Cary L. Brown said:
Okay, I'm diggin' this... check out this quote from someone who's read the script:
TrekMovie.com: That’s true, but in that film Abrams made an interesting choice with regards to the central plot revolving around the ‘Rabbit’s Foot’ or the film’s MacGuffin. It was never explained. I always thought that was a daring choice to not overwhelm the audience with the technology. Which brings up an issue that has plagued Trek over the last decade or so…the notion that has come to be called ‘technobabble.’ Often on the recent TV series and even films the characters would go on and on about polarizing this and re-aligning that as solutions to dilemmas…
Leonard Nimoy: (emphatically) I agree! I agree! I totally agree. At one point during The Next Generation television series I contacted the Paramount television people and said “I am looking at some of these shows and I don’t understand them.” These technobabble scenes where people sit around a table and pour out information that has no dramatic impact - that is not in character. It is just people putting out information to try and explain what is going on, but it doesn’t explain…it is just boring. I think you are right, Abrams did not do that. He kept this thing moving and some of the scenes were absolutely gripping…gripping. When he gets hold of a scene he knows how to milk the drama out of it and that is one of his great talents.
TrekMovie.com: So you see similarities with this new movie
Leonard Nimoy: Yah…I am not worried about technobabble with this movie I will tell you that. When I see technobabble my blood runs cold.
So, it seems very obvious that Leonard Nimoy (1) hates technobabble, and (2) is telling us that there's NO technobabbling in this script.
Good news, huh?
