Abrams Gushes Over Nimoy and Shatner November 24, 2006
by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Abrams, Star Trek (2009 film) , trackback
3 months ago TrekMovie confirmed that both William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy have some sort of contractual involvement in Star Trek XI. In the latest issue of Dreamwatch Magazine, producer J.J. Abrams talks up how happy he is to have them around…
the involvement of William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy means a great deal to us on many levels, not the least of which is just the respect of who they are and what they do. They are the carriers of this torch and, without being too reverential; we want to show them the kind of appreciation and admiration they deserve.
Is this guy a fanboy or what? Of course there is still no definitive word on what the extent of their involvement is. It may just be for the promotion or it may be roles in the movie (which Shatner seems to be gunning for).
Star Trek XII?
Abrams also addressed the issue of the potential for sequels, but as usual didn’t really say much
You know, I would say that wherever it goes, it goes and hopefully boldly. I want to tell a great story and make sure that the movie works as well as it possibly can, and that it’s as thoughtful and entertaining as it can possibly be. If it works and results in another film, I would love to have that option when the time comes. But I’m not looking at Star Trek XII yet.
This issue of a sequel is fairly important. The in thing to do these days seems to be related trilogies (like X Men and Spiderman), and of course the ‘classic’ trilogy of trek films (II, III, IV) is considered the high point of the franchise. However if this film is truly set as ‘Kirk’s First Mission On the Enterprise’, that doesn’t leave much room before the original series pilot itself. One possibility would be to set the next film after the 3rd season but before the end of the ‘5 year mission’. Or they could just set a film during the Original Series itself…who knows.
Source: Dreamwatch (via SciFi Pulse)
Loading ...
Comments»
The original actors are too old and no one else can play their parts. They should put the whole idea to rest.
I hope SOMEHOW that Mr. Abrams is reading this and has the wisdom
to get back to the very basic concept of telling and focusing on the actual characters first and foremost. IF he decides to tell of the characters without getting too touchy - feelie (girlie) about it all then perhaps Star Trek has a chance yet.
Put equal emphasis on all three elements of a story….that being the story being told….the characters and the special effects. IF the first two are done with any care then the special effects will be just the icing on the cake that we all been wanting and hoping to see and that Star Trek is worthy of.
Star Wars did it in their first film and their characters weren’t developed (well known) in any shape - form or fashion - it was just done right the
first time around so that shouldn’t be asking expecting too much as fans.
I would rather see a 70 year old bloated, swollen, red faced, pompous William Shatner and a dried up, shriveled, wrinkly, gaunt Leonard Nimoy than ANYTHING Trek has offered in the last 15 years.
Since we are addressing Abrams,
Shatner and Nimoy get my 10 bucks J.J.
Anything post TOS doesn’t.
Simple economics.
Oh and J.J.
Young Kirk and Spock MEET Old Kirk and Spock.
The names Vance, Josh Vance.
The next film is doomed IF they insist on having Mr. Shatner or Nimoy in their roles as they look now. However….with trick of hand and computer enhancement then perhaps they could make a last run at it. Now….if it was set at Starfleet Headquarters on Earth with Spock and Kirk as instructors or consultants then it may work but never in their original roles even if for a fleeting moment where the story revolves around them. Its time for both characters to send/see the next ship off in grand style and lets all hope that its done with some first class story telling so people won’t be debating the validity of the story as their leaving the theaters - leave the characters as they should be both proud and true to their original roots and let the Enterprise travel untethered by its past poor storylines and older characters. Do it right or not at all. Or start anew.
Did anyone posting here actually READ the article or did they just imagine what they wanted it to say?
Shanter and Nimoy have some sort of “contractual involvement”. It didn’t say they were IN the film. Once again the pointless debate over Shatner and Nimoy being the film is going to dominate yet another topic thread in a pointless debate.
No one at Paramount cares if your ten bucks is going to film that features Shatner and Nimoy. No one at Paramount cares what era you want the film set in. No one at Paramount cares what your idea is on the perfect story that would bring these elements together.
You can’t visit a topic on this site unless you bring a stick so so everyone can beat a dead horse already.
You’re right of course - Paramount doesn’t care and thats THEIR problem.
They and everyone involved in the production of this film better start caring NOW or its due time to shoot that so call dead horse in the head before anyone takes any bets (invests) any more money into this dead project.
And Paramount better drop those 2 dead horses (Shatner & Nimoy) now before they lay manure all over the screen before anyone sits down and has to smell this film…..better yet….just shut down this site and the film altogether.
Getting Shatner and Nimoy involved would be exciting. Dead horses? That’s just dumb to say.
Shatner and Nimoy as Kirk is a HUGE draw–especially in their most famous roles. Both of them are in phenomenal shape for their age and can easily handle a movie with a parallel plot.
Bringing back Kirk is not only due, it’s long OVER due.
Shatner and Nimoy = $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Shatner and Nimoy are who I want to see on the screen. Age means nothing.
WOW!……now theres an intelligent thing you just wrote “Duane” ,
in reality thats an agiest and ignorant thing to coming from any sane
persons perspective, well, perhaps you are on crack?, or is it just maybe didn’t any of your parents kids live?
YOU WILL BE ASSMILATED FOR THE GOOD OF THE BODY!
re post 6.
Dave is right. My personal hope is that Shatner and Nimoy will be in the movie simply to introduce the story arc, and set up the historical tale. It’s a nice way to pass the torch and tie the old and new together.
Regarding the story… old kirk/ spock meet new kirk spock is the lamest idea i’ve heard. how many times do you want to play this theme. Let’s not forget that Picard and Data just spent the last trek movie meeting variant versions of themselves, and it was pretty bad and unnecessary, not to mention leaving little room for the other actors to get a bit of action.
All the “Academy” stories strike me as being kind of boring too. Although it’s never actually stated… the natural way for Kirk and Spock to have met, is that Kirk takes command of the Enterprise from Christopher Pike, and Spock is already there, as has been established in the Cage, and the Menagerie.
I personally would like that story. Kirks takes command from Pike, and then there first mission together!
Doug
Yeah but Doug, Both Shatner and Nimoy could “the reminicing about the good o’l days”, if it was done right and pull it off….. because they embody what Star Trek is REALLY all about…imo, not the endless dronings of Picard, and the ever annoying post tv series version of Data we have seen since Generations.
just my 2 cents
Just to be clear, I advocate the idea of Shatner and Nimoy “reminiscing about the old days) I think that’s the best way to use those actors. I agree, they do embody the true essence of Trek, along w/ deForest Kelly, I loved McCoy’s character.
I grew up with original Trek on WPIX in NYC at 6:00 every evening. Couldn’t wait to watch them!!.. on the flip side, I never was a Trek basher for everything post original series. I loved TNG and DS9… both had really great episodes, along with some true losers.
(Voyager was boring, and Enterprise downright sucked for the most part in my opinion, but I still am hopeful for some new stuff w/ Abrams)
Doug
re post 9
“Shatner & Nimoy = $$$$$$$$$$”
I assume you mean box office, but really the dollars are their salary’s. They will demand a mint to be in the movies, and I guarantee you regardless of whether they love the characters, Nimoy and Shatner will not be in this movie if their prices aren’t met.
d
I am now 100% convinced that Shatner and Nimoy will be in this film as Kirk and Spock.
Abrams refers to Shatner/Nimoy as “carriers of the torch”,and that he wants to show reverence.Sounds to me like there will be some kind of “passing of the torch” theme in the new movie.A form of endorsment from the old cast to the new.ALSO Mr Pascale.I’ve read from some posters here that there was a whole second 5 year mission that was never covered giving even more TOS territory to cover.
Love the headline!
Abrams must be really keen on those guys . . .
Sorry, I have a one-track mind!!! ;)
Training? Kobayashi Maru scene? 2006 effects and DIRECTION instead of treating it like a ham-fister episode of a tv show? Character reboot?
I say hell yes.
It must either be something in the water or a sign of the coming apocalypse,
but when Star Trek “fans” can in any way, shape, or form have something negative to say about Captain KIRK or Mister SPOCK, being featured in a STAR TREK film, something is seriously Fubar.
This is the perfect and prime example of how messed up Star Trek is and how Rick Berman destroyed it.
I want to see a Superman fim that doesn’t have Superman in it.
I want to see a Rocky Balboa film that doesn’t have Rocky in it.
I want to see a James Bond film that doesn’t have James Bond in it.
That’s about how ridiculous some people sound, and Star Trek is in the sad, petty state it’s in BECAUSE Shatner and Kirk WEREN’T in it, the last 3 times.
I find the headline extremely VILE and repugnant. Where I live to “gush” is the act of a woman……
The fact that is that any film still might tank at the box-office regardless of who starred in it. It has to have a good (firm) storyline and well represented characters who are well defined and care about each other.
The last 3 films bombed simply because the stories were either poorly received or just had a lack of direction. I’m certain that the Star Trek X would have done a lot better had it been released at a time when our country wasn’t
involved in a battle overseas in a place we didn’t belong sent by a President who he himself never had the nerve to serve his country in the Vietnam War and had his Father slip him out the side door. Bush is not only a war monger but a big pussy too. Anyhow…Star Trek needs a good story to succeed.
#21 - Josh - You’ve always come across as a pretty sharp guy (passionate, but sharp), so I’m a little surprised that you’ve gotten caught in the same trap that so many others have.
No one is suggesting that this Star Trek film shouldn’t have Kirk or Spock.
Many are suggesting that this Star Trek film shouldn’t have Shatner and Nimoy.
So your post would have been more accurate as follows:
I want to see a Superman film that doesn’t have Christorpher Reeve in it.
I want to see a Rocky Balboa film that doesn’t have Sylvester Stallone in it.
I want to see a James Bond film that doesn’t have Pierce Brosnan in it.
I’m not going to fall into the trap of debating the first two, but the last one is the most interesting, because the fanatical extremes that I hear on this site remind me of the crap that went on last year when Daniel Craig was cast as the new Bond.
“Bond is not BLONDE!” they shouted. “He’s too UGLY!” they cried.
Well… I saw “Casino Royale” last week, and personally I’m glad the studio ignored THOSE fanboys. Craig is right up there with Connery, and may even surpass him. The film has made $100 million worldwide in it’s first 5 days of release.
If only Star Trek could fare so well…
Given the historical parallel perhaps this IS indeed a ripe time for growth for Trek.
You have two inescapable quagmires, societal upheaval, two unpopular Presidents, political scandal , and a serious lack of imagination coming out of Hollywood.
Perhaps “Good” Trek comes on the heels of societal and cultural Bullgarbage.
#22 - Duane - while you are entitled to your own polictical beliefs , the final part of your comment has to be one of the most ill-conceived that I have ever heard.
Here are the top 5 domestic grossing films released the same year as Nemesis:
$403,706,375 Spider-Man (2002)
$340,478,898 The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002)
$310,675,583 Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones (2002)
$261,970,615 Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (2002)
$241,437,427 My Big Fat Greek Wedding (2002)
Gee… why didn’t the political climate sink THOSE films?
You were more accurate at the beginning of your post… Nemesis failed because of story, direction, original concept, etc…
John N, I haven’t seen Casino Royale and I won’t. Daniel Craig IS too ugly. He isn’t James Bond. The film is too much Bourne and not enough Bond.
When a childrens film such as “Happy Feet” tops Bond in it’s opening weekend, that’s a pretty sad harbinger for the status of Bond.
Casino Royale defeats the entire purpose of Bond and escapism.
I don’t NEED to see Bond as a mere mortal, i see that everyday I get up out of bed and look in the mirror. Broccoli missed the point of what has kept Bond going 40 years. People don’t want to relate to a pug average Joe being thrown into circumstances beyond their control, people go to movies for escapism and to see winners, people succeed.
Bond dancing with a smirk his way through danger after danger is the whole point of his charm.
As far as the studio ignoring the fans, you can see the results in the form of “Happy Feet” knocking a new Bond film.
No one but mindless action fans are buying tickets.
Every Bond fan or Bond website I’ve visited indicates a disturbing REJECTION of this film, something no previous Bond entry has endured, even the Timothy Dalton entries.
Daniel Craig is NOT Bond. Daniel Craig is the second rate answer to Jason Bourne.
The politcal climate in the Untied States at the time Nemesis was released had nothing to do with the poor reception Nemesis received at the box office.
Yeah!!!!! Maybe now Paramount can stop pretending this film is not ALL about real original Star Trek in some thinly veiled attempt to not hurt the feelings of the few hard core next gen era fans, who aren’t busy chanting or fiddling with their crystals or Joan Biaz music collections. Kirk and Spock, Punches, drop kicks, trechorous duplicitous iron curtain ottoman Turk klingons, hot chicks, Logic, real peril, friendship, family, brotherhood, wonderful allegories set in a flowing action adventure with real meaning, Triumph of humanity admist our human frailties. No more pretentous psedo-intellectual pablum -pink couches- ships councelers - children on the the flag battleship of the fleet- tea sipping- sexually repressed or completely asexual- technobabal - lack of any villans of consiquence - flute playing - noble samuari apachee honorous misunderstood by our own limited human perceptions spiritual klingons - zeoluosly politically correct devoid of any interesting human conflict or emotions - bland Rick Berman era Poop!!!!! All the Next Gen era Trek (except DS9) is dead long live Star Trek. MAY THE SHATNER BE WITH YOU!!!
# 25 - Hmm…..well lets see. You in a way already answered your question.
ALL of the films you mentioned (2002) were at a time obviously when this nation was when we(didn’t know) that we would be spinning our wheels by spending future taxes and resources that we don’t have and can’t afford.
Not to mention the loss of life….their is no God given excuse for that. Recent studies and Washington D.C.’s assessment is that we won’t be out of there until at least 2010. Yet another Vietnam - their is no denial of that true fact!
With respect, Josh, many people who have seen Bond (the majority that I have seen) like Daniel Craig as the new Bond. And I fail to see how you can make judgements on an actor in a film you haven’t seen yet.
Yeah, do the story after the third season, during the original five year mission. Or with the second five year mission. Then there’ll be no problems with when Kirk & Spock’s first meeting happened. Just go on from the third year onward. There is a space in time where not much has been done between the original mission(s) and the launch of the refit Enterprise. That’ll work.
# 27….Perhaps….but oh boy lets all go to the theater for some escape from the reality of war and loved ones outside. The lights dim…a supposed Young Picard appears (another nutjob) their are battles in space….people are traumatized and blah….blah…blah…a prime (main character) is killed….
This story makes no sense and goes nowhere fast….the lights come up and you leave…Gee….(1/2 day later) asking yourself…..why did I go see that film?
#30
I don’t need to put a pistol to my head and pull the trigger to know NOT to do that.
I’ve read and heard enough about it to know I don’t want to go see it.
#29 & 32 - Duane - First things first… I’m not on a Star Trek web site to debate your political beliefs.
Secondly, if you are saying that a darker story may not have resonated with an audience that was looking for escapism at the time, I can see your point.
Thirdly, I find it difficult to believe that Nemesis would have done any better released in a different climate, but neither of us can prove that, so there’s no point in arguing it.
#33 - Josh, there’s a BIG difference between deciding that you’re not interested in seeing a movie, and KNOWING it’s quality.
As Anthony has previously said (to you I believe) … you are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
Who are YOU to presume to try to tell me facts pertaining to myself?
How presumptuous is that?
You liked the film, fine, but dont presume to lecture those that have no inerest in it why they SHOULD like it.
I don’t like Daniel Craig as Bond, that’s good enough for me, AND you.
Duane #5
Why would Bill Shatner and Leonard Nimoy “doom” the next Star Trek film? Don’t people age in the Star Trek universe? Have you see the real life age and physical appearance of some of the leading military men in the US armed forces?
There is no reason Shatner and Nimoy can’t appear as the elder statesmen of the Star Trek universe.
From an artistic point of view. I think it would be quite interesting to see these men portray these same characters 40 years after they created the characters. This is such a unique and almost unpresented opportunity to have characters of their iconic stature played by the original iconic actors over four decades later in a major motion picture.
Clearly, I don’t think anyone is suggesting that they are the long term solution to the problems that the ST franchise has at the moment.
But, from a strictly commercial point of view it makes all the sense in the world to have them back for Star Trek 11. Their mere presence offers this film a level of credibility that it would not be have without them.
Plus, I feel their return would make this film an event film. If the return of Shatner and Nimoy (even if in a somewhat limited manner) as Kirk and Spock does not bring out the legions of Star Trek fans, nothing will. Their on screen appearance as Kirk and Spock would make this a box office winner. Much like the original TOS films were. Many people may be too young to remember when Star Trek was a big deal at the box office. A Kirk era ST film was about as big as a current James Bond film. They were major events. Unlike the last couple of Trek films that were duds (Nemesis didn’t even make $50 million in 2002 dollars) at the box office.
On the other hand when you adjust for inflation. All the TOS films made over $100 million. And a couple (TMP+TVH) made over $200 million. TMP was the #2 film the year it came out. To compare that to current films Spiderman 2 was the number 2 film of 2004. That’s were a ST film should be at the box office. Not making the top 50 of the year is a disgrace for this once powerfull franchise. (Jesus I sound like a dork, don’t I)
To the vast majority of the public, they (Kirk + Spock)are Star Trek. Is it any coincedence that when the other series needed to boost their ratings they went back to TOS for help?
Or, is it a mere coincedence that the biggest selling Star Trek book (and there are thousands at this point) in the history of Trek literature is “The Return” by William Shatner? In this book Kirk is returned from that horrible ending he was given in “Generations”
Many people (fans of the original and most popluar iconic series) felt alienated after Kirk was killed in such a meaningless and disrespectful (to Kirk and TOS fans) manner. Data’s cat was treated w/more respect than Kirk (the face of the franchise) was.
You can trace back almost to the day they killed Kirk off the commercial failure of the entire franchise. His death was such a polarizing subject among old and new fans it split the fanbase up. The majority of Kirk/TOS fans (which are the majority of ST fans) simply didn’t care anymore about the Rick Berman’s (who is on record as saying he didn’t like TOS)bland incarnations of Star Trek and the bland characters that were introduced in those series.
People want the return of the real thing. The character and the fans deserve better than what Rick Berman gave them (in regards to Kirk)
Has their ever been a worse end to a major fictional character in the history of film? This is the chance to right that wrong.
Also, this is a no lose scenerio for people who feel Shatner and Nimoy are too old. A younger version of Kirk and Spock are going to be introduced to carry the series on. It’s simply the best of both worlds for ST fans.
Bring back William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy as Kirk and Spock and the massive fanbase Star Trek once had will follow.
#36 - Hey Josh - go nuts… throw anything away that you want to, along with all of the books that you won’t read because of their cover.
Who am I? I’m someone who doesn’t trash things on second-hand information. That’s good enough for me.
I know that Anthony’s mom reads these things, so for me, the disucssion ends here.
# 34 : Well….I wouldn’t want to debate facts either - their not personal beliefs but facts that are being played out day by day and dollar by tax dollar but the sadder fact is people are dying there. BUT….this isn’t the correct forum for such a discussion so I’ll won’t add anymore to it. I’ll gladly link you up to site that has all the facts if thats what you want but why….I know you don’t.
Enough said…..
# 38
Well you can not trash things on second hand information, but Im not going to go waste 10 precious bucks to go see something I have no interest in just to be able to come back here and say John, I didnt like it.
# Voodoo….(cool nickname) Yeah….I agree that they could appear in a well written story as elder spokemen of Starfleet Command. What I questioned was their position or need for them to refill their prior roles on the Enterprise.
Good characters in a good storyline….sounds good….too many goods? ; )
#39 - Hey Duane… just for the record… I’m Canadian, and was proud that my country didn’t (officially) support the invasion of Iraq. Unofficially, they deployed troops to Afghanistan, which relieved U.S. troops to be re-deployed in Irag, but that’s another story. I always felt that the war was an illegal one, and did not have sufficient proof to justify it.
Anyway, point being that I probably agree with you more than you give me credit for, which is unfortunate. Just because I don’t agree with you about the reasons that Nemesis failed doesn’t mean that I’m not politically aware.
#42 : Take it easy….I don’t even know you nor did I ever imply for a mere nanosecond that you weren’t politically aware…..to each their own I say.
Now whether a person agrees with me about Star Trek X thats their own personal business or problem - not mine. Grab a beer - roll a joint - do whatever makes you happy - Ok?
#43 - It was your comment of “but why….I know you don’t” in #39 that clearly implied that you felt I was either a) ignorant, or b) that I have a closed mind.
Sorry if you felt that I’m over-reacting, but those are two categories to which I do not belong. Cheers.
Kirk is dead, right?
Re:33,
…”Ill bet you credits to navy beans, he’ll go see the star trek movie, when it comes out mister!”… Lt Desalle told the young ensign with the rather bad “beatles/monkees” wig who doubted him…
#37-Bring back William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy as Kirk and Spock and the massive fanbase Star Trek once had will follow.
Well, I certainly won’t. Nostalgia kills so many things. Star Trek 5 and especially 6…was sticky sweet with nostalgia for the old days. Next Gen went out of its way to avoid original series references when it first came out, and it forged an identity for itself…it moved on. That’s what I would like to see Star Trek do..I’m sick this constant traveling back to the same reservoir. Sure, if they want to do an original series based movie…go for it, but have the guts to do it without gimmicks and cameos.
#47?
you couldnt be more wrong …if you tried.
Next Gen Era never happened Voila Kirk never died, just grew a bit older a bit plumper but can still throw a mean punch and still looks ten years younger than Patrick Stewart anyway. Yes it appears that the only solution is that the whole zeolously left wing next gen era never happened. No synthohol, no androgony. A world where it is ok to have clearly defined villians, ok to appreciate the alure of beautiful women who can be strong women and relish their beauty at the same time, drop kicks and phaser pistols galore!!!!! If it means sacrificing DS9 to the cannon gods to wipe clean the terrible Next Gen era slate then so be it. Perhaps in this Orginal crew, no let’s just call it Star Trek (no more prefixes or suffixes) we can tip the cap to the Next Gen that never happened by saying tachyion 15 times for no apparent reason .
I think it would be interesting to have a prequel that took place when Kirk and Spock first met etc, but it would also be more interesting if that was just part of the overall story, not the entire film.
As much as I love Star Trek TOS, I really don’t want to see Nimoy and Shantner or anyone else from original series in the movie, unless it’s a small cameo.
They are all way past their prime…
Having said that, I don’t want to see two new younger actors trying to mimic the acting of Shantner and Nimoy in the original series either. I think that would be a big mistake!
I’m sure many regulars to this site have already checked on the internet based “Star Trek- The New Voyages”. As much as I admire the effort and work they have put into that series, I can’t help but feel they ended up “lampooing” the original characters by having new actors try to “act” like the orginal cast. It just didn’t work for me…
I hope the new cast and director bring a fresh perspective to the original series, but without changing things so much that similarities to the original series are lost.
By creating and new ship and crew for Star Trek XI, they will have a “logical” place to go in future sequels.
Mike
Well I can say I enjoyed watching a 35 year old Jim Kirk in the TV series, I enjoyed a 40 something Kirk in the early movies and I enjoyed a retiring 50 something Kirk in Trek 6. With good writing, writing that ages the character, I would also love to see the thoughts and reflections of a 73 year old Jim Kirk. The same goes for Spock. Whether or not they are in the entire film or just a small portion, their involvement…with good writing…is most welcome.
The beauty of Trek is that is has allowed these icons to grow gracefully and HASN”T kept them in a bubble…and that is rare in Hollywood. With the changing of a few DVD’s we can see Kirk, played by WIlliam Shatner, as a brash young Captain, a middle aged captian Kirk searching for answers about family and career, a retiring Kirk…forcing the reality of being put out to pasture….and with the next movie, the possibility of an elderly Kirk…still portrayed by William Shatner, with his whole life behind him…..how cool is that? You just don’t get that kind of character development in film….ever.
Those that are against it are either expecting the absurd…a 70 year old Kirk doing drop kicks….or Next Gennies with sour grapes that the 24th century has been jettisoned. Kirk and Spock will be in his movie if JJ has his way, and they WILL create buzz for the movie, both within fandom and within the industry. It’s a good move, and a smart move and people just need to get used to the idea.
…to quote Kor….”it will be glorious.”
Sometimes, I squint my eyes, and I swear I’m at Aint It Cool News! Totally bizarro tangents and rationales abounding… Weird political angling… and for some reason, an utter lack of faith in humanity being able to accept “OLDER” actors as “OLDER” characters! Gah! :(
I hope Abrams has a vision… and I hope he can hold it in his head clearly and translate it to film… I may bitch about things that I disagree with, but I’ll never hold it too much against him, unless he’s totally sailing without a compass.
~
Amen to TomBot2006…. :)
Its is intresting to note here…
Everyone wants to see Shantner and Nimoy as Kirk and Spock in Trek XII. What is even more intresting is how many FANS have accepted the cast of the fan producded New Voyages as legitimate portrayals of Kirk, Spock and McCoy. Their site is only deluged with thousands of e-mails when a new episode is delayed and they have received nothing but positive support from Paramount and the fans.
Obviously Shatner and Nimoy have nothing to say about this production. Its intreresting how Paramount is letting this project go without any legal backlash and the fact they have a lot of support of Trek’s behind-the-scenes people and guest actors, as well as the cast themselves proves that you don’t need Shatner and Nimoy to have a successful Trek.
Kirk, Spock and McCoy? Yes without fail. Shatner and Nimoy. Promotional tools, definately.
Cameos in the new film? I’d like to see that. Portraying old versions of themselves? I don’t care one way or the other.
I enjoyed seeing most of the original cast of Lost In Space in the remake. It was nice to have them there. I didn’t need to see them in their original roles. At their ages it would have boardered on silly. I don’t see how it would be any different in Trek. Nimoy and Shatner are not the spry young things they were even ten years ago. They are starting to show their age badly. Make-up can only do so much and let’s face it, Shatner is not the slim trim Captain we watched for years on the TV and the big screen. While Shatner moves easily on screen as evidenced by his new evening game show on ABC, Nimoy does not demonstrate the same agile mobility. You guys ask for too much in demanding that these actors HAVE TO BE IN THIS FILM.
JJA doesn’t have to do anything you suggest. Paramount can review the script and toss the idea in one fell swoop. The debate again is pointless until the script is finished and Paramount green lights it. That hasn’t even happened yet. All this speculation does is create animosity and causes faractures within what was once a very unified fandom.
You can’t even follow the basic tenants of the show itself by respecting IDIC. You have to come online felling somewhat secure because you don’t have to look any of these other posters in the face. You can come in here, be rude, insulting and post your little post and watch the fireworks.
You call yourself Trek fans. Its insulting to anyone who ever really loved this series and cared about it at all.
What he said… :)
I’m not sure how Shantner and Nimoy could be cast as an older Kirk and Spock in this film. From what I’ve been reading, the new film is to take place in the time frame of the original TV series, or some years before.
I guess the movie could begin with Kird and Spock as old men, and then flashback to earlier times with two new actors playing the younger Kirk and Spock. Who knows, with a clever plot and some creative writing it could work…
There as so many new possibilities for Star Trek XI, but I think it may be more fun to see a new crew in this movie. Shanter and Nimoy would be fine playing Kirk and Spock as older Star Fleet veterans, or better yet, in completely new cameo roles! Who says they have to play Kirk and Spock?
Shatner could be play a highly decorated Fleet admiral that is semi-retired and teaching at the academy. Nimoy could play a completely new Vulcan character, or maybe even better, Nimoy could take off the ears and play a non vulcan character! What a surprise that would be!
Two of the original cast members have already passed. Maybe all the original stars should be cast in small cameos throughout this film. This would be a fun way to pay respects to the original crew and series, and would definately add an “extra buzz” to the upcoming film. It would also be fun to see a young McCoy and Scotty in this film….
So many possibilities! Personally, I just dont want to see the original cast being reassembled yet again to save the universe. It can be so much more fun that that!
Mike :o
#54 Dave, Dave, Dave…..
When it comes to these blogs, nothing annoys me more than a post like yours.
Every Star Trek blog has a person like you that so easily gets offended when they read posts they don’t agree with. So you think you are the only “true” Star Trek fan here? Hogwash!
Being a “true fan” doesn’t mean you have to love everthing about Star Trek, and it sure doesn’t mean you can’t be critical or have differing opinions about the various movies, TV series, books etc.
I for one think the “Star Trek- The New Voyages” are interesting and well made, but sorry to say I’m not a big fan. Does that make me any less a Star Trek fan than you? I’m sure you think so…
There are many people, especially the younger crowd, that really doesn’t care for the original series, but prefers TNG or DS9. Are they any less a Star Trek fans than you are?
I love the original series and have all the DVD’s, but I didn’t care much for the last series “Enterprise”. Is that Star Trek “heresy” because I prefer one series over the other??
I don’t have a Star Trek calendar on my wall, sleep on Star Trek sheets and I hated “Star Trek the animated series!” Does that make me less of a fan than you, and unworthy to write my opinions here in this blog?
Star Trek “fandom” as you call it has always been ‘fractured” and it’s not for you or anyone else in this blog to tell us what we can and can’t say. My opinion is just as valid as yours!
As long as people are friendly on this blog and don’t post rude and insulting things to each other, then all is fine in the Star Trek universe.
So before you write another post like that….let me leave you with the famous words of Bill Shatner from his Saturday Night Live skit…Get A Life!
Mike :o
#54 - IDIC, Schmidic. All that was was a Roddenberry merchandising gimmick inserted into an episode.
Nemoy and Shatner should play Telosians in the new film, complete with the ‘butthead’ headpieces. I know the orignals were played by women but if you can believe in Enterprise series you can believe this to. Anyway they could be the Telosians and lure the Enterprise with a new crew back to Telos 4 and give the crew illusions like those in the Cage and bring the series full circle back to the pilot. And Majel Barrett could be in it as #1in her later years. I don’t have the details work out but this is an idea I got.
FROM THE ARCHIVES - HOW TO BRING BACK KIRK AND SPOCK WITH DIGNITY AND NO CHEAP TRICKS:
58. An olde timey fan - October 9, 2006
John and Dom have a line on what could be a beautful story. Think for a moment of “The Shadowlands” or that wonderful James Garner movie (name escapes me) about his wife who suffers from Alzheimer’s Disease… it made me cry at the end for the sheer tenderness and shock at the denoument. James Garner is in the same league as William Shatner and would be a money-making example of class from Hollywood despite its greedy instincts.
So we open at Kirk’s grave on Earth. Spock, mad with guilt cannot stop blaming himself for his death, “I always knew I would die alone” etc. In fact, Spock has entered a strange form of Vulcan psychosis (haunting? Possession?) in which he mind-melds with the ghost of Kirk (what did they call it in TSFS? “Katra”) and perhaps McCoy and Scotty, too in a fuzzy/blurry nightmare reminiscent of Ebenezer Scrooge on Christmas Eve!
Wham! Spock’s Mind can no longer stand the intensity and he falls, unconscious, onto the grass of the cemetary. A bright light washes out the screen and we are now on the U.S.S. Enterprise warping out of orbit from Talos IV. And the adventure ensues.
70 minutes later, another flash of white light envelops the screen and we see Kirk, McCoy, Scotty and all the rest just as they were in 1969, standing about the bridge of the Enterprise as though time had stopped. They are laughing and smiling and happy to be alive. Even Spock is grining his goofy grin as seen in The Cage.
Wham! Yet a third flash of light and we see Spock, lying in a hospital-like bed, old, decrepit, shaking and gaunt, moaning in agony and yet smiling through clenched teeth. To the side, we see the Keeper and the Theremin music, eery in its electronic, almost but not human tonality, is joined by a soprano voice singing the strange music of Talos IV.
Spock is dead.
Fade to black.
That’s crazy man I don’t mean in a bad way.
#60….no offense, but that is pretty depressing! I think JJ intends to bring the fun and adventure back to Trek, I don’t think they are in the market for such a downer. Not that it’s a bad idea…just probably not the tone that Paramount is probably wanting to establish to re-energize the franchise. Would make a good book though.
Wow…cool but bizarre idea for a movie..kind of reminded me of the end of 2001 the space odyssey.
Here’s another idea for Star Trek XI…when I’m rich and famous I will produce and direct this one myself!
The movie is actually two movies in one…
The beginning of the movie is Shatner and Nimoy in their twilight years. They are very old and grey, and way past the age of every being recalled to save the world in another Trek movie!
Since it’s my movie, I will pay Shanter an extra million bucks just to go without his “toupee” in this film. This in itself should guarantee I make a profit on this flick!
The story continues with Kirk and Spock reminiscing about when they first met at Star Fleet…etc etc etc.
The movie then becomes a flashback and centers on the young stud, “cadet Kirk ” attending Star Fleet Academy. In this part of the story, young Kirk will be back in action with the women, just like in the TV series. Of course I will cast the hottest star fleet babes I can find…
The second story, within this movie, is the launching of the Enterprise with Capt Pike in command with a young Mr Spock as part of his crew. Maybe I will actually show final assembly of the Enterprise- that would be very cool! A young Scotty would be a junior engineer at this point, helping to assemble the ship.
Somewhere between these two stories..Kirk meet Spock…maybe even Bones and Scotty at some alien strip joint/ nightclub.
The story continues with Kirk being assigned to his first ship as a junior officer, as his space adventures begin!
At this point in the movie, I will somehow incorporate the plot from the original pilot “the cage” into this script..
Finally, at the end of the movie, Capt Kirk becomes the new commander of the Enterprise. He requests certain old friends like Spock, McCoy and Scotty to be crewmembers and the rest we already know….
Of course my movie would not be complete without the following: lots of phasers action, both ship phasers and hand phasers, transporter problems, Kirk fighting hand to hand and doing his famour “Kirk Rolls”, shuttlecraft action, subtle comedy, Romulan and Klingon Ship action, Gorns, tribbles and many of the other alien characters from TOS, and finally, internal and external views of the Enterprise we never got to see. Wow!
Also, since I love the original music and score from Star Trek TOS so much, I would remaster all the music in 5.1 surround, and this would be my movie soundtrack…
Mike :o
Get the Starship Enterprise, a little Jerry Goldsmith music, and a rollicking adventure story and you have yourself a great Star Trek movie. It’s not THAT complicated. Well, it is not an easy task, but the formula is known.
Re #57 - Michael John…
First, I am not a “true” Trek fan. You have manged to hang a label on me that doesn’t apply.
What gets my goat is that FANDOM has divided into three (or more) camps.
1 - Won’t see the film unless Shatner and Nimoy are in it and this camp is way too vocal for not having a finished script approved by Paramount and green lit for production.
2 - Those who won’t see if the film if Shatner and Nimoy are in it. Not as vocal as #1 but still highly opinionated.
3 - Those who would be happy with any Trek film that took place with anyone playing the roles, or even set in a different time frame in the Trek Universe.
The camps all get riled up about insignificant issues about a film and story line that has not been given a go by Paramount. Writing a script is not a green light. No money has been put aside. Paramount has put out a poster which hangs in my room, but movies that haven’t been made have gotten posters before. So that means nothing.
JJA may have this “great idea” but again debating the merits of it means nothing until the money has been given over based on the script. So far, no script, no money, no Shatner and no Nimoy. Its pretty simple.
Just for the record… TOS is my favorite of the Trek series. Next Gen was passible and everything else went down hill from there. So I guess I’m not a “true fan” as I don’t forship at the alter of every blasted version of Trek that has been realised. The animated series was thumbs up as far as I’m concerned, so you have my preferences on record.
As a torch carrier for TOS, I’m fine with Kirk’s death. It was Hollywood fluff and until I can pony up the $75 mil it will take to do one of these films I’m not gonna have much of a say in the next story line.
It was more of an insult to me that the key storyline in most Trek films after STII was the severe damaging or destruction of the Enterprise. The Federation flagship is so easily blown up after surviving the perils of a five-year mission? Heck, in Next Gen is survived seven years of galactic pounding and even a trip to another galaxy and kept on going like nothing happened. All it takes is one film to make the ship expendible? Bull crap!
* - Destroyed in Star Trek III
* - Returned in Star Trek IV
* - Barely survived in Star Trek V
* - Decomissioned in ST VI
* - Destroyed in ST VII
* - New ship issued in ST VIII
* - Gets collective butt kicked in ST XI
* - Gets major reaming by Romulans in ST X
If anything needs to be discussed anywhere its about not making the Enterprise the easiest ship to defeat in the Federation. Its about giving the ship its due and making it a little more reliable. The series and movies are about “the Enterprise and her crew…” after all. Without the ship there are no adventures. If I am a true fan of anything, its the Enterprise.
Next time you wanna hang a label, read some prior posts. I haven’t called anyone names. I haven’t hung labels on anyone. I expect the same out of you and others. All I’ve done is said is why argue about it until its been officially announced and for that I get called the most insulting thing in the world… “a true Fan.” What a load of garbage.
xoxo
Dave,
All people are doing is expressing their thoughts, ideas and views on the possible story line of the new movie…Is there something inherently wrong with that?
Can people not post thoughts and ideas about what they think would make a good Star Trek XI film, without offending you?
I don’t think anyone who posts on this site is hoping or expecting that their comments will be read by JJ Abrams or anyone else invovled in the next movie. Gosh we are not all that naive!
Star trek is many things to many people, your view and opinions on the Star Trek universe are just yours. You don’t speak for others, or the “fandom” as you call it.
I myself enjoy reading what others have to say about the past, present and current state of the Star Trek franchise. I find these blogs very entertaining and sometimes hilarious! I could personally care less if one person hates TOS and loves TNG, or is only a fan of Voyager. Does it really matter?
You are the one who made the comment -”You call yourself Trek fans. Its insulting to anyone who ever really loved this series and cared about it at all”
Sounds to be like you are being the judge and jury as to who qualifies as being a “trek fan” or not, and that’s my point. Why be offended or feel insulted because you don’t agree with a post you read here?
Why not just allow people have there say without infering that they are not fans, because you don’t like their opinions and views?
It seems to me that some fans have become too obsessed and sensitive about their beloved Star Trek. I can see that while reading many of the posts on this blog and others.
Mike :o
Ummm,… what was the subject?…
I tend to agree overall with Dave. Josh may play Kirk, for all we know. Shat’s signed to something… but no-one’s said what. I am resigned to whatever part he plays, even advisor, but the smaller the better on screen if this ia a TOS-era story.
The subject in here WAS NOT debating true fandom or the merits of any of the series…or each other.
I am glad JJ has a reverential eye toward Trek’s past and Alumni.
Anthony, can you start a post for the wannabe writers? I cannot write and will admit to it right now. It would be good therapy for some of your posters.
The subject is about the new movie…how fans feel about Shatner and Nimoy being involved…thoughts and ideas about a good story for Star Trek XI etc…
I’MMMMMMMMMMMM Captain Kirrrrrrrrrk!
I’mmmmmmmmmmm captain Kirk!!!!
In a lot of other forums, the topic is usually dictated by the article that starts the topic off. I would guess in this case it should be…
Abrams Gushes Over Nimoy and Shatner
MichaelJohn - you indicated said, “The subject is about the new movie…how fans feel about Shatner and Nimoy being involved…thoughts and ideas about a good story for Star Trek XI etc… ” which just isn’t true. That topic exists in every topic where the posted news has anything to do with STXI. Its not specific to this thread.
For instance to debate all the hot action in this one at the top of the article JJA says, “the involvement of William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy means a great deal to us on many levels, not the least of which is just the respect of who they are and what they do. They are the carriers of this torch and, without being too reverential; we want to show them the kind of appreciation and admiration they deserve.”
That’s a great quote from JJA. Very positive and upbeat. Unfortunately its still vague to the power of ten as to what Shatner and Nimoy’s participation in the film is. Spokesmen? Advertising ringers? Well dressed friends of the Producer? No announcement again on casting. No word on exactly what their participation is on any level.
You can’t take Shatner’s word for anything going on with this production because he has contradicted himself and backpeddled on every statement he’s made in the last two months.
Nimoy’s only made one statement and it was along the lines of I’d like to be involved, or I am involved… but again its too vague.
What’s fun is discussing all the myrid possibilities for this film. Not just the one area which seems to have to involve Shatner and Nimoy being involved. So what if they aren’t? What ideas does everyone have for the film if that comes to pass?
Re #66 - I don’t speak for Trek fandom in any way shape or form. Never have, never will. If I were offended by what I was reading, I wouldn’t be posting at all. I love lots of things and care about them. The list is quite lengthy. Trek does not top it.
There is that labeling thing again. Now I’m the “judge and jury” . All I can say to that is that I was born in 1961. I grew up with this series. I’ve atteneded conventions before the “splintering” of the Trek fans. I’ve attended real conventions before CreationCon took over and made them cash cows and drove real fan run conventions into the ground. I’ve worked in local television and had some level of involvement in TV production with Babylon 5. I also sold an unproduced script to Paramount for STTNG. That doesn’t make me an expert, but when it comes to how Hollywood works I do have a slightly better grasp on that and while I try to temper that against what I read here, it gets a bit frustrating to read the same comments about Shatner and Nimoy over and over and over and over and over and over and over in every new movie article that is posted here.
Its almost like people believe that if they can fill up every topic that is created here with the exact same posts with little variation that they will somehow have convinced the power that be that these ideas are the ones all the fans want to see.
Yeah well… it looks like its about time to drop out of the movie topics. The more interesting conversations that actually manage to have something new to say every time are the TOSR articles.
Its been fun but MichaelJohn’s pat little labels have become annoying.
This is the Judge and Jury for all Trek Fandom signing off.
Some seriously heated debates out there…
From the James Bond recasting issue to Iraq… Did anyone stop to eat Thanksgiving dinner yesterday?? ;)
I just hope we get a good movie. Shatner/ Nimoy not withstanding… True Trek Fans and Fake Trek fans alike can all give thanks that we have another go around at this, with some fresh blood at the helm. Trek has been lackluster for sometime.
I don’t give much credence to falling in the TOS camp/ or the TNG camp, or the DS9 camp… I think all the series had stellar moments, along with moments of really bad acting and stories. ALL of them. With such a huge body of work to draw from, it’s pretty much guaranteed.
I love Star Trek. I grew up watching TOS in reruns in the 70’s and it left an indelible mark on my 10 year old brain. It helped shape many of my beliefs about religion and politics and tolerance. I want to see it continue cause Trek isn’t about Kirk and Spock. It’s about what we as humanity can achieve and aspire to, wrapped up in stories with great characters and conflicts to overcome.
I’ll give any version of Star Trek, in any era, a fair shake. Let’s have some good stories and be relevant!
Doug
It’s ironic none of the other incarnations of Trek have resonated with the collective social consciousness, yet people say Trek isn’t about Kirk and Spock.
How about this then, Star Trek that MATTERS is about Kirk and Spock.
re 73,
That would suggest you simply can’t open your mind to anything beyond what you’re comfortable with. -d
Debate is good and healthy, and many times quite entertaining. It’s obvious everyone here has their own feelings about what Star Trek means to them. For some, the whole subject is very much more serious than it is for me. To each his own.
I remember reading blogs a few months back, when they first announced they were remastering the effects on the original series. Some of the fan reaction and comments, even before the first remastered episode aired, really amazed me. To say there are some passionate Star Trek TOS fans out there is an understatement!
Many feel the Trek series is mainly about the relationship between Kirk and Spock. Others say the heart and soul of Star Trek is the Enterprise ship itself.. For myself, I feel Trek can be any crew, any ship as long as it’s good quality entertainment, and most of all FUN!
I think that’s one of the main reasons the first movie was not a favorite with fans and critics alike. It had the original crew, a cool updated enterprise, and an interesting story. But all in all the film was not very exciting and was not a whole lot of fun to watch. I remember as a kid being so disappointed when I saw the movie in the theater…
Luckily, the next three movies were excellent and they incorporated all the things that made Star Trek TOS so wonderful- great action, great effects, exciting stories, subtle comedy. They were great movies and so much fun to watch!
I think the best thing about the newly remastered episodes, is that it has made the old series, new again. For me it’s almost like watching the old show for the first time. I find it so much fun to search for the new effects and changes in each newly remastered episode, and it’s great to see the episodes so clearly now, as if they were filmed yesterday. I don’t think I’ve ever watched Star Trek TOS as intently as I do now.
Whatever happens with Star Trek XI, I just hope the new movie is great fun and appeals to all Star Trek fans, not just the TOS crowd…
Mike :o
#73 Josh…. get a new song…. this lack of “resonance” of non-TOS Trek speech and it’s variations gets old. Again… why does it keep coming up? Someone else heard news about XI being about TNG or DS9?… No. Just a few wishes.
YOUR opinion about the Social Consciousness is just that, opinion, not fact.
Correct?… A yes or no will be fine.
Hey Josh — good points about Trek’s insinuation in the popular culture. What most everyone forgets when comparing the one, the only Star Trek to the varous spinoffs, is this:
Trek was done BEFORE man landed on the moon. In fact, it was done before man left earth’s orbit. As such, it was ahead of its time — and “making it up as they went along”.
In marketing terms, the spinoff series weren’t really Star Trek per se — they were “brand extensions” designed to garner additional market by leveraging the goodwill of the original. In that regard, TNG et al are “Pepsi Jazz Cherry Vanilla” and “Pepsi One” to the original Pepsi.
However, I think it’s fair to say Herr Berman got too avaricious for our own good and thought in terms of “New Coke” as a complete replacement for “Coca-Cola”.
We all know how both of those bright ideas turned out!
Way back to #1 Denny Crane..
I’ve said this to others…
Your wish for this movie to never happen… isn’t likely to happen. Sounds like it’s moving forward.
So, should we hold a spot in line for you, or just tell you how the movie ends when we come out?
Has anyone heard of any plans or interest from Paramount/CBS, in developing a new Star Trek TV series that would take place during the TOS time period?
I can’t help but think it would be successful and a big money maker, being there as so many TOS fans in the Trek universe.
I’ve read that the Star Trek TOS DVD box sets were big sellers, and there is obviously alot of interest in Star Trek- The New Voyages, as well as the newly remastered episodes. Seems like a “no brainer” that another series based on TOS would be well received and a hit.
I know, I know, it’s all wishful thinking…but I think its at least a possibility. Since the spin offs all lasted around eight seasons, except “Enterprise,” Star Trek TOS deserves another five more seasons on syndicated television. It’s perfectly logical!
Mike :o
Does anyone here know if Paramount/CBS had ever seriously looked into making a new Star Trek TV series, that took place during the TOS time frame?
I can’t help but feel that such a new series would be very successful and a big hit, being there are still so many TOS fans in the Star Trek universe.
With so much interest in Star Trek-The New Voyages, as well as the newly remastered episodes, (not to mention that the TOS dvd box sets sold very well) it would seem “logical” to seriously look into the possibility of a new show based on TOS.
The way I look at it, Star Trek TOS only lasted three years, but TNG, DS9 and Voyager all lasted eight seasons (I think) so TOS still deserves five more seasons on television!
I know, I know…very wishful thinking, but to me it would make more sense to develop on new series based on TOS, than to start from scratch and try to create yet another completely new ST spin off.
By the way, I would much prefer to see a new TV series based on TOS, than another TOS movie. A movie is great, but it’s a one time event. I would much rather have my TOS trek in weekly hour doses..over the course of four or five years!
Keep dreaming!
Mike :o
OOPs..sorry about the double post..thought I lost the first one!
TOS - 3 seasons
TNG - 7 seasons
DS9 - 7 seasons
VOY - 7 seasons
ENT - 4 seasons
Paramount at one time kicked around the idea of another TOS era series and nixed it. Current thought are that fans would not be happy with new sets that did not reflect the garish color schemes of 1960’s television and with thechnology being what it is, there would be very obvious changes in the sets and so on. So for now, the studio is not considering the possibility at all.
# 74 and 76
The truth is rarely popular or widely accepted initially.
As far as my perception being merely opinion, it is evidently a consensus of opinion, which reinforces the notions I postulate.
You can elect to shoot the messenger all you wish, but the message remains clear, and I’ll convey it succinctly and to the point as to not cause undue fatigue in perceiving the message.
DS9 Sucks.
Voyager sucks worse.
Enterprise sucks horrendously.
It’s as simple as that.
Those series were not commercially viable or widely accepted and they most certainly did NOT resonate in any measurable way lest we would be discussing the upcoming movie featuring one of these series, as opposed to how to SAVE a dying franchise choked by the wasteful excess the legacy of those series created.
TNG movies sucked. Badly.
Again, if not we would be discussing the next adventure of Captain baldy frenchman. Not how to save a dying franchise.
Where is the merchandise for these successor series? Where are the continual allusions and references in pop culture? Where are the episodes of Family Guy, or the SImpsons reffering to Janeway or Sisko? Or Odo?
Who the hell cares about Tuvok, Janeway, Archer, or Seven of Nine with the exception of THE most devoted individual?
Enterprise fans couldn’t even mount a successful campaign to save that roasted turd of a series.
TOS fans mounted 3 successful campaigns, including lobbying Ford to re-christen the first shuttle orbiter “Enterprise.”
How is my perception merely an opinion? It sounds a bit like fact to me.
The sooner people accept post TOS Star Trek SUCKS badly, the sooner we can get back to Star Trek that matters.
J.J. Abrams and the new head of Paramount studios evidently gets it.
They aren’t producing another Next Gen movie. Berman was canned.
How much simpler can it be?
That’s fine, people liked Voyager, or Enterprise.
But don’t presume to try to lecture people on how bringing back characters such as Kirk and Spock, the STARS of the series, can in any conceivable way be a BAD thing, in light of the TRIPE that’s tried to pass itself off as “Star Trek” for years now. Sprinkling perfume on a pig doesn’t change the fact it’s a PIG.
Thus endeth the lesson.
#82 Thanks for the post…oh well, I guess I won’t get my wish!
I didn’t realize “Enterprise” lasted longer than TOS, I’m surprised!
Mike :o
Hey Josh..interesting post.
I’m curious to see what others will write in response. As I said in an earlier post, healthy debate is fine as long as we all respect each other opinions, as much as they may “piss us off!”
A few years ago I was in Las Vegas and made sure I visited the Star Trek Experience at the Hilton Hotel.
Overall, I thought it was very well done, but was I the only one that thought it was too geared to TNG? The two rides and all the sets seem to be copied from the TNG series, and I was disappointed not to see some recreations from TOS. Maybe it has changed since then, but I do wish TOS had a more prominent role in that exhibition.
Also, if I’m not mistaken, I’ve seen a pole on Startrek.com that asked fans to rate their favorite Star Trek shows. Very surprisingly, TOS came in far behind TNG and DS9 in this pole. Can this be true?
I’ve hought that the original, the inspiration for all the other series, would always be the most popular with fans. Maybe I’m wrong…
I find that sad and disappointing if it’s true. I really do like watching the other spin off series..but long live TOS!
Mike :o
The bottom line is Josh (#83 et al.)… is right.
Although I don’t agree with Josh in his appraisal that everything else other than the original series and it’s feature film legacy sucked, I do agree wholeheartedly with his observations about the current state of Star Trek and the necessity to find that “lightning in a bottle” again.
And I agree when he says that Kirk and Spock and/or Shatner and Nimoy are integral… No, that they are absolutely critical to create that specific electrical charge… if only to jump start Star Trek in a new (and old) direction.
Star Trek is at best on life support and the prognosis for a long and healthy life is in serious doubt.
Dr. Roddenberry gave birth to this amazing idea and he enlisted other practitioners to help it grow… Coon, Fontana, Jeffries, Shatner, Nimoy, Kelley… the list of attendants is huge (so forgive me for not mentioning more of them.)
When this creation was ready to graduate from the small screen to the big screen other specialists were brought in to consult… Wise, Trumbull, Bennett, Meyer… again, a huge and talented list.
Like all things in life when there is success and prosperity there is the desire for progeny. And although Dr. Roddenberry was instrumental in setting the foundation of the first child, Dr. Berman was largely responsible for raising that child and the subsequent births of TNG’s siblings.
Now I’m not gonna knock everything about TNG, DS9, Voyager and Enterprise because I enjoyed aspects of all of the them. And I’m not gonna knock Dr. Berman because he did some good work too. And he introduced us to some very talented practitioners and interns that, for the most part, made me feel like I was part of the universe I had been introduced to in 1966.
But to be honest… even at their best those offspring were still in a mighty big shadow. I say that not because I don’t think they had their merits and were entertaining (?!?) I say that because TOS was so damn good.
The thing about TOS is it was the first… it was original… It gave us delightful, adventurous stories… with iconic, dramatic characters… with thoughtful, wondrous ideas. Even though it is in some ways dated, there is this marvelous timelessness about it. It was the template… the standard bearer for science fiction on television. Moreover, it made us feel like everything was in front of us… it made us aspire.
Wouldn’t it be great to be as brave and heroic as Kirk? As smart and cool as Spock? As warm and gentile as McCoy? That crew and that ship held the best of what we might want to be. And on top of it all, they were fun! God, they were entertaining and joyful and inspiring and… just great fun!
All these things made TOS part of our cultural lexicon… it inserted TOS into a global “zeitgeist”… it elevated TOS to the status of ubiquitous. However one may think that TNG or DS9 or Voyager or Enterprise resonated… none have resonated like the original series. None.
To continue the medical metaphor… Maybe Dr. Berman’s nursery had too many kids running around and he was more worried about the nursery than the kids. Maybe Star Trek’s offspring became a little too self involved and they forgot about some of the lessons TOS tried to teach. Maybe like most creations they are simply products of the times they are born to. I dunno.
What I do know is that J.J. Abrams is a fine doctor. He understands character and story. He understands how to create fiction that entertains, makes us think and very often makes our breath hitch. He understands that if he is going to deliver a new creation that has an old name, he’d better have whatever elements are available to bring validity to using that name.
So, if the rumors are true and Shatner and Nimoy are to be part of Star Trek XI, I hope that Dr. Abrams delivers this new offspring with a spirited passion for possibilities… with a literary and learned deftness of touch… with a commanding scope of cinema. And with a respect for the doctors that preceded him.
Oh, and Josh… It’s not necessarily a bad thing to put perfume on a pig. They have feelings, too. Besides, smelling good helps the delusion… errr, I meant illusion.
#83…I knew he couldn’t say yes or no or refrain from breaking out the thesaurus. Josh, it’s likely you are surprised to hear that every word was understood… but you didn’t answer my question. Read the post and try again.
And be to the point please.
re post 83… What do you have against pigs anyway…
Josh. People who assume that their opinions represent the majority, and then denounce the subject of an opposing opinion as crap, really don’t offer any objective criticism at all.
I accept that Kirk and Spock exist in the “cultural zeitgiest” of our times, because it’s true. Not everything that is good becomes iconic. Spiderman is iconic and sometimes it sucks. I can name hundreds of brilliant movies, books, TV shows and comics that no one has ever heard of. But I can also judge a body of work completely. DS9 had moments of brilliance. I would wager that TNG has at least an equally vocal fan base to classic. I wonder if there are numbers to support it anywhere.
I think you’re arguments are poorly formed and a little nasty. If I were to use your type of argument, I would remind you that TOS was cancelled, while TNG, DS9 and VOY went on for 7 successful years. (I couldn’t stand Enterprise personally and that outlasted TOS), but I’d like to know how you consider 25 collective seasons of the other four series as being commercially unviable??? I’d say that’s a fairly astounding commercial success.
Let’s also consider that if Kirk/ Shatner is the saving grace for the franchise, then why do you think Generations sucked. He’s in it. Must be great? Let’s not forget that Star Trek 5 was pretty bad too, and while we’re at I think First Contact was fantastic.
You resort to blanketly denouncing everything outside of your point of view as crap or turd. I barely know why I’m wasting my time in responding to your post. It’s clear you are incapable of reasonably arguing when you are fanatically devoted to one take on a concept.
You’re entitled to prefer TOS and characters, I personally love it too, but you don’t even come close to offering any objective insight on the subject.
Doug
post #83 and many others…
Josh,
First, you need to understand that your condescending attitude in many posts is insulting. But, I suspect you know this and have your reason. But that reason is wrong, please bring it back to a civil tone.
Your opinion is just that, yours. I saw no election that voted you to speak for a segment of fans. The same goes for me.
In my opinion, each series has it’s moments, none were perfect… you need not respond to that… We all know your opinion of the four other series. You have repeated that opinion over and over again, even when un-prompted. I’ll expect you to write a novel when the thread is about the other four series.
Don’t get me wrong… I like TOS. I like Shatner and Nimoy, but I believe their participation in XI, if on screen, should be small. If this is an early TOS film (all evidence supports that) they shouldn’t be on screen long anyway for all the obvious reasons.
And that brings me to my question… again.
This thread is about Shatner and Nimoy, and JJ’s TOS movie.
Why do you continue to trash the other series in this type of forum? It’s NOT a TNG, DS9, VOY or ENT Movie. We all know that. We also all know your dislike of those series. Why hammer on it? Running out of things to say? I am not sure if I have ever heard you mention if you even watched any of these shows for more than one episode.
Were mistakes made? Sure. Bad Scripts? Sure. But some good stories happened. Awards were won and most importantly, people were entertained in a thought provoking way most times. However, we will always disagree on what we like.
I won’t debate the resonance of Star Trek. I agree with it. But I’ll remind you that TOS had 40+ years of episodes and movies continually rerunning on stations worldwide that the younger sister series didn’t enjoy. Think that helps the resonance? A repeated message is the most memorable. My adult children grew up with TNG and have no problem understanding that “… resistance is futile” or what a reference to “number one” is about. A coworkers password into her computer is Dominion.
If one of your “culturally significant” benchmarks is a mention on the “Family Guy”, that speaks volumes.
The return of the TOS “old days” in a movie isn’t so much of a surprise. It’s the most widely known crew and situations for the reasons stated above. Plus it was good story telling for the most part, despite the space-ameoba and salt-vampire.
I await the answer to my question. And please be to the point.
MichaelT
Doug,
I see you are having fun too.
Pardon the off-topic
re 90 - Well, really I am, I keep coming back to these blogs for more! best, d
Poor Josh, he really gets it on here sometimes, but I personally hopes he keeps posting, as some of his stuff has been fun and thoughtful to my mind. And his opinions are as relevant or not, as worthless or not, and as unimportant or not as mine and everyone else’s here not connected with the Trek franchise. Variety is the spice of life, and that’s what makes this site a good one.
MichaelT, I personally LOVED the space-ameoba and salt vampire as a kid…but your “Josh may play Kirk, for all we know” conjecture cracked me up, as did your equally witty “Spartacus” reference Josh.
Wow, look how passionate people get about Kirk’s return. This is the one topic sure to ignite all of Star Trek fandom.
MichaelIT:
You really can’t compare TOS being cancelled to the later versions of ST poor ratings and general commercial failure.
TOS was the one that set off the cultural phenomenon. It’s popularity grew while in syndication. Surely, you are not arguing that the other series are as popular or iconic as the original?
Most people could not name a character from the other series. Kirk and Spock are as well known as James Bond and Indiana Jones. That’s why JJA wants them back in ST XI.
I’m sure the studio would love to do a ST XI with the cheaper cast of DS9,Voy,TNG and ENT. But the fact of the matter is that TOS is the only commercially viable property in the Star Trek universe.
Mr Shatner’s return (as Kirk) would go a long way to bringing the fans back to the series. TOS along with Kirk and Spock are easily the most recognizable characters and series. There is no doubt about that.
I for one would welcome Mr Shatner and Nimoy back as their legendary characters. I think the vast majority of Star Trek (and the general public)fans would as well.
re post 94
First - To be clear… I don’t think anyone is arguing that Kirk and Spock aren’t well recognized icons, I’m not sure how anyone is inferring that from my post or Michael T’s…
Second - 25 seasons of Trek in no way constitutes a commercial failure. How are you guys coming up with that?? The simple fact is, towards the end, they were making very mediocre TV and movies, and therefore, towards the end, the ratings and box office takes clearly reflected that. The last 2 movies, and Enterprise fared poorly… TNG, DS9 and VOY were pretty darn successful.
Third - You’re right, you can’t compare TOS being cancelled to later versions of Trek, because TV in the 60’s and TV of the last 15 years bear absolutely no resemblance to eachother in terms of the amount of programming and competition for viewers.
Fourth - James Bond has been recast at least 5 times, and is still pretty damn successful. (meaning it doesn’t have to be Shatner for this to work)
Finally, I want Star Trek to succeed too. I’m excited by the new blood being introduced into the franchise. I’m excited by the recasting of the TOS characters and hope it’s good. I’ll also be excited to see Shatner and Nimoy reprise those roles as a passing of the torch to the new cast.
Doug
Carol,
I didn’t even mention Trek’s cancellation. And I did say I was fine with Shatner and Nimoy’s return (like any of us have a say..).
My quote from above…
“… I like TOS. I like Shatner and Nimoy, but I believe their participation in XI, if on screen, should be small. If this is an early TOS film (all evidence supports that) they shouldn’t be on screen long anyway for all the obvious reasons.”
Please go back and re-read my post…. and Doug’s (#95). He was very eloquent and I agree with him on this.
I am not suggesting this film be anything other than what it looks like… an early TOS film. Again a quote…
“The return of the TOS “old days” in a movie isn’t so much of a surprise. It’s the most widely known crew and situations for the reasons stated above. (in the post) Plus it was good story telling for the most part, despite the space-ameoba and salt-vampire.
I respect your questions on my post, and perhaps I wasn’t clear. Hopefully this clarified it for you.
Dave… Dam good post.
Pardon me… how’d I get Litenbug’s name?
Anyway, #96 was MichaelT’s post
Michael, quit impersonating me… LOL
I also agree with Dave.
I want to point out that we all have passions regarding Trek. Some, like me, like it all… the whole universe, some like one part, such as TOS. Thankfully, only a few people on these threads seem to cast extreme negativity on the parts they dislike and trash people they disagree with. It’s unjustified and those comments don’t belong here. It’s all about opinions…yours and respecting the opinions of others.
Josh # 83
I could not have said it better myself. You were on point with every statement.
Good job.
They can use same technology that made Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellan appear younger in X-Men: The Last Stand.
Or even better:
They could digitally paste 30 y.o. Shatner and Nimoy’s image over younger actors.
We could get new Star Trek movies forever!!!