costume artists could do that with a bigger budget when the first motion picture was approved. ENTERPRISE writers just made up a solution for it (sort of). I'm sure that they have come up with other "solutions" to bridge such things. For instance, why was the Enterprise in the original series so much smaller than the Enterprise in the first three films? An "overhaul" increased the size by 150%? There isn't anything "original" from the first ship that appeared in the next. Maybe they used the same light bulbs? Nah. The budget and "vision" was bigger when they were making the first movie -- and the original ship just looked so pathetically cheesy and low-budget. Hence, the change.

  • April 28, 2012, 1:44 p.m. CST

    Not a single pitch for a new show has been

    by SuperTrekkie

    Set in the P.U. Not Singer/Fuller Not Stracynski/Zabel Not MacFarlane Not Moore Not going to happen. Even Braga said they should have rebooted.

  • April 28, 2012, 1:49 p.m. CST

    But What of the Coveted 42-year-old Bachelor Demographic?

    by Lesbianna_Winterlude


  • April 28, 2012, 3:12 p.m. CST

    Agree, m6y. Plants or sockpuppets?

    by Chief Joseph

    A long winded, unoriginal JJ-saved-Trek rant by spire_walk followed by four consecutive *that spire_walk's right* posts. Transparent.

  • April 28, 2012, 3:24 p.m. CST

    OK, THAT's a new one.

    by Chief Joseph

    TOS didn't have Spock womanizing only because they didn't have the budget for it. Gotcha.

  • April 28, 2012, 3:28 p.m. CST

    Nichelle demands $100K for love scene with Nimoy

    by Chief Joseph

    Sorry, Mr. Roddenberry, it can't be done. Your vision of Uhura-Spock love is going to have to wait 43 years.

  • April 28, 2012, 3:29 p.m. CST

    The haters are completely irrelevant at this point.

    by Duck of Death

    It's pointless to try to reason with the benighted fools who can't deal with the reboot. The same people who bitched and moaned about how shitty every Star Trek movie was since III, are the ones bitching and moaning about how shitty the new Trek movie is. The problem is, they don't actually know what they want. They keep harkening back to some mythical golden age of Star Trek when it was all about IDEAS and deep themes, but the fact is, the show really only achieved that elevated level a tiny handful of times during decades of material that was mostly action-oriented, science-fantasy cheese. The one Trek movie that everyone creams their corduroy pants over is Wrath of Khan, and that was pure balls-to-the-wall ACTION. Meanwhile, the Trek film that most embodies the film that Trekkies claim to want is Star Trek: The Motion Picture, a.k.a. the snoozefest that only a minority of fans will admit to liking. Even if these people got what they're constantly demanding, they wouldn't like it. Trying to appease these confused fans is why the movies became steadily worse and worse over the years. It took a fresh presence like J.J. Abrams, who has completely ignored the desires of Trekkies, to actually revitalize the franchise and turn Star Trek into something people would actually want to see. Which is awesome. These fans should be ignored, because their wishes are total fantasies with no practical application to entertainment. They are utterly, totally irrelevant to either the creators of Trek, to Paramount, or to the culture at large, who flocked to the new film precisely because it ignored this kind of Trek fan. But of course, that's why they scream until blue in the face, because they think they're all-important to the franchise, and like neglected toddlers they can't stand the fact that they're not being catered to. They think they're the all-important core of the Trek franchise, but in fact they mean nothing. The powers that be have wised up to the fact that the "true fans" have actually been a millstone around the neck of Trek, dragging it down year after year. I'm thankful that these puling nitwits have finally been properly pushed to the margins, so that Trek can grow and flourish and continue to be culturally relevant.

  • April 28, 2012, 3:30 p.m. CST

    Spock hooked up with Uhura for one reason.

    by Chief Joseph

  • April 28, 2012, 3:39 p.m. CST

    is he going to be using his walker?

    by danny rose

  • April 28, 2012, 3:41 p.m. CST

    shaftner is too fat

    by danny rose

  • April 28, 2012, 3:42 p.m. CST

    so your sayin the actors are more important then the characters?

    by danny rose

  • April 28, 2012, 3:42 p.m. CST


    by Ryan Kinsel

    say assimov into your computer monitor three times and he will appear and begin to troll!

  • April 28, 2012, 3:46 p.m. CST

    And another thing...

    by Duck of Death

    ...yeah, the new Trek movie was filled with things that made no sense, unlike TNG, where the galaxy was populated by aliens who were all basically human except for slightly different nose bridges, and where the "universal translator" not only translated everything into English, but somehow caused the "aliens'" lips to form English words as they were talking. Why can't "nu Trek" be logical and realistic like this???

  • The TOS (and movies) had serious tones but never forgot how to be fun and exciting, by the time those shitty Voyager and DS9 shows came on, it was time to kill that franchise.

  • April 28, 2012, 4:02 p.m. CST

    The TNG movies, VOY, ENT argument is a strawman

    by Chief Joseph

    Yes, they all sucked. I don't think anyone is saying otherwise. What the *haters* are saying is that NuTrek sucked, too. And the human-looking aliens were explained in TNG. If human-looking aliens and universal translators are stupid, then they should FIX those things in the remake, not add more problems.

  • April 28, 2012, 4:13 p.m. CST

    I totally disagree that TNG movies and Voyager sucked

    by Jaka

    Only Nemesis truly sucked. The other three TNG movies are quite enjoyable. Some people even, ya now, love them. <p> Voyager was not perfect, but in hindsight there were far more good episodes than I remembered during the original run. They just needed to come home sooner and move on. <p> Enterprise, on the other hand, suffers from the same issues that many of us have with Nu Trek. They went backwards. Stop going backwards. Stop rebooting and retelling existing stories, history, timelines, etc. <p> This is maybe something I've never explained in all the complaints I've made about ST2006; I have no problem with a new Star Trek that's done differently, so long as it's good. What I take umbrage with is the insistence that it involve established, well-known and well-loved characters. It's insulting to the legacy of the show; the actors, writers, producers, directors, set designers and everyone else involved. <p> Don't take something that already exists, change it and then thump your chest about how new and original it is, because it's not! Do something TRULY new and original and I'm there.

  • Time to let go and retire for good this time. Otherwise totally enjoyable movie and it didn't just ignore everything people did before with a square one reboot like Spider-man will this summer.

  • April 28, 2012, 4:30 p.m. CST

    Come Out Of Your Psychosis m6y

    by Real Deal

    Some of us old and new Trek fans ( most actually ) liked the the new movie. Sorry you can't get passed that.

  • April 28, 2012, 4:35 p.m. CST

    JJ Trek has its flaws...

    by spire_walk

    But it was fun, which is something that had gone from Trek. Your mileage may vary, but the last time I had fun watching Trek prior to JJ Trek was DS9. I like DS9 the same reason I like Game of Thrones (minus the sex scenes every five minutes), and it was probably my favorite Trek series because they were doing something that neither the TNG movies, Voyager, Enterprise, or JJ Trek did--they were furthering the universe. By the end of the Dominion War, the Klingon Empire was nearly wrecked, the Cardassians were dead by the hundreds of millions and occupied by the Feds and their allies, the Feds were hurt bad, but victorious and facing a possible cold war with the Romulans who the were least hurt by the war because they entered so late in the game to tip the scales. The Dominion was back in the Gamma quadrant, smarting from its only defeat ever but virtually unscathed by the war. It really depended on what mood the Founders were going to be in after Odo rejoined the Great Link. The Breen Confederation lost a lot of ships, but nothing is said about their territory. In other words, the stage was set for a post-war series that could have been full of issues to deal with. Heck, just look at the real world and all of the shit we're STILL dealing with as a result of WWI and WWII.

  • April 28, 2012, 4:48 p.m. CST

    Great Post duck of death!

    by Real Deal

    The thing that the Trek purists ( or whatever you want to call them ) are missing is that Roddenberry always wanted his show to be relevent with what was happening in the current world. He always wanted the fresh approach. For the record I've come to appreciate TMP for what it was and what they were trying to accomplish. Especially the revised version that Wise was able to do in 2000. It kind of fixed alot of what was wrong with the addition of the FXs that were planned but not done in the first place and some much needed reeditiing. However WOK is my favorite because it delt with a good character driven storyline that redefined all of them. Something that the Vger storyline couldn't have. The new Trek is a breath of fresh air. The problem with the old Trek is that it had written itself into a corner. It no longer had storylines that redefined the characters.A fter the original trilogy was done it was basically the same thing over and over again. Even ST 6 was trying to recapture the sucess of Khan. Now we have a whole new universe where things can be fresh again and new insight into those characters is possible. I know the purists will never see that and that's just too bad. I really think Roddenberry would have approved. I know his son and wife did.

  • April 28, 2012, 4:56 p.m. CST

    Bring Back Shatner!!!

    by Jake Pantlin

    I don't need to see Shatner in the new movie, but if they make a trilogy of flms, they should have him appear in it. It good even just be as "nu-Kirk" in the future.

  • April 28, 2012, 5 p.m. CST

    re: Even ST 6 was trying to recapture the sucess of Khan.

    by Jake Pantlin

    Star Trek 6 is #2 on my list of best Trek films. It succeeded because they had a good script and they had the same director as Trek II. I don't feel that they tried to replicate Trek II at all, as the story, plot, and villain (Chang) are completely different.

  • April 28, 2012, 5:12 p.m. CST

    I enjoyed the movie. sorry u didn't.

    by Arcadian Del Sol

  • April 28, 2012, 5:18 p.m. CST

    atheron: ST6

    by spire_walk

    Yeah, I place it at 2nd place as well. Trek II is so great because it exists outside of the other Trek movies as something unto itself. It was the true sequel, and finale of TOS. Yeah they show Spock's torpedo coffin at the end of the movie hinting at a sequel, but for the most part they set out making a movie that was fully prepared to be The End. They pulled out all of the stops and put the cast that we love into danger, and ultimately results in the death of Spock, who if there is ever a character that sums up the Star Trek franchise, it's that motherfucker. It's all about the past catching up with Kirk and facing death without a safety net or a red shirt there to die instead. It was, what, the first time Kirk ever truly lost something so dear to him? Hell, for the first time, Star Trek itself bet the farm on such a sacrifice. You can destroy an enterprise every other movie and kill supporting characters, but Trek II took the biggest risk of all in the name of drama and stabbed at the heart of everything Star Trek when it killed Spock. Trek II bet all or nothing and won.

  • April 28, 2012, 5:32 p.m. CST

    Star Trek Generations done right

    by CARTMANEZ imagine how awesome going to see that wouldve been in 1994? directed by Meyer or Nimoy?!

  • April 28, 2012, 5:41 p.m. CST

    It took everything we knew about the characters and EEEEELLECTRIFIED them!

    by Margot Tenenbaum

    Oh, Plinkett. You are best.

  • If they had changed the names of all the characters and called it something else the only problem I'd have is the abundance of giant plot holes. But hey! Lots of movies have those!

  • April 28, 2012, 5:52 p.m. CST

    The only prequel I want to see go into production is JOHN KREESE BEGINS

    by SmokieGeezer

  • April 28, 2012, 5:58 p.m. CST

    I have a love/hate relationship with 2009 Trek.

    by gotilk

    Re-watches have been difficult and frustrating. But I loved it on first viewing. But most of all, the paranoia here is hilarious. Keep it up!

  • April 28, 2012, 6:32 p.m. CST

    Maybe the 3 people here would sound much less pathetic

    by SuperTrekkie

    if Abrams' movie had been a failure on some level. Like critically or financially. Or some criteria that actually matters.

  • April 28, 2012, 6:48 p.m. CST

    Star Trek is like all the versions of Christianity

    by tangcameo

    Everyone has their favourite way of seeing likes it and considers everyone else's version to be fucking moronic heresy. I predict Star Trek holy wars in the future.

  • April 28, 2012, 6:57 p.m. CST

    @tangcameo: Spockdamnit!

    by spire_walk

  • I kinda hoped they would leave Nimoy Spock off to "start the Vulcan colony". Otherwise you're hitting a dramatic dead end if every time a problem rears it's head Spock calls Spock for an infodump.

  • April 28, 2012, 7:12 p.m. CST

    @chief joseph Glad someone else sees

    by Brian Hopper

    the plants and/or sockpuppets (not sure on that, either).

  • April 28, 2012, 7:24 p.m. CST

    Buckethead, my good woman. Do pay attention.

    by SuperTrekkie

    The Hunger Games stands at 85 on RT. Granted, that is no match for Abrams Trek's whopping 95 but the opinions of internet nerds do not nullify the opinions of legitimate motion picture critics.

  • are beyond ridiculous. As @chief joseph points out, 'If human-looking aliens and universal translators are stupid, then they should FIX those things in the remake, not add more problems.' I mean, who forced Abrams Orci and Kurtzman to put Scotty in a brewery engine room and give him an alien monkey butler? Abrams' Crap Trek doesn't suck less because Voyager also 'sucked.' I'm not a huge fan of VOY, but I'll take it over Crap Trek any day. Much of what is wrong with Crap Trek was avoidable and is thus unforgivable. Drawing false equivalence between unequal sins fools nobody.

  • April 28, 2012, 7:35 p.m. CST

    Turns my stomach to see the Enterprise going to NYC

    by Smartacus

    That orbiter belonged in Houston and nothing will ever change that. Begin an article with that picture and I don't care if you're reporting on the second coming of Christ. All I think is "I wonder if the pilots of that 747 wore masks?"

  • April 28, 2012, 7:40 p.m. CST

    Thats a really nice picture

    by shalashaska

    i love the little plane in the background

  • Come again? They've all been set in the Prime Universe. There WAS no Abrams altverse prior to his coming along and concocting it, and then doing Star Wars type stuff in it like blowing up Vulcan and Romulus, etc. A reboot didn't necessarily mean departing from canon the way Abrams and his cronies did. I wasn't against a reboot in principal, just against a shitty stupid Transformers-ish one. Abrams' shitverse was created for the sole purpose of these three Shit Trek movies. It will collapse in on itself via the weight of its own idiocy, and promptly be forgotten.

  • It failed on numerous levels, which wouldn't have to be explained to you if you were an actual Star Trek fan and not a Bad Robot intern.

  • April 28, 2012, 8:37 p.m. CST

    uh, there's more than "3 people." and they're right because...

    by Detached

    ... Kiddie Trek really didn't make any more $$ than the first four TOS movies, adjusted for inflation. And, had it been a good movie like its defenders claim, it would have made wayyyyy more. You would have had both Baby Boomers (the original fans) plus Gen X (younger fans) go see it. Instead, Bomers stayed away in droves. They knew what the game was. Had Boomers gone to see it in the numbers they would have, that thing would have made in the $400 million range. Instead, well... not so much. Not even close. And critics? Few of them ever "got" TOS to begin with. A popcorn film was fine with them. The only critic whose opinion I cared about (ahead of time) was Ebert, and I knew he would see through it. He did. (And yes, Ebert liked the original films). But hey, Kiddie Trek supporters have a good defense: "It had a good beat and I could dance to it."

  • April 28, 2012, 9:01 p.m. CST

    Yeah why not?

    by Norman Colson

    Lenord Nimoy aint doing anything else... Will khan show up??? That will be awesome!

  • April 28, 2012, 9:06 p.m. CST

    The guys that brought you that stupid April Fool's prank...

    by guitar_dudester91 Gee this looks familiar. Talk about ripping AICN off.

  • April 28, 2012, 9:27 p.m. CST

    smokiegeezer...Alien Comic Relief...

    by conspiracy

    ...I still can't figure out what the fuck that thing is, why it's there, or what it is supposed to be doing. It isn't funny, Scotty yelling at it isn't funny; the fucking thing serves no purpose; they'd have been just as effective if they'd have had Scotty yelling at a Mop...maybe that'd have actually been better...serving to show Scot was going mad after being marooned out there after scrambling Admiral Archers Beagle.

  • April 28, 2012, 9:36 p.m. CST

    okay okay okay okay okay okay okay okay

    by SmokieGeezer

  • ...It was a decidedly psychological move. This isn't 1964...back then people expected, and respected, the fact that power and success must be earned. Nope, that bit is actually a little bit it plays upon the 21st century 13-25yr old demographic (prime Film Goers) desire for instant gratification and general feeling of entitlement. It's stupid...but the kids in the audience fucking took to it like edibles.

  • April 28, 2012, 9:39 p.m. CST

    It was just shitty writing

    by Mugato5150

    The suits said, "Make this look as much like Star Wars as you can" and they did. Hence the space battles, the blasters, the ice monsters, the retractable swords and goofy Jedi flips and the silly aliens.

  • April 28, 2012, 9:47 p.m. CST

    He would be like Yoda

    by Ed

    A green-blooded Vulcan bastard Yoda

  • So, uh, since everyone else on the entire planet dug Star Trek aside from, y'know, you people, I'm gonna happily go along with the planet on this one.

  • April 28, 2012, 9:58 p.m. CST

    I'm excited if he's in it.

    by philmcknight

    While the 2009 film wasn't perfect, for me it hit all the right notes. It did what it was intended to do and that's make Star Trek an exciting franchise again. While I was still a fan of the Rick Berman era of Star Trek, I frankly needed a break. The big failing of the Rick Berman era movies was that his attempts at the movies came off as nothing more than a two part episode of the series with better graphics. There was no scope whatsoever to the last few films, and as shown in the Mr. Plinkett reviews, no real understanding or desire to respect the continuity of the Star Trek Universe. The 2009 movie felt like just that, a movie. It also didn't require a masters degree in Star Trek backstory to understand or appreciate who everyone was and where the story was going. It threw you into the universe and if you couldn't keep up, it was your own damn fault, which I loved. If Nimoy is back, then he saw something he liked in the script. If he saw something he liked then we sure as hell will enjoy it.

  • April 28, 2012, 10:07 p.m. CST

    tallboy6t6..I didn't say I didn't Like it...

    by conspiracy

    ...just that in places it is just fucking inane. It is enjoyable the way Fast and Furious is is eye candy, filler, Katy can't over think it or expect too much or the illusion falls apart; but taken for what it is...a popcorn film with the weight of a works perfectly. However...I DO wish these guys would go that extra mile and put some meat on that sizzling plate.

  • April 28, 2012, 10:11 p.m. CST

    Plot holes? Uh where?

    by Vindibudd

    I am a big Trek fan, and have been since TMP. I'm also not a some lunatic who worships the franchise. I absolutely loved Trek2k9 and it's right up there with Khan and Undiscovered Country with me. That being said, some people have tried to say there are massive plot holes in the movie. Uh, just because something happens that you don't agree with or you don't feel is realistic in your personal opinion does not make it a plot hole. A plot hole is what happened in The Big Sleep. Kirk being promoted to field captain is at worst unrealistic. So all of you Berman apologists are free to list for me actual unexplained occurrences in 2k9.

  • April 28, 2012, 10:19 p.m. CST

    Nobody does commentary on real life anymore

    by Don_Drapers_Acid_Trip

    It's all escapist fantasy bullshit. Writers don't want to think about tough questions and audiences don't want to hear them.

  • April 28, 2012, 10:26 p.m. CST

    JJ Trek's #1 glaring problem

    by spire_walk

    Kirk lands on Planet Coincidence, where he finds Old Spock AND Scotty. It's like the Room of Requirement out of Harry Potter, only HP's plot device made sense. That said, Kirk in TOS once built a musket from a bamboo stick that was the perfect size and didn't look like any of the other plants growing behind it, scraped up some sulfur and coal that were also conveniently available. Still one of the better TOS episodes.... mostly because of the joke scene where Kirk picks up a small bolder and hurls at the Gorn, not hurting it, and it turns around, casually picks up this HUMONGOUS bolder and throws it at Kirk. One of the funnier scenes in Trek history.

  • April 28, 2012, 10:33 p.m. CST

    Star Trek 2 The Quest for More Money.

    by Yoda's Ball Sack

    G G Abrams should be doing a LOST reboot after the dismal last season of it.

  • April 28, 2012, 10:33 p.m. CST


    by RealWorldGuy

    Are tough to speak with. Those things give him trouble with his lines.

  • April 28, 2012, 11:11 p.m. CST

    I want more real Star Trek, no more of this Abrams shit.

    by Yamato

    You, sci-fi with thought behind it.

  • April 29, 2012, 1:13 a.m. CST

    Nimoy's Return Would Make Sense...

    by Leto III

    ...considering that the destruction of Vulcan and Spock Prime's new mission to resettle the last remnants of his race (in the new timeline) is a honking huge dangling plot-point from the last film. I don't see the producers leaving that storyline untended in the next movie, and having Nimoy back to help push it forward would make total story-sense. Even if it's just for a few scenes, it needs to be acknowledged. Also, there's no way in hell Nimoy would even consider participating in the next movie if the Spock Prime role wasn't up to snuff -- if he's onboard, it's obviously something fairly juicy. He wouldn't show up just for a two-second cameo.

  • I think getting away from attachments to the original cast would help me forget that this is supposed to be all new.

  • April 29, 2012, 3:10 a.m. CST

    by schulzcreative

    Come on, guys. The Trek movie and TV franchises were dead, dead, dead. At least JJ's outing was successful enough to show studios there is still enough public interest to produce more. Yeah, it's not 1960s Trek, but then again this isn't the 1960s. I'm sure everyone involved in Trek09 knew it was going to be impossible to please everyone, especially the now geriatric fans. Being a Trek fan since the 70s, I was quite pleased with T09 on several levels and am happy to know fresh blood has been pumped into the general Trek concept and there will be more to come. I think we owe Abrams something for that.

  • April 29, 2012, 3:27 a.m. CST

    And we have to remember...

    by philmcknight

    The storyline for the movie in and of itself sets it up to where the hardcore Trek fans who didn't want to see that movie happen can just simply ignore it thanks to the time travel aspect of the story. It doesn't disrupt established continuity.

  • April 29, 2012, 6:08 a.m. CST

    playkins is right

    by kwisatzhaderach

    It just didn't feel like Star Trek. Abrams himself admitted he was more of a Star Wars fan. The best Trek is fun, well-written and with some kind of philosophical quality that marks it out as superior science fiction. The Abrams film, sadly, was badly written by a couple of morons. Science fiction can be many things, but it should never be moronic.

  • Basically they cater for retards!

  • April 29, 2012, 6:21 a.m. CST

    Do Houston complainers remember...?

    by Nem_Wan

    It's pretty hypocritical to complain about political favoritism when the only reason, I repeat, the ONLY reason, there was ever a space program in Houston was because Texas elected a Democratic politician a long time ago. Then you gave us George W. Bush. Maybe if he and the Congress his party controlled had put more than a couple speech's worth of thought into the space program in an election year, Obama would have inherited something for Houston Mission Control to control besides ISS (which doesn't really need U.S. mission control because all critical systems are Russian). Obama inherited a Constellation program that was stillborn and a Space Shuttle program that was terminal. Once Bush set an end date for the shuttle, contractors were let go and there was no more workflow to build parts. From that point there was a set number of flights that could be flown. Even before the Challenger disaster, the shuttle would have been thought to be retired by now, not flying and requiring 1970s parts to come from somewhere in the 21st century. The best frequency achieved by one orbiter was 4 flights by Discovery in 1985. If that had been maintained, in a disaster-free universe, Discovery would have reached the end of its 100-flight design life in 2011 and gone to a museum at the same time as in our universe. Maybe even a Texas museum, since there would have been more orbiters. Another place that didn't get one was Marshall Space Flight Center in Alabama, and they actually handled Enterprise during some of its ground testing. They have Pathfinder which was the wooden model used to practice handling Enterprise. Houston is getting a pretty nice full-scale replica that has an interior visitors can experience, unlike the real orbiters that will be look-but-don't-touch.

  • April 29, 2012, 6:26 a.m. CST

    I'm just glad AbramsTrek is technobabble free

    by BoyNamedSue

    Berman/Bragga Trek had a serious problem with that, often at the expense of telling a good story.....but I do wish AbramsTrek was a little more than just popcorn fluff. Maybe Berman and Abrams could work together and cancel out each other's weaknesses?!?

  • April 29, 2012, 7:42 a.m. CST

    the best star trek film has been GALAXY QUEST

    by Flutchy

  • April 29, 2012, 7:53 a.m. CST

    The only good thing about these new films is that Nimoy is getting paid.

    by Margot Tenenbaum

    Yep. Its all in the subject line. I ripped you off.

  • April 29, 2012, 9:06 a.m. CST

    Of course it didn't =feel like Trek=

    by Mugato5150

    because it did everything it could to emulate Star Wars. The big space battles, the ice monsters, destroying planets, the goofy comic relief aliens, the guy with the retractable sword doing silly Jedi flips. They did everything they could to make it look like Star Wars and that's why it succeeded. If they went back to Star Trek it would bomb.

  • April 29, 2012, 10:04 a.m. CST

    Here on earth:

    by UltraTron

    Every year in Pakistan, at least 100 men feel entitled to throw acid into the faces of their wives, some of them still in early adolescence. I think the crew should encounter a race of beings doing something horrible to their women. Then they violate the prime directive and vaporize a large section of that planet from orbit.

  • April 29, 2012, 10:16 a.m. CST



    Minor Plot hole: In the movie, Red Matter can create black holes, but can also create time-traveling holes; depending on what the script needs. Also, a drop of red matter or the entire ship supply will cause approximately the same effects. Minor Plot hole: When a black hole is created inside Vulcan, the small planet that is close enough for Older Spock to see his home planet disappear does not get drawn towards the black hole. Minor Plot hole: Captain Robau accepts to meet Captain Nero at the beginning of the movie in his ship. The technology that permitted them to talk in their respective cockpit was enough to have a fluid discussion. There was no good reason for Captain Robau to leave his ship and to board Nero's in order to have a conversation he could easily have in his cockpit with the added bonus of being protected from stab wounds. Major Plot hole: Because Kirk is challenging the authority of Captain Spock, he is marooned on a dangerous icy planet....instead of being kept in the Enterprise in a cell. Which is surprising considering that most of Star Fleet was destroyed by Nero. Who would pick Kirk up ? Major Plot hole: A Supernova is not a surprise. it announces its arrival millions of years in advance. There is no reason for all Romulans to die to a Supernova when primitive humans of the 21st century can already know when a star will die. Contrived Plot point: In Star Fleet, 90% of the personnel are students (that makes sense), most of which die during the attack on Vulcan; and no one seems to care afterward. Contrived Plot Point: Chekov is able to find and beam Kirk and Sulu in the Enterprise while they fall from the sky but is not able to beam Spock's mother that is right beside all the other Vulcans who get beamed successfully...just because the rocks under her starts to fall. Contrived Plot Point: Kirk, who could have ended anywhere on the Icy planet (Delta Vega), encounters the older Spock just before he is killed by a terrible monster. The odds of Kirk's capsule landing a couple of meters away from Spock's cave are ridiculously low. Unaddressed Issue: Nero, the villain, comes back in time. During the whole movie, he seems dedicated to keep his operations limited to his star ship. Did he contact the other Romulans to tell them that their planet will explode in a century ? Since they failed to notice it themselves, it might have been important for someone to eventually contact them.

  • April 29, 2012, 10:54 a.m. CST


    by yesiamaplant

    ...I think he was kidding. That didn't sound like a genuine response.

  • April 29, 2012, 11:13 a.m. CST

    I remember in '87-'88 when Trekkies said TNG didn't feel like Trek...

    by spire_walk

    ...because it was just a bunch of talking and no action. I don't think people realize how many TOS fans back in the day thought Trek had been pussified. They made fun of how in the 24th Century, Frenchmen spoke with British accents... cancer was cured, but baldness remained a mystery, etc... God, and this was the during the first two seasons of TNG that were horrible. It sucked until season 3. I don't know, JJ Trek is more TOS than TNG ever was.

  • April 29, 2012, 11:13 a.m. CST

    Anyone remember when Nimoy retired back in 2010?

    by IndyCollector

    Who is he? The Sugar Ray Leonard of acting?

  • Thanks for the movie trivia, seriously. I like nitpicks and goof lists for good and bad movies, but it's not the first Trek ever to have them by far.

  • April 29, 2012, 11:41 a.m. CST

    president baltar ...Ever heard the phrase "Hot as Vulcan"?

    by conspiracy

    If you are a Trek fan you have; then why is Vulcan's Moon a planet covered with ice? Are all Federation escape capsules programmed to land a few Km from a Starfleet outpost? THey can beam people through space but they can't program an escape pod to land AT the friggin base? Why are Nero's crew so compliant? Why would you stay on board a ship with a madman when you could take over and simply go home to an intact Romulous? Who is in charge of Starfleet that they would send their ENTIRE force so far away they couldn't respond to threats closer to home? Do they have so few ships? Why would you man your newest, most advanced ship with the most inexperienced, untested crew? Wouldn't Enterprise staff consist of the best, brightest, most experienced to handle the inevitable problems that arise in a new ship? Doesn't Starfleet do Sea Trials before commissioning? Where is the Shake down crew? Ooooh. fuck it....just crack a pop, turn off your brain, and watch the's enjoyable.

  • That was riveting dialogue, just like those times when Worf would count down shield damage as a percentage or Harry Kim would pull some technobabble out of his ass to save the ship.

  • April 29, 2012, 12:03 p.m. CST

    Okay, I'll play the Nitpick game too...

    by spire_walk

    So, red matter cannot cause a time tunnel, but Romulan photon torpedoes can create a static time tunnel? (TNG, Yesterday's Enterprise). Riker was considered to be this great commander, but the enterprise seems to either get taken over or destroyed whenever he's left in command of it. He has a particular weakness with 20 yr old Bird of Preys. In the real world, he would have been sent off to a base far away from a starship. Too lazy to go through all of it....

  • April 29, 2012, 12:08 p.m. CST

    @spire_walk 'JJ Trek is more TOS than TNG ever was'

    by Brian Hopper

    Comments like that are just embarrassing. Abrams' Spunk Trek really has nothing to do with Star Trek, whereas TOS and TNG ARE Star Trek.

  • It was a temporal anomaly consisting of super-dense interstellar strings. At least know what the hell you're talking about. There's plenty of gaffs in any and everyb t.v. show. Setting aside for a moment that comparing t.v. to film is asinine, gaffs are not the same thing as Giant, Gaping Plotholes and Incredible Coincidences which the entire premise of the movie relies on to exist. TOS has relied on an equal mix of philosophical thought and action, with the former steering the wheel and propelled by the latter. NuTrek: Extreme! ADHD did not. It completely and totally failed as 'Star Trek', because it was 0 percent of the former, and 110 percent of the latter. It stumbled awkwardly as an action film, because of the plotholes. It's two different critical approaches entirely. If you're a Trek fan, you can point out both. But even casual-Trek fans of the movie have pointed out how contrived and convenient the events are.

  • April 29, 2012, 12:21 p.m. CST

    The least Bad Robot could do with all you unpaid interns is

    by Brian Hopper

    teach you how to make better straw man arguments. Saying things like 'Why didn't Gandalf just summon those birds to drop the rings in the volcano?' will convince exactly no one that Abrams' Suck Trek isn't overflowing with coincidences, plot holes and idiocy.

  • April 29, 2012, 12:36 p.m. CST

    I wonder which one is the Roberto Orci sockpuppet.

    by Brian Hopper

  • The problem is that the non-Trekkies will see that it's a Star Trek film and turn away. And of course, some Trekkies will be disappointed by the amount of action and less "Trek Talk" techno-babel. It also doesn't help that the story is trying to tell the origins of TOS. That's the main problem. I don't think a lot of people want to see a new cast, playing the original Trek crew (Nimoy's cameo doesn't count). Besides the rebooting of the original crew, I think there wasn't enough balance of the action and the "Trek talk" in the 2009 film. Although, the intention was to reboot the franchise and make it more "exciting" and yes, it felt more like Star Wars. Everything is getting rebooted\remade, so if you haven't got used to it, esp with the JJ Star Trek, then don't watch the sequel. Imo, create a new Star Trek franchise, with a new crew, ship and bring on the Borg!

  • April 29, 2012, 12:57 p.m. CST

    zodlovesgod..Eagle Lords in Lord of the Rings...

    by conspiracy

    ...every story has inconsistencies, coincidences and gaps ...even the Lord of the Rings had a few from Hobbit to Silmarillion. One of my personal favorites is in Wrath of Khan...where Khan quotes a "Klingon Proverb" about Revenge. He was only on Enterprise for a few hours maybe a day or two, all of that time scheming, before being marooned by Kirk without any way to communicate with the outside world. So, how would he even know of Klingons, let alone be able to attribute a proverb to them? I think the problem with JJ Trek isn't that it has coincidences, or gaps....but simply the sheer number of them in the course of a single 2 hour film.

  • April 29, 2012, 1:01 p.m. CST

    Absolute Bullshit

    by Jason

    Please stop spreading bullshit, just like Herc did last year who went on record saying Shatner was in the film because one of his sources told him. Nimoy is not, and will not be in the movie. JJ is on record stating that there are no original series members in this film. Nimoy was not prepared for that question and was probably being polite, rather than saying he's had enough of Star Trek and acting whilst the reporters brown nosed him.

  • April 29, 2012, 1:02 p.m. CST

    Rebutting Some of President Baltar's Points...

    by Leto III

    "Minor Plot hole: In the movie, Red Matter can create black holes, but can also create time-traveling holes; depending on what the script needs. Also, a drop of red matter or the entire ship supply will cause approximately the same effects." TNG established that black-holes can possess time-travel characteristics. The writers of those shows invented whatever science was needed to advance the story. Trek'09 is no different. "Minor Plot hole: When a black hole is created inside Vulcan, the small planet that is close enough for Older Spock to see his home planet disappear does not get drawn towards the black hole." See above answer. "Minor Plot hole: Captain Robau accepts to meet Captain Nero at the beginning of the movie in his ship. The technology that permitted them to talk in their respective cockpit was enough to have a fluid discussion. There was no good reason for Captain Robau to leave his ship and to board Nero's in order to have a conversation he could easily have in his cockpit with the added bonus of being protected from stab wounds." Because if Robau DIDN'T accept Nero's "invitation," he would've blown his entire ship to hell regardless. From Robau's point of view, if he went over, there was still a small chance he could buy his crew some time to escape. "Major Plot hole: Because Kirk is challenging the authority of Captain Spock, he is marooned on a dangerous icy planet....instead of being kept in the Enterprise in a cell. Which is surprising considering that most of Star Fleet was destroyed by Nero. Who would pick Kirk up?" Watch the movie again. There was an entire other major fleet mentioned by Spock (in "the Laurentian system), not to mention the computer telling Kirk about the Starfleet outpust just a few klicks away from his position. They clearly would've been aware of this aboard the Enterprise, as well. "Contrived Plot point: In Star Fleet, 90% of the personnel are students (that makes sense), most of which die during the attack on Vulcan; and no one seems to care afterward." Wait...*what*? Um, no. At most, only a couple hundred or so Academy cadets were getting quickly reassigned to various ships during the emergency; just look at the corridors once Kirk boards the Enterprise. Hundreds more already-commissioned and -experienced officers were aboard at that point, serving under Pike. (This one's a real reach, man.) "Contrived Plot Point: Kirk, who could have ended anywhere on the Icy planet (Delta Vega), encounters the older Spock just before he is killed by a terrible monster. The odds of Kirk's capsule landing a couple of meters away from Spock's cave are ridiculously low." This was answered in a deleted scene -- essentially, Nimoy-Spock tells Kirk that the odds of him landing near his cave were indeed ridiculously slim, and that it's likely the timeline/continuum attempting to repair itself. Agreed that this should've been explained better in the film, but it was something that the writers did attempt to address, before getting cut for pacing reasons.

  • I mean, did you not notice the giant EYE watching over the land, like, ALL THE TIME. Frodo was able to SNEAK the ring in because he was the least affected by it, thereby not drawing the attention of Sauron while doing so. If GIANT ASS EAGLES had flown directly at Mordor everything Sauron had at his power would have been directed to blast them out of the sky. Like, duh!

  • April 29, 2012, 1:25 p.m. CST

    Geez, apologists for Abrams' Crap Trek would be way better off

    by Brian Hopper

    conceding the obvious: Crap Trek '09 contains numerous coincidences and plot holes and is poorly written. Look, I've admitted in past talkbacks that Abrams' Shit Trek is not without its minor enjoyments. It is by no means the worst movie ever made. The fx are occasionally stunning. Bruce Greenwood, as always, is terrific. etc. But apologists for Abrams' Suck Trek forget who they're talking to with these defenses of Suck Trek's shitty script. Star Trek fans have been spoiled over the years with some of the best time travel/skewed reality/alt universe stories ever in SF. The examples are numerous: -- Picard living a lifetime in one hour in the 'The Inner Light' (I dare anyone not to cry). -- The still-powerful 'City on the Edge of Forever,' with its sublime evocation of love and loss amid the awesome sweep of time. -- Anything in the mirror universe, from the unbelievably entertaining 'Mirror, Mirror' to the unbelievably entertaining 'In a Mirror Darkly'. -- 'Yesterday's Enterprise,' which is easily one of the best hours of television ever produced. And on and on. This thought-provoking aspect of Star Trek is what makes it great. Abrams' Spunk Trek and its half-assed mimicry of these types of great stories just won't cut it for trekkers, and it never will.

  • April 29, 2012, 1:27 p.m. CST

    Have never posted here as anyone but myself.

    by Boborci


  • April 29, 2012, 1:35 p.m. CST

    pink: rewatch the episode.

    by spire_walk

    The volley of photon torpedoes was the catalyst. Anyway, it doesn't matter that it ws torpedoes or a fucking phaser hitting a can of Yoohoo traveling at warp 9. Star Trek is all about pulling pseudo-physics out of the writers' asses to support the story. It makes no fucking difference.

  • April 29, 2012, 1:52 p.m. CST

    Really, 'Bob'? You're really not going to do it?

    by 3774

    You're not going to admit that NuTrek failed to deliver an engaging, thought-provoking science fiction commentary on some existential aspect of the human experience? Which is the very definition an authentic Star Trek experience? You're really not going to admit that NuTrek had plot holes and conveniences that were troublesome, at best? That it relied entirely on style over substance? That it tossed logic out the window in favor of Loud, Exciting Moments which fall apart upon reflection during afterglow? O.k. Thirty years from now, time will have painted a clear picture of the value NuTrek has. It will defer greatly from that which is considered great Trek lore. But what do execs care? They whipped up a fast-food special and cashed their checks, right?

  • April 29, 2012, 2:07 p.m. CST

    Welcome back Roberto...Uhura/Spock...lets discuss this.

    by conspiracy

    I'm serious...a civil discussion as to why that made sense. I"m curious; was this a story decision or a marketing decision...and as a writer aren't these sometimes one in the same. BTW and off topic...get ready dude; they are shuffling troops, moving people've been notified.

  • April 29, 2012, 2:09 p.m. CST

    Pink. Really? You're not gonna admit that you just didnt get it?

    by Boborci

  • April 29, 2012, 2:17 p.m. CST

    Conspiracy Uhura/Spock

    by Boborci

    That was one of a few elements that Alex and I did not even pitch to anyone ( not JJ or Damon even). We just put it in the script, knowing that would flip for the surprise of it. Remember, when we agreed to write trek, JJ had not agreed to direct it and was keaning away from doing it. So it was designed for two reasons - because we liked it, and because we thought it would make JJ directing more likely.

  • April 29, 2012, 2:32 p.m. CST

    Pink_Apocalypse, Get Over Yourself.

    by Leto III

    You're just coming across as a smug, self-absorbed elitist douchebag, using the AICN Talkbacks to try and massage your iconoclast-cred.

  • April 29, 2012, 2:55 p.m. CST

    boborci...fair enough...

    by conspiracy

    although from a character point of view it is completely illogical ; and in a way compromises a prime character trait, In my opinion of course. Perhaps that is the point; JJ liked it because it broke with tradition, was a "Gotcha" to stir the pot among the faithful? I hated it to be honest...but the girls in attendance did get moist. Anyway, have you carried on with with this more "emotion" driven character, perhaps a Spock that has come to terms with, or even accept, his emotions; or do you still see the internal fight between the Vulcan way and his humanity taking place? For a guy that basically threw the rule book and logic into the fire because his girlfriend threw a fit...I think the question is answered...but I think we'd all like to hear your thoughts on this aspect of Spocks future. General terms...not asking for plot points or you to risk a payday. Will take this answer off the air...gotta go to fucking Costco.

  • April 29, 2012, 2:55 p.m. CST

    I'm with Pink - NuTrek sucked.

    by KnowItAllFromCali

    95 percent my ass.

  • April 29, 2012, 3:07 p.m. CST

    Basic psychology, Bob.

    by 3774

    The very fact that you get so personally defensive about NuTrek, despite 95% approval on Rotten Tomatoes, shows that you are both aware and insecure of your strange, success-failure with it. Popcorn-shoveling mouth-breather pleaser? Yes. Timeless Star Trek tale that will hold up with time? No. And you know that, or you wouldn't even bother reading criticism, much less respond to it. Including criticism of people like Marc Bane or Roger Ebert. Much less an insignificant peasant talkbacker like myself. But you do. And that speaks volumes. For the record, you had me. I saw the movie, and it bombarded me with enough TOTALLY EXTREME to keep me too disoriented to reflect on anything. Much like Harry Plinkett's review, I came home unsure if I liked it or not. I think maybe I did. It was like being slipped a roofie colada, and having everyone tell me I had a good time. I think I may have, but the more I thought about the movie, the more it fell apart. Even for the 'dumb it down, speed it up' Bayformers generation, it just did not make internal sense. Whether or not it constitutes what makes a great Star Trek movie 'great', is another argument entirely. I don't think it does. Creating a whole new timeline to play in, and using the same characters is a great concept I can embrace. Turning that new universe into FAST AND LOUD 'SPLOSIONS WITH FAST AND LOUD EMOTIONS is something I cannot embrace. I've written appeals to the wind before about how any future movie needs to do two simple things to carry the spirit of Roddenberry and Star Trek with it: approach meaningful questions of the human existence, and explore strange new worlds doing it. Follow those tenets, and you can't go wrong. No matter what kind of style or package you wrap it up in. Completely disregarding those, and worse, unnecessarily rehashing the very best examples of when those have already been done before (RE: Khan), is a blueprint to irrelevancy in the future.

  • April 29, 2012, 3:08 p.m. CST

    Conspiracy - illogical from a character point of view?

    by Boborci

    We figured Spock is younger than you ever seen him, so he is not as fully formed as you know him. Also, boys marry rheir mothers as they say, so why not a human girlfriend?

  • April 29, 2012, 3:20 p.m. CST

    Pink - hahahaha! Your psychobabble is awesome!

    by Boborci

    You clearly dont know me at all, even in a superficial internet way. I respond to criticism because it is a fascnatng experiment and lesson in social media for which i have larger uses. You make the classic mistake of insulting yourself by saying that i must be flawed to respond to the likes of you. Apparently, i respect you more than you respect yourself. You didnt get the movie. That is totally fine. You also dont get me. Totally fine, too. I dont even thnk the human race is going to survive, so do you really thnk i gve a shit if you think a movie is timeless? Do you really thnink i am worried about 2 hours of entertainment survivng when i believe we are all royally fucked? Wake up.

  • April 29, 2012, 3:30 p.m. CST

    Lol... Like TNG didn't require turning your brain off...

    by spire_walk

    Technocratic space socialists going to a planet, something breaks, they fix it, go to another planet, something breaks, they fix it. We need a Space Therapist sitting in the chair next to the Captain. We needed more extreme technocratic dogma like how it's better to let a whole alien species get wiped out rather than break the Prime Directive. We need more Evil Capitalist Space Jews like the Ferengi for the main characters to "tsk, tsk" at. We also need a Klingon character we ignore, who represents the less evolved human aspects of violence and prejudice. The noble savage we must teach to be more like evolved socialist technocratic humanity. Guys, the rest of us had to turn our brains off a long time ago while watching TNG just to make it through the 1 dimensional characters and their hyper-West Coast ideology. They bent the laws of physics and economics to make that utopia work. The rest of us rolled our eyes, and said, "Yeah, sure." and waited for an episode where the Feds had to face a real crisis, like Borg, Romulans, etc...

  • April 29, 2012, 3:31 p.m. CST

    Pink thinks she "gets" people, particularly men

    by Jaka

    She doesn't.

  • April 29, 2012, 3:32 p.m. CST

    http://www. derailingfordummies. com/complete.html#surprise

    by 3774

    That was....a bizarre little meltdown.

  • April 29, 2012, 4:17 p.m. CST

    I didn't know that many babies were dropped

    by Teddy Artery

    ...on their heads. Proves I've vastly underestimated the total number based on the trollish comments on this thread. Abrams' Trek was a great reboot of the series and even if it didn't earn the box office it did, I'd still recommend it. Incidentally, it's "Trekkers", not "Trekkies".

  • April 29, 2012, 4:18 p.m. CST

    @boborci - I AM THE 95%

    by montessaurus

    Just finished watching ST2K9 for about the dozenth time yesterday, well done sir. So, uh... Benedict Cumberbatch: Joachim or Gary Mitchell? C'MON, GUY! C'MOOOOOOONNNNNNNNNN...

  • April 29, 2012, 4:20 p.m. CST

    @boborci - I AM THE 95%

    by montessaurus

    So, anyway... this Benedict Cumberbatch chap, is he playing Joachim or Gary Mitchell? Please....? OH C'MONNNNN MAAAAAAAAAAN... C'MOOOOOOOOOOON!!!

  • April 29, 2012, 4:22 p.m. CST


    by montessaurus

    Oh AintItCool - Keep partying like its 2002.

  • April 29, 2012, 4:24 p.m. CST

    boborci - check out this


    if you havent already seen it - alternate Generations.

  • April 29, 2012, 4:36 p.m. CST

    Cumberbatch is playing:

    by Boborci

    A great character. Lame, i know!

  • April 29, 2012, 4:42 p.m. CST

    Fair enough, boborci. Fair enough.

    by montessaurus

    That being said, C'MAAAAAHHHN GUUUUUY! ...alright. It's cool. I'm cool. I mean, shooting is almost done, right? Yeah. No probs, just a few more...wait. When is this coming out again?

  • April 29, 2012, 5:05 p.m. CST

    It was a brewery, no kidding.

    by spire_walk

    Filmed in a Budweiser Brewery for engine room shots. Appropriate.

  • April 29, 2012, 5:17 p.m. CST

    (looks into mirror) boborci boborci boborci boborci boborci......

    by SmokieGeezer

  • April 29, 2012, 5:20 p.m. CST

    Did the focus group/toy meeting get you to bring back Scotty's gimp too?

    by SmokieGeezer

  • April 29, 2012, 5:28 p.m. CST

    God, pink_apocalypse, you're a fucking nerd

    by kidicarus

    Maybe your problem is going into a movie and expecting a revelatory, tour-de-force about the human condition, the Singularity, the Universe, Time, and social progress all wrapped up into a 2 hour action movie (which the originals were too, stop treating them like works of art). It's Star Trek, for chrissakes, not James Joyce. If you're looking for sometime on that level, try picking up a book sometime.

  • April 29, 2012, 6:05 p.m. CST

    The Problem With Pink_Apocalpyse Is...

    by Leto III

    She's a pretentious, faux-intellectual...well, I was about to use a term that Englishpeople use to describe male assholes that's also a derogatory term for a woman's anatomy, but since P_A's clearly female, I won't now. But she clearly thinks she's a cut above the rest of us, and a butthurt nerd, to boot. To quote the late, great Guy Pearce: "Climb down off that cross -- someone else needs the wood."

  • April 29, 2012, 6:26 p.m. CST

    seriously though enough with the lens flares

    by Reelheed

    Everyone knows they are just hiding an extraordinarily boring series of sets. Lens flares look like money but are in fact cheap, easy to chuck in and boring as fuck. Having said that I quite liked the last trek. It was ok.

  • April 29, 2012, 6:28 p.m. CST

    Smokiegeezer - Hey hit TAB, look at that big comment blank!

    by spire_walk

    Seriously, do you have to put a whole blog post in your subject line? Are you that insecure no one will read your words of wisdom?

  • April 29, 2012, 6:28 p.m. CST

    New Engine Room?

    by c miles

    So if reports are correct that they are filming some Trek Stuff in NoCal at Lawrence Livermore- this week- Could we maybe (please)get a new engine room filmed in the NIF facility there? These pics look like an acceptable jump from Mr. Scott's brewery to something more advanced- but it still has a huge pipe-y look that Mr. Abrams must prefer. A gazillion lasers - enough to make fusion- seems like a good candidate for me. And think of what fun Simon Pegg would have a place that looks like this:

  • April 29, 2012, 6:38 p.m. CST

    Speak for yerself, teddy artery: I'm a Trekkie.

    by Perigee

    All us firstborn Trek graybeards are. That's what we called ourselves, back in the day when we wore onions on our belts. The TNG crowd decided that "Trekkie" was undignified, and decided that was the PC term to use. In the end, it's just a way of quickly defining which gen fan is speaking.

  • April 29, 2012, 6:47 p.m. CST

    Roberto...Spock Needs Poon Too...

    by conspiracy

    I have two problems with Spock and women, especially Uhura... 1. Vulcans, by canon, are betrothed at a very young age; arranged, logical pairings. Spocks father had such an arrangement, though never a true marriage...which produced Sybok...;before putting the Vulcan Clam Cracker to Spocks mom. Spock, logical as he is...would see no reason for a relationship at this point, knowing his time of mating was to come, and someone was waiting for him. 2. Not Uhura. Ok...I know it was a good way to get her on Enterprise, I know it creates a little tension and gives Compromised Spock a shoulder to cry on. And it is that last part that is the issue. If you guys were going to give him a human should have been the hot green babe. Why? Added Weight and sorrow for Spock when she gets spaced. We all KNOW Uhura is going to live...there is no question and therefore no drama; but if we had seen that he had been hitting the green gash, and lost her in battle, it would have made Spock an even more pitiable guy by the time he blows his lid; he then would have had NOTHING...not even his on board bed warmer. would have made Spock question his human side..the frailty of an emotional existence...with no mom, no people, ad not even a shoulder to cry on, would he still allow himself to be even a tiny bit open to emotion? It could have set the stage for a journey of personal discovery for Spock. As it stands...there is Uhura to hold his hand, coo in his pointy ears, and...well...lets just say with him in such close proximity, she is breaking down his logic, keeping him from his Vulcan ways by plying him with hot chocolate lovin...saucy wench. I also do not see a Logical creature such as Spock having an affair with an underling; a situation rife with potential for conflict, charges of favoritism, and issues upon issues. It simply would be logical to hook up with a chick who could throw a personally tinged fit during some situation...ooops, babe already did. Anyway...Just my 10 cents...whats done is done.

  • April 29, 2012, 6:48 p.m. CST

    Thats "Illogical"...^

    by conspiracy

    It isn't the Pacifico in my veins...its the lack of a proper fucking edit function.

  • April 29, 2012, 6:59 p.m. CST



    thank you for the link i am also a regular reader of new scientist one small problem: the article states that the "black holes" created by your "red matter" and the "wormholes" which could lead to alternate universes are actually. two. completely. different. things. oops!

  • April 29, 2012, 7:45 p.m. CST

    Because, you know, the guy you want to hire

    by Brian Hopper

    to write Star Trek -- the most optimistic cultural mythology ever created -- is the guy who believes 'I dont even thnk the human race is going to survive.'

  • April 29, 2012, 8:03 p.m. CST

    He was the worst thing about STINO

    by Autodidact

    Nimoy is a great performer and still has screen presence, but the writing of his part in that movie is atrociously poor. I really think the entire story in ST 2009 was incredibly lame but my god the fucking diarrhea fart stench of the entire ice planet sequence is off the charts in foulness. All that said, I am able to enjoy the movie... but I can never really accept what's on screen while watching it.

  • April 29, 2012, 8:12 p.m. CST

    Three words that'll make you appreciate the 2009 film

    by I_Snake_Plissken

    "Manual steering column." The moment that Riker started flying the Enterprise with a CH Flightstick Pro, ST: TNG imploded.

  • If STINO has the diarrhea fart smell, that's not so bad compared to ST: Nemesis which has a load of hot wet diarrhea all over its own face and there is actual diarrhea spray coating all of its expensive electronics and tough to clean fabrics. So STINO was an improvement in that sense.

  • April 29, 2012, 8:48 p.m. CST

    That's how I view Insurrection...

    by Jaka a fine TV episode. Or two of them, rather. There's nothing wrong with Insurrection, it's just not at what would most would consider major motion picture level. But it's a fine story - well acted and directed.

  • April 29, 2012, 9:22 p.m. CST

    Of TNG films...only First Contact is watchable...

    by conspiracy

    ...and even that one has moments where it just seems like an extended TV show..the Drunk Troi is painful to watch. And I lay the blame on more than the bad writing, and reused effects...first and foremost I put the blame on the cast. Save Patrick Stewart...none of them really is that fine of an actor; certainly none of them has the gravitas of Nimoy or Shatner...who fucking OWNED the characters. I'm sure that is gonna generate some hate...but I feel it is true...bad fucking acting is a major problem of TNG films. Hate saying that...I pleasured myself raw to Marina Sirtis as a young man..

  • April 29, 2012, 9:31 p.m. CST

    Pine on set in uniform!!!

    by genrefanboy

  • April 29, 2012, 9:38 p.m. CST

    somkie geezer -- Star Trek came first

    by Boborci

    Planet destroyer, warp speed, the force, etc... so you know not of what you speak!


  • April 29, 2012, 9:47 p.m. CST

    Conspiracy -- fair points

    by Boborci

    though it is just as possible that Spock rejected being set into an arranged marriage in our universe. As for his choice of Uhura, in my mind, he didn't start dating her until she was 21 and out of his classes;)

  • April 29, 2012, 10:02 p.m. CST


    by Boborci


  • April 29, 2012, 10:32 p.m. CST

    Jesus. People Actually Act Like This?

    by Leto III

    ...Seriously. I shudder to think what type of mental landscape most of these people inhabit. Most of these folks wouldn't have the balls to say this stuff to Bob's face if they saw him on the street. Drive-by Internet anonymity is a glorious thing, evidently.

  • April 29, 2012, 10:33 p.m. CST


    by DrMorbius

    * ... I pleasured myself raw to Marina Sirtis as a young man... * Which episode did Marina play a young man?

  • But honestly...if Marina had played a young man, it'd have had the same effect...hotness of that caliber can't be hidden by makeup!

  • April 29, 2012, 10:45 p.m. CST

    boborci: why do you keep posting links...


    ... that contradict your points, and actually prove that you are wrong? "...subsequent black hole studies have suggested it would be impossible to use them as wormhole portals" "Burko noted that [his] theory rests on some unproven assumptions"

  • April 29, 2012, 10:49 p.m. CST

    even Kerr contradicts you:


    " is possible for observers in this region to return to their past" THEIR past, NOT an alternate universe.

  • April 29, 2012, 10:55 p.m. CST

    Nimoy will be in it

    by vladvampire

    Only to have NewKirk call him up and ask him how to defeat Khan, to which NimoySpock will reply, "how the hell should I know? I'm retired!"

  • April 29, 2012, 11:09 p.m. CST

    You guys and "canon"

    by FastEddie8139

    It's far from a great film, but for fuck's sake, all this "NOTHING FROM ANY OF THE OLD STAR TREKS EVER HAPPENED NOW!" bullshit, get over it. zOMG JJ ABRAMS MADE A MOVIE AND NOW I NEVER SAW ANY OF THE OLD TREK MOVIES AND THE SERIES, I TOTALLY HAVE NO MEMORY OF ANY OF THAT! It's not a real universe, you know? This last Trek film didn't actually erase Star Trek II from existence. Get a grip.

  • April 29, 2012, 11:09 p.m. CST


    by Teddy Artery

    We're going with the idea that Spock Prime devises a Genesis device to use on a candidate planet for the Vulcans to inhabit, yes? Which of course, leads to terrorist Klingons (or the like) attempting to use the device on Earth......? Discuss.

  • April 29, 2012, 11:49 p.m. CST


    by 2sdaychicken

    Just in case (God forbid) Sony's "Amazing Spider-man" is successful, and the sequel is greenlit, can you fuck up the screenplay so horrendously that there is no other option left than to give the rights back to Marvel???? PLEASE!?!?

  • April 30, 2012, 12:11 a.m. CST

    "No one is saying that the TNG movies were good"

    by Lesbianna_Winterlude

    Well. No. How could they?

  • April 30, 2012, 3:50 a.m. CST

    Anyone who believes "we are all royally fucked"

    by Dingbatty

    regarding the future of humanity has no business writing Star Trek.

  • April 30, 2012, 6:01 a.m. CST

    Spock/Uhura was in the original series

    by ellid

    There were several episodes of the first season where they're pretty openly flirting with each other. Add in that the forced kiss in Plato's Stepchildren was supposed to be between Spock and Uhura, and the romance in the reboot makes perfect sense.

  • April 30, 2012, 6:39 a.m. CST


    by CharlesG

    I agree with david_denmans_beard: There seems to be a lot more of Mr. Nimoy around since his retirement (even if it's just his voice, his animated image, or his appearance in suspended animation). On the other hand, Amanda Bynes's retirement from acting seems to have been pretty effective.

  • Face it, Trekkies, your life has been wasted. Accept it and move on. Blame Rick Bermen, because you will never blame yourselves!!!!!!!

  • April 30, 2012, 8:10 a.m. CST

    If Shatner isn't allowed into this one either and Nimoy is

    by proevad

    Fur will fly. Shat won't keep his mouth shut if it happens again.

  • April 30, 2012, 8:38 a.m. CST

    start trek

    by xphyle

    actually thats all they want..i just rewatched wrath of khan over the weekend...(they have have been showing all of the star treks on satellite lateyl) and it occurs to me practically every single movie has been trying to recapture that movie...even the reboot. and now the sequel to the reboot is supposed to have khan in have the whole galaxy tons of alien species and the alien or menace always have to have some personal relationship to the crew of the enterprise? ..I would like to see some borg stories or even flesh out some species 8472 storiesr....Q or atleast some more omnipotent type beings...Something else..

  • April 30, 2012, 8:43 a.m. CST

    Arafel - parallel universe means canon intact.

    by Boborci

  • April 30, 2012, 8:54 a.m. CST

    Dingbatty - yet here we are. Life's not fair.

    by Boborci

  • What matters is that we are not stuck with Team Abrams' version of Star Trek. Which to call it a bad mean spirited parody would be more charitable then it deserves. By the way, Star Trek wasn't needing any saving. And even if it did, which didn't, certainly it wouldn't be from the likes of Team Abrams. If anything, it's now that Star Trek needs to be saved... from Team Abrams.

  • any anybod with the minimum knowledge about astronomy would know for sure that a black hole and a wormhole are two entirely different things. Starting with the fact that black holes actually exists and are a natural consequence of the laws of physics (they even first predicted at the turn of the 20th century), while wormholes are just theoretical constructs which can't happen in real life unless matter with very exotic characteristics (which they are called exotic matter) existed, like anti-gravity (matter that instead of causeing a wrap in of space-time, a gravity hole, like all matter does, would created the opposite effect, a wrap out or anti-gravity). Problem is, no matural occuring matter does. It would need to be created artificially. But the red matter in Abrams Trek does not behave like exotic matter, it's just another technogook nonsense that creates instant black holes just add water. Don't ask science stuff to our friend Mr Orci, he would be loss for a reply. He's the wrong person to be doing science queeries to. So wrong.

  • Don't be too sure about that. Though it could come more politelly.

  • April 30, 2012, 10:26 a.m. CST

    Conspiracy, agree and disagree with you about TNG

    by Joe Plumber

    Agree that Patrick Stewart is the tits! But, disagree that he was the only decent actor. Brent Spiner was perfect as Data. He created an incredibly unique and fascinating tv character. That said, Spiner has not been able to do anything near as great since. Michael Dorn was great as Worf and the only crew member who could hold his own with Picard. Love the scene when he and Stewart almost come to blows in First Contact. Marina Sirtis however was a mediocre at best actress and her performance has not aged well. Worf's son was an abomination! That's when Next Gen jumped the wormhole.

  • April 30, 2012, 10:43 a.m. CST

    I hated every single "personal connection" character on TNG

    by Autodidact

    Alexander Roshenko (Worf's son) L'waxana Troi (Troi's mom) Wesley Crusher (Crusher's son) Any episode featuring those characters just sucked. I watch ST for a sense of exploration and knowledge seeking, not some gross horny 60 year-old woman.

  • April 30, 2012, 11:21 a.m. CST

    RE: smokiegeezer

    by kidicarus

    Enjoying the new Trek movie automatically makes me a Transformers fan by default, and an Abrams lackey to boot? Keep attacking that strawman, son.

  • Fashion is fleeting, but style is forever.


  • April 30, 2012, 12:22 p.m. CST


    by AsimovLives

    Everybody except his ass-kissers. There's a few of them.

  • JJ Abrams resurrected the Star Trek Universe, but it is not the same one. All of you Trekkies just have to accept it. If you want to blame someone for destroying your life, don't blame Abrams. Blame Rick Bermen for creating Star Trek: Enterprise. Blame him for ass raping, killing Star Trek, and then burning the body.

  • April 30, 2012, 5:04 p.m. CST

    boborci Who is this "we?" I'm not a writer.

    by Dingbatty

    So your attempt to wound me by mentioning "fair" falls flat. Trek isn't that important to me, as well. I think Blake's 7, Farscape, and Firefly are superior. But there is no denying that Trek is about hope for our future, and there is no escaping a weak, pointless retort from you.

  • Umm, that's silly. I absolutely HATE Enterprise, but it did nothing to diminish what was great (both big and small) about all Trek that came before it.

  • April 30, 2012, 6:37 p.m. CST

    Spock Prime's behavior

    by John jackson

    IMHO, the biggest flaw with the reboot was that Spock did not even consider attempting to restore the timeline that he was largely responsible for changing. That's inconsistent with all the other time travel episodes where the TOS crew was largely concerned with not changing the past. I expected Spock Prime to use the Guardian of Forever to return to a time before Nero arrives, and come up with a way to destroy him immediately before anything else could change. If not that, he could have at least used the Guardian to return to Vulcan pre-destruction and convinced them to evacuate. Instead he simply accepts Pine-Kirk without question, not factoring in how he must be somewhat different from Shatner-Kirk, and assumes that the Kirk-Spock relationship will become a good thing. To me, it was not logical at all.

  • April 30, 2012, 7:46 p.m. CST

    Merrick STFU or prove you're misdirection

    by Jason

    Some Star Trek fans are still fuming from Herc's bollocks for Trek 09 that Shatner was in the movie, you're claiming you have independent sources, name them, prove your claim or shut the fuck up with your bullshit spreading!

  • April 30, 2012, 10:31 p.m. CST

    Star Trek 12

    by Bob Tompkins

    They started late, they started without a finished script; if they think bringing Nimoy in for a cameo will put butts in the seats, I have a news flash for them. The next Trek is a disaster waiting to happen. I have seen every Star Trek movie on its first day of release. I don't think I am going to bother with this one. Everything about it smacks of being an after thought for JJ Abrams and company. As keeper of the Trek flame, they aren't doing a very good job of it. Allowing for inflation, Star Trek: The Motion Picture outgrossed the 2009 effort. The plot of the 2009 mess made less sense than The Final Frontier; plot holes big enough to run the Romulan Armada through and the entire movie fell into complete disarray when Spock Prime was captured. He knew the importance of Red Matter. He would have gladly died before allowing it to fall into Nero's hands- and that's just one of the smaller problems with the story. Paramount had better give Star Trek to someone who actually cares and will devote the appropriate time and effort to Trek, or it is over. The really sad thing is when this next effort resoundingly fails, Star Trek itself will be blamed, not JJ Abrams or Roberto Orci; it could be many barren years before we see another Star Trek on any screen big or small. And that is the shame of it.