ROTTEN TOMATOES: Weekly Ketchup: J.J. Abrams' Star Trek plot revealed Comments

Weekly Ketchup: J.J. Abrams' Star Trek plot revealed

by Greg Dean Schmitz | August 29, 2008

Summary

This week's Ketchup bottle brings news on the plot from the upcoming Star Trek movie, plus casting news for George Clooney, Robert Downey Jr, and Audrey Tautou Back to Article

(1-43 of 43 posts) | Reply

jokerboy1991 writes:
on Aug 29 2008 04:47 PM

I personally love the Star Trek idea, it sounds so cool that it even pisses me off more that it isn't coming out this christmas.

(Reply to this)

The Vile writes:
on Aug 29 2008 05:54 PM

yeah, i'm starting to think Trek can't fail. it already contains double the Spock.

that Lennon biopic will rule as well. everyone knows what happened after they met, so it's probably the 'final frontier' for Beatles stories not already covered through mass media.

(Reply to this)

arendr writes:
on Aug 29 2008 06:40 PM

I don't know about that Trek plot. It's kind of conventional. We'll see.

Also, kids know the Beatles right? They have to!

(Reply to this)

kaike_67 writes:
on Aug 29 2008 06:43 PM

I know it's crap, but actually the whole "Cher as Catwoman, a vamp in her twilight years" sound kinda... cool. That would be turning the whole established cinematic concept (Michelle Pfeiffer, Halle Berry) of the kitty on its head, and we've known for quite some time ("Memento", anyone?) that the Nolan Brothers are fantastic writers, so I have absolutely no doubt that they'd make it work. Besides, say what you will, but Cher can actually act. Check out "Silkwood", "Mask" and "Moonstruck".

(Reply to this)

The Vile writes:
on Aug 29 2008 07:02 PM

In reply to this comment (#2007814)
yeah, that gimmick has popped up a thousand times in trek. but in this case it's probably justified as a lead-in to the new franchise. a good way of linking the new with the old. and i'll take romulans over the borg anyday

(Reply to this)

jokerboy1991 writes:
on Aug 29 2008 07:12 PM

In reply to this comment (#2007864)
Exactly, I love they way how its going back to the roots of Star Trek. I never liked the Star Trek movies or Star Trek Nemesis, I always stood by the fact that I think the original Star Trek show was the funnest and best. Also I do like the cast they got, and I do like JJ.

(Reply to this)

thereign writes:
on Aug 29 2008 07:12 PM

Watch Star Trek: Of Gods and Men online, in order to see that exact same premise(with Charlie X instead of the Romulans) carried out.

Not thrilled at all.

(Reply to this)

Daniel Aaron writes:
on Aug 29 2008 09:22 PM

if Nolan were to direct another Batman they need more Paza's one and two were flat to me good idea but he forgot the color and lights not lame light I mean imagine what couold have been done with the scarecrow and cgi effects of visions...or to do the joker..give him a lair at least...to inter ject I would re introduce Halucenengentics and I would use the Mad Hatter then you can keep the real feel but say the Hatter Laces bat mans head piece throw on some hendricks for the preview the basis of the film Batman a juggernaught having to figure out whats real and what not at times..take him to wonderland no foul licking (ledger was not the joker in my book..ever nice trip for a henchmen though He is the Clown Prince of crime he does not act that way..that was about as much the joker as Harvey Dent A.K.A Two Face melting down at the end of the film in emotion..duh. Harvey snapped when it all came down as in lost all sense of judgment and emotion he would let you go just as quick as kill you that was the point. "I will flip a coin" it didn't matter what you said there was no plea bargain that was his character..chance. or in his twisted mind Fate. Any way my email is angelsdrawswords@yahoo dot com if any industry boys read this and want to talk. Im in L.A working on some other stuff but alas thats always this is a no brainer..and to fan boy's before you admit your coin on my post you have no idea who checks in.
stay fresh Im just a fan( wait..was inspired by could relate to at 16..still today how I would right or write him at 36 is what they pay you the big bucks for that was a snyopsis) too who bleeds for Characters I love..maybe thats why im in the middle of the City of Angels at times..
God Bless
Daniel.

(Reply to this)

arendr writes:
on Aug 29 2008 09:30 PM

In reply to this comment (#2008040)
Obviously you're not a girl because you don't have any periods.

(Reply to this)

sunsaz writes:
on Aug 29 2008 10:05 PM

Interesting idea for the Star Trek plot. And here I was (with most people likely) thinking the Nimoy involvement was merely to set up a flashback.

Not to mention some of Trek's best stories (both on TV and the movies) have to do with time travel.

(Reply to this)

Daniel Aaron writes:
on Aug 29 2008 10:06 PM

One more side note the new Star trek film...Star trek 4 revisited just joking sounds like an idea who knows I will have to see it I dont think abbrams is that good of a director myself Mission Impossible 3 was so flat I felt as though I was watch mid day television while after I had faked sick to stay home. All that was missing was my bowl of cherrios. After De Palama and Woo i did not think that was possible but alas he "made it so." which brings us to Star Trek first bad sign but coy cute in away ..the poster ..remember what I said about "T.V" watch M.I 3 again you'll know what I mean ..it dragged hard went no where the guy is a T.V director it's his lot in life I'm sorry I don't mean nothing buy it ..maybe he will surprise I doubt it though..this will not hold a stick to Wrath of Khan or even the first film..(which by the way many berate but forget that Star Trek was about Science more than fiction and finding the Voyager one in the middle of an electric cloud or what ever it was ..I was ten when I saw the first film .all I know was my Dad and his science geeks walked out in awe and satisfied (this was before MTV and quick cut's when people still thought.
Anyhoot all I can say about this "Film" is if Abrams f#cks this up he is treading on dangerous ground. Trekkies are not normal people you mess with Star Trek .try and "re-arrange" Star Fleet Command..dude..there will be a hot pocket bounty on you.(believe me I have sat in on more than one of my brothers 3 am discussions of the Romulan Empire the Kilingon battle fleet why Star fleet Command just doesn't get it the concept of teleportation why a 20 sided die should be rolled instead of a six when scuttling a uncloaked Bird of Prey.."Uncloaked or not it is still a machine of war!.(insert fist pound here sip of Jolt and chair lean back)" ....A year supply if brought in alive. A lifetime for his head. That's not me thats just conjecture on what "could take place" I am not a Trekke these are thoughts to a young man walking into a bee hive that is all..Im not a bee..just letting you know what you could be walking into. I know some and they are good people it's all they have Leave it alone. Do it right or dont pick up the pen or Camera. And if one ever showed up with Abbrams tied up in the back of his 76 Pacer and just needed a cup of water and some rest to gather his thoughts as he head "home" ..Yes I would. "come in Homes..where you headin?..."
"Cleveland."

(note these words are in jest one my part to any Patriot act type stuff .you cant even type these days..but no really if Abbrams reads this ..hey man..look if someone showed up at my place some random trekkie on the underground rail road who "got my name" because "Dan's out of the loop they won't know!.. but he's cool." if your movie sucks hey I dont want to know who is tied up in the back seat of your car his little eyes pleading thru duck tape. I saw it too. I will simply invite him in and offer him a couple of Hot Pocket's and a Mountain Dew a pillow the rest of the six pack for the road and send him on his way with my blessing in his own time..."I heard Cleveland is a great town")
selah.
P.S if any of you Myspace feel free to hit me up add me ect Im at www.myspace.com/itsjustthebeat
love and everything else
Daniel
P.S.S
and if you are a trekkie hey man lets just wait and see and if it is that bad remeber you have a future it's cool..you cant get hot pockets in the pen..well you can...but only if your doing a good size stretch and you dont want that...besides who is ganna take your mom to brunch on Sunday?but in the end it's a free country brother I can't stop you..God Speed.
God Bless
Stay Good your a geek yes . But Geeks rule.
:)

(Reply to this)

Doc_Callihan writes:
on Aug 29 2008 10:54 PM

Cher as catwoman? Granted she can be foxy enough to play the feline, but she's 62(!). Imagining the sexual tension of a catwoman twice the age of are caped crusader is a tad imaginative...kind of like the persons who ever thought a candy and dark shaded van combo was ever a good idea.

To be fair, Cher did win a leading actress oscar back in 88 (Moonstruck, sporting a pre con-air Nick Cage...no kidding), she can be sexy as hell, and, I mean, come on, Nolan's basically a genius with this stuff.

And Verne Troyer, if that was true, this would be one hell of a day (Sarah Palin AND Verne Troyer!)

Anyway Greg, one can always rely on you for a solid humor infused wrap up.

(Reply to this)

Sulaco2k writes:
on Aug 30 2008 01:51 AM

Ignore all the Batman 3 rumors...well maybe you should stop posting them on the front ****ing page under news as if they're fact and maybe all of us would.

(Reply to this)

kodie131 writes:
on Aug 30 2008 07:15 AM

The Star Trek plot sounds amazing! The project is definitely in the right hands, I have a lot of trust in JJ. And rats, I was really looking forward to the rumor of Depp being the ridler.

(Reply to this)

kodie131 writes:
on Aug 30 2008 07:17 AM

Oh and also... I am only 19, and I own all of the Beatles albums. Plus Abbey Road on vinyl. I'm pretty sure us youngins will want to see a John Lennon biopic.

(Reply to this)

EmperorFabulous writes:
on Aug 30 2008 11:48 AM

Everyone in my high school is aware of The Beatles, actually. Kind of hard not to know about them. You'd have to really try. And I, too, own some of their stuff on vinyl.

(Reply to this)

arendr writes:
on Aug 30 2008 12:45 PM

Thank God you guys know The Beatles! I'm 25 and I remember talking to a girl in high school who said "John Lennon? Is he that white haired guy on TV?"

(I assume she meant Jay Leno. You can assume that I wanted to vomit.)

(Reply to this)

jason913 writes:
on Aug 30 2008 02:02 PM

Actually, I think the Star Trek plot is kind of intresting and I'll be looing forward to the film.

A John Lennon Biopic sounds great, if they can get a good director and cast on board. Who'd play Lennon?

This is my first post on RT!

(Reply to this)

jason913 writes:
on Aug 30 2008 02:05 PM

Also, I'm down for Cher as Catwoman. Iy's almost certainly not going to happen, but it's a good idea nonetheless.

(Reply to this)

Rikochet writes:
on Aug 30 2008 03:37 PM

So, um, if anyone actually watched the clip (http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid1513658585?bctid=1755337967) of the writers "revealing" the plot of the new Star Trek movie, they wouldn't see any mention of Romulans or time travel (or any plot details).

It looks like LatinoReview.com *sarcastically* speculated on the plot of the movie (http://www.latinoreview.com/news/star-trek-writers-talk-trek-5291) which chud.com reported as the actual plot (http://chud.com/articles/articles/16146/1/STAR-TREK-THE-UNDISCOVERED-NOMENCLATURE/Page1.html) and then RT reported it as fact in turn.

Yay for fact-checking.

(Reply to this)

jason913 writes:
on Aug 30 2008 03:47 PM

Oh, O.K. 0_0

(Reply to this)

tomwaitsjr writes:
on Aug 30 2008 04:16 PM

I always found the whole flapper thing extremely cool, and I love Audrey Tatou. Probably will be the first "chic" film I'm going to look forward to in a while.

(Reply to this)

greg_dean_schmitz writes:
on Aug 30 2008 04:35 PM

In reply to this comment (#2009944)
Rikochet, wow, thanks for checking in on that. It's interesting that CHUD's story had all these details, apparently reported as fact, that the other two sources didn't have. CHUD is a great site that doesn't normally just pull things out of thin air, so my initial reaction is that they must have gotten that premise from...SOMEWHERE. I'm going to look into this. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.

(Reply to this)

greg_dean_schmitz writes:
on Aug 30 2008 04:44 PM

TomWaitsJr: You're absolutely right about the flapper look. I have a personal anecdote on the subject, actually. Back in college, I was a grad student working at the University of Tampa Library, and had the chance to look through the yearbooks from throughout the 20th century. Looking at most decades, the "kids" (specifically the girls) had that dated look, but when I looked at the yearbooks from the 1920s and early 1930s, when the "Flapper Look" was all the rage, I noticed something strange... the girls looked surprisingly "contemporary" (to 1995). It felt a little creepy to think this (considering they were probably all either grammas or dead), but a lot of the 1929 girls... surprisingly cute/hot. The 1920s were indeed a sort of golden age in fashion, and then things fell apart with, you know, crippling, devastating economic crisis.

Various posters: good to hear some people under 25 HAVE heard of the Beatles, although it would be interesting to see the results of an actual poll on the subject.

DocCalihan: Thanks for the good word !

(Reply to this)

tomwaitsjr writes:
on Aug 30 2008 06:17 PM

Thanks Greg!

I agree.

(Reply to this)

eastern2western writes:
on Aug 30 2008 07:53 PM

basically, star trek is a reboot because its sequels are so deep into their mythos that they only interest the season fans. calling it not a prequel or reboot is just a writer who is selling his script. how can you not call it a reboot when the previous movies bombed, the next generation cast got dumped and the original generation is too chunky to wear those space suits. call it what ever they want, when a movie comes out after being in hiatus for many years and comes out with a complete new cast and new stories is bascially a reboot

(Reply to this)

Facil writes:
on Aug 31 2008 06:32 AM

Team Abrams haven't revealed plot details. CHUD is regurgitating rumors that were reported by AICN a year ago, which have recently been (partially) vetted by ST:XI actors Leonard Nimoy and Clifton Collins Jr.

Here's a link to the AICN report from August 2007...

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/33832

:)

(Reply to this)

ZigBallistic writes:
on Aug 31 2008 07:53 AM

It's actually kind of funny they are to chicken to call it a reboot and/or a prequel. All they have to do is make a second movie(which they will if this one is successful) and there won't be anything else to call it.

I just think it's sad that the producers appear to be very afraid of upsetting the fanboys, when i think most fans of the franchise would be open minded about it if it's done well! The time traveling thing is a nice way to tie it together but honestly, Rodenberry is dead, why not just cut ties completely with the original.....

Then again, it may not be fanboys they are trying to placate, maybe it's the family.

(Reply to this)

ZigBallistic writes:
on Aug 31 2008 07:58 AM

Cher as Catwoman? Only if she is doing her own stunts! Seriously though, I trust whatever Nolan does after the first two movies. He could put Mr. Freeze in there as a bald hitman with no ice powers whatsoever and I would still go pay to watch it, even if he decides that Bruce Wayne should be emo, wear black mascara, and do a couple music numbers. ;)

(Reply to this)

lestatthevampire writes:
on Aug 31 2008 09:34 AM

Time travel?
Ugh... this sounds like a Sarah Chronicles thing. Horrible concept. Just reboot it for the War Generation.

(Reply to this)

High School With Money writes:
on Aug 31 2008 11:39 AM

Wasn't the "nail in the coffin" supposed to be Insurrection? After that point, Star Trek was just undead, and there's no point nailing an undead into a coffin.

As for Batbreath, the only way Warners will get a script underway is if fans quit talking about it. Nothing like the silent treatment to get some results.

(Reply to this)

Dav3 writes:
on Aug 31 2008 07:34 PM

Verne Troyer as Penguin! I love it! that is the best casting idea I've ever heard! Forget Batman, I wanna see a Penguin spinoff!

As for the Trek rumors, I'm a moderately zealous Trekkie and I would rather have a reboot than something tied to what's been done. I was watching Nemesis on TV the other night and it is just awful... like a sci-fi version of of Joel Silver movie.

The Star Trek franchise is like an old house that's been remodeled so many times that it's unrecognizable. Someone needs to take it down to the foundation and rebuild it from the ground up.

(Reply to this)

rt_hire_me writes:
on Aug 31 2008 09:05 PM

Yes, kids today know the Beetles (Beatles?). But they don't know Rock Me Amadeus Pretty sad.

(Reply to this)

tommyhawk writes:
on Sep 01 2008 12:08 AM

Unless I'm missing something, no where do I see where the producers revealed the plot. It looks like one site published one thing, then the other blog must have thought it was true, and now Rotten Tomatoes is actually reporting the same thing. Sorry, but can someone show me in that video that's linked on the blog where the producers "revealed" the plot?

(Reply to this)

tommyhawk writes:
on Sep 01 2008 12:21 AM

Oops, looks like Facil beat me to it. Didn't see the second page of replies! My apologies, though our points still stand.

(Reply to this)

riseup124 writes:
on Sep 01 2008 06:08 AM

I don't think they should go with Depp ( I know it just a rumor ),as the Riddler cuase they might want to bring the Joker back and who else besides Depp could pull that off?

(Reply to this)

greg_dean_schmitz writes:
on Sep 01 2008 02:03 PM

Hey gang, an update on the Star Trek premise angle to this week's story. I've heard back from Devin at CHUD, and he clarified that he wrote that premise based on tips he's received from reliable sources, corroborating the aspects of AICN's original post that he posted as the premise this week (which is to say that not everything posted by AICN is corroborated).

So, based on Devin's sources, I stand by our posting of that premise (although there might be much more to the movie than just that), and the column won't be getting an edit.

(Reply to this)

greg_dean_schmitz writes:
on Sep 02 2008 03:29 AM

Actually, I'm going to take that back. I *have* asked Rotten Tomatoes to edit the headline story, since the premise came from CHUD not the writers.

(Reply to this)

quietus28 writes:
on Sep 02 2008 06:57 AM

Ugh. Time travel? Really? There goes my optimism for the new Trek movie.

(Reply to this)

AudioSuede writes:
on Sep 02 2008 07:34 AM

In reply to this comment (#2007829)
Yes, the Nolan brothers are brilliant writers, but the one huge flaw they've always had is writing for female characters. Carrie Anne Moss in Memento: Complete and utter *****. Scarlett Johannsen in The Prestige: Needy ho. Rachel Dawes: Whiny, disappointingly needy damsel-in-distress. They work with some of the best actresses of this young generation, and they can't write their parts to make them compelling. I think Catwoman IS an important character that should definitely show up in the next flick, but whether or not they can pull her off remains to be seen. On top of that, I hate the Cher idea. Hate it. Angelina Jolie would make the ultimate Catwoman, but even if they wanted to go for an older actress in her "twilight years", there are many better choices (I'd like to see Mary Louise Parker get a shot, but that's probably just me).

And the Clooney and Downey Jr. movies sound amazing.

(Reply to this)

tommyhawk writes:
on Sep 02 2008 10:32 AM

In reply to this comment (#2014115)
quietus.. not that I disrespect your opinion, but if "Time Travel" has some how "ruined your optimism" for this movie you've already overthought this. What's wrong with it?

(Reply to this)

domer415 writes:
on Sep 02 2008 02:24 PM

i like the sound of the star trek plot, sounds interesting. Some of those casting rumors for batman 3 are rediculous but i think johnny depp as riddler and mila kunis as harley quinn might actually be good, although it might be hard to include harley quinn with no joker.

(Reply to this)

domer415 writes:
on Sep 02 2008 02:25 PM

i like the sound of the star trek plot, sounds interesting. Some of those casting rumors for batman 3 are rediculous but i think johnny depp as riddler and mila kunis as harley quinn might actually be good, although it might be hard to include harley quinn with no joker.

(Reply to this)

Related Links

Star Trek

Related Articles

Most Discussed

Latest News

Latest Interviews

Latest Features

Sponsored Links