Linky Linky!
Granted, it’s a prequel, but at this point, I’ll take any Trek at all.
Let the casting speculations begin!
So we are looking for a Young Kirk and a Young Spock and probably a Young Bones. IRC, in some of early books (I read them in the 80’s) Kirk knew Bones before he met Spock and Scotty helped design the Enterprise.
Might see all 4 characters. I would be fun if they brought in Finnigan?, Kirk’s Nemesis at the Academy from the episode “Shore Leave”.
Jim
Wow…that article raised an amazing number of red flags for me. About all they could have done to top it would have been to say it was going to be directed by Brett Ratner or produced by Jerry Bruckheimer.
Me, too. Will they play Spock from The Cage and Where No Man Has Gone Before where he screams a lot? 
Hopefully they will be able to capture some of the originality seen in Abram’s other projects like Lost… and didn’t he do Alias too? So I’m cautiously optimistic. I guess when MI3 comes out we’ll have more to work with, speculation-wise.
Star Fleet Academy? Yikes! It sounds like The Dreaded Wesley Crusher all over again!
I fear it could become a fan-fic-fest like Manny Cotto perpetrated in Enterprise.
For example, wasting time on Kirk taking the Kobiashi Maru test.
If it’s about Kirk at the Academy, or shortly after, it has to mention the Kobiashi Maru. Or else continuity would be shot, and we can’t have that in a Trek episode or movie.
Forget the puking smiley, I want a sarcastics font.
I’m curious who has even claimed that. I mean… sure, continuity says that Kirk took Kobyashi Maru (it’s spelled with a y isn’t it?) while he was at the academy. How could it shoot continuity not to mention something that happened?
When it comes down to that, actually, what is meant by ‘continuity’ in a franchise canon? I generally use it to mean ‘internal consistency’ I suppose… but something that isn’t mentioned can’t ruin consistency, only something that is mentioned in two different ways, or mentioned and then negated. ‘Continuity’ suggests that a series makes an uninterrupted whole, and when you think about that, NO art does that. Even 24 jumps back and forth between characters and leaves some stuff out. 
It would kinduv be funny if they mentioned it, but only in a very small way. Like coming back from season two, and someone telling Kirk to quite rambling on and on about how he beat the unbeatable situation.
Oh, one other question. Is there anything at all in the widest possible star trek canon, about what Kirk and Bones were up to while Spock was assigned to the Enterprise in ‘the cage’??
Someone in another forum used the term “Star Trek 90210”, and I think that sums it up.
It will suck ass.
They have to go forward, not back.
From other thread:
Abrams just directed Mission Impossible:3 (did he write it too?). Tom Cruise as an intelligent sane action hero, if that ain’t sci fi I don’t know what is.
I agree that any new Trek should be set post-Next Generation/DS9/Voyager.
And given that the technobabble has become so sophisticated in those series that almost EVERYTHING can be solved by “insertyoursillynamion rays” I think a drastic but very cool solution would be to set the next movie/series after an apocalyptic war that has wiped out much of the Federation and thrown everyone back to a technology not much more than when Earth first developed star travel.
What I read was that it was supposed to focus on the Earth/Romulan wars, what started it, etc… supposed to be immediatly following “Enterprise” and before “TOS”… new ship and new crew.
I’m desperately hoping they do not have a young kirk/spock/mccoy - other than possibly in passing.
A young(er) Sarek - sure…
This just… this isn’t going to be good.
The “Academy” idea’s been around for what – 10 years or so? Even the first time around it sounded very “we’ve run out of ideas”.
I’m guessing the only ones who’d be keen to see this are the real fans, but the concept’s been mooted and argued over so many times by now that nearly all of them will have entrenched opinions about it. Hell, half of them have probably written it, cast it, built the spaceships and sewn the costumes. Nothing’s going to beat what they’ve imagined for themselves – and they’ve all imagined different things. I’m picturing running phaser battles outside cinemas in a couple of years, as the various factions settle their differences.
I’d be happy to be wrong, of course – Abrams et al may come up with something really original and fun, but being old and cynical I feel the odds are against it.
On the other hand, that article says that Paramount are looking to “re-energize the pipeline via high-profile tentpoles” – which is something I’d like to see.
Based on this, I wouldn’t get my hopes up too high.
maybe they’ll finally have a gay character.
If this becomes Star Trek meets 90210, Trek will have reached out to a whole new audience of geek.
With the Lost creator at the helm it sounds interesting, but I was also hoping for more from Stuart Biard.
I hope it is light on the academy stuff and heavy on the first space mission stuff. Though I will say now, NO ONE will be able to imitate the great chemistry and mannerisms of Nimoy, Shatner, and McCoy.
I doubt the Star Trek franchise will ever be cutting edge again. The truly talented sci-fi writers who could turn Star Trek around are all working on shows like Firefly. They probably don’t even want to do Star Trek because before they write anything they would have to check it against the Star Trek Bible to make sure it’s within continuity. I agree with the person who said that right now it’s basically fan fiction.
So where the Hell is Christopher Pike supposed to be? Isn’t it more-or-less canon that he’s the first captain of the Enterprise? Why are the young Spock and Kirk, fresh out of Starfleet, flying missions together?
In short: WTF?
C’mon guys: Let it go. Please. Trek is beat. If they can’t come up with some damned original characters or stories, why flog this bloated corpse yet again? Gimme a frigging break.