Shatner Says Abrams Wants Him and Nimoy in Trek XI |
jump to navigation

Shatner Says Abrams Wants Him and Nimoy in Trek XI November 14, 2006

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Abrams,Conventions/Events/Attractions,Rumor,Shatner,ST09 Cast , trackback

William Shatner appeared at a couple of Trek conventions over the weekend and gave some more details from his conversations with Star Trek XI Producer J.J. Abrams. According to TrekWeb, Shatner again confirmed that the characters of Kirk and Spock would be in the film, telling the crowd in Springfield, MA that "I had a talk with J.J. Abrams a while ago and they were writing a new script – and we are all hoping it will be wonderful…and he said, they were going to get the Kirk and Spock characters in there." The next day Shatner was in New York where Doug Wilson of reports Shatner as saying "J.J. [Abrams] is committed to having Leonard and I, Leonard and me, in the film." Shatner also suggested that Abrams would be looking at unkowns for the roles of the younger Kirk and Spock.

Bring Kirk Back To Life?
According to both reports Shatner wondered how they would deal with Kirk’s death (at the end of Star Trek: Generations). "It’s easy for Leonard, because Spock’s alive. But I’m dead," said Shatner in New York.  Assuming the bulk of the film takes place during the Original Series era, Kirk’s death would only become an issue if Nimoy and Shatner portion of the film takes place in some form of ‘flashforward’ and the scenes were set after the events of ‘Star Trek: Generations’ . There is no problem if their scenes are set before Generations (perhaps in the period between Star Trek VI and Generations), and Shatner’s recent CGI-enhanced DirecTV commercial shows how this can still be done believably. Alternatively they can be cast as different characters within the Original Series era. Although many fans have called for it, it is hard to imagine that they would spend the exposition time required to bring Kirk back to life in a post Generations setting.


Speaking of Shatner, don’t forget his new game show has a special preview this evening on ABC. Watch the first 12 minutes at 


1. Greg Stamper - November 14, 2006

Use this opportunity to rectify the decision to kill Kirk in “Generations”. It was a bad idea then and remains one to this day. Fix it — Have Spock find a way, push till it gives!! This would remove the need for a CGI de-aging effect for Spock. But another reason would have to be given for Kirk’s appearance since presumably he “actually” is still trapped inside the Nexus.

PS So was killing Mr. Data a bad move. Killing off a main character has always been regarded as a solution to “Writer’s Block” — and simply a lack of anymore good ideas.

2. JON - November 14, 2006

Bringing back Shatner and Nimoy tells me Abrams doesn’t have enough confidence that the new Trek can make it on it’s own without them and needs an insurance policy.It also tells me new Trek will not have it’s own identity apart from the original.

3. MichaelT - November 14, 2006

Kirk’s death was just wrong. But if the plot isn’t done right to revive him, it’ll look bad and the entire film will suffer. They have to be careful….

by the way, Josh you have messages near the end of the threads on “Viacom Chief”…

4. Greg Stamper - November 14, 2006

… or to bring validity to the “New” actors who are to play the roles. I personally prefer that TREK go forward but it is out of my hands. The next movie is going back to the Original Series Era — it appears to be policy — so I’m on board with the concept rather than ignore that it is going to happen.

5. JON - November 14, 2006

…New actors better be unknowns with nothing to say because no self respecting actor would let themselves be upstaged by Shatner/Nimoy.

6. Greg Stamper - November 14, 2006

good point Jon. So what does that say for Matt Damon?

7. Bob - November 14, 2006

This would be great news. A perfect chance to give Kirk the ending he deserves.

It would be so easy to do. Just have Spock rescue Kirk from the nexus. Much like Kirk saved Spock on the Genesis planet. The circle would be complete.

Surely it can be explained that there is anothet Kirk still alive in the nexus.
That entire nexus plot was written so poorly. Anyhthing is possible.

Shatner and Nimoy as Kirk and Spock in Star Trek XI would be just the event film the franchise needs to get back on it’s feet.

This is awesome news. Bring back the real Kirk and Spock. One more time.

8. Oco Chico - November 14, 2006

Kirk, deserves a better ending than he got in Generations. I’d love to see Kirk brought back to life.

Wow, Nimoy and Shatner. Now JJ has my attention.

It’s good to have a long time fan running the series.

9. Steve - November 14, 2006

except of course as Ronald D. Moore and Brannon Braga explained the Nexus, if you willingly leave it and are not pulled out forcibly, you don’t leave behind a peace of yourself and Guinan and Soran did; that is why there is no Kirk and no Picard left in the Nexus; they left by CHOICE. The argument can be made, though, now that I think of it, Kirk was forced by his sense of DUTY to leave but he didn’t want to exit his paradise. Hmmmm….

10. Steve - November 14, 2006

come to think of it, they don’t even have to show this rescue from the Nexus; Kirk could just be alive and in an off hand way thanking Spock for saving him from that false paradise and returning him where he was meant to be; or something like that……it’s so easy to fix with the crap that was the Nexus…..

11. Steve - November 14, 2006

How about this? Kirk joins Spock in working on the Romulan reunification issue and the flashbacks could have to do with the Earth/Romulan war and the first reappearance of the Romulans in the TOS era in “Balance of Terror”. So many possibilities….

12. Bring Back Kirk - November 14, 2006

Steve–the nexus has more plot holes than swiss cheese.

There are several ways to bring Kirk back with the nexus. Here’s the easiest:

–When Kirk left the nexus with Picard, he and Picard travelled back in time to a point before Soran beat the snot out of Picard and therefore prevented Soran and Picard from entering the nexus. By doing that, the nexus passed by without Picard going in. If Picard didn’t go in, a new timeline is created where Kirk didn’t leave. So Kirk is still in there.

Paradoxes can be your friend.

And here’s a solid for this website because it has been giving cool news.

Go to that link. Remember when TV Guide said Shatner “dismissed the idea of Kirk appearing” and they promised a full interview.

The above link is that full interview.

He did NOT dismiss a thing. All he said that it was possible that we’ve seen the last of Kirk. No shit. Until he is signed, that’s true.

Now just bring back Kirk damn it!

13. Bring Back Kirk - November 14, 2006

In response to Jon’s comment about not having confidence. It’s not a lack of confidence to use Shatner. It’s a sign that they need to relaunch.

There is no better way to relaunch a franchise that was ran into the ground than to finally do the story that so many people have been clamoring for over the last 13 years.

For 13 years a good chunk of Trek fans have been pissed over Kirk’s death. And so many people have abandoned this franchise.

What better way to reach out to the Trek fans that have left, then by bringing back the most notable character? What better way to allow another actor to play Kirk, than to have William Shatner pass the torch?

Abrams bringing back Kirk would be absolutely brilliant.

14. Steve - November 14, 2006

I think your scenario is too complicated and would take valuable screen time to explain. Just have Kirk thank Spock for rescuing him from that prison and be done with it; give the Nexus as little attention as it deserves. We all know that Spock could figure it out and save Kirk; we don’t need to see it.

15. Steve - November 14, 2006

Okay, here it is: The movie could open with Spock welcoming Kirk back but doing so in the period between when Kirk is lost in the Nexus and when he is found by Picard in there. Pulling Kirk out of the Nexus would leave a portion of Kirk in there and that is what Picard finds in the future to stop Soran. No paradoxes, no issues, all works well and fits. Or, if you like this better, Spock could find Kirk after the events of Generations and he could make a comment about the TNG era, something like “if the science were any more obvious…..”. He simply cannot believe they left Kirk there. Kind of a TOS stab at TNG for its dry dependence on science and lack of emotion. Coming from Spock, this would be an interesting comment.

16. DB - November 14, 2006

Kirk’s been dead for over a decade, and I don’t care. If Abrams feels the need to have Nimoy and Shatner in the film for a couple of minutes somewhere he’s certainly clever enough to do it without taking time out to resurrect Kirk post-“Generations.”

17. Dom - November 14, 2006

Well, the Nexus ***does*** allow you to revisit your past. Maybe Spock finds his way into the Nexus and takes a journey back into his past in order to rescue his best friend!

As for that scientifically-dodgy business about ***willingly*** leaving the Nexus, just ignore it: Guinan was wrong. Who says Guinan’s the great expert?! ;)

Oh, and another thing that pee-ed me off with Generations: why didn’t Kirk travel back from the Nexus to the Enterprise-B and stop Soran there?!!

18. cbspock - November 14, 2006

It would be very easy to just have Kirk alive again, you just don’t count Generations, which was the first in a horrible series of TNG movies. What a better way to reboot the franchise than dump all the baggage of Modern Trek .

19. Steve - November 14, 2006

Because Picard led the way and Kirk followed. Picard believed that he could not alter the timeline BUT he also believed the massive loss of life at failing to stop Soran was his fault; his failure and he needed to prevent that but in a way that altered the timeline as little as possible.

Anyway, Spock should NOT go into the Nexus himself just bring Kirk out as if it were easy and not understand why Picard and the Enterprise-D could not figure it out themselves. Easy. Done. No more than 5 minutes on screen than get on with the story which I say should be Kirk accompanying Spock back to Romulus and working with him on the reunification issue.

20. Steve - November 14, 2006

This could be the movie that Nemesis could have been. Bringing the Romulans to the big screen; something they deserve after all this time. We could deal with issues of pre-federation and federation relationship with the Romulans (i.e. the Earth/Romulan War). All contact with the Romulans through history could be covered as part of the reunification issue. The Romulans are so overdue for some real development and on the big screen would just be awesome. Nemesis really hurt the Romulans as a legitimate race so Abrams could fix that and still have a young Kirk and Spock in flashback moments, recreations of “Balance of Terror” moments, individual Kirk and Spock moments where Romulans impacted on their early lives separately. I think this could work well.

21. John N - November 14, 2006

I love Kirk, and really wish that they had never killed him off… but do we really want to go down the road of some convoluted solution to bring him back, all the while remaining consistent with canon?

Isn’t it this sort of ‘weight’ that has been bringing Trek down over the last few series?

I know it’s controversial, but they’ve done such a wonderful job with Battlestar Galactica, that I would fully welcome a reboot of TOS.

What more evidence do you need than Ronald Moore? Free from the constraints of Trek, he has gone one to create an amazing character-driven show.

I’m not saying abandon everything that made TOS as great as it was… but perhaps abandon everything that came afterwards that has added so many layers that the original product is no longer recognizable, and dare I say it… interesting.

22. Bring Back Kirk - November 14, 2006

I don’t think it’s that complicated. It’s no more complicated than when Doc Brown explained alternate timelines to Marty McFly in Back to the Future 2.

I agree that Kirk’s return should be done as quickly as possible to move on. But I’d like to see Shatner and Nimoy in a big role.

Kirk may have been gone a long time, but he is the most recognizable character in Star Trek. Generations created unfinished business. What good is watching a prequel Kirk when you know exactly how his life ends?

Kirk’s final appearance should be a happy ending, where he rides off into the sunset.

And Shatner’s final appearance should be used to pass the torch to another Kirk.

23. Bring Back Kirk - November 14, 2006

Also keep in mind that one does not NEED the nexus to bring back Kirk. It’s a flawed concept. If Abrams wants to do something to reanimate the body on Veridian III, like what Shatner did in THE RETURN, that’s cool too.

One only needs to say that Kirk was revived shortly after Generations, and has been doing his thing for a decade.

But I do think that there is a LOT of potential for a parallel story with Shatner and Nimoy in big roles, saving the day in the 24th century, while young Kirk and Spock do the same thing in their first adventure.

Shatner in this movie is too exciting.

24. The Gospel truth - November 14, 2006

The Nexus was just bullshit anyway. They could just easily say that what helped Picard wasn’t kirk, but an ‘echo’ of him. Thus meaning the real Kirk is still alive.

25. Bring Back Kirk - November 14, 2006

Whatever they decide, the key is that Kirk is alive, post-Generations at the end.

Any other use of Shatner–especially as another character–would be a waste. And doing a pre-Generations appearance would be a blown opportunity.

Signing Shatner gets the ball to the 5 yard line. Anything that doesn’t have a post-Generations living Kirk–would be a fumble.

Screw a cameo. Make them top billing.

26. Steve - November 14, 2006

I agree with all of you except with the reboot. Rebooting is a cop-out; an option for weak, tired writers with no real skill of imagination. It’s so easy to fix the death of Kirk, there is no reason for that exercise in lazy creativity that is the reboot (Battlestar Galactica reboot was acceptable because the original never got developed; it barely started). Everyone here has come up with viable solutions to the death of Kirk and no doubt these ideas came, just as mine did, with just a few seconds of thought; imagine if some real time with creative minds worked on this. I just hope the solution is a very small amount of screen time so we can get on with the new story. Maybe Kirk has been with Spock on Vulcan for all this time (you can tell I really want to continue this reunification story; so much wasted potential there).

27. Dom - November 14, 2006

Open the film with Spock looking over a desolate terrain alone.

Kirk walks up to him.

Spock raises his eyebrow and asks: ‘Aren’t you dead?’

Kirk shrugs and replies: ‘Aren’t you?’

That was painless!!! ;)

28. Cheryl B - November 14, 2006

Kirk’s return portrayed by William Shatner would be wonderfull. I can’t wait.
I always felt his “death” in Generations was poorly done.

I’m really looking forward to this.

29. Steve - November 14, 2006

Dom, THAT’S PERFECT!!! Exactly what I was getting at. Keep it simple, very little screen time, AND NOT THE MAIN PLOT OF THE NEW MOVIE! Excellent. I can picture it so perfectly right now; JJ? JJ? You reading?

30. Daniel Shock - November 14, 2006

I think they could bring Kirk back to life without even really talking about how it was done. If it were me, I would start the film out with a huge exploding Nexsus, a ship warping out of it just ahead of the explosion. Kirk and Spock are onboard with Spock mind melding with Kirk to “bring him back”. No explanation necessry – just Spock saving Kirk from an unexplained phenomena. The person writing the novelization could fill in the details. I don’t see a need for any big expository rescue. Exposition should be limited as it is really boring.

31. Steve - November 14, 2006

You could even see Spock responding, ” I got better, thanks to you.” And Kirk commenting somehow that the reverse is also true and that’s all the information we need. Obviously, Spock rescued Kirk from the Nexus and life goes on.

32. Steve - November 14, 2006

Daniel, even that is too much. Don’t waste FX money on saving Kirk, keep it simple in a scene like Dom described above and let US fill in the details and if you like, the novelization can expand.

33. John N - November 14, 2006

Listen, I appreciate everyone’s enthusiasm, I really do.

But as an media editor, I feel that I can say with a certain level of confidence that the ONLY way to bring Kirk back would be to make that the plot of the ENTIRE movie. You would need that amount of time to properly develop any sort of believable story arc that would pull people in emotionally.

Know what happens if you don’t? Ever see “Batman & Robin”? If so, remember this brilliant bit of exposition?

BATMOBILE hurles out of the Bat Cave. And image of Commisioner Gorden appears on the monitor of the dash.

GORDON: Batman… there’s a man freezing everything at Gotham Museum. He calls himself… MR. FREEZE!

See how ‘simple’ that was? No details required, and now we can start the heroes right off with the REAL story. Rember how terrible a film this was that put the final nail in the coffin (only to be later saved by a reboot).

And if you think that the reboot is lazy (though I can’t imagine that anyone who actually watches Battlestar would call their writing lazy), then how can any can any “Simple! They can do it in 5 minutes” throw-away opening be considered anything BUT lazy writing?

34. Dave - November 14, 2006

Why is it that fan of SciFi tend to think that the solution to death is to bring a character back to life?\

Spock’s heroic death in ST2 was cheapened by bringing him back in ST3. Granted its great to see the character back in the films and all, but what is the point in killing a character off and making it somewhat meaningful if the next writer can come along and undo it?

Thank goodness, JMS has no such issues. If he kills a character in a series that character stays dead.

I have no desire to see Kirk resurrected. I’m one of a small minority that thought his death is Generations was very Kirk-like. He went out saving the galaxy from a terrible fate. Something that Kirk would have wanted to do. If you want to talk about pointless deaths that should have been undone, how about Tasha Yar in “Skin of Evil?” If anyone ever deserved a more meaningful death it was her.

35. Steve - November 14, 2006

God, there’s always someone who reintrets what people say to fit there own argument. I did not say the writers of BG are lazy only that reboots in general are a non-creative and lazy way of continuing the Trek franchise. It worked for BG because so little had been established in that franchise and I’m a huge fan of both. You know why Batman & Return failed? Because it was a BAD movie; period, simple as that. From direction, to acting, to script, nothing worked. We all already have an emotional connection to Kirk so don’t need a long convoluted FX filled film to show us his return. We would accept it. Why? Because the plot devices used to create his death were so bad and inexplicable that undoing that nonsense would be simple and undeserving of a full movie. The Nexus as a concept simply didn’t work, just grab Kirk from it using Spocks scientific genius and be done with it. And as Dom and I and others have said, it would even work if this were done off screen.

36. Daniel Shock - November 14, 2006

Steve – I agree – I was just tossing something off the top of my head. I think things work great when you don’t explain every little detail – leave stuff to the imagination and people will have fun filling it in on their own.

37. Daniel Shock - November 14, 2006

John N – I don’t agree – lots of movies start off as if they are in the middle of the story. Star Wars, for example. This movie wouldn’t be about saving Kirk. It would be about Kirk and Spock in the early days. But a bookend situation in which the characters are remembering something from the past, I think it works fine.

38. John N - November 14, 2006

Daniel… I agree with your statement, and think that it would work well if Kirk were conveniently alive.

Steve… relax… I wasn’t trying to twist your words… I obviously misunderstood your point, and if so, then I apologize.

However, I still don’t see how a five minute intro that ‘leaves everything to the imagination’ isn’t lazy, and would appeal to anyone other than those who are just so anxious to have Kirk back that they are willing to overlook this classic example of Deux Ex Machina.

39. John N - November 14, 2006

oops… Deus Ex Machina… if I pull out terms like that, I had better at least get the spelling right… ;)

40. John N - November 14, 2006

One other point Steve… the reboot doesn’t only work for under-developed franchises like the original Battlestar Galactica.

Comic book franchises with a rich history of back stories have successfully rebooted themselves several times.

41. jonboc - November 14, 2006

Nexus Schmexus. Who cares about the Nexus? The new crowd that Paramount is aiming at, and the old school original series fans don’t really care. Just get Shat and Nimoy in there somwhere, as Kirk and Spock, use them to introduce the new Kirk and Spock and their early adventure in the era, make it good, and everyone will be happy campers.

42. John A. - November 14, 2006

Anyone who thinks Shatner and Nimoy -shouldn’t- be in the film is crazy. Sorry, but I just to say that :)

43. Lao3D - November 14, 2006

John N is right (jonboc too)– the idea of this film is to reinvigorate the Trek “franchise” (god what an awful term, but that’s what it is). Obviously they don’t want to alienate diehard fans and creat backlash, but neither can they do backflips trying to cater to plot lines and continuity that only the diehards here know or care about (and I count myself among that number, believe me). But the Kirk I know is a lean, mean femalien-chasing machine, a lover, fighter and all around kick-ass leader of men and women. And I love and admire Shatner, I really do, but it makes me sad to see him trussed up now in that costume, bedecked in some bad rug. And Nimoy has allowed Spock to retire with dignity. Let Abrams and company build on the huge, and I mean HUGE legacy, these two fine actors created. Write them big fat checks as consultants, but don’t try to find a way to force them on-screen as Kirk and Spock. Let’s allow the torch to be passed and see if we can build a Trek that will survive further into the 21st century.

44. JON - November 14, 2006

If you want to see Shatner and Nimoy again go to a Star Trek convention.Shatner made his final contribution when he endorsed the death of Kirk.

45. Lao3D - November 14, 2006

What he said. :)

46. Dr. Image - November 14, 2006

A good writer (JJ) could dispense with all the Nexus BS in five minutes. THAT’S all that Braga-created quagmire would need to obliterate it.

Killing Kirk was the most arrogant and misguided gesture in the history of Trek. How short-sighted and just plain stupid could someone be??
Not surprising though, given who was behind it.

Bring. Shat. BACK!!!

47. John A. - November 14, 2006

The RETURN (or a movie based on that premise) would work well to bring Kirk back, and be a logical way to have both Spock and TNG in the movie.

I was watching Voyager yesterday, where 7 of 9 brough Neelix back to life by using nanoprobes after he had been dead for 18 hrs. In the episode, she said that the Borg could bring people back to life after being dead for as long as 72hrs. First Contact was the biggest TNG movie because it had the Borg in it. A “RETURN” style movie would give people the ‘Kirk VS Picard” angle that alot of people have wanted over the years (just please don’t keep him a Borg).

48. Lao3D - November 14, 2006

First Contact was the most successful TNG film because it didn’t put people to sleep, or force us to see Riker and Troi in a hottub.

49. JON - November 14, 2006

Great ! Make ANOTHER star Trek movie about bringing back a dead character.Yeah.That’ll really pack em into theaters (all 6 of the Trekkies who post Kirk’s return from death on this site).No more back from the dead themes in Trek.PLEASE!

50. John N - November 14, 2006

That’s TrekKERs… :)

#46 – ” Bring. Shat. BACK!!! ”

If you think about it, you’ve really clarified the argument here. People in here really aren’t arguing about bring Kirk back. That’s going to happen regardless.

They want Shatner back.

51. Lao3D - November 14, 2006

So what, they do a reenactment of WNMHGB using new actors while Old Kirk and Old Spock reminisce? I like your idea of the character of Gary Mitchell making an appearance, but only in the prequel timeline, using new actors.

52. Dom - November 14, 2006

Dignity is the key thing in this film.

Shatner and Nimoy can appear, but the characters, in older age, need to be treated respectfully!

As an aside, there could be an off-cuff reference made in the course of the ‘young crew’ section of the film that ‘explains’ Kirk’s presence in his Shatner form in the ‘older Kirk and Spock’ section of the film.

Y’know, some sort of reference by and Apollo/Q type entity that Kirk was supposed to die in an accident in his later years, but as a reward, that fate will be sidestepped . . .

. . . or hopefully something more inventive than I’m capable after a long day at work! ;)

53. Lao3D - November 14, 2006

Whoa I must be losing it. I swear I just saw a post about Gary Mitchell. What the h— happened there?

54. Lao3D - November 14, 2006

Oh nooooo! No more Shatner as Kirk, please! Stop this money-grabbin’ old man from spoiling the freshness we need. Bring in a new, young Kirk by all means, but don’t keep digging up this campy idiot.

55. acb - November 14, 2006

Actually Lao3d, The Voyage home was the most successful Trek film. First contact made 94 million at the box office, Voyage home pulled in around 108 million. Then if u want to equivicate that the value of box office circa 86 with circa 96 ST:IV pulled in roughly 186 million…….yeah

56. acb - November 14, 2006

oh….and why not simply have spock visiting Kirk’s gravestone. I know we all would like to have seen a better ending to Generations, but bringing him back would put the film in the dangerous area of getting hokey and mundayne.

57. JON - November 14, 2006

Maybe they should have Adam West and Burt Ward in the next Batman guys need to get a life.

58. Lao3D - November 14, 2006

BTW, Post 54 was someone posting as Lao3D, I assume accidentally, not me. And in post 48 I was referring to John A.’s post about the most successful TNG (i.e. The Next Generation) film — which Voyage home aint…. so…. yeah

59. Lao3D - November 14, 2006

You can’t compare Shatner to West, Jon.

60. Lao3D - November 14, 2006

54, 59, Stop that, I say, you mad im-posters!!! Not the real Lao3D!

But anyway, did no one else see a post right after Jon’s #49 from some guy named Lansing with a long detailed plot involving Gary Mitchell? Have I gone mad?? Have I altered the timeline? Or was he too close to the truth and they had to -gulp- eliminate him?

61. Flake - November 14, 2006

I don’t know if its a good idea to have them in the movie, it would take one hell of a script and then they have got to get Nimoy and Shatner to agree with the goings on in the script – which means delays – its never going to happen.

62. JON - November 14, 2006

I can’t compare Shatner to a campy idiot like West?MR. post 54!

63. JON - November 14, 2006

post 60…Oh yeah .They accidently posted the plot for Trek xi .Whew !That was close.Glad you were the only one who saw it!

64. acb - November 14, 2006

Hey Lao3d what did post 49 say before it was removed?

65. Bring Back Kirk - November 14, 2006

Nothing about the return of Kirk would be “just another Trek movie about bringing a dead character back.” This is a case of a dead character that SHOULD be brought back and given his happy ending.

Ever see the bring back Kirk trailer?

Bring the character back would not make the film hokey. It’s called science fiction. If you want reality, feel free to go outside. There are plenty of ways that the dead need not stay dead.

Star Trek has always been about optimism. Spock hanging out at Kirk’s grave is just depressing. Kirk needs an upbeat ending.

Star Trek, at its best always dealt with humanity at its finest. Some of humanity’s best traits are loyalty and friendship. The Kirk/Spock friendship is one that not even death could stop. Kirk risked his life and his career to bring his friend back. He paid for it dearly. But he had no regrets because it was the right thing to do.

When Spock saw Kirk, the first thing he said was “you came back for me.”
Kirk’s answer was, “you would have done the same for me.”

Let’s see Spock prove it.

66. JON - November 14, 2006

Post 64 …It said ,it said ,it said …ugh.

67. An olde timey fan - November 14, 2006

#18 cbspock



TNG was never “Trek” to begin with — it was merely a similarly named product. A brand extension. Chevrolet Corvette & Chevrolet Chevette

Or as the perfume knock-offs say,

“If you liked ‘Star Trek’, you’ll love ‘The Next Generation’!”

68. acb - November 14, 2006

Actually i think they should reinforce the Kirk-Spock loyalty within the prequel story line itself as well. I have posted this before but imagine the first film with both Kirk and Spock at the academy in their last months, meeting for the first time and not getting along at first (since those two personalities would have their rough edges to be worked out). With the end of the film revolving around a simulation combat scenario where Kirk, Spock and a cadet crew are on one ship and an experienced crew on another with K and S left to use their own wits to outsmart the other ship but have something go wrong at the end, their crew being beamed aboard the other ship and K and S remain behind to steer the ship in some fashion to save the other one, with Kirk and Spock being forced to race through multiple decks before they can be beamed aboard safely.

The 2nd film should take place a few years later while Kirk and Spock are still moving up in the ranks (Spock now on the enterprise with Pike). I think u could wrap a film around the idea of how Kirk was shown to have went on planet surveys in TOS. Perhaps having a planet ready to join the federation and Kirk and other officers are sent for the final preceedings only to find that mass genocide was being carried out on the planet between the race that is in control onto another race. The ship that Kirk and the officers arrive on is destroyed and Kirk and company have to survive til help arrives (from Pike, Spock and the Enterprise). Just kind of picture the trailer to “The New World” mixed with the scene from “King Kong” were the inhabitants of the island come out and kill some of the crew with tweaks here and there. Touch on the darkness, just to show why Starfleet and what it stands for are so important. Now picture a scene where once Kirk is saved and in sick bay on the Enterprise with Pike next to him telling him that it was all thanks to their science officer that they found Kirk. Cue the subtle Jerry Goldsmith theme (similiar to the rendition of the one used in ST:V when Spock spun around in the klingon chair) as Spock approaches his friends side…… that would be nice.

Then u can have any kind of Nexus resolution at the end.

69. JON - November 14, 2006

bring Back Kirk…You know Kirk could have had a worse ending.He coulda died from something he picked up (you know , those aliens)

70. dmack - November 14, 2006

Good lord, HOW mant times did they go back in time either by accident or by choice? Jeez, fly at the sun, slingshot, go back in time and save Kirk’s ass… done

71. JON - November 14, 2006

If you wanna see Shatner as kirk again just click on poster #65 ‘s link to get it out of your system.Then go see the re-booted Trek xi in `08 with a new actor playing Kirk.

72. Big Ed - November 14, 2006

I love the idea of Kirk ‘s return. That entire nexus thing stunk.

Shatner and Nimoy in Star Trek 11. What else could a Star Trek fan ask for?

73. Buttermaker - November 14, 2006

Bring Back Kirk…. NOW!!!!!

Shatner and Nimoy are Star Trek.

74. JON - November 14, 2006

Don’t you guys realize there’s more Trek stories to be told out there than geriatric space commando’s coming back from the dead due to poor plotlines of a previous movie?How many versions of The Search for Spock can be told?It’s the same story.Lets see new actors play the leads.A reboot.A whole new approach.

75. Dave - November 14, 2006

Re #65 – And sometimes the best sci-fi is that which depicts real-world happenings like death.

Sometimes characters just need to stay dead whether it suits you or anybody else.

I have no issue with them bringing Kirk back as long as it suits the overall story. If its just tossed in there to suit a group of hideously vocal fans than its wasted effort and lip-service to group that financially will have no greater impact on the bottom-line of the boxoffice take than if I chose to not pay to see it or not buy the film when it comes out on DVD.

They have to appeal to an audience that may not have seen a Star Trek film before. They also have to appeal to science fiction fans in general who may not care for Trek but have decided to check this one out because JJA is involved. Finally, they have to appeal to the core Trek audience, who, by themselves, have never helped a Trek film become a financial success. Trek is for the masses not the Trek fan.

Those boxoffice grosses were not generated by Trek fans alone and its time people here started realizing that. Trek films are made to make money, not to please the average Trek fan who MAY or MAY NOT attend this film when it opens.

Sorry if that seems heartless but the day Paramount makes a film based only on what the Trek fans want to see will be the day they decide to never produce Trek again.

The studio certainly appreciates the feedback that is left all over the web, I’m sure. But their bottom line is to make a buck and Trek fans alone will not help them achieve boxoffice success. The wide discrepencies in boxoffice grosses over the course of ten films is proof alone of that. Bond has a more consistent box office take. Hell, even Godzilla can be counted on to generate a certain amount of revenue after 29+ films.

The other unfortunate side of all this speculation is that once you’ve posted your various ideas here for the world to see on how they can bring Kirk back, that automatically elimanates the possibility of that storyline due to legal restrictions placed on the writers by Paramount. So keep speculating. Sooner or later you will have eliminated all the possible good storylines and they’ll be forced to eliminate the idea of bringing Kirk back at all… if they even considered it.

76. Adam Cohen - November 14, 2006

Fellow TOSers,

A great amount of sadness just hit me amidst my joy of knowing Shatner and NImoy are coming back to Trek. De Kelley won’t be there with his brothers. De was a class act, a true Southern gentlemen. He is missed.

Abrams is smart to get Kirk and Spock back on the big screen. Will he address the Nexus or Kirk’s death? Doubtful. It’s too distracting to tell a new story with all of that business getting in the way (fixing Braga and Moore’s mistake). They’ll probably try to set it before the launch of the Enterprise-B or ignore the events in Generations altogether.

77. JON - November 14, 2006

I said it on a previous post.Paramount knowsStar Trekkies will go to see “Star Trek;Plumbing”(8 times).It’s a built-in audience.they need to get other people interested by broadening it’s appeal.

78. Norm - November 14, 2006

All they have to do is a quick comment saying ‘since your return from the Nexus.’ Or a banner stateing many years after Kirks return from the Nexus.

79. Bob - November 14, 2006


Post #74

Nobody cares about anything that has to do with Star Trek that does not involve Kirk and Spock. That is why we are getting this film.

The fact of the matter is Ds9,Voy and Ent nearly killed the franchise. The series lost it’s commercial appeal.

The best way to return to massive audience Star Trek once enjoyed is to have Kirk and Spock return along with William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy.

This isn’t rocket science.

Kirk+Spock+Shatner+Nimoy = $$$$

Nbody cares about anything else in the Star Trek universe.

80. Norm - November 14, 2006

We all know one of the main reasons they killed Kirk. They though that by killing Kirk they could bury the past & force the fans to move forward with TNG movies. If Generations or its sequels sucked the fans couldn’t scream bring back the old cast, as easily with a dead Kirk. But guess what you failed Berman & Co., Bring Back Kirk!!!

81. Josh - November 14, 2006

One thing is for certain, the Voyager and Enterprise fan camps are well represented here and it’s quite easy to ascertain who is who.

82. mikeg - November 14, 2006

I really doubt there’s any reason to go through a whole “Kirk resurrection” plot-line. I’m guessing Shatner and Nimoy will open the film to tell their story, and the rest of the film will be done as a flashback.
The film will be legitimized by the presence of the original Kirk and Spock, and the audience will, therefore, be more willing to embrace the “new” Kirk and Spock… whoever they turn out to be.
There’s a great deal riding on this film… and it is not just $$$. It is also the future of Star Trek. I believe this film will make or break the Trek franchise.
“Mr. Spock, what are the odds this film will match or surpass the critical and financial success of The Voyage Home?”

83. K - November 14, 2006

I vot e for #27!!!!! :) AWESOME!

84. K - November 14, 2006

#55 has a good point. ST:IV brought a LOT of closet Trekkers out to the movie theater. There are plenty of normal, cool people who like Star Trek and respect what it stands for, BUT are afraid of being stigmatized by the general populace. ST:IV brought the Trek characters into the real world and that struck a nerve. I remember my older brother, who was always concerned about his image, dragged me AND his girlfriend to see ST:IV. That shocked me. I have a feeling JJ will connect K&S to our real world and remind us that the American dream is a world where everyone is free and able to live their lives as they do in Star Trek. This is the dream America needs now! TOS showed us the world as it should be and did not try to adapt to or explain the issues of the day. It displayed the issues of the day and tackled ’em like an angry lost Gorn who left his rations on the ship. People want Roddenbery’s vision of the future cause it’s a hell of a lot less painful than our present situation.

Also #27, after that dialogue:
Spock: “Whatever… Let’s grab a starship, Captain.”

85. Doug - November 15, 2006

You can honor the canon without getting all into the nexus thing, and open the film with a flashforward Kirk and Spock very easily. This debate is a bit nuts, but entertaining.

Kirk and Spock have both died before and come back. Kirk could have come back any number of plausible ways (for sci-fi) at any point between Generations and Trek XI. This story does not need to be told now. Kirk’s death and ressurrection can simply be addressed in a little aside comment from one of them, suggesting that there is another story to be told someday, and allowing us to move on to Trek XI with a nice send off from the originals.

They handled it the best in DS9’s Trials and Tribblations, when Worf had to explain away the appearance of the TOS era Klingons. “They are Klingons, and we don’t like to talk about it.”

Simple, amusing and effective.

86. John N - November 15, 2006

I’ve got it… Spock wakes up… and sees Krik coming out of the shower. That’s when we realize… it was all just a dream.

Not very satisfying is it? Well, neither are any of the “you don’t need to explain it” suggestions coming forward.

Josh…. out of curiosity… can you tell which camp I’m in? :)

87. Doug - November 15, 2006

I think you’re in the camp (John N) who wants to see a movie about the ressurrection of Kirk. That just aint what this movie is going to be about. The only point to Nimoy and Shatner being in it (if they’re in it) is basically an homage and a send off and that’s it.

If that’s the case, I’d like some recognition of the fact that Kirk was last seen dead. You guys who are trying to see a ressurrection story told are trying to make a different movie. That’s cool. But it’s definitely not where it’s going. – Doug

88. Dom - November 15, 2006

God no! Don’t let it be a resurrection movie. Shatner’s Kirk should be alive in it, his death and resurrection shrugged off as something that happened offscreen.

Why? Because it will be endlessly debated! Fans will go nuts looking for every reference in every film and TV episode to ‘explain’ how Kirk is still alive. There’ll be endless contradictory explanations in countless novels and novelisations. And the general cinematic audience won’t care, as long as the film is good!

Handled well, it could be a fun aspect of the film!

89. Dave - November 15, 2006

Re#80 – No, one of the main reasons for moving on from TOS cast to TNG cast was to bring down the astronomical sums of money that went into the budget to get Shatner and Nimoy to sign up for additional films. That fact is well documented all over the place.

It had nothing to do with “forcing fans” to accept a new series of films with the TNG characters.

90. Øystein - November 15, 2006

I think, a good idea could be(if not reviving Kirk directly)like this:
An old Spock manage to make spiritual contact with Kirk. They talk about their past, and then, the rest of the movie could take place in the pre-TOS-era, with a young Kirk and Spock, or eventually DURING the TOS-era.

91. Cervantes - November 15, 2006

Ah…my OWN ideal casting hopes and structure for this upcoming movie, as humbly suggested on various previous threads here, seem to be coming dangerously, and wonderfully, nearer to fruition with this news…

I await to hear how closely the DESIGN and MUSIC ethic will be to my ideal…

92. Cervantes - November 15, 2006

Whatever the plot…it will be great to see Bill and Leonard on the big screen again.

93. John N - November 15, 2006

#87 – Hey Doug…. good guess, and I can see why you guessed that based on that single post, but if you look higher, you’ll see my REAL camp is this:

I’d probably be most happy with a reboot (i.e. don’t even need to see Shatner or Nimoy). To me, the new Battlestar Galactica is the best sci-fi show on television since TOS. When you let go of the confines of the current Trek mythology and combine it with great writing and acting, I think great things could occur. The argument that there is too much back-story to reboot just doesn’t hold up. Comic books have successfully rebooted with more back story than Trek.

As far as the Shatner thing goes, I’m just trying to say that IF you had a resurrection story, you can’t insult the intelligence of your audience by shrugging it off or doing it offscreen. The Klingon explanation during DS9’s Trials and Tribble-lations was funny, but ultimately a lazy cop out.

94. dmack - November 15, 2006

I totally agree that to sell the new, younger versions of Kirk and Spock it is best to have Shat and Nimoy do a bookend.. If well done, could be very moving and pass the torch with dignity. They’re doing the young thing anyways..

95. acb - November 15, 2006

But if u force a scenario with Shatner and Spock into the film it will hurt it more than anything. To be honest, I feel that Nimoy should reprise Spock and simply have him visiting the gravesite of his friend. U do not have to acknowledge Generations openly, and since many viewers outside of Trek probably dont even know what happened in that film u will simply have the notion that Jim Kirk had died and Spock is remembering his friend that changed him for the rest of his life. Then simply focus on what made the bond between the two so strong in the story with the new actors.

96. Dave - November 15, 2006

Wow! 95 posts on kirk/spock. How about this:
1) Spock is in a shuttlepod on the other side of Veridian 3 and beams kirk off the bridge before it falls

2) Spock back in time travels to Veridian 3 and his grabs kirk’s hand after he decloaks Soran’s probe, pulling in him up to safety.

3) Correct it in the past: Tell young kirk “When you follow Picard out of the nexus, stay off the fricking bridge!” –Voila! New timeline

4) tell young Kirk to never let his weight get over 170lbs, then the bridge might support him and not fall ( i know, that was mean!)

97. Mark - November 15, 2006

Dom’s idea (#27) was great, but you can avoid the Nexus problem by simply having Spock and Kirk, separately or together, reappear from the Guardian of Forever – and then the “Aren’t you dead?” conversation. Spock obviously uses the Guardian to prevent the whole Nexus disaster including Kirk’s death.

98. trekmaster - November 16, 2006

Just film the Shatner-Novels or an alternative version of Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens’ “The Federation”.

99. John N - November 16, 2006

#97 – Mark… an excellent idea… and probably the most satisfying I’ve heard that still adheres to Trek canon.

However, you have left half of the audience (the essential ‘casual fan’ that Trek needs to attract to grow and prosper) scratching their heads and saying “huh?”

100. acb - November 16, 2006

………………yep, this is why not all Star Trek fans should write st stories

101. Paul - November 16, 2006

Why does it have to be set after generations? Its probably only goin to be them in a scene at the beginning and end talking about the old days. they can use the same CGI effects as that advert for both actors. Its a movie god sake. I’m sure they can afford it. This movie aint going to be about the old kirk and spock. they’ll barely be in it at all me thinks.

102. MichaelT - November 16, 2006

From another thread… We don’t have a one solid lead that Shatner and Nimoy are in this for sure and even if hired, they could be anything from actors to advisors. I like Shatner, but he likes his money and he’s the biggest piece of Canadian bacon (ham) there is. He’s an attention whore. If he’s in the film, I pray it’s not more than a small part intro-ing the new Kirk.
Don’t follow my post with another chorus of “Bring Back Shatner” or there’s no way Trek can go on without Shatner and Nimoy….puleeessee. It can. Trek dam near started without Shatner…twice. Don’t get me wrong, Shat and Nimoy almost…. almost, own the parts. And I enjoy them both… but it’s time folks… let them pass the torch with dignity (on ours AND their parts) and let’s truly see the legends of the TOS crew move on to new adventures.
I agree, Kirk’s death was a poor choice and a stumbling block for all the wannbe writer’s in this thread. We have more plot devices buried in the messages above mine than I can count. And I don’t discount any of them, they are your opinions. I won’t launch into my own without knowing IF Shat’s in the flick and to what degree.
In my opinion and others I have read here and on other threads, this film is almost 100% likely to be a Kirk/Spock TOS story. Not any of the other franchises because since TOS was first and did it well (for the most part, despite giant space amoebas), and it’s the most recognizable to fans and non-fans. Both are needed to make this film a financial success.
I disagree with the all the smack talk about TNG, DS9, VOY and ENT. Especially TNG and DS9. Those shows wereTREK in a different form, not just in a different uniform. All had their moments. I won’t go into great detail, but poor writing was not the only problem ENT had… the final season was fun and that’s why I watch any Trek show…to ENJOY it. In my local market ENT was buried late at night and made it difficult to watch and the time varied. I suspect this could have happened in several markets. Also, the audience changed… and more channels have been added. It’s fragmentation of the viewing market and TV viewing as a whole has suffered.

#95 acb… you said it well.

P.S…. this is my opinion. Thanks

103. Jason - November 16, 2006

so can we put the Damon thing to rest now

104. Litenbug - November 17, 2006

Shatner as Kirk…. again… Please, no.
New Movie, New Story… resume TOS with a young cast, a good story, excellent direction.
Give the old boys things to do… even direct or advise.
Bill… The gold shirt just won’t fit anymore… or the red one.

Enterprise ships out with the same names and fresh faces.

105. Mark - November 17, 2006

#99 John N:

Mark… an excellent idea… and probably the most satisfying I’ve heard that still adheres to Trek canon.

However, you have left half of the audience (the essential ‘casual fan’ that Trek needs to attract to grow and prosper) scratching their heads and saying “huh?”
John – I understand your point. I’m sure the writers always have the juggling act of creating the right balance in a story that will satisfy the serious fan and still stand alone for the casual or non-fan. However, to a degree you will always have that in any movie that is a sequel (or even a prequel.) Sci-fi movies are going to require that to a greater degree than, say, the Rocky series. Does each new movie have to explain tractor beams, transporters and phasers to the potential fan – let alone the history of the main characters and the interpersonal relationships? You have to draw the line somewhere.

In this case, all we are trying to do is get Kirk back in the picture. imo, the Guardian is a great way for Spock to do that. Since the fans don’t even need to know what Spock did (only that he did something), the non-fans don’t even need to know that Kirk was dead. Akin, as someone else has pointed out, to Worf’s “explanation” about TOS Klingons in DS9.

It seems unlikely that the story line of the new movie is going to be built around Kirk’s resurrection. All we need is something plausible to explain his appearance in the film and go from there. The non-fans are free to pursue the previous stories if they want – hopefully the film will have a story that prompts them to do that. As Trek fans, we want a good Trek movie, and that requires Kirk and Spock, imo, even if they only play a small role.

Kirk and Spock ARE Star Trek. Sure, other characters (TOS) and new characters (TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT) are fine, but Trek is Kirk and Spock. If Trek is just Roddenberry’s vision of the future and the “can’t we all just get along mentality,” etc., then why are they even considering recasting the roles? Why not just a TV show and/or films that are just Star Trekish, with different characters each episode or movie? iow, a Trek version of Twilight Zone? It’s not *just* the future that Trek envisions, but the characters, primarily Kirk and Spock, *in that future* in their various adventures, etc. I know they’re old, and they won’t live forever, but while they are still around, I am glad they are being reconsidered for another film. And, personally, I don’t care who the actors are (known or unknown), how well they act, or how good the story is, I believe that after this film (assuming it recasts the roles) no future movies with another Kirk and another Spock will be successful. They may be able to have another successful Trek film (I doubt it), but no TV series or film that recasts the roles will work. Don’t get me wrong, I’m a serious fan, but I think Trek is dead after this movie. It would already be dead if Shatner and Nimoy weren’t being considered for this film.

106. William - November 17, 2006

I want to start by saying that I would love to see both Shatner and Nimoy one last time, if they could pull it off at their age. However, from strictly a story line point of view, if I were writing a story that incorporated these characters in their youth and when the are old, I would want their older selves doing something that provoked emotions strong enough to cause them to reflect on the past. Altough I know there are several reasons my idea would never work as a film, here is a description of the story I would write:
While on Romulus (Unification), Spock gets word form Picard that Kirk has died on whatever planet that was in Generations. Spock leaves Romulus on a mission to take Kirk’s body back to Earth. The sheer emotion caused by the death of his friend causes Spock to flashback to the time he first met Kirk. I think it is only natural for someone facing the death of a lifetime friend to think about how their friendship began. This would allow for parallel stories in both the “present” and the past. The older Spock could be plauged with Problems with Romulans as the tries to leave Romulus or some other damn thing and the story in the past could be about pretty much anything. I think that that this story would neatly “bookend” their friendship.
As I said, I know this would never work as a film because I very much doubt that Shatner would willing sit the movie out as Nimoy took a major role. Just my thoughts.

107. trekmaster - November 18, 2006

Maybe Shatner could play a ghost or a kind of elder mirror in Spocks mind.

Trek is also Picard & Co. Both TOS and TNG are Roddenberry-productions.

108. William - November 18, 2006

Again, I’d like to see Shatner back in action too but in terms of writing a well written story that is cannon, I can’t see a good way to fit him in. I think that a ghost or a Spock delesion would seem too forced and would cheapen story.

109. trekmaster - November 18, 2006

At the age of 75 or at least 77 in the year 2008 you can’t be an action hero. We need a character based believable story that flies on the wings of fantasy.

110. Litenbug - November 18, 2006

Mark #105…
If Trek’s dead either way… why waste the money or time?
I’m sorry, I don’t subscribe to that thought at all… especially with a potential major movie nearly written and ready to start filming in the spring. I’ve suggested several times that Shatner bow out, but I’ll still be excited either way.

Stay home, save your money…. we might tell you what you missed.

111. Mark - November 19, 2006

Lit –

You may have misunderstood me. I am a huge fan of Trek, and will be there for a movie with or without Kirk. I have an unbroken record of seeing the Trek movies on opening night (I saw the first episode on TV in 1966 and have been a fan ever since), and this will be no exception. I am not saying I want ST to die – far from it. I’m just saying that because of a combination of things – probably the primary one being box office receipts – that ST will die after this movie. I don’t think the audience – new or old – will accept someone else playing the Kirk and Spock roles for more than one movie, I doubt they will do another TNG movie, and I’m almost completely certain we will never see a DS9, VOY or ENT movie (probably a good idea, frankly.) Best bet is another TV show down the road, but I’m not too optimistic about that, either. It’s not what I want, it’s just all good things, you know? I know this movie is an attempt to restore/resurrect the franchise, and I hope it works, but I’m just not optimistic about it. I seriously I hope I can come back here one day and eat crow.

112. litenbug - November 19, 2006

111 Mark

I’ll bring the Ketchup for you.

#79 Bob
“Nbody cares about anything else in the Star Trek universe.”

…don’t make statements like that. You don’t speak for me or anyone but yourself.

113. david - January 6, 2007

OK, kirk is buried under rocks on veridian 3.picard leaves, only the rocks and terrain on veridian 3 contain regenerative properties that revive kirk.
He rigs up a distress call from the remaining wreckage of enterprise d.Job done.10 minutes screen time. is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.