‘Star Trek 3′: Roberto Orci is Set as Director

Published 2 months ago by

star trek 3 director roberto orci Star Trek 3: Roberto Orci is Set as Director

Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci have written for so many blockbuster franchises (Transformers, Star Trek) and big genre TV shows (Alias, Fringe) by this point, it was inevitable that the pair would eventually want to make the jump to directing some of these splashy tentpoles themselves. The dynamic duo is separating professionally, in order to better pursue such directing opportunities; Kurtzman is currently attached to helm the Spider-Man spinoff film Venom, while Orci is reported to have recently entered official talks for him to call the shots on the next Star Trek movie installment.

While Kurtzman has a feature-length film (People Like Us) and a couple TV episodes under his belt as director, Orci is a newcomer to that world. The latter’s newcomer status in the directing arena is said to have contributed to Paramount Pictures being hesitant to hand Star Trek 3 (as we’ve been calling it) over to Orci. Then again, the writer/producer arguably has as much industry experience as Star Trek and Star Trek Into Darkness director J.J. Abrams had, when Paramount decided to allow the latter to hold the reins on the third Mission: Impossible film installment back in the mid-aughts.

Which is to say, it’s not shocking that the studio’s heads have started to warm up more and more to the idea of Orci helming the next Star Trek – especially with a desired release date deadline in 2016 (which is the franchise’s 50th anniversary) looming overhead, as further incentive for Paramount to get the ball rolling on this project sooner than later.

star trek kurtzman orci Star Trek 3: Roberto Orci is Set as Director

Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci

Variety is now reporting that Orci has, in fact, been set to direct Star Trek 3, with other news outlets (like Deadline) confirming as much to be true. Abrams, who is currently getting production started on Star Wars: Episode VII, is still producing this next Star Trek movie. Meanwhile, Orci is putting together a story and script in collaboration with J.D. Payne and Patrick McKay: a relative newcomer writing duo, who have also been recruited to reboot the Flash Gordon sci-fi franchise on the big screen.

The last two Star Trek installments – both co-penned and co-produced by Orci – were both overall critical successes, as well as lucrative ventures at the box office. Yet, especially with the last film, Into Darkness, an increasing number of die-hard Trek fans (and even certain cast members) have begun vocalizing their interest in seeing the next movie return to the series’ roots in space exploration and humanism – while still retaining the whiz-bang fun of the Abrams-helmed installments, that is. Orci, as it were, is on the same page as a large chunk of the Star Trek fanbase – in that respect anyway.

star trek 3 screenwriters Star Trek 3: Roberto Orci is Set as Director

In our interview with him on the Screen Rant Underground Podcast, Orci admitted that he felt that he’d “earned the right to explore new worlds” in Star Trek 3, having retread familiar territory before (see: rebooting the Star Trek universe – literally – with the 2009 installment, then going on to re-imagine Khan with Star Trek into Darkness). That’s not to say there won’t be well-established aliens featured in the next movie, as Orci also indicated that elements touched upon in Into Darkness may be included in the background - like the Cold War tension between the Federation and Klingon Empire. Still, innovation in terms of the story being told, would be quite welcome at this point.

What are your feelings on Orci directing Star Trek 3? Are there any classic alien worlds or characters you’re hoping might be featured in this next installment – or would you rather that this film truly go somewhere that this nearly-50 year old franchise has never gone before?


Star Trek 3 (not the official title) is expected to reach theaters by 2016; we’ll let you know when it has an exact release date.

Source: Variety, Deadline

TAGS: star trek, star trek 3


Post a Comment

  1. Overall, it’s a safe decision for Paramount. At least Orci is very familiar with the story and characters, as well as the direction that Abrhams has setup. Would he be the 1st choice for me? No. Mainly because jumping from a writer to a director are two way completely different jobs. I could be wrong, but this is just my opinion. Take David S. Goyer…he wrote all of the Blade movies and directed Blade Trinity. :( Goyer knew the material and such, but still. If I would have made the decision, I would have brought in an outsider to keep things fresh. But what do I know, I’m just a movie-geek. Congrats to Orci and I hope he kills it. :p

    • Don’t blame Goyer for Blade Trinity, that movie sucked because Wesley Snipes had contract disputes. Not going to be a good movie when you try to cut Blade out of the movie about, well, Blade.

      • Snipes contract disputes were directly tied to Foyer trying to take the franchise in some other direction by spinning off the the Hannibal King and Whistler characters. So between that and him writing and directing a good percentage of how that product turned out is on Goyer.

  2. May the Great Bird of the Galaxy have mercy on our souls!

  3. I’m fine with it…then again I bailed on the new Trek after “Into Darkness”.

    • That is interesting considering the FACT that Into Darkness is a fantastic movie.

      • Aaron, that’s simply your OPINION, not a fact. And a lot of people disagree with you.

      • “That is interesting considering the FACT that Into Darkness is a fantastic movie.”

        That’s your OPINION, not a FACT. You liked it, a lot from what I can tell. That’s fine. To me, it was a dull, incoherent, mess.

        • Star Trek Into Darkness… A bad cover of my favorite movie… Embrace the suck that is new trek :P

      • Star Trek is the only Star Trek Movie that I had to turn off half way through, as it was that bad. Even the previous one was at least bearable, if bad.

        • Into Darkness I mean, I hated it!

  4. Boo!

    Look at his track record the last few years – Transformers, TASM2, STID – not impressive at all. He has spread himself too thin and now he’s going to take on extra chores as something he’s never done before!??!?!?!

    Recipe for Disaster.

    Star Trek 3 – The Black Hole

    Condition – majorly bummed.

    • I know! He is just soooooo bad. I mean, look at those AWFUL movies he was involved with! TF, ASM2, STID…ALL of those are just complete flops at the box office and NO ONE wanted to see them! OMG SOOOOO BAD!!!

      *face palm*

      • He’s a bad writer. Everyone knows it. All of those movies are bad for your IQ.

        You know, Aaron, sometimes people see movie because of something called an add campaign. Sometimes people find out that, while the trailer was totally rad, the film actually sucked. Sometimes we need to read the reviews before we spend our money. No, not all reviews are right, but we can get a pretty accurate picture when we read a few dozen that all warn the same thing.”

        Aaron, I think it’s time for you to read the collective reviews of all the movies you’ve listed. After that, you’re brain will say some bull like “well.. well, what do they know? I know a good movie when I see it.” Years later, after you’ve matured a bit and you go to watch STID again, your brain will say, “Oh. This movie doesn’t really hold up on subsequent viewings. It really does suck. Orci really does suck.”

        • He is def a bad writer… His stuff has soooo many plot holes and inconsistancies… It’s like he thinks the audience is retarded… For the most part he’s probably right…

          • Using the word “retarded” does not help your argument and speaks volumes for about your character.

            • Mentally challenged, slow, stupid, whatever…

              • That is a derogatory term, a simple apology would have been more appropriate.

                • What makes it derogatory? Mentally challenge sounds way worse…

      • Facts and opinions are two different things. Justin Beiber has a lot of fans and has sold a lot of records, that is a fact. Whether he is a talented musician who’s work will stand the test of time, or if he is not a jerk is opinion.

        The same goes for some of the movies these guys have worked on. Financially successful, yes. High quality writing and story-telling, depends on the taste of the individual viewer.

    • @OldDarth, Yeah, Orci has a horrible track record with sequels.

      Mission Impossible III, The Amazing Spider-Man 2, The Amazing Spider-Man 3, and Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen were completely horrible movies.

      Star Trek Into Darkness turned the series in Jag and NCIS. It was pretty horrible.

      When JJ comes to JJ’s (Bad Robot) recent screenplays, the majority of his recent tv-shows have been cancelled.

  5. I’m skeptical because the guy has never directed a film before, and his first outing will be a million-dollar blockbuster franchise. On the other hand, he’s wrote the previous two films and knows the universe more than anyone else does.

  6. I hope Srar Trek III gets down to the nitty gritty of the universe and explores some new ground. The first two films were great but felt like two parts of the same film in many ways. I’m guessing it won’t be inspired by the search for spock given there is no genesis device in the reboot as yet but who knows?

  7. Now that the other guys has finally left, they should base Star Trek 3 off of Star Trek. They can’t base it off of Star Wars again!

  8. I’d rather see another series for TV that is a continuation of the TNG, DS9 and Voyager world but I seem to be in the minority. I did not hate the two new films but they were not Star Trek for me and there was far too much lens flare, I won’t be rushing to watch the third.

    • I’m with on this one. I’ve loved Star Trek since my college days and these new Treks have diverged from the Trek formula. Kirk is not the tactical genius as before; Spock is way too emotional; Starfleet security is incompetent; warp speed is now 100 times faster, as well as communications; and the Klingons allow invaders into their space. I liked the action and effects but the story was sorely lacking, IMHO. Hopefully they’ll get things right this time.

  9. F*** Orci

    • start that hashtag!

  10. There are a lot of safe financial bets the studios could place. I have to assume they’re making this out of spite, specifically to annoy the fans who thought “Into Darkness” was a grandiose, badly written, nonsensical piece of mess. It all boils down to one distinction: legally owning the franchise porperties, versus the ability to skillfully develop them into something the audience wants.

    Does anyone actually believe that just because a new installment of a certain series is made, it necessarily becomes definitive of that series, to anybody? Yeah, right, and I’ve got your nose.
    Want it back?

    • Yeah. That’s what studios do…try to piss off their fans. They don’t like their salaries and bonuses either.

  11. Well he can’t possibly be a worse director than he is a writer…. this film will be terrible

  12. Yeah, this film has officially sunk. Abrams was the only thing that held these films together because Star Trek was the only good thing Orci and Kurtzman (the stooges of Hollywood) ever wrote, and even their screenplay sucked for these movies. Now they’ve pulled one of these crappy writers to direct the film? Jesus Christ, Paramount.

    • are you nuts it cant get any worse than what that hack abbrams did to the franchise, bad film, no story, no clue about trek period other than names and it makes money on that name, his movies stunk…….

      • I actually found them entertaining. Abrams is a competent director of action/adventure, and knows how to give these films a memorable personality.

      • You do realize that Orci was on the “story team” for those Abrams films?

  13. Not a great fan of the duo’s writing.

    Transformers are awful, Trek 1 was okay, ID fell flat for me. not familiar with his TV works having no seen Alias or Fringe so maybe he’s better at writing TV than features.

    Directing is a completely different game than writing, there’s so much work that has to be done of the set, can he handle that workload and pressure doing some thing this big first time out.

    Regardless of his knowledge of the script and story (as he’s writing it) I think this is too much movie for a first time. He needs to cut his teeth on some smaller projects, bit of TV or a small self scripted indie film or something.

    I think what’s more interesting is what the script will be like….. how much of the other scripts was Orci and how much was Kurtzman. See how the “voice” changes with the different colabortators.

    • +1,000,000

  14. I have a great idea for plot of new movie and it would be totally original, the spocks get together and correct the timeline,t will put trek right and cancel all that abbrams garbage

    • Nah, that’ll never happen. Makes too much sense.

    • I agree with you cris but It’ll never happen as long as that arrogant hack Orci is invollved.

    • Yeah! That’s the spirit! Let’s go back to the way things were. While we’re at it…Get our women out of the work force. Put a rich white guy in the Oval Office. Who needs affirmative action? Evolution is just a theory! Who needs it? Keep things the same always and forever.

      • Your rant has nothing to do with new Star Trek. Affirmative action and rich white guys? seriously flawed…

        • So you say…

  15. there are for sure other directors (exp) who could have been chosen, BUT … directing movies like this – sometimes the director doesn’t totally matter. The template has been set, the look, the feel, the main cast, etc

    at this point 3 movies in, it’s kind of like directing a episode of television –
    the only difference is he is also one of the co-writers so he does have a more complete sense of everything that has come before
    but in reality – the full team – DP, other producers, designers, etc – all are equally involved in the final product
    all the director really does is say: I like X, Y, Z and if someone on the team thinks his ideas suck they’ll speak up and say: …
    “uh … I disagree .. how about we do it like this … A, B, C” and next thing you know … a movie is made.

    the question of how good it will be will always come down the script – which he has written before – so safe assumption he’ll do it again.

  16. Congratulations Bob!

    With the biggest fan of Star Trek within the Supreme Court now at the helm, I’m confident we’ll get a movie will be true to the spirit of TOS while boldily moving forward.

    My hope would be that we stay away from some revenge-driven villain.

    And IF there is any revisiting, I think it would be interesting to see the Talosians in the rebooted universe. Think of the mind-blowing, Inception-like possibilities! And it would be a nod to the 50th anniversary by revisiting the very first antagonists created by Trek.

    Can’t wait!

  17. Enough with the negativity already, he should be fine… The only thing I would like to see is something new. There is no need to rehash old stories now since the foundations has been set, it’s time to bring something fresh!

  18. There may be no words to express my deep and bleak disappointment in Paramount at this point. I am beyond appalled that Orci got this gig.

    • To clarify — he may do fine as a director, technically speaking. But (1) the last thing that Star Trek needs is anyone involved with writing Into Darkness to be back for another go-around. And (2) Orci’s online scuffle with fans last year cost him any respect that he might hope to have from me. I am offended, as a fan, that he now has the directorial reigns of the franchise.

      I am usually not the type to say things like this, but I may very well boycott this film. For the 50th anniversary of Star Trek, that is a sad thought.

      • Yeah, I’m with you on that. Might see it on Netflix if the reviews and synopsis are good.

  19. bdcarter: Jumping on the offence here are’t we? I preffer old trek to the new stuff. A lot of us do. A lot of us go to the theater to support the brand hoping that the next one will be better. So far the original movies are more entertaining than any of the new ones to me. I guess I need more than some exploding objects, and 3d ships to be entertained. If thats all you need then more power to you. Now simmer down and lets enjoy a nice conversation while we mind our manners.

    • Your calling ME out? Seriously? Yes…I’m on the offensive. Have you read the posts here? They ARE offensive.

      “Scrrenplay sucked.”
      “Stooges of Hollywood.”
      “Crappy writers.”
      “Arrogant hacks.”
      “F*** Orci.”

      You want respective discourse, you have to earn it. But I should know by now…Haters gonna hate.

      • “Your calling ME out? Seriously? Yes…I’m on the offensive. Have you read the posts here? They ARE offensive.

        “Scrrenplay sucked.”
        “Stooges of Hollywood.”
        “Crappy writers.”
        “Arrogant hacks.”
        “F*** Orci.”

        You want respective discourse, you have to earn it. But I should know by now…Haters gonna hate.”


        No one is calling you garbage. Everyone is calling Roberto Orci’s an arrogant hack because that what he is. Orci is a no intelligent no-talent hack …. and all his movies are pure mindless crap

        So unless your name is Roberto Orci, you have no reason to start picking fights with a lot of true longtime Trek fans :)

  20. First I’m a life long Star Trek fan. Seen every movie and own all the television series, even Enterprise.

    I’ve said this before on other sites the newer Star Trek movies aren’t that bad, they may not be Wrath of Khan or Voyage Home story lines, but there fun to watch. Paramount and Abrams set theses newer movies in this new timeline for a reason. It was there way of cleaning the slate and starting over with out causing issues with the Trek we already know.

    What if they had rebooted Star Trek and left it in the original time line? All of you who are so eager to express your views in a rude way would be even more outraged by claiming they now screwed up this story or that event. You can’t say you wouldn’t either.

    To jump on people and reply to them telling that the fact they liked the last two movies that they don’t know what there talking about is not cool. Everyone is entitled to there views.

    I would love to reply to some of you on here for hating the movies, but i don’t, that’s your view and your entitled to have it.

    This may come as a shock to some of you, but there are people out there who are fans of the original trek and the new trek.

    The story lines from the tv shows and the movies with the original cast and even the TNG cast in some way would not hold up with today’s younger more impatient audiences.

    Now has everything been right with the last two movies, no, but there also not that unwatchable either.

    If you don’t like the new movies, fine, don’t go see the third movie in 2016, but don’t reply to people telling them there immature for liking them.

    I will respect a lot of peoples views more by them not being so rude and vulgar.

    What if the third movie turns out to be more like everyone was hoping for with the first two? What if it technically makes more then Episode VII of Star Wars? Has a beter plot the Star Wars? What will some of you say then?

    Be glad some form of Star Trek is being made. If you don’t like, don’t see it, but stop trying to tell those who do like it their wrong. Maybe your wrong as well.

    • Actually, I don’t have to tolerate the big budget Star Trek series, given how great Star Trek Continues is at making actual stories. That’s pretty much my recommendations for all Star Trek fans: try looking at fan productions now and don’t let your prejudice keep you from exploring new forms of shows.

  21. They should try a storyline like the Planetkiller (episode “The Doomsday Machine” from TOS), where Commodore Decker lost his crew and the USS Constellation was so badly damaged, and they nearly lost the Enterprise. That would be slick…!

  22. I’m also a life long Star Trek viewer going back to 1966. Abrahms and Orci are far from being the only directors who haven’t understood their subject material or what it was there for, (which was essentially to be a crucible to discuss what you couldn’t discuss on American television at that time in history). However the true crime of Abrabms and Co is a little like saying, look, I’ve dressed Darth Vadar in white and I’m calling it a reboot look how clever I am. Nice computer effects, lame, empty meaningless movies. Shame really because not all of his (their) stuff is terrible they just don’t have the collective life experience to write for something as originally ground breaking as Star Trek. Perhaps when they’re older they’ll realise just how much of an opportunity was squandered.

  23. So who is going to write and direct the reboot in 5-7 years ?

  24. I’m just happy that “Into the Darkness” got my nephews interested and excited about Star Trek. We’ll be looking forward to the next one.

    • Exactly. New fans and a broader audience. What’s wrong with that. A 30-year co-worker discovered Star Trek ’09 through one of the cable movie providers. She had heard me talking Trek so she mentioned she really enjoyed it. Began to understand why I liked it. So I lent her by STID blu-ray. She loved it. THEN…I said, if you loved that, check out TWOK. Lent her that. It took her three attempts to get through it because she kept falling asleep.

      Heavy sigh.

      But that’s the reality Star Trek faces. All of the people that want new movies closer to the originals would be killing the franchise. We live in an A.D.D. 21st century where the attention span of the average moviegoer today is 140 characters. Trek HAS to adapt to survive. IMHO, the new movies work! They have the thought-provoking ideas (impact of the Prime Directive), allegories to current issues (government/military over-reach)and the classic Trek themes of friendship/family. But the JJverse adds the whiz-bang spectacle that today’s audiences demand.

      Thank goodness it’s working. The critics are positive. The WORLDWIDE audience is growing. Star Trek is relevant again. Which means we long-time fans aren’t relegated to watching 50-year old episodes on Betamax tapes.

      • I think that’s part of the problem. STID isn’t a gateway into the franchise, it’s a dead end.

        And not all of us except that new Trek movies can only be explosions, running, yelling, crying, boobs, relationship drama. It’s weak. It’s stupid. Just because the quality of films has taken a dive doesn’t mean that great franchises should follow suite. I expect more.

        I’m serious. It’s so stupid. I don’t understand how you watch New Trek movies more than one time. Doesn’t start to show its plot holes and bad writing? Don’t the flaws become painfully apparent? Doesn’t your brain reject that faulty information? This is my complaint of all JJ movies, the retard with subsequent viewings. It’s like they were made for 13yr olds.

  25. They should remake “The Balance of Terror” or “Where No Man Has Gone Before” or “Mirror Mirror” or “Journey to Babel” for the next movie (if they do Babel, then Nimoy could replace Sarek as the Vulcan representative…)

    • Oh wow, that’s a badass idea! Yes! They should continue ripping off episodes from 50 years ago. But they should pull a clever casting switch (wink wink). Amazing! They definitely shouldn’t do anything new. That would be lame. Nobody likes new stories. I only want to see remakes.

  26. —I know you read these, Orci. You’re too insecure to ignore them.—

    I do not agree with Paramount’s decision. His abysmal writing record aside, Orci represents the original fundamental flaw in this whole reboot Trek thing: the fact they shouldn’t have done it. They should dump the caricatures of the old crew. They should dump the alternate universe. These things don’t honor all the Trek that came before, they disrespect and laugh at it.

    (And no Orci, I don’t care about your box office numbers. You’ve sacrificed the long-term brand for short-term numbers. 10 or 20 years from now, we’ll look back at New Trek as the LAST pathetic incarnation of Trek, the final nail in the coffin. But hey, at least its sexy and makes money. Who needs intellectual stimulation?)

    • Without the reboot, Star Trek would ALREADY be dead and buried.

      • bdrcarter, Does it get tiring constantly defending New Trek? I hope you’re being paid, because I certainly wouldn’t do it for free.

        And no, it wouldn’t ALREADY be dead and buried. New Trek just adds to the last ten years of crappy Trek material. What makes New Trek especially bad is that it’s making money. And that, my sensitive friend, is factor that digs Trek so deep that it may never be saved. Because of box office numbers, dollars, and super fans like you, execs are lead to believe that is this actually the correct path to take. It’s take another decade to right this wrong (if it’s even possible at this point).

        P.S. – How’d you like Alice Eve’s undies? Classy! Go Frat Kirk! Check out those lady pecs!

        • Not at all. I’ve been defending Trek since I was 9 years old. But now, instead of getting teased as a nerd when I was a kid, I’m in the VAST majority of movie-goers that likes the movies. The broader audience has embraced Star Trek. It’s fantastic to be able to welcome people to the ideas of Gene Roddenberry and team.

          But it is funny to listen to the rigid Talifans complain about the slightest change to “their” Trek. And the revisionist history about how sophisticated TOS was. Alice Eve’s undies? There were half-naked women in just about every episode. And they were there by design by Roddenberry himself to titillate the audience. (Read the excellent series of books by Marc Cushman….These Are The Voyages. Outstanding and in-depth histories on each and every episode.) Kirk has been jumping into bed with beautiful women(or trying to)for nearly 50 years. And for every Khan’s Magic Blood there was a Genesis Wave. Star Trek is replete with plotholes and convenient storytelling.

          So don’t get all holier-than-thou.

          Embrace change and new ideas. It’s what Star Trek was all about…if you were paying attention.

    • I will assume by your comment that you are not a fan of the last two Trek films? And that’s fine.

      I would think for those of you who feel as you said “These things don’t honor all the Trek that came before” would at least be happy the newer films are at least set in the alternate universe.

      You may wonder why I would suggest that and hears why. What if they had rebooted Star Trek and left it the universe were all familiar with, still went with the original crew on the first Enterprise? Wouldn’t you be more upset then?

      If they had done that they could have easily wiped out certain story lines or events that had already been told thus creating a huge mess with the continuity that had already been established.

      At least with the newer movies being set in the alternate universe any story they tell does not effect the history of the original or prime universe, how ever you wish to refer to it as.

      In my view today’s movie paying patrons most likely would not sit through a Star Trek film like we did with Voyage Home(Highest grossing movie of the original cast). Today’s youth, right or wrong, are looking for the faster paced movies.

      I have co-workers who were born in the late 80′s early 90′s who don’t like the older Star Trek movies with Shanter and Nimoy, to slow they say, but they liked the two made by Abrams. As much as some out there, like yourself, who would give there right arm to get back the Trek you loved, most likely will never be seen again unless you put in the movie at home yourself.

      The older generation who grew up with Trek always on TV has a choice, get on board with where Star Trek is headed or resign to watching what we like on DVD.

  27. Abrams and Orci gave us the best 11 minutes of Trek ever in the opening battle sequence of ST1, but sadly, we have been chasing the dragon’s tail ever since. From one slam-bang set-piece to the next, with next to nothing in the way of plot or character development to tie them together. Vulcan’s destruction, transporters with unlimited range, and death-defying augment blood have already made a mess of things, and the dull, Kazon-like Klingons aren’t a good sign of things to come. Let’s hope Orci can tighten up this ship before he makes it necessary to whip around the sun, stangle Nero in his crib, and start over.

    • It would probably help quite a bit to see the larger implications of “Vulcan’s destruction, transporters with unlimited range, and death-defying augment blood” and how all those things create conflict in a story. At the very least, it would feel less like deus ex machina devices and more like actual things in its universe.

      That’s one large element of why the New Trek is just so bad. Plot devices are introduced in order to write the story out of the holes it creates.

  28. What’s wrong with modern trek?, well, it’s that the original did more with spray painted coffee cups and computer lights made from ice cube trays glued to pieces of cardboard than JJ & Co have managed to do with millions of dollars worth of special effects. If there’s one piece of advice I’d give the new director it’s this: Write a moral based story examining some of the big questions affecting todays society and human nature, things that make the audience think long after they’ve left the theatre that even today you can’t really speak about openly that’s not dumbed down or patronising but is believable and very relevant to a modern day audience that it would be a brilliant movie even if it were set on a bus, let alone a star ship and then you just might be starting to achieve something really worth arguing about.

  29. Having just seen Into Darkness, I guess it could have been worse. Not a big fan of the whole reboot in general but I was pleased to see the model of the NX-01 in this movie. I realize the reboot changes the whole universe post TOS but lets not forget that by that logic, everything that happened in ENT should still be relevant in the new timeline. I would like to see more references to ENT, maybe some Insectoids or Aquatics or maybe they find an old NX class ship out in deep space in the new movie. I cant be the only one who loved Enterprise, can I?

Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.

If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it.

Be Social, Follow Us!!