The news broke in The Wall Street Journal, of all places, in a story about toy lines being co-opted by movie studios:

J.J. Abrams, who created the TV show "Lost" and directed this summer's "Star Trek" film, is in discussions to produce a movie about Japanese toy line Micronauts, which Hasbro just acquired.

With Abrams producing, that opens the door for some Kurtzman/Orci involvement, if they could be convinced to jump from the Transformers franchise into another toy universe. We're really keeping our fingers crossed for comic artist and Micronaut lover Paul Pope getting involved on the design side, though.

The Cry Goes Out in Hollywood: 'Get Me Mr. Potato Head's Agent!' [Wall Street Journal]

Apparently Wheaton did a lot of voice work for the Romulan crew, and it's all thanks to fellow voiceover-artist Greg Grunberg's Twitter outreach to Wheaton. The clip and casting extra is from the Star Trek DVD, which will be released November 17, 2009.

Casting Spock:

Wil Wheaton's Cameo:

From Wil's Blog on the whole voice dubbing experience:

I met JJ at an ADR stage a few days later, where he told me the entire plot of the movie (and, for the record, hearing JJ Freakin' Abrams tell you the plot of his Star Trek is even more awesome than you'd expect) and showed me some of the scenes that I'd be dubbing. I ended up providing voices for all the Romulans on Nero's ship, including the guy who tells him that "it's time" at the very beginning of the movie. (Yeah, how cool is that?)

[via Trek Movie and Wil Wheaton]

Anyone else shocked this was how they chose to use Baird? We can see why it got cut — it doesn't exactly paint Kirk as a sensitive guy when dealing with alien species, but damn if Chris Pine isn't turning his charm up to 11 here.

Star Trek will be out on DVD Nov. 17. [Borders]

Spike TV has an official clip from the new trailer (which is available in much higher resolution over at Spike's site):

But it turns out there's less to the Klingons than meet the eye in some scenes. According to a snippet of making-of footage which turned up online recently, some of the Klingons were actually little kids in Klingon costumes, shot from angles to make them look like grown-ups, so the sets would look huge.

Star Trek will be out on DVD Nov. 17. [Borders]

MTV's Splash Page blog quotes Abrams, who wrote a screenplay for an unmade Superman movie years ago, as saying that he wouldn't necessarily say no if asked to return:

It was a very passionate character for me. As a kid growing up it meant a lot to me. It would be wonderful and fun to see that brought back. I don't know what Warners is thinking or what their plan is. It would be a blast.

This seems like a no-brainer for Warners, who are already facing the possibility of having to pay damages to the families of Superman's creators if they don't have another Superman movie in production by 2011. But does even that mean it's likely to happen?

J.J. Abrams Says Returning To Superman 'Would Be A Blast' [MTV Splash Page]

According to Entertainment Weekly, Reznor will be mixing William Bell's on screen dialogue with his 07 track "Zero-Sum," voiced by Leonard Nimoy, naturally. Reznor became involved when Fringe used a clip of his song in a previous promo, and was reached out to, to see if he would be interesting in collaborating even more. But the real question here is, will Reznor make a cameo on Fringe? I'd like to see him as an observer or a before-the-title "freak of the week." Series exec producer Jeff Pinkner told EW:

"If he wants to come act on the show, that's not tit for tat — that's an open invitation, and we made that known to him," says Pinkner. Any ideas on what he may play? "Well, his head would probably end up exploding," deadpans Pinkner. "There'd be some uncomfortable biology in there one way or another."

Here's a sneak peek of Reznor's official promo and the entire thing will air Thursday during the American League Championship Series.

According to TrekWeb, the Star Trek Season 3 Blu-Ray set will include the longer cut of "Where No Man Has Gone Before," which has never aired or appeared on DVD or VHS. (The Youtube video above includes all the sections that are different.) The original cut started with a view of our galaxy, while Captain Kirk talks poetically (in an "Enterprise Log," about Earth and its sun being specks of dust as the Enterprise ventures out of the galaxy. There's also a long scene of the crew stalking down a hallway as the ship goes on full alert, and a bit more Kirk/Spock banter. Not only that, but the opening and closing credits are totally different, with the televised "whoooo-ooooo" music being replaced by some music that sounds more like the show's other incidental tunes.

Given that the season three box set also includes season three, it's good that there's some incentive for fans to buy this thing.

Separately, Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman told the Screenwriters Expo in L.A. that they think the next Star Trek movie is coming out in 2012, not 2011 as we've been told previously. Orci and Kurtzman had planned to have the screenplay done by Christmas, but with the new timeframe, they're going to take longer with it. As for what happens in Trek 2, says Kurtzman:

They're established now in the second movie and they're finally a crew so it will resemble what you see in terms of they are already who they are.

Which sounds very zen, somehow. [TrekWeb and Coming Soon]

As part of a larger piece in Variety about the JJ Abrams-related army of creators taking over genre entertainment, Orci says:

Cinematically, this generational movement is kind of like hip-hop... Entertainment exploded when we were kids. We all became students of film and TV because we were so saturated with it. Now our (work) is kind of like hip-hop where we're sampling things we all know and love.

We're unconvinced that "sampling" really works as a musical metaphor for something like Star Trek, GI Joe or Transformers, mind you. Isn't that more like Goldfinger's cover of "99 Red Balloons"?

Abrams keeps it all in the fan family [Variety]

While Star Trek bascially depended on Nimoy's involvement to work, at least for the writers, Shatner was nowhere to be found in the reimagining of the Trek lore.

Abrams explained to reporters, at the Trek DVD junket last week, that one of the hardest decisions for him was not to include William Shatner in the film — however, it just wasn't logical in the big scope of the story and where on the timeline they wanted to set the movie.

The idea ... was a forgone conclusion, we wanted him in the movie. The problem was his character dies onscreen in one of the Trek films and because we decided very early on we wanted to adhere to Trek canon as best we could. ... The required mechanations to get Shatner into the movie would have been very difficult to do given a story where he was himself and also give him the kind of part he would be happy with. It was this thing where it would have felt like a gimmick in order to get Shatner into the movie, which would have honestly, to me, have been distracting.

Sure, they could have set the film before "Generations," but then what would the story have been? I concede it would have been totally possible, but it would not have been the same film.

He went on to explain that the special feature delves into the very issue of how do you try to get him in the film? How do you "put him in the movie when we want him in it so badly, and yet the story" just doesn't fit in the context of the movie?

No word on whether the scene Orci and Kurtzman originally wrote with Shatner's Kirk Prime in it is discussed in the Conundrum special, however.

Abrams definitely doesn't sound like he's against the idea of including Shatner in a later film, even saying the two have a lunch date planned for the near future.

"Would it have been fun to have him in the movie? Of course. Would it have been great to work with him? No doubt."

On November 17, Paramount is releasing the highest-grossing Star Trek movie of all time on DVD and BluRay. The DVD version has considerably less than the BluRay — the latter version has "branching pods" embedded in the special features. Think of it like a non-hidden Easter Egg, a special featurette within the features.

Disc One of the two-disc DVD version contains the film, along with commentary from J.J. Abrams, Robert Orci and Alex Kurtzman, executive producer Bryan Burk and producer Damon Lindelof. There's also a special called "A New Vision," featuring Abrams' style and drive to make the film real and relatable, as well as a gag reel.

In addition, the second disc is of course more fun stuff, including four features, DVD-ROM accessible content (free trials of Star Trek D-A-C for XBOX 360, PC and PlayStation network), and deleted scenes.

The deleted scenes include optional commentary and are:

o Spock Birth
o Klingons Take Over Narada
o Young Kirk, Johnny and Uncle Frank
o Amanda and Sarek Argue After Spock Fights
o Prison Interrogation and Breakout
o Sarek Gets Amanda
o Dorm Room and Kobayashi Maru (original version)
o Kirk Apologizes to the Green Girl
o Sarek Sees Spock

Abrams said that he was always thinking about the DVD, saying he was constantly making sure things were being filmed and recorded specifically for the DVD, getting video crews in the mix as early as possible.

And that prevalence of cameras is wildly apparent on the Blu-Ray edition.

The first disc of the Blu-Ray edition has the film and the same commentary as the DVD, as well as a BD Live feature giving viewers access to the latest NASA news about space. It has an RSS feed of the news as well as a space pic of the day. The second disc has the same specials as the DVD's disc two above, plus six (!) others and those crazy "branching pods."

Disc two of the Blu-Ray adds on these special features.

• Starships - An in-depth look at the creation of the film's starships and vessels.
• Planets - How the art department created the look for planets such as Delta Vega.
• Props and Costumes - Paying homage to the original series was very important with this update, and here's how they did it.
• Ben Burtt and the Sounds of Star Trek - Sound designer Ben Burtt shares the music he created for the newest Trek.
• Gene Roddenberry's Vision - The vision of Gene Roddenberry as told by J.J. Abrams, Leonard Nimoy, previous Star Trek writers and producers, and scientific consultant Carolyn Porco.
• Starfleet Vessel Simulator -Here you can see a 360˚ model of the Enterprise and the Narada including some looks inside as well some fun firing their weapons onscreen.

Most of the features contain extra content within. "To Boldly Go" contains some of these mini-specials, including "The Shatner Conundrum," accessible while watching the overarching main special or by the menu, as seen above.

There is also a digital copy of the movie included with both releases.

In any case, suffice it to say any Trekkie worth his or her weight who doesn't own a Blu-Ray player (especially this poor college girl) is definitely pining for one right now.

At the junket for the DVD release, Abrams told us that his friend Victor Garber is featured on the DVD in a deleted scene as a Klingon. In the scene, Garber is all costumed up as a Klingon on the prison planet Rura Penthe.

In the scene, which had some shots slip into the trailer, Nero is stranded on the prison planet and is chained to a table, about to be tortured by the Klingons. A Klingon threatens him with the very slug we later see Nero force upon Capt. Pike. Garber's voice rings out as the interrogator, demanding Nero tell them how he came from the future.

It seems like a scene merely meant to show some cool Klingons costume updates and tell us what the heck Nero was up to for all those missing years, as well as clue the audience into the passage of the 25 years before we get to see grown-up Kirk. But it does have Nero's most quotable line from the trailer: "The wait is over."

Sadly, Abrams said, the Klingon prison scene had to get cut for theaters.

It's one of those things I hated to cut for a number of reasons. One of them was I loved the design, I love the world, I love the story — in that moment it was really cool, and I'm excited for people to see this scene. But also, Victor Garber, who's one of my favorite actors, played a Klingon in the movie. [He] had a ton of makeup, a very heavy, hot costume [that] we shot with him. And I had to call and tell him that his scene wasn't in the film and a huge consolation for me was, it will live forever on the DVD and Blu-Ray. I'm psyched for people to see that.

BUT, he cautions, that doesn't mean we will or will not see some more of the Klingons in the future. He says that half the fun of essentially starting your own franchise is coming up with new experiences for your characters. And with Star Trek, there's already so much to gather from to cobble together new stories.

I don't want to do something that is so inside that ... only die-hard fans will appreciate [it]. But I guarantee you whatever the story - we're just now working on the script, we're just beginning the process of story breaking - whatever the final movie ends up being, I know it will be something that will at least be intense; it'll work on its own terms and be something that you don't need to know and study Star Trek to get. But if you are a fan, hopefully, it will sort of be gift after gift of connections, references, characters, things that you hopefully as a fan hold near and dear.

Me? I want the Borg.

Please?

What if Nimoy came back in Abrams next project as his original Mission: Impossible character, Paris? How open is the director to casting Nimoy in his next film? Well, he definitely lit up at the idea.

"How cool would that be?" J.J. gushed.

Great timing, says Abrams, because he, "just got a call that Peter Graves is in great shape" as well.
Ignoring obvious continuity problems featuring Graves as his original character, "which would be a very strange bend in the space-time continuum, for obvious reasons," it would be great to have the original Mr. Phelps.

Seems a mini-reunion is definitely on the table.

We can only hope that Abrams' affinity for using Nimoy in everything these days extends to future projects. Especially if Nimoy doesn't believe he's necessary for the next Star Trek, saying "They have a wonderful new cast in place ... I don't see why they would need me in this next film. But if they called me, I would be happy to have a conversation about it."

Someone call him. Then stick Abrams, Orci and Kurtzman in a room quick.

We sat with writers Orci and Kurtzman at the Paramount Star Trek DVD junket eagerly awaiting details on the next Trek. Right away they cleared up recent rumors that they've already created a storyline for the second outing — they have yet to sit down and lock themselves in a hotel room as they did the first time around. As fans of the series in all its incarnations, they have yet to settle even on who exactly they want to include, says Kurtzman, let alone whether to tackle weightier world issues.

But what about the rumored Gitmo plot line? Orci stated that the reports that they're writing a commentary on torture and the Bush doctrine (while never entirely out of the question) are a little absurd, since they've barely begun work on the sequel.

We have nothing. The torture thing was just a 'for instance.' Someone said, 'Modern day issues?' And we said, 'Yeah, sure, modern day issues.'

We're not doing a story about Gitmo. I read on some site that it was going to be about Guantanamo Bay. But now that we've established the characters, we can have a more philosophical allegory, where what's happening in the future represents our world — like the best versions of it in the '60s did with women's rights, racial equality, [and] progressive issues.

We're still just brainstorming internally, and we're going to get together soon and bust our riffs out and see where it takes us.

Also, we'd like to note there was a bit a torture in the first already. So should they revisit this, let's hope they break new ground with it.

In a separate interview, director J.J. Abrams agreed with his writers' remarks, saying that it's never as simple as making a political statement.

"It's not like we're looking to make the second movie some kind of heavy political allegory - I think it's important that there is metaphor to what we know, and that there is relevance. And I think that allegory is the thing that made shows like The Twilight Zone and Star Trek resonate and still vital today."

He continued on, explaining that where the first film was all introductions — to the world, to the characters, to the time period — the second has a duty to go deeper and examine this new world and grow with it.

The truth is, it's more of a comedy with drama and action than a straight drama. It's certainly sweeter and more fun in tone than Alias was.

No wonder there's talk of this show appearing next to Chuck. Now the only question is, how science-fictional will this show's crazy gadgets and supervillain plots get? [EW]

Fringe follows the FBI's Fringe Science Division — FBI Agent Olivia Dunham, fringe scientist Walter Bishop, Walter's son Peter Bishop, and lab assistant Astrid — as they investigate bizarre occurrences related to the fringes of current scientific knowledge. Last season left us with a bioterrorist group, an alternate dimension, and supersoldier program to prepare us for the looming interdimensional war:

The Pattern

The FBI's Fringe Science Division was set up to investigate the Pattern, a series of bizarre occurrences happening all over the world. From a contagion that causes a plane full of people to literally melt to children disappearing and then reappearing years later, apparently unaged, the Pattern has been described as a series of experiments where the whole world is the laboratory.

It becomes increasingly clear that the Pattern is linked to Zerstörung durch Fortschritte der Technologie ("Destruction through Technological Progress") better known as ZFT. More on them below.

Walter Bishop

Agent Olivia Dunham quickly links one incidence of the Pattern with Walter Bishop. Once a respected Harvard biochemist, Walter worked for the US government on developing "fringe" sciences — teleportation, genetic engineering, and the like. But after a lab accident killed one of his research assistants, Walter's ethics were called into question, and he was accused (rightly so) of experimenting on human test subjects. As a result, he spent several years in a psychiatric facility until he was liberated by Olivia and his estranged son Peter to investigate cases with the Fringe Science Division.

Many of the cases related to the Pattern involve Walter's research, but Walter walks about in a personal fog that leaves him often unable (or perhaps unwilling) to recall his exact connections to the cases — to the extent that he can't remember whether he authored the ZFT Manifesto.

ZFT and the Alternate Dimension

Bioterrorist group ZFT is responsible for many of the experiments the Fringe team investigates. ZFT's extensive network of scientists perform bizarre and often deadly experiments on other human beings — like infecting a woman with a form of vampiric syphilis or growing fast-aging humans. In addition to their biohacks, ZFT possesses some technologies developed by Walter Bishop, including a teleportation device.

But there's also a method behind ZFT's biological madness. ZFT members operate according to a manifesto that states two key things: there is another dimension more scientifically advanced than our own, and in the coming interdimensional war, only one dimension can survive. ZFT is out to create an army of biologically enhanced supersoldiers who will fight for our dimension in that war. But there's also a chapter missing from ZFT's manifesto — one that outlines ethics.

The face of ZFT has been David Robert Jones, a genetic weapons trafficker with an obsession with Olivia. Jones was bisected in the season finale when the gateway between dimensions closed on him, but we also learned there is an even more powerful figure behind ZFT: William Bell.

William Bell and Massive Dynamic

William Bell was Walter Bishop's lab partner back in their Harvard research days, helping him develop the fringe sciences. After Walter is sent to the psychiatric facility, Bell starts on a far more lucrative career path, founding "We Make Everything" conglomerate Massive Dynamic. His company, and its COO Nina Sharp, seem to have ties to the pattern, but little is known about Bell himself until the season finale, when it's revealed that he not only is funding ZFT, he authored the ZFT Manifesto and has been chilling out in the alternate universe.

Olivia's Supersoldier Powers

Agent Olivia Dunham soon discovers that Walter isn't the only one on the Fringe Team with shades of ZFT in their past. Before he was incarcerated, Walter experimented with a drug called Cortexiphan, giving the drug to children — Olivia among them. Olivia doesn't remember the experiments (perhaps because she was instructed to forget), but after an encounter with Jones, she begins to manifest strange abilities, including the power to switch off lightbulbs with her mind and glimpse the alternate dimension.

Peter's Extradimensional Origins

Peter Bishop's strained relationship with his father improved over the first season, but Walter's sitting on a secret that could destroy not only their relationship, but Peter as well. Walter has mentioned that Peter was deathly ill as a child, something Peter has no memory of, and mentions that he once traveled to the other dimension to retrieve something he had lost. In the season finale, it's revealed that our dimension's Peter died of his illness, meaning Peter himself must be from the other universe. One imagines that somewhere there is an alternate Walter Bishop who's pretty pissed off.

The Observer

Sitting in the background of every episode is the Observer, a bald fellow who watches the Fringe Team and their investigations. Very little is known about the Observer — he has little sense of taste, the ability to communicate telepathically, and a notebook where he records his observations. He's not alone in his mission, having contacted someone upon viewing a mysterious beacon, and he's apparently been watching Walter and Peter a long time. He saved the pair from falling through the ice when Peter was a boy.

The Cow

Gene the Cow is a permanent fixture of the Fringe lab. Walter has explained that cows are genetically similar to humans and frequently uses her as his bovine guinea pig. She hasn't shown any mysterious qualities yet, but this being Fringe, I wouldn't rule it out.

Oh, and there are obviously spoilers in this post.

The L.A. Times caught up with director Abrams plus co-writer Roberto Orci, on the set of their TV show Fringe, and both Abrams and Orci hinted that the biggest difference between their first movie and the upcoming sequel would be the socially conscious message. Says Abrams:

The first movie was so concerned with just setting up the characters — their meeting each and galvanizing that family — that in many ways a sequel will have a very different mission. it needs to do what [the late 'Trek' creator Gene] Roddenberry did so well, which is allegory. It needs to tell a story that has connection to what is familiar and what is relevant. It also needs to tell it in a spectacular way that hides the machinery and in a primarily entertaining and hopefully moving story. There needs to be relevance, yes, and that doesn't mean it should be pretentious. If there are simple truths — truths connected to what we live — that elevates any story — that's true with any story.

So okay, that just means that they're going to make sure it has some kind of a messagethat reflects "simple truths." Doesn't necessarily mean we're going to get a full-on allegory for today's challenges. But then here's Orci:

We got a lot of fan response from the first one and a considerable amount of critical response and one of the things we heard was, ‘Make sure the next one deals with modern-day issues.' We're trying to keep it as up-to-date and as reflective of what's going on today as possible. So that's one thing, to make it reflect the things that we are all dealing with today.

The L.A. Times reporter asked if this meant the next Trek could deal with terrorism, the ethics of torture, or a long-running, painful war with the Klingons. And Orci acted as though the reporter had just read his mind.

A painful war with the Klingons sounds like a great backdrop for the next movie — allegories about terrorism and torture, though? Sound a bit too 2005. What do you think?

[L.A. Times]

We caught up with Orci on the red carpet at the SyFy/Entertainment Weekly party, last Saturday evening, and we had a lot of questions for him.

First of all, we asked Orci about his statements the other day that Star Trek 2 and 3 might have a linked storyline — maybe with a cliffhanger, or a plot thread that continues from one movie into the next. Orci downplayed the speculation, saying he, writer Alex Kurtzman, director J.J. Abrams, Damon Lindelof and producer Bryan Burk had had one meeting, lasting 15 minutes, and they had considered for a brief moment the idea of doing the next two movies as a linked story. But it's still way too early to say anything definite, and they're still in the phase of throwing ideas out there and seeing what sticks.

When we interviewed Orci and his writing partner, Alex Kurtzman, about Transformers 2, they pointed out that it's very common for the second movie in a series to feature the protagonist trying to quit the "hero" racket. (Think Superman II or Spider-Man 2.) Transformers 2 follows that pattern, with Sam wanting to go off to college and lead a normal life. So we were wondering if Star Trek 2 would follow that formula as well — would we see Kirk thinking about quitting the Enterprise and going back to Iowa?

But Orci says the formula isn't iron-clad, and it doesn't apply to every second movie in a series. In the case of Trek, he sees the Enterprise crew as being much more committed to their mission and to doing good in the universe, so that kind of "hero no more" story wouldn't fit.

Meanwhile, Orci says that the Fringe writing staff had originally wanted to wait a few years before unveiling the "alternate world" storyline — but doing it now forces them to be more inventive about what happens next, and to create an even larger world to explore. "Let us force ourselves to come up with a bigger world. So you get a little bit of both. We wanted to answer things and see where that leads.

As for Cowboys And Aliens, the movie with the world's most self-explanatory title, Orci says, "We're wrapping up another draft, and hopefully that one will be good enough."

The Comic Book Legal Defense Fund is auctioning off this page of original Pope artwork from the short strip that appeared in March's JJ Abrams-edited issue of Wired magazine, featuring Spock's memories of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan at this year's San Diego Comic-Con. Pope was happy about how this page turned out:

It was a fun page to draw... It's got Spock, of course, and J.J's take on him is what drew me into this story. But I got to draw Shatner too, Kirk, and he's surprisingly a lot harder to capture.

The original art measures 16" x 21.5". The art will be displayed at the CBLDF booth and auctioned on Saturday night, July 25 at 7:15 in Room 2 of the Convention Center, but remote bids will also be taken at info@cbldf.org.

CBLDF's Comic-Con Auction Preview! [CBLDF]

Variety reports that special packaging for the movie's DVD and BluRay release will offer something called "Augmented Reality" that, when used in conjunction with a webcam, will transport you to the final frontier:

With the packaging feature dubbed "augmented reality," consumers will be able to hold their disc packaging in front of any standard webcam to unlock an interactive hologram on the computer screen, through which they can tour five cabins on the Enterprise, even shooting enemies from the ship's deck. Users will have to log in to a website to access the feature, but they control the hologram by holding the disc packaging.

A beta version of the idea is available here (Have your iPhone handy.)

But yes, those deleted scenes will be there as well, and they will explain a lot of the film's more puzzling lapses. They'll include Klingon appearances, baby Spock and the history of the villainous Nero. In other words, everything you thought was missing from the movie when you saw it in theaters.

The DVD is released November 17th,

'Trek' beams up homevid hologram [Variety]

Talking to SciFi Wire, Nimoy hinted that, depending on what the writers end up planning, we may see his Spock - sorry, I can't call him Spock Prime without thinking of this guy - again:

I have no illusions on whether or not they need me. They decided that they wanted to make this film using Spock as kind of an anchor for the story, which I think worked very, very well. They don't have to do that again. If they decide they have a role for me to play, I would be very interested in talking to them about it... My sense is that he has some work to do. He talked about establishing a new Vulcan colony, and I think he will be very involved in that. If we never see him again that is what I would imagine he is doing. He is busy rebuilding the Vulcan story.

While I would happily let OG Spock drift into continuity limbo after the last movie, I can't help but feel as if that last comment sounds like a William Shatner-esque series of spin-off novels should be created at the very least, surely...

What's next for Spock Prime? Trek's Nimoy speaks [SciFi Wire]

Oh, and there are spoilers in this post, but only fairly old ones. Like, who's in the coffin. And who's the final Cylon.

There are many reasons to love spoilers, all of them totally valid, in my book. (Inflicting spoilers on people who don't want to be spoiled? That's a different matter, and it's something we agonize over a lot at io9. We do inadvertently put spoilers where spoilerphobes can see them, on occasion, but it's always by accident or misjudgment, and we agonize over it a lot more than you might think. Generally, though, we try to include spoiler warnings before going over to the spoiler side.)

But at the same time, there's a pervasive misconception about spoiler-lovers floating around out there that I'd like to clear up: that we're power mad. That the only pleasure in reading spoilers, or sharing spoilers, is to feel powerful. To know something that other people don't know. The spoiler-phile, in the view of some media people, feels powerful because she or he is robbing stories of their power: the power of suspense, their ability to surprise.

J.J. Abrams writes in a recent issue of Wired Magazine:

It's telling that the very term itself-spoiler-has become synonymous with "cool info you can get before the other guy." What no one remembers is that it literally means "to damage irreparably; to ruin." Spoilers make no bones about destroying the intended experience-and somehow that has become, for many, the preferred choice.

But to be honest, knowing spoilers doesn't make me feel powerful or one-up on any one else. And i don't feel like they ruin the experience of consuming stories afterwards. It just makes me more excited about the narratives I already love. And, often, more curious about the narratives I don't know anything about — or have already lost interest in. The more I know, the more fascinated I become. Because I'm a geek, duh.

So here are some reasons why we love spoilers.

The lure of the forbidden:

Okay, sure. We just got done saying that we don't love spoilers because of some crazy power trip. But at the same time, the fact that spoilers are regarded as "naughty" or even sleazy certainly has its appeal. It would be hypocritical to pretend otherwise. Here at io9, we don't publish gossip: Edward James Olmos could do nude gymnastics in public every single day, and we'd never mention it on our blog. But we decided early on that spoilers are to us what gossip is to Perez Hilton. It's our naughty indulgence, and the stigma attached to it only makes it more exciting.

The more you tell us it's wrong, and we'll go to Hell or grow hair in places our Brazilian waxer won't go near, the more we crave it. It's just human nature.

The grand conversation:

Paradoxically, the Internet has fueled my love of old media. I would have given up reading comic books years ago, if it weren't for the fact that writers like Gail Simone and Kurt Busiek are so accessible online. Commenting on their work, answering fans' questions, responding to your harshest criticisms. I'm much more excited to pick up issue #5001 of Super-Blasting Mega-Dorks when I know that my $2.99 is, in part, buying me a chance to participate in a huge ongoing conversation online.

And it's not just creator participation — it's reviews, previews, and yes... spoilers. Part of the thrill of taking part in fan communities is piecing together the clues about what's coming next. Movie studios, TV companies and comics companies know this, and they try to use it to their advantage, with viral marketing, clever hints and promos that tease you with upcoming plots. When fans get together and geek out about upcoming TV shows and movies, a big part of that is always going to be speculating/guessing/clue-hunting about what the next thing is.

Like I said, the big media companies know that this is going on, and they would like to control it. In fact, they know that eventually, this conversation will become the entertainment you consume. Television will be moving online slowly but surely, and "webisodes," awful as they usually are, are just the thin end of that wedge. Entertainment is going to become more and more interactive, and harder and harder for big media to control.

But that's a meta-topic for another day. Suffice to say, for now, that obsessing over spoilers, rumors, leaks and sometimes outright lies is a huge part of the way we're all building community around the shows and movies we love. Just like fanfic, it's not authorized, or under the big conglomerates' control, but it fuels our shared love. And often the speculation about what's coming is more entertaining than the reality turns out to be. (See: Almost every movie this summer.)

The unconventional seduction:

I gave up on Star Trek after Deep Space Nine went away. I tried to watch Voyager, but it made me feel like my brain was being squished into a jello mold very, very slowly. And Enterprise just left me totally apathetic.

But then a funny thing happened: long after I stopped watching Trek, I kept reading spoilers for it. I also read reviews of episodes I'd missed, on Cynic's Corner or Jammer's Reviews or Television Without Pity. But reading spoilers for upcoming Trek episodes was more fun, partly because they sounded more crazy and over-the-top when you heard about them in advance. ("Kes gets a barbarian warrior's personality stuck in her brain? Tucker gets pregnant?")

The weird thing is, reading spoilers for Trek — and for other shows I barely watched, like Smallville — made me feel like I was still following them, to some extent. And the spoilers and rumors actually helped recharge my interest in those shows. I actually came back to Voyager in its last season, and also started watching Enterprise again after a couple years away, because I was reading spoilers and they seemed excitingly weird and/or potentially awesome.

Ditto for several comic books, and more than a few movies. Hollywood's official marketing machine gives away plenty of details about the storylines of upcoming stuff, but at the same time, the blandness of a lot of trailers and blurbs tends to turn me off. But sometimes, coming across a really outrageous set photo or gonzo rumor can spark my curiosity in the way a hundred peanut-butter-smooth promos never can.

The dreadful admonition:

And then there's the other side of it: Sometimes we need to be warned. "Trip gets pregnant" actually isn't necessarily a good thing. Neither is "Satan annuls Spider-Man's marriage." Or "we'll be meeting Hiro Nakamura as a young boy." There's almost no way "Kid Hiro" could have turned out to be a good thing.

Sometimes, a television show or movie or comic has so much pain in store for us, we need a giant warning buoy flashing crazily and sounding a banshee siren, letting us know in advance. Of course, you can't really judge a piece of media based on advance plot info — especially stuff you read on the Internet. But at the same time, when a particular franchise has an established track record, you have to be vigiilant for the warning signs. Suppose Voyager was still on the air, and you started seeing reports that an upcoming episode would feature Janeway and Michelangelo going white-water rafting on the Holodeck. You would panic! And you'd be right to do so.

And then there's the case of Terminator Salvation, which originally ended with John Connor's face being transplanted onto Marcus Wright's cyborg body — after which a red-eyed Wright killed Kate Connor, Kyle Reese, and the rest of the supporting cast. The filmmakers were serious enough about this ending that they apparently filmed it. But after Ain't It Cool News leaked the ending, McG and company scrambled to replace it with the slightly-less-ridiculous heart transplant thing. So there's a case where spoilers not only warned us of a horrendous storyline, but actually averted it.

Getting back to what Abrams wrote in Wired, I don't actually think knowing who's in the coffin on Lost actually ruins your enjoyment of the storyline. The fun of a show like Lost, for most viewers, is seeing the characters grow and their relationships shifting. And finding out how Locke got into that coffin. (Which, for me at least, was a bit of a let-down.) A good plot twist is one that, even if you know it's coming, you still enjoy the ride getting there.

As I said before, I think entertainment is going to become much more interactive and much more audience-driven in the next decade or two, and the battle over spoilers is just one small piece of that. Traditionally, being a storyteller has meant having control over the narrative and deciding what the audience gets to know, and when. Maybe eventually, we'll have a new balance of power, one in which there's more of a give and take. We don't yet know what this'll look like, but here's hoping it leads to richer stories, in which strong characters — not closely guarded plot twists — are the real source of creators' power.

J.J. Abrams has found his other FBI woman. Her name is Meghan Markle, and don't let the smile fool you: She'll be playing another tough-as-nails agent. Before working on Fringe Megan was a Deal or No Deal Case Lady.

In other Fringe news, Abrams sent the crew a sweet little "welcome back and hello Canada" letter. So at least we know Fringe is back to filming, which means somewhere out there Walter is drinking a root beer float, and this makes us smile.

[Hollywood Reporter]

It's a far cry from any normal star-studded event, but SDCC always brings us our own pantheon of SF gods and goddesses every year. For me personally, this includes a handful of stars (Michael C. Hall, David Tennant, Felicia Day) and Creators (Joss Whedon, Alan Ball, J.J. "You-Make-Life-Worth-Living" Abrams) and, above all, the unsung heroes behind-the-scenes like Julie Gardner and Jane Espenson.

The addition of Dr.Who and its naughty little spin-off Torchwood to the SDCC TV panel lineup has already been big news around here lately. While everyone is lining up to see the sexy stars of these two BBC series, I'm going to see the amazing Julie Gardner. Gardner is the executive producer of Who and Torchwood, and helped co-create the latter along with Russell T. Davies. While RTD is leaving the TARDIS for other adventures, Gardner will continue to executive produce the show and help Matt Smith fill David Tennant's Hi-Tops.

Jane Espenson has been a script editor, writer and producer behind Buffy, Dollhouse and Battlestar Galactica. She wrote the antebellum-themed Firefly episode "Shindig", and spends her free time working with Joss on the Buffy comics for Dark Horse. She's scripted the pilot episode to Warehouse 13 and will hopefully turn up on the W13 panel to promote the new show, and maybe to give us some hints as to what to expect from Caprica, which she'll be showrunning with Ronald D. Moore.

Way back when the mere idea for a new Star Trek film couldn't find a home, director Sam Raimi was offered the movie, and he declined. We have no idea why he passed, but I'm really curious just how colorful and weird a Raimi Star Trek would be. I'm willing to bet the bridge alone would have been entirely different.

And in other Star Trek news, rumors have been circulating that JJ Abrams wants Jack Black to play the rapscallion Harcourt Fenton Mudd in his second Trek movie.

Abrams refuted the rumor over at AICN writing:

"Yes, talking to Jack Black about doing something — but not Mudd." Abrams and revealed that, "Bryan, Damon, Alex and Bob and I have not had MEETING ONE about a sequel."

While we like Jack Black here and there, we're awfully relieved — because we just don't think he could have pulled it off.

I mean you can't ask for much more from an award show that is basically one big peddler for commercials and self promotion. Well done Samberg — now, go hit on Megan Fox some more.

Can you name them all? Don't forget From Dusk Til Dawn.

In an interview with MTV, director J.J. Abrams explained that all the in-jokes we thought we were catching were actually just us projecting onto the screen:

Yes, I have heard that theory," laughed Abrams. "It was so funny when I heard it. I wish I could say it was done on purpose, but it was not. I just dig the song."

So what else did we over-analyze? How about the theory that throwing a 1966 Corvette ('66 being the year Trek was first broadcast) off a cliff was a symbolic gesture, demonstrating the writers decision to cast off the canon in favor of their own alternate reality?

Nope:

"I'm not sure if it was a '66," Abrams said of the Corvette. "But that was also the year that I was born, so I wouldn't want to do that to the year, for personal reasons. No, the idea was to show the renegade, young Kirk and have a wildly anachronistic scene where you had an earthbound, almost back-looking scene combined with a forward-looking futuristic scene technologically. It had nothing to do with that kind of metaphor."

Call me crazy but I feel like in a movie of this magnitude nothing is overlooked from dates to song choices? Is he back-peddling or did someone else on the crew pull a fast one on the "I'm not a Trek fan" Abrams.

One interesting point Abrams made was to defend the technological advancements made to the Enterprise bridge, which completely eclipse the twinkle lights and cardboard look of the 1960s original. According to Abrams, there was a trans-temporal technology transfer taking place, when the Kelvin took readings from the Romulan ship - both giving Starfleet a kick in the pants, and allowing the Federation to upgrade its current technology. Thus giving us the shiny "Apple store" Enterprise.

For more answers to Trek, like how the crew of the Kelvin knew who the Romulans were check out the report at MTV. Hint... it rhymes with bime bavel.

To be fair, Abrams isn't saying that Shatner will be in the next movie. (And it's early enough that if interviewers asked, "Could Gracie the whale and Squire Trelaine dance together in the next movie?" Abrams' response would probably be, "Maybe.") But still, this is the first indication from Abrams that a long-awaited Shatner cameo could happen in the next movie. And he even has a rationale for it.

Abrams told MTV:

"The point of creating this independent timeline is to not have the restrictions we had coming into this one. And one of those restrictions was that Kirk was dead."

The second name that came up was whether or not they'd be bringing back the most beloved villain in all Trekkerdom, Khan.

As for Khan, many people believe that since Kirk never stranded him on Ceti Alpha V, the character would no longer be the same villain we saw in Star Trek 2. But Abrams argues that it is still possible to feature Khan as the villain in the Trek sequels: "[Kirk and Khan] exist - and while their history may not be exactly as people are familiar with, I would argue that a person's character is what it is. Certain people are destined to cross paths and come together, and Khan is out there … even if he doesn't have the same issues."

Well at least it's good to know that they are toying with the idea of bringing him back. I feel like no matter the time rift, Kirk and Khan are destined to be enemies. If not in one way, then in another.

JJ Abrams is a time-traveler from a parallel Earth here to prepare us for some kind of upcoming reality shift. Really, it's the only solution that makes sense.

Think about it. Lost has turned into your weekly primer on the rules of time travel and what can, and can't be done by those sailing the silver seas of the chronoverse. Its creators have spoken before about how they've had to sneak in the more science fictional aspects of the show before this past season's all-out time travel insanity, in order to lure in unsuspecting, potentially sci-fi-phobic audiences, and that's clearly because they are the ones who need to be taught this stuff the most. Sure, most of us know our time travel rules - So much so that we suspect that even detonating a hydrogen bomb through the brute force of lost love isn't going to undo everything as much as cement a new timeline and bump the Lostees forward in time so that they can meet NotLocke - but not everyone is as... let's go with "educated," shall we? as us. Hurley and Miles' most important roles in Lost season 5 were to bring the newbies up to speed about what time travel is all about.

Fringe, meanwhile, dropped the pretense of being an enjoyable dumb-science procedural in the last few weeks of its first season, as soon as Walter wheeled out that chalkboard and started trying to explain the multiverse to us all. Now, I'm not buying the "And that's where deja vu comes from!" aspect of the explanation at all, but you have to take some of it with a grain of salt thanks to Akiva Goldsman's involvement; nonetheless, there's now a whole new audience out there who have discovered the idea of parallel Earths and Schrödinger's cat (Okay, maybe that one is better illustrated here), just as Lost has educated them about time travel.

And then we come to Star Trek, which demonstrates to the previously unaware that time travel + changing the past = parallel timeline. I mean, okay, so it really demonstrates that time travel + changing the past = everyone becomes a younger, hotter version of themselves, but you get what I'm saying. It's a movie that takes the lessons of Abrams' two television shows and puts them into something approaching practice... But for what end?

Clearly, Abrams' entire career to date has not been one of merely entertainment, but instead a cunningly disguised form of education in scientific theories unlikely to be taught in even the most liberal schools (Even Felicity ended with time travel shenanigans!). We may not know exactly why he is trying his best to make sure that as many people as possible understand the nature of time travel and parallel universes - Perhaps he's taunted us with an evil master plan that he intends to carry out when he tires of being called the new Spielberg - but the evidence is unmistakable. All we can do now is hope that interviewers in future will be able to ask him more pointed, valuable questions... before it's too late.

Rarely do you hear people saying that The Simpsons changed their lives, even though it is a long-running franchise. And you don't see people getting teared up as they remember the first time they saw Terminator, even though that franchise hasn't quit since the early 1980s. Why does Star Trek stay with people as a source of personal inspiration?

I can't speak for everyone, but I will offer a personal confession. I grew up without a television set in my house, so I was never exposed to the original Star Trek series except through the movies. Which I saw, and liked, but they didn't deliver any soul-stirring moments of revelation. But then I started watching Star Trek: The Next Generation with a group of friends right after college. It was the third season, when things really got good on the show, and I was drawn in absolutely.

It was a tough time for me when I started following the adventures of Picard and crew. I had just begun a really difficult course of study in graduate school, and I wasn't sure if it was the right thing to be doing with my life. I'd always had a rocky relationship with my family, to put it mildly, and I'd finally had the nerve to kick them out of my life for good. So I was trying to deal with those giant questions in life, like "Who am I?" and "What is my quest?" Most especially, I was trying to find friends who would treat me better than my family had.

I guess I was looking for models of community, and that's why Star Trek: The Next Generation lodged itself so deeply in my heart. I wanted to believe in a world where people who weren't family cared for each other, the way the Enterprise crew did. I wanted to think that the future would bring me adventures that weren't always just about smashing things up, but sometimes dealt with rather bookish topics like ethics and geopolitics. I'm a little embarrassed to admit how closely I studied the behavior of the crew and tried to imitate them in my new life as a grownup. I loved how they were very professional and rational, despite their strong emotional ties. When they were upset, the answer was always "do the work" or "solve the problem," not "mope endlessly." I can't tell you how many times I've told myself "do the work" when all I wanted to do was cry. And it's always helped me get through tough things.

I did find a few friends through Star Trek. One of my best friends for many years was a major Trek fan whom I met the year I discovered TNG. But it wasn't like I found a fan community who became my new family. It was more that Star Trek helped me imagine how I wanted my friendships to be, and then I found those friends in the usual places: In school, at work, at my volunteer job, or randomly at a show.

Star Trek: TNG is the reason I bought my first television set. It's also the reason I keep doing difficult things, even when the odds seem stacked against me.

So yeah, I get it when people freak out over how Abrams changed Star Trek - he's messing with a story that helped them through difficulties, or just kept them from getting too bored.

At the same time, I think we all know that stories exist in a specific time and place. I'm not sure that Star Trek: TNG would capture my heart in the same way if I were to see it now for the first time. And even if Abrams were to mangle my TNG canon the way he did with the original series, I don't think it would be life-shattering. Why? Because there would always be the original TNG, the one I saw twenty years ago that changed my life. Even if Abrams or whomever decides that his Picard likes disco and Data should marry a gynoid.

The fact is, stories are meant to be retold. You may like them less in the retelling, or you may suddenly like them more (hence the phenomenon of rebooted Battlestar Galactica). But nobody can take away the stories that changed your life. Those are always going to be yours, untouched, until the space worms nibble your ganglia. They will keep inspiring you, and keep being meaningful. Hopefully, new stories will come along that mean something to you later in life, or that spur you to action in a way you never expected.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that there's a difference between personal stories and public stories. Star Trek is a public story that belongs to the world, for better or worse. (OK let's not get into a copyright discussion right now - you know what I mean.) You can't control what happens to a public story. You can't stop slash fiction pervs like me from writing dirty stories about Spock, and you can't stop nerds like JJ Abrams, Roberto Orci, and Alex Kurtzman from blowing up Vulcan.

But then there's your personal Star Trek, the story that matters to you. For me, Star Trek: TNG is always going to be a personal story about finding community and solving problems even when it hurts. This, I think, is what powers the fandom of Star Trek. It's a rich enough public story that it can spawn zillions of personal stories, all very real. Fandom is made in personal byways off the public tale, in the strange little alleys the story builds in its viewers' minds.

And ultimately that's why I have no fear that Star Trek will get retold, often badly. What matters most is the personal story, which lives safely in my brain, far beyond the reach of Abrams and his reboot crew.

Reviewing the new Trek movie for website Shiny Shelf, critic and Doctor Who novelist Lance Parkin suggests that the timing of the events has more meaning than we may think:

Abrams has long been the guy that actually does all the things Joss Whedon's fans only imagine their guy does - that Abrams launched a 'Star Trek' movie that'll outgross all the 'TNG' movies put together, saw its sequel greenlit and 'Fringe' renewed all on the very same Friday that 'Dollhouse' finally died in a ditch settles it, we can declare a winner and all move on.

I admit, I'm pretty convinced - I even said something similar last October - but I can't help but feel that Parkin's way of putting it (and especially his take on the entirely coincidental timing of Trek's success) sure seems like fightin' talk. What say you people?

Star Trek [Shiny Shelf]

To expand a little on that box office estimate, Hollywood Reporter is estimating "somewhere between $65 million to $75 million," while the always-editing Nikki Finke is currently pinning it down somewhere closer to $72 million. This is less than last weekend's X-Men Origins: Wolverine (which raked in $85.1 million), but way above the original tracking numbers for the revamped space opera, which had suggested an opening weekend of around $50 million (For math fans, Trek also played in 3,849 theaters versus Wolverine's 4,099, not that that 250 theater difference probably affected the outcome noticably).

Add to that, Abrams' reboot is the most successful opening for the director (Unsurprisingly, considering that it's only his second movie after Mission: Impossible III) and the most successful for the Trek franchise. Most importantly, perhaps, it's also the most successful franchise reboot movie of recent years, significantly besting Casino Royale and Batman Begins in terms of opening day takes. Not bad for a series that was, many thought, best left for dead after the cancellation of Star Trek: Enterprise in 2005.

(International box office estimates aren't officially in yet, but rumors are that Trek is close to Wolverine's $72 million, which would be unprecedented for the franchise, and a sign that this Trek is a bona fide hit for Paramount.)

With critical response for the movie so positive - currently at 96% on Rotten Tomatoes - this movie may end up being this year's Iron Man; a nerd movie that surprises critics and mainstream audiences alike, and ends up showing more staying power than anyone expected.

While you're making up your mind what you think of the new Star Trek movie, why not take a look at Annalee's review from earlier this week? Spoiler: The words "brilliant and exciting re-imagining of the original series" and "hot, sexy new Spock" appear pretty early on.

Meredith managed to talk to some of the people responsible for said brilliance and excitement, giving you a look behind the scenes in these four posts:

J.J. Abrams Admits Star Trek Lens Flares Are "Ridiculous"
If you've seen a single second of Abrams' Star Trek you know the film is stuffed with audience blinding lens flashes. J.J. Abrams admitted he got a bit carried away, but explained why they're there.

The Romance That Will Change Star Trek Forever
J.J. Abrams' Star Trek takes your familiar crewmembers places they've never been before - including one love story that will forever alter the crew's dynamic. We asked writers Orci and Kurtzman about it.

Sulu and Chekov Talk Takei's Baritone, And How To Say "Wessel"
What's it take to pilot the shiny new Enterprise? We asked crew members John Cho and Anton Yelchin about changing their accents, mannerisms and overall tone, to portray Hikaru Sulu and Pavel Chekov.

Bana: Nero Is Really The Misunderstood Tragic Hero Of Star Trek
We got a few minutes alone with Star Trek's Romulan bad boy, Eric Bana, and looked deep into the psyche of Nero. Bana explained how he got so revved up, he passed out on set.

Meanwhile, Charlie Jane asks the important question Why Is The Media Trying To Make Star Trek Fans Look Like Naysaying Dorks?, wondering just why certain mainstream news outlets seem to want to find fans who hate the new movie.

If that's not enough for you, then we've also got The Complete Guide To All Things Star Trek Online to keep you busy, as well as our 5 Favorite Star Trek Rip-Offs, just in case you're wondering what's next. Besides going to see the movie again, that is.

As part of a profile in British newspaper the Guardian, Abrams talked about the sense of faith that Lost's fans have that the show's writers had everything planned out from the start - and shattered their illusions:

It's a leap of faith doing any serialised storytelling. We had an idea early on, but certain things we thought would work well didn't. We couldn't have told you which characters would be in which seasons. We couldn't tell you who would even survive... You feel that electricity [of improvisation]. It's almost like live TV. We don't quite know what might happen. I'm sure when Charles Dickens was writing, he had a sense of where he was going - but he would make adjustments as he went along. You jump into it, knowing there's something great out there to find.

Wait, does this mean that we'll never find out what the deal was with Libby? Seriously?

JJ Abrams: 'I never got Star Trek' [Guardian.co.uk]

Spock was always the secret heart of the original Star Trek series. His half-human, half-Vulcan identity made him an Everyperson for young Americans dealing with a multicultural society where the familiar and the foreign were alloyed. In J.J. Abrams' new film, this subtext is made explicit: Spock leaves Vulcan to escape the anti-human racism he encounters everywhere, even among his people's most revered scientists. What's also made explicit in the new film is the intense emotional passion that Spock cannot repress. While the old Spock occasionally gave in to feeling, he generally remains imperturbable.

But our new Spock is less convinced about the rightness of Vulcan ways. He's been told by Vulcan authority figures that he's "defective" because of his human side. So why should he embrace the Vulcan path of repression? Though he remains obsessed with logic, his face often hovers on the brink of an ironic smile. This Spock seems to have a sense of humor. And when he's challenged by mean Vulcan kids as a child, and later by Kirk as an adult, he unleashes a wrathful violence that makes it clear he's a man of action as well as a logician. His emotions aren't limited to brief outbursts, though. In this alternate Star Trek universe, Spock is a lover. One of the most touching relationships we see in the film is between Spock and Uhura, his former student and lover. Because she is also devoted to an intellectual discipline - alien languages and culture - she appreciates Spock's emotionless devotion to duty. And his hot kisses in the lift.

When celebrated science fiction writer James Tiptree, Jr. (AKA Alice Sheldon) started watching Star Trek in the 1960s, she wrote in letters to her friends about how the one aspect of the show that truly fascinated her was Spock. She wrote a fan letter to Leonard Nimoy, explaining that his sexual magnetism came from humans' natural exogamy, their urge to marry outside their own groups. An alien would be the ultimate outsider, the ultimate object of desire. In one besotted passage, she described Spock's "touching shoulder blades, the tremor, the shadowed and infinitely effective squint."

Tiptree's renegade nerd sexual desires have now gotten a lot closer to being the desires of the mainstream. Zachary Quinto's new Spock still has a thin, trembling body and the squint of a scientist, but he's emerged into this special-effects blockbuster of a film as a leading man, competent, virile, and sexually desirable. This triumphant sexualization of Spock could only have happened in the early 21st century, when geeks are culture heroes and dork actor Michael Cera has become a romantic lead. In this version of Star Trek, there is no contradiction between geeky logic and sexy action.

What director Abrams and writers Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman have done to reboot the Trek franchise is quite clever. They've created a solid, and entertaining, reason why the original set of characters from the series have completely new back stories. An accident with "red matter" in the future changes the whole timeline (yes, it's really called red matter and is so science-magical that it could be ripped right out of Fringe).

This accident sets off a cascade of events that change history. Kirk's father is killed when a time-traveling Romulan called Nero emerges from a strange whirling hole in space, and Kirk grows up a roughed-up, troubled kid. Presto: New Kirk. Nero is also on a mysterious vendetta against Spock, and he destroys Vulcan by using the futuristic red matter to create a planet-eating black hole. Presto: New Spock, with a far more tragic past. And with a Doctor Who-esque status as one of the few remaining members of his people.

Nero, as played by Eric Bana, is a terrific villain. I won't give away what his major malfunction is, but I will simply say that he manages to be the opposite of Khan while also conveying the same sense of tragedy and uncontrollable power. There's a terrific moment when he first introduces himself and he's weirdly casual, coming up on screen and saying simply, "Hi." You're expecting this grand speech and instead there's this strangely menacing Facebook-style greeting.

The way the whole crew of the Enterprise comes together has been changed, too. Nero's attack on Vulcan forces a desperate Star Fleet to crew the newly-built ship with cadets from the Academy. These cadets happen to include future officers Sulu, Spock, Chekov, and Uhura. McCoy manages to smuggle Kirk on board, despite the fact that he's been grounded, and so the crew begins to take shape. There's even a moment when the crew contemplates the fact that Nero has plunged them into a parallel timeline, and Uhura describes it as an "alternate universe."

Of course there were some disappointing bits and moments of pure cheese in this alternate universe. The premise - that a bunch of cadets inherit the Enterprise - is fairly hard to swallow. And a time-tripping elderly Spock comes across as a little bit too platitudinous. Most disappointing is Kirk, played by Chris Pine as a douchebag without charm who spends most of the movie yelling and getting beaten up.

For the most part this film was a successful retelling of a beloved story. And I have a feeling the alternate timeline is the one we'll be following as the franchise boldly goes where no one has gone before. With Spock, at last, taking his place at its center.

How much were you influenced by your predecessors?

Cho: A great deal, though, I sort of had to get it out of my head a little. I don't think any of us wanted to do imitations although the temptation was there. We just felt it probably wouldn't have made sense and distracted people.

Yelchin: There's obviously an enormous influence and a huge desire to capture what made these characters so great and what's given them this legacy for the past forty years. But at the same time, like John said, there's a certain point where you do all of your research, and then you have your character and you've added your own thing. You come on set, and you just kind of do it. You're not thinking about it anymore.

There are also a lot of really important quirks that fans are looking for, like the accent and using certain words. Did you practice saying "wessels" over and over again?

Yelchin: Yeah, I mean obviously once you watch a series you see that and you register that. Then you take sort of specific things and you use them. It's fun to embrace that, you know, it'd be one thing just to play a Russian character but that's not the goal you know? The goal is to play Chekhov. And you if Chekhov changes his v's to his w's then that's what you do. And it's a blast.

Were there any other quirks that you guys picked up on that you brought out in your character?

Cho: Yeah, I think one day my voice went a little too high, even though I wasn't really sweating doing George, I wasn't trying to do this George Takei impression. But, one day I said, "Cap'n!" [makes a high squeaky voice], and J.J. comes over and says, "a little lower.. just… lower…" and that was the one time we had.

Yelchin: A lot of it the physicality as well. They all had a very specific kind of walk, and a very, very specific kind of smile and a very specific look. There's a very natural optimism about him [Chekov] and I just thought it was really important to capture that. It's beyond the accent, there's the body language and everything that comes with that.

You two have to work a lot of gadgets on the bridge. Did you study the hand motions of your former characters? Were there a lot of re-shoots on the bridge?

Cho: There was a little bit of a tension on the first day. We got together and said, "what's this gonna be" so we had a little pow-wow with J.J., who knows how much scrutiny this is going to come under and we sort of tried figuring out a finger language.

Did you ever have a couple of times you just thought "I'm just gonna go with it. Just move this around here, and then the ship goes forward?"

Cho: I remember when I was pushing the lever once and they were getting coverage on that and the camera person said to me "let's do it again… sexier." [Laughs] Really!

John, you really kick a lot of butt in this. Did you go and watch any of the original scenes, when Takei is going nuts and mimic any of those moves?

Cho: That was a little bit different. He was doing a classical fencing style and you know he had a rapier and I have a modified electronic, I don't know, samurai sword situation. So it was a different style altogether. It was sort of like a tribute to that.

M: John I read you're working on Flash Forward? And it is possibly a show that could rival Lost? Do you think that's true and can you tell us anything about your character?

Cho: I'll tell you the series is focused on a black out that the whole world experiences for two minutes and they see a vision. Everyone sees a vision of their future. Joseph Fiennes and I play FBI agents, partners, so we're trying to piece the whole thing together. Beyond that, I'm not sure I can say much more.

Lost island map from Lostmap.Blogspot.Com.

CAPRICA:
I still haven't watched it.
And by the way? I didn't want your stupid Zune anyways, my Sansa works just fine.



STAR TREK:
Lens flares, clever creative enhancement or blinding nuissance? Discuss.

Seriously though, I am really excited for this film. The ship looks awesome.

New Kirk, Old Kirk, Picard etc... Who's the best captain? Keep in mind, Janeway never put srtipper poles in the shuttlecraft.



THE ROAD:
Well, the film adaptation of Cormac McCarthy's "The Road" finally got a more secure release date. It had been held up for some retooling after the test screenings decided that it was entirely way too dark and depressing to be released in its current form.
So the studio put their best minds behind it and problem solved! Now it's a story of a father and son in a post apocalyptic wasteland looking for salvation while on the run from cannibalistic marauders, but they're aided by a giant cartoon bear named Rhoadie who's as loveable as he is clumsy. Watch as they get into any number of crazy misadventures. From Rhoadie scaring off bad guys to the time when they all wake up in a fallout shelter and Rhoadie accidentally eats all the food while he's dreaming. UH OH! Here is a shot from the improved film where Rhoadie is trying to catch up to his buddies.


SUPERDORKS:
So it's decided. The unchecked goodie-goodieness of these pathetic fools wedged into bike shorts who call themselves "Superheroes" is about to be thrown back into their face! The police can handle muggers and bleeding heart liberals can feed homeless people. These sods want to be Superheroes?! How can one be a Superhero without a Super-Villain as their Arch-nemesis!!! I call on you io9ers.. join me and my organization as we reduce these comic-store rejects to whimpering piles of goo on their city streets and the basements of their mothers.

Join R.O.A.C.H. (thanks to NefariousNewt for the Acronym) to fulfill your villainous destiny! Plus, how can you say no to a logo like that, especially after you look at their website. The only thing super about that, is that it's super shitty.

DISASTER:
Oh guys... Wolverine has a confession.



Alright, have a good week, stay frosty.

GarrisonDean's real name is not GarrisonDean and he once went to college.

Star Trek hits theaters in the evening on Thursday, May 7.