I think it's pretty clear that Nimoy probably won't just be sitting around telling a story in this movie. The fact that Nimoy's in it is enough to convince me of that. What I want to know though is what exactly Spock will be doing. Any thoughts? 
Nimoy/Spock's Storyline
- Thread starter SeamusShameless
- Start date
I've said this on other threads, but this looks like a good place for my thoughts on this.
I think the film will begin in 2385 in a post-Nemesis time period with Nimoy's Spock in the middle of a very important mission. Then -- in the midst of this mission -- we (the audience) are made privvy to some vital information that happened in Spock's past that has a direct bearing on what is going on in Spock's "present" regarding this mission. We are presented this information through Abrams' signature "backstory" plot device that he and his writers use on 'Lost'. Of course, this backstory will involve a younger Jim Kirk and possibly the rest of the TOS cast (if we are to believe the casting rumors). This non-linear story-telling style will bounce back and forth between Spock's/Kirk's past and Spock's present multiple times. The bottom line is this: The events in both time frames will be very meaningful. I don't think this will involve Spock "thinking back".
It is possible (just possible) that Old Spock's mission involves Romulan/Vulcan Reunification, and the back story possibly takes place post-'Balance of Terror' (yes, in the middle of TOS's TV timeframe -- maybe around 2266), and involves the entire TOS crew on a mission involving Romulans and Vulcans.
Now, I admit that I'm not convinced that this involves a post-'Balance of Terror' timeframe, but I still think it may be possible to do this. Of course, this would make sequels using this new young cast a bit problematic, since Abrams would possibly be stuck in the TOS timeframe for any future films.
I still think this will basically be an "Old Spock on a mission that requires a backstory" story, but I really don't know what that mission or backstory will be all about.
I think the film will begin in 2385 in a post-Nemesis time period with Nimoy's Spock in the middle of a very important mission. Then -- in the midst of this mission -- we (the audience) are made privvy to some vital information that happened in Spock's past that has a direct bearing on what is going on in Spock's "present" regarding this mission. We are presented this information through Abrams' signature "backstory" plot device that he and his writers use on 'Lost'. Of course, this backstory will involve a younger Jim Kirk and possibly the rest of the TOS cast (if we are to believe the casting rumors). This non-linear story-telling style will bounce back and forth between Spock's/Kirk's past and Spock's present multiple times. The bottom line is this: The events in both time frames will be very meaningful. I don't think this will involve Spock "thinking back".
It is possible (just possible) that Old Spock's mission involves Romulan/Vulcan Reunification, and the back story possibly takes place post-'Balance of Terror' (yes, in the middle of TOS's TV timeframe -- maybe around 2266), and involves the entire TOS crew on a mission involving Romulans and Vulcans.
Now, I admit that I'm not convinced that this involves a post-'Balance of Terror' timeframe, but I still think it may be possible to do this. Of course, this would make sequels using this new young cast a bit problematic, since Abrams would possibly be stuck in the TOS timeframe for any future films.
I still think this will basically be an "Old Spock on a mission that requires a backstory" story, but I really don't know what that mission or backstory will be all about.
The Romulans are out. This must be pre-TOS. The Klingons would be the biggest threat. I just hope they all don't look like walking hershey bars despite the so called explaination. To me they are just another displaced, forsaken branch or form of humanity and no, they're not all evil.
I would hope that whatever the conflict, it somehow requires both old and young Spock to resolve it.
I'd love to see old Spock be the ultimate hero of the movie, too.
I keep thinking back a couple of months ago or so when Abrams first confirmed Kirk "makes an appearance" in this movie. His choice of words (appearance) raised a few eyebrows at the time.
Just speculating, but I'm beginning to think Kirk is not a major character in this story. At least not compared to the role Spock(s) will have.
Kirk won't move the story, and the story won't have the how-a-young-Lt.-became-the-great-leader-and-starship-capatin storyline that gets thrown around on these boards.
Obviously, Kirk will have an important part, but I bet this is mostly Quinto's and Nimoy's film to carry.
I'd love to see old Spock be the ultimate hero of the movie, too.
I keep thinking back a couple of months ago or so when Abrams first confirmed Kirk "makes an appearance" in this movie. His choice of words (appearance) raised a few eyebrows at the time.
Just speculating, but I'm beginning to think Kirk is not a major character in this story. At least not compared to the role Spock(s) will have.
Kirk won't move the story, and the story won't have the how-a-young-Lt.-became-the-great-leader-and-starship-capatin storyline that gets thrown around on these boards.
Obviously, Kirk will have an important part, but I bet this is mostly Quinto's and Nimoy's film to carry.
From Spock's perspective, Kirk is the flawed sidekick, always letting his emotions get the better of him. What a crybaby. He's lucky he has the far more stable Spock along to watch his butt (but not in a slashy way!!! 
)
Bring on the Spock movie!
)Bring on the Spock movie!
Nope. Anyone who's taken Psych 101 should immediately get what these characters are.
ID, Ego, and SuperEgo.
Or, in probably more "easily recognizable" terms... the heart, the mind, and the will.
McCoy was always the heart. Spock was always the mind. And Kirk was always the will. And the three of them, together, were stronger than the sum of their parts.
I don't think this was Roddenberry's original intention... at least, not entirely. But it ended up working out that way, and that's a large part of why classic Trek worked so well. Basically, you had three character who, together, could voice all the internal struggles we all go through. We all have those three sides, and they're often in conflict... but nobody hears what's going on inside of our heads (unless we're the sorts who walk down the sidewalk of San Francisco talking to ourselves!)
In fact, that's part of what I want to see in this movie... not the fully-realized triumvirate, but the fact that these three characters (and McCoy will very likely be there, but hopefully as a civilian at this point!) don't necessarily LIKE each other at first because of that, but that they find that the strengths and weaknesses COMPLIMENT each other's.
A directionless McCoy... trying to figure out what to do now that his marriage has totally collapsed and he had to let his own father die. No will, no intellectual calmness... but lots of heart.
A lost Spock... complete intellectual togetherness, but lacking any drive, any purposefulness, and willfully rejecting his own heart.
And a Kirk who's the epitome of willpower, but who lacks the calculating calmness and the grip on his own feelings that a great leader really needs.
See, that's what I see. I don't WANT Kirk to be the final guy we know, because that Kirk is formed as a result of his interactions with Spock and McCoy. He needs them... badly.
L
Lord Garth
Guest
Exactly. That's how I see it and when I started seeing it that way.
^ And that is why the "big three" have withstood the test of time so much better than the others.
I dunno, I think Kirk has a lot of heart as well. Which is why just Kirk and Spock could work in a movie.
But I could also see a dynamic whereby Kirk is more willful and heartless (it's already been established that he was less emotionally effusive and more "grim" in the Academy - presumably willful and driven but maybe too indifferent to his impact on people around him), and is changed by the introduction of McCoy. The problem here is that the movie already has enough material for two hours with just the Kirk and Spock dynamic, plus Nimoy flashbacks, plus cameos/flash-forwards for all the other major characters, plus whatever plotline and villain they're going to introduce.
But I could also see a dynamic whereby Kirk is more willful and heartless (it's already been established that he was less emotionally effusive and more "grim" in the Academy - presumably willful and driven but maybe too indifferent to his impact on people around him), and is changed by the introduction of McCoy. The problem here is that the movie already has enough material for two hours with just the Kirk and Spock dynamic, plus Nimoy flashbacks, plus cameos/flash-forwards for all the other major characters, plus whatever plotline and villain they're going to introduce.
People are much more capable then you seem to think. Any average joe can grasp these ideas you do not need a degree in Trek to understand this sort of storytelling. Though for a Trek film it will indeed be much more complex way of telling a story. Batman managed to do it well enough and look what happaned.
Sharr
Right, because there has NEVER been a flashback story, ever, at all, in the whole history of filmmaking. This will be the first time in the whole wide world that a story starts in the "future" and then goes back to the "past." And since it's NEVER happened before, moviegoers (all of whom have the I.Q. of white lab rats) will have no idea what's going on and will run screaming out of the theater.
Is that an accurate extrapolation of what you said?
We have to start on the assumption the audience does not know anything about Trek other than that "Kirk" and "Spock" rode around on the "Enterprise." 
Beyond that, familiar notions of storytelling such as the flashback structure should not be beyond anyone's grasp.
Seriously, how hard is it for people to comprehend that: Kirk and Spock are friends. They have a dangerous job. They work together. This is happening in the future. They have cool magical technology. There are dangerous aliens around.
That's not so difficult to grasp, and it's enough to catch someone's attention and keep them quiet in their seat for two hours, assuming the story is good in the way all stories need to be good. Details such as the color of Spock's blood or whether Chekov should know Kirk or Spock in this time frame are immaterial to the majority of the audience.
Beyond that, familiar notions of storytelling such as the flashback structure should not be beyond anyone's grasp.
Seriously, how hard is it for people to comprehend that: Kirk and Spock are friends. They have a dangerous job. They work together. This is happening in the future. They have cool magical technology. There are dangerous aliens around.
That's not so difficult to grasp, and it's enough to catch someone's attention and keep them quiet in their seat for two hours, assuming the story is good in the way all stories need to be good. Details such as the color of Spock's blood or whether Chekov should know Kirk or Spock in this time frame are immaterial to the majority of the audience.
Similar threads
