@Knixon: I believe that McCoy uses that line when he meets Kirk in the shuttle that's taking the newest Starfleet recruits to the Academy in Star Trek (2009).

@SecretaryIMF said:

@Knixon: I believe that McCoy uses that line when he meets Kirk in the shuttle that's taking the newest Starfleet recruits to the Academy in Star Trek (2009).

That movie was BS claptrap retcon nonsense from start to finish. As has all the rest of the JJ Trek etc.

@SecretaryIMF: Yep. McCoy is where I heard it (not an exact quote).

Anyway...

Excepts from an article by: Robert Vaux - CBR 6/23/2021

“The 2009 film reboot was very specific about the origin of McCoy's nickname, but the original character never received an official explanation.”

--“Abrams claims the moment was improvised by Karl Urban, a longtime Trek fan.”--

"Roddenberry’s original pitch for the show included a specific reference to a doctor named “Bones.” It wasn’t Dr. McCoy, but instead Philip Boyce (played by veteran actor John Hoyt), who served under Christopher Pike in "The Cage," and who was replaced, along with most of the rest of the cast, for the show’s second pilot."

Yes, but, just one example (I don't remember if there are any others, but one is enough really) from "A Piece Of The Action:"

KIRK: Wrong again, Oxmyx.

MCCOY: Jim.

KIRK: Knock it off, Sawbones. I want to talk to this creep. Now listen, I'm getting tired of playing pattycake with you penny-ante operators.

Why would Kirk refer to him like that if his nickname supposedly came about due to a divorce?

And why would anything think that a divorce in the latter half of the 23rd century would leave someone with "nothing but their bones?"

Karl Urban might do a good job of portraying a younger Deforest Kelley, but he doesn't really know Star Trek or do a decent job of thinking about the future.

And that doesn't even get into things like Chekov is so much younger than Kirk that if Kirk got command of the Enterprise before the YEARS of other experiences we learned about in TOS, Chekov would be a child, if he had been born yet at all.

@Knixon: No, it wasn't. Star Trek (2009) was a great movie and a fine beginning of the Kelvin Timeline Trilogy. If you don't like it that's your right, but I loved it. JJ Abrams did a fine job directing it and it has the distinction of being the only Star Trek movie to win an Oscar.

@SecretaryIMF said:

@Knixon: No, it wasn't. Star Trek (2009) was a great movie and a fine beginning of the Kelvin Timeline Trilogy. If you don't like it that's your right, but I loved it. JJ Abrams did a fine job directing it and it has the distinction of being the only Star Trek movie to win an Oscar.

Can you explain how Chekov could be at least 12 to maybe 15 years older in the Kelvin timeline? We're talking "parallel universes" here, same as the "Mirror Universe" garbage, nobody gets to be older or younger.

Also, the traditional Jar Jar Abrams lens-flare etc makes it difficult to enjoy anything he directs. Fortunately he hadn't yet developed that habit - or others wouldn't let him get away with it - for Alias.

According to "official" timelines, James T Kirk was born in 2233. The "Kelvin" timeline of the 2009 movie begins in 2255, so Kirk would be 21 or 22 when he supposedly (cough gag choke barf) takes command of the Enterprise.

Without having ANY of the experience and maturity that came from serving under Captain Garrovick, just for one example.

Pavel Chekov was born in 2245, which makes him at most TEN YEARS OLD at that point.

Sulu was supposedly born in 2237, which makes him a wizened 17 or 18.

@FormerlyKnownAs: EXACTLY!

But the doctor in the second pilot wasn't McCoy either.

A scene can be so well-acted and scripted that it never loses its relevancy; and never loses its power to captivate.

@FormerlyKnownAs: Truer words were never spoken.