Stewart: Star Trek Was A ‘Calamity’ February 14, 2007
by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: TNG , trackback
Patrick Stewart seems to be continuing to distance himself from Star Trek and Jean Luc Picard. In an interview with The Stage, the veteran actor talks about the life changing event in 1986 when he choose to do Star Trek: The Next Generation instead of taking a role in "Who’s Afraid of Virginia Wolf" on the London stage.
I was a different actor after that — doing that kind of play, and finally being able to make truth of an emotional commitment to a role like that in such a small, exposing theatre, with the support of three magnificent actors [Billie Whitelaw, Saskia Reeves and Matthew Marsh], made all the difference to me. The calamity that then happened to me was that I was offered Star Trek: The Next Generation. […]It did change many, many things, and I’m immensely grateful for that. I have worked hard not in any sense to feel they were wasted years —though time is a factor in all of this, and I now have a lot of catching up to do. I feel that acutely — not that there have been lost opportunities, but that there are things I might have done and I’ve got to do a lot of them quickly now.
In recent years Stewart has re-embraced his work as a theatrical actor, including working with the Royal Shakespeare Company. Before the announcement of the TOS prequel based Star Trek XI there was some talk about yet another TNG film, but Stewart has stated that he has "hung up his spacesuit." Last June when asked if he wanted to be in another Trek film Stewart replied that Trek was "like a romantic relationship that is over" to him. Although he said he hadn’t ruled it out entirely, Stewart noted that he "didn’t think it would happen." It may be that the last time Stewart will portray Jean Luc Picard will be the recent video game Star Trek Legacy, to which he supplied some voice work.
Loading ...
Comments»
I don’t know … seems a little ungrateful to me.
oh … and FIRST!
I guess his interest might perk up if the right script ($$$) was offered.
To me, it really seems like he’s done with Trek. I was actually quite surprised that he even did voice-work for Legacy.
Can I say anything or will Dr. Adams censor me with his post-opinion – free speech neural neutralizer???
The “romantic relationship” analogy is accurate; I’ve used it myself to describe a number of my own creative endeavors. I don’t think Stewart is ungrateful at all; it’s just that he’s entitled to pursue other opportunities and areas of creativity/expertise. I’m sure that he personally values the experience of Star Trek. Just because he doesn’t say so, in so many words, shouldn’t rule it out.
I don’t blame him….Many people end up wanting to do different things with their lives. I didn’t get the idea he was ungrateful, just eager to do other things. Anyway, It’s hard to know anyone’s true feelings from reading an interview, so I wouldn’t place too much stock in anything some actor says in print.
And for that matter, I’ve seen plenty of Captain Picard. Never really cared for that character or for the actor’s portrayal anyway.
Man sounds reasonable.
Acting, even if you’re a starship commander, is a job. Makes sense to me.
I don’t think he’s ungrateful….I simply think he meant that being tied up playing Picard for alot of years tied his hands as far as other projects are concerned.
Also, I’ve noticed that he caters his feelings toward Trek based on who’s interviewing him, so take this with a grain of salt.
I doubt Stewart would pass up the opportunity to do more voice work for Trek. Usually that can be done without traveling to Hollywood and it is much smaller exposure. Yes, we may have seen the last of a flesh and blood Jean Luc Picard, but “there are always possiblities.”
Ah, I wouldn’t get my tail feathers in a ruffle… don’t you remember how Shatner and Nimoy tried to distance themselves from Trek? They’re actors who want to be able to work on things OTHER than Trek projects… but they eventually come to a place where they realized that they were forever going to be associated with the Trek universe and that it was okay…
He’ll come around once he stops fighting it.
I think he’s very sensible. I wish more Trek actors could see the sense in moving on. Patrick Stewart is a fine actor and, to carry on playing his great stage roles, he needs to distance himself from Star Trek.
When you read about people like Marina Sirtis complaining endlessly about not being in Trek you want to scream. She’s made herself a one-trick pony.
Look at Gillian Anderson: nine series of The X-Files and one X-Files film, followed by British theatre work and a gobsmackingly brilliant performance as Lady Dedlock in Bleak House.
William Shatner didn’t stick with Jim Kirk forever: he played loads of guest roles and played TJ Hooker through the 1980s in the regular series and films, while playing Kirk on the big screen.
Thank you Patrick Stewart for everything you contributed to Star Trek. TNG isn’t my favourite version of Trek, but you gave it class.
The problem lies with his use of the word “calamity.” It seems to imply that he felt accepting the role of Picard was a mistake. Since this is just a small segment of an obviously larger interview, there may be some context missing. Furthermore, having seen and read many other interviews with Stewart, I’ve never come away with the feeling that he regrets being part of Trek. He’s always been appreciative of the fact that Trek made him an international superstar.
Patrick Stewart’s first love has always been the stage. He is, first and foremost, a thater actor, and he must look back to those years and see some missed opportunities. Seems rather natural to me, actually. So, I don’t think he’s being disparaging toward Trek, rather he was thinking about some things that might have been. No big whup.
Who doesn’t regret that we can’t do enough things in the time we have? Stewart is just realizing he’s too old to do a lot of the roles he wishes he’d done and that TNG took a lot of time he can’t get back. He does say he’s grateful for TNG, but it dominated his schedule for a lot of years. A LOT more years than Shatner spent on Trek.
The UK tabloid headline version – “Stewart to Trekkies: SCREW YOU!”
Kinda sad and kinda funny. So, when’re the “Amok Time” photos gonna start leaking out?
He doesn’t say at all that Star Trek was a calamity.
He seems to say that being offered a roll that was on a different career path was calamitous to the path he was currently on. He goes on to say that the TNG years weren’t wasted and that there haven’t been any wasted opportunities. In fact, I bet the reverse is true: he’s probably had more opportunities because of TNG.
He’s either too rich to care, or playing this angle up to increase his pricetag if he ever does get the call.
He was great, and it would be a shame if TNG were thoughtfully brought back, and JLP wasn’t there to command.
I feel as though either Stewart might have said this better, or we might have to listen more closely to what he’s trying to say. The choice of headline is certainly misleading. He’s not saying Star Trek was a calamity. He’s saying he’s always been of two minds about committing himself to a longterm TV project (yucky American TV at that) which took him from his first love, the London stage.
(My eye just now glanced up to 17 – Kirkunit — YES!)
Once again, creative people aren’t like many people. They speak in very romanticized and idealized terms. I’m a writer and often say things in a dramatic way that makes people take a half step back.
In season one, ONLY Stewart and to a lesser degree Burton and Spiner held my interest on screen. The others grew as actors around Stewart. I understand if Stewart has some regrets. He’s a thespian!
Calamity to a stage actor. That’s where his heart is. TNG simply lasted longer than he had imagined, and his sense of loyalty kept him from quitting long ago… and yes, probably his paycheck.
As for myself, I wanted to see a movie with Will Ryker in command of the Titan. Why can’t we go there? We have pretty much missed the chance to see Captain Sulu movies. Why can’t we have more variety?
I always got the impression he was more of a stage actor from the way he posed and shouted his lines.
Have any of you noticed a distinct change in Patrick Stewart’s performance of Jean-Luc Picard starting during TNG’s 3rd season? I don’t know if it was a change in the show’s writing, or Stewart’s acting (or a combination of both) but the show never really cmae together for me until its third season- and my opinion is that Stewart remade his approach to the character during the show’s 3rd year.
My point being that without Stewart’s contribution, TNG would have suffered and probably not had been as successful. While I prefer TOS by a large margin, I appreciate Stewart’s contributions to the franchise. He had some brilliant moments within those 7 seasons. As fans, we ought to respect his efforts, even in spite of his personal issues with Trek.
Yeah. I agree with that Jon (21). Sometimes, I wonder if much of the dreadful dialogue and stilted acting in post-1987 Trek was the result of writers and actors trying to imitiate Stewart, but lacking his talent.
Personally, I think TNG should have carried on on TV, rather than go to movies. Picard could have been promoted, so Stewart could have moved to a guest role, along with some of the other actors, the Enterprise-D could still have been replaced with a new ship and, gradually, an all-new cast could have emerged, as happens with most ensemble shows!
I didn’t take offense at what he said…sounded reasonable to me.
Then again, I am not an anal retentive Trek geek looking to get my knickers in a knot at the slightest comment. ;-)
TTM
Get over yourself for Christ’s sake.
You play make believe for a living and get paid very,very well for it.
Just think what a “calamity” it would be if he had to get a real job and be paid real money.
My heart bleeds for his calamitous situation.
I wonder if the headline to this article had not included the word “calamity” if some people might have gleaned something quite different from it. Having that in the headline sets the tone for what attitude the reader might take while reading it. If the headline had taken another line of his from above, such as “Stewart Grateful To Trek” the entire article would be taken by many readers in a whole different light.
I dont see Stewart as being negative or ungrateful in this article. True, he does seem to have distanced himself from Trek in recent years, but I bet he’d jump at the chance to play Picard again, if the offer came along…
#22 — I think you’re right. Right around then Picard became less of a caricature of a stalwart captain, and more of a well-rounded character.
Stewart rightly admitted he’s “immensely grateful” to have had the career he’s had. I’m sure he’s aware that so many talented actors never even get a shot at success, let alone stardom. It’s just human nature to imagine the road not taken.
For those of us who saw him on British TV in the 1970s, the shock when we found out he was the new Captain can never be recaptured
29 – Yes. Sejanus went bald! That was a shock!
http://home.comcast.net/~sinalco05/2005/graphics/sejanus2.jpg
Like anything I’m sure there are days when he regrets choices he’s made and other days where he’s embraced them. He’s only speaking like an *actor* after all.
Capital “E”
Capital “G”
Capital “O”
What’s that spell?
Patrick Stewart!
It’s been nice knowing you. C-YA!
TNG a calamity? Sure, I can agree with that.
I don’t think he’s ungreatful. That role did wonders for his career. He was ready to play the role again after Nemisis. I think he’s just accepted that there won’t be another TNG movie. Much the same way when a relationship ends. You enjoyed it, but when it’s over you have to except it.
I think the article title might be misleading. The “calamity” was that he strayed from what had always made him happy. He’s never stated he regrets or resents his star trek work.
To me, Picard & Stewart epitomizes what star trek is all about. I’ll forever have for the utmost respect for the character & the man. Though the “relationship” is over, it’s lessons have changed me. And I think that was the core point of Star Trek anyway.
I hope the new star trek movie can give me a part of that too.
Well, if ST: Legacy is the last act for Picard, that would at least give the game some value beyond that of a coaster.
I think those high-principled, theatre-actor values will go right out the door if the payday is big enough. Let’s hope he’s never offered millions to don the spacesuit again for a performance that is phoned in. (Nemesis anyone?)
This guy would be nothing without Star Trek. He ought to kiss Bob Justman’s feet and shut the *#@% up.
You people are NUTS. He wasn’t being insulting…at…all.
jeebus!!!
Personally, I think Patrick Stewart brought acting genius to the role of Picard and would credit he alone with over half of TNG’s overall appeal and success. He brought intellect, class, maturity, weight, wisdom, authority, brilliance and superb subtlety to the role of Picard. And, over the course of 7 seasons, he took that role and honed it and tweaked it and refined it to ever-greater levels of perfection.
In his best moments, he made Picard positively god-like.
Now, now, I think TNG was a fine show, and there were many terrific things about it, including the cast. When TNG first came on, I was put off more by the “stiffness” of the performances, but, in time, the actors really got into character, and those characters became part of memorable Trek lore.
I think when you have a group of people spending the better part of their daily lives together (in this case over the course of 7 years), those people become “tight”, like a rock-band does. And when those people are suddenly done with that 7 year marriage, I can surely imagine them feeling some sense of loss, and even emptiness. One’s reaction to this can manifest in all sorts of ways… which is why they may, at times, sound flippant about things.
But, as an ensemble, they worked well together, and did some great work together.
Buckaroohawk and THEETrekMaster, thank you for saying what needs to be said.
Picard is a character, an inspiring one to me on many levels, but a fictional person.
Patrick Stewart is an acclaimed theatre actor. A man of his talents knows that he cannot grow artistically or professionally by doing the same job, over and over ….
Read the article again. Stewart said he was immensely grateful for his work in Trek, but he needed to move onto other challenges.
Just my 2 Lincolns.
I dunno – it sounds to me like he’s ungrateful only because he talks about what opportunities he’s lost. If he were truly grateful he’d be glad for what it did for him instead of lamenting the things he couldn’t do and now has to hurry up to do.
Predictable responses…
I’ll be sure to keep a look out for his upcoming tell all book, “I am not Picard”
Patrick Stewart is one of the best things that ever happened to Star Trek.
#31 – I’m not sure, but isn’t Stewart wearing a wig in the picture of Sejanus? I remember reading an interview with Stewart once, and he said he went bald when he was 17 or 19 years old (don’t remember which.) It’s not surprising that a fairly young man would wear a wig out of vanity and/or being required by the role he was playing.
Shellhead1 (#43) Are you saying that you’ve never, ever in your life thought, “I wonder what things would be like if I’d done this instead of that?” or “I’m glad I had this opportunity, but I’m sorry I missed THAT one.”? If you say you haven’t, you’re either deluding yourself or you’re still too young to have reached such a point in your life. If it hasn’t happened yet, believe me, it will.
bdrcarter (#38) Patrick Stewart was a well-respected and noted theater actor in England and Europe before taking the role of Picard. All that did was put him into a huge international spotlight. He would have been successful without Trek, as would many other Trek actors. Furthermore, he was repsonding to a legitimate question from an interviewer. Nothing in the segment above shows any animosity toward Trek or its fans, why do you have so much toward him? He’s not the one who needs to shut up.
VOODOO (#25) Actors get paid what studios and theaters are willing to pay them, and their job is as real as anyone else’s. The final product may be a fiction or a fantasy to us, but filmmaking ain’t easy, not by a long shot. Weeks of auditions, pre-production meetings and rehearsals, 16 hour days, six days a week, for maybe months at a time. Up before dawn, done well after sunset (or later). Additional shooting, re-shooting, FX work, hours in a make-up chair where you’re unable to move. Shooting the same scene, over and over, for an entire day. Post-production, still photography, interviews, and publicity tours. High profile actors do get paid well, no doubt about it, but if you think that they don’t earn it, then you’re just plain ignorant. Give it a try for a year or two, or 10 or 15, (if you can even get an acting career started, that is) then come back and tell us that YOU are overpaid.
No one needs Captain baldy Frenchman anyway.
“We surrender!”
[...] Stewart: Star Trek Was A ‘Calamity’ | TrekMovie.com Patrick Stewart seems to be continuing to distance himself from Star Trek and Jean Luc Picard. In an interview with The Stage, the veteran actor talks about the life changing event in 1986 when he choose to do Star Trek: The Next Generation instead of tak (tags: startrek scifi tv) [...]
Here’s another actor who’s full of shit about how trek hurt him. This guy had nothing but bit parts in sci-fi movies like Dune and Excalibur, and now he has bit parts in “X-Men”. Listen Stewart, you got to do a one man show of the Christmas Carol. Be happy anyone sat through it, you hack. TNG made yo a sex symbol for christ sake. How often does that happen to a short bald man who can’t get a job?
Amen Mark, Stewart was relegated to the status of supporting players prior to Next Gen.
I personally can’t stand the character, but regardless of what one thinks of the character of Picard, Stewarts self righteous indignation merely reinforces how someone that refers to himself in the third person routinely is a farce and prima donna undeserving of the celebrity and status afforded to him. There have been many anecdotes over the years sneaking out of the soundstages about this Pompous Brit that thinks he’s Gods gift to acting.
Stewarts best roles were from Excalibur and Dune, the man doesn’t have the presence to be a leading actor. He’s a character actor through and through, and a questionable one at that.
45 – Yeah, it looks like a rug. Good role for him, though. By the time Excalibur and Lady Anne rolled around, he was Picardesque in the pate.
Patrick Stewart (and Jon Frakes, for that matter), since the end of the TNG series, has seemed as though he considers himself above the whole Trek thing. I can’t help but think that if they’d taken the Trek films at least a little bit more seriously, they might have turned out better.
(or, maybe bacause the writing was so bad, and the constraints from Berman and Paramount killed the films in utero, such that Stewart had to let it roll off his back in order to not become stressed about something that was beyond his control.)
I am amazed and pleased that MOST of the comments seemed sane and could actually read the words written, instead of seeing what they wanted to see.
#50 Josh….. gee… replace a few words in there and you have Shatner.
#49 mark…. you sure told him. Does he read this site too?
Anytime we get a TNG actor story..Slam!
A few minds close rapidly and all we hear is how awful they were.
I think it’s normal that Stewart wants to move on with his acting career and return to his roots in theatre.
Obviously playing Picard for a decade gave him steady work and great money, but he must have worried about being permanently typecast. I think most actors fear being out of work, as much as being typecast and remembered for playing only one role or character.
But I wonder…if five years from now Paramount offers him another multi-million dollar pay day to don his spacesuit and play Picard again, will he really say no? Maybe so if he doesn’t need the money, but time will tell…..
Mike :o
It always seems there’s a thread available here for the gang to get together and bash TNG cast members.
The headline is utterly misleading. Like a Fox News headline.
RE: #47…BTW both of my Grandfathers were part French and WWII veterans, one purple heart, one dead in the war. So, just so everyone knows, I really appreciated reading that comment.
#53
On the contrary Xai, take note, Shatner has never ONCE, once in 40 years said anything derogatory about his affiliation with Star Trek. Not once.
People jumped all over the Saturday Night Liver skit as though Shatner was being serious, when in reality, Shatner always took a very serious approach to his participation in Star Trek, and was readily available any, and everytime another venture was being planned or discussed. You never once read anything about The Shat not wanting to be involved, unlike his partner in crime Nimoy.
Based on everything I’ve ever read about Star Trek, from day one being toured on the set the Shat genuinely believed in Star Trek and wanted it to excell.
As far as being a Prima Donna and over the top world class Ham, that’s the fundamental difference between Shatner and Stewart, Shatner has never once pretended to be anything other than what he is and has made an industry out of his camp and cult status, Stewart would have you believe he is Sir Lawrence Olivier and everyone should bow before his acting prowess when in reality the man can’t do happy or ecstatic worth a damn, his anger comes off as forced and unnatural as well.
Shatner didn’t bite the hand that fed him and recognized Star Trek was his mealticket and his fans were the reason he isn’t still eating fruit salad at Kresges in Ontario, Stewart reluctantly took the part of Picard and always felt he was above it.
# 55
That’s why you should never assume, it makes an ass out of you.
The reference to surrendering wasn’t a reference to the sterotype of Frenchmen, but rather to Picards first act we see in Encounter at Farpoint as Captain, is to SURRENDER. Definately inspired leadership.
#57
Wow. Now I feel like I’m back blogging on Powerline and Drudge Report.
Explain it all you like. You were talking about more than Trek in that post.
Why would I?
Just because you want to twist and spin the statement doesn’t take away from my intention behind it and what I ultimately meant, and I certainly don’t need or require your misguided political sensibilities to presume to lecture me on what constitutes analogies or inference.
I know what I meant and that is good enough for ME.
get a room you two
re: headline
i was just going with the same headline as the cited source…but thank you all for your editing advice!
No need for a room, evidently some Next Gen fans are pissy their hero has turned his back on them and they feel the need to vent by conjuring up correlations where none exist.
I’d like to openly say I like TNG and Picard. Not necessarily love, but like and respect. Stewart did a great job in the role. I didn’t like what stewart said in this interview. That’s not TNG bashing, so get over it.
he was an invisible actor with an undistinguished career,just 2 years before TNG,he was appearing in Cannon Films(makers of those awful Chuck Norris movies) garbage like Lifeforce,and people didn’t even notice he was in Excalibur.If it wasn’t for Trek,he’d still be nowhere.
invisible actor? He was in The royal shakespeare company and the royal National theater pre-Trek. That might not be big in the video stores of America but for an Actor in Europe that is the ultimate.
You really have no effing clue what you are talking about, do you….
He has also been quoted as saying this re:Trek…
“It was almost entirely a blessing. It introduced me to a world I never expected to be a part of — celebrity, fame, financial success. It also gave me the chance to work with the finest group of people I’ve ever known.”
I have always liked the quality of Stewart’s acting although again somewhat theateresque (why TNG had a strong #1?).
If only Billy Crystal hadn’t turned down the part before Stewart and Gil Gerard….
I thought Patrick Stewart was great as Picard, particularly (as another poster said) after the third season.
Another fantastic idea brought up in this thread would have been to continue TNG and phase out the actors while bringing in new actors. Look at the long time success of ER which has done exactly that. This would have given “the next generation” moniker relevance. Very interesting idea that.
Well, it is what it is. I do hope someday to see another TNG film. But it’s got to be good, and let’s keep the actors away from writing and directing. Stewart is at his best acting.
Doug
Star Trek (real Trek, not the disassociated approach that was Enterprise) needs to return to television. Star Trek is at its heart a TV show. I agree with #67 that they could have done something akin to ER with TNG years ago. But that ship may have left Spacedock. Whatever this new movie does for the franchise, I hope that renewed interest in Trek translates into a new show.
Perception is such a funny thing…
I got no sense that Stewart was “dissing” his time with Star Trek. Any interview I’ve ever seen or read with him, he has always been grateful about the opportunities, exposure, and good will that Jean Luc Picard has brought him.
His choice of the word “calamity” might have been ill-advised… certainly within the context of this forum. However, if anything negative might be trolled from the snippet posted, perhaps he was overly wistful about the road not taken.
Most people when they reach a certain age… when they realize there is less time in front of them than behind… often reflect about the choices they’ve made. Should I have gone left instead of right? Zig or zag? I should have gotten the veal instead of chicken… Damn!
My guess is Anthony was bored and thought, “Mmmm, how can I stoke the matter/anti-matter pile?” Well, I hope your proud of yourself, mister! Can’t wait to see what you put up about Social Security reform or foreign oil dependency. ;)
I feel like Stewart thinks that his time with ST has possibly diminished his image in the minds of some of the serious theater critics and devotees., and that had he stayed with it he might have had more stage roles that were serious. But he still recognizes the opportunities the recognition has brought him.
Maybe calamity was the wrong choice of words, too easily lifted out of context (as the article title did, for example) and made to look as if he regrets it.
I think he meant that it simply was an upheaval of his plans, that worked out well overall, but made havoc of his dreams of accomplishing stage drama over that period of time.
64,what are you,his agent?if he was any good,he would have continued to work in quality productions after I,Claudius instead of junk like Lifeforce.He lacks range,I just realized I’ve never been moved by any of his performances,he’s a barely competent stage actor that got lucky with TNG.
Why does Trek leave a bad taste in his mouth? See this link: (Warning: language, though I don’t believe that’ll affect this group that much):
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Nemesis/Pictorial-1.html
I feel a realllllllly snide remark coming on but no why waste it. Spinnoff Trek is dead. Like many who loathed the complete borefest that was the spinnoff era of Trek, we did like DS9 although it was never really properly pushed. Patrick Stewart is a fine Shakesperian actor. There were tiny flashes of an interesting swashbuckler there in his portrail of Picard. Flashes of the character he played in Excalibur who wielding a bloody axe held off a company of invading knights or the bold Gurney in Dune. But for the most part it was just bland. Not his portrail but the character. It was not Star Trek. I must thank him and the spinoff era for letting me discover and fall in love with Babylon 5. I wish him well I just disliked his foray in Trek
Leave Stewart alone….damn.
He WAS NOT trashing Star Trek. GAH!!! Some of you people are IDIOTS!!!!
Do they teach people how to READ in schools anymore?
Damn.
TTM
I’m tired of the whole “Shakespeare is the top” crap. I don’t know why speaking loudly and pompously in a dialect no one understands anymore is the apex of culture 400 years after the fact. Didn’t anything equally good come out of the last half a millennium, or even – god forbid – the 20th Century? Stewart can prance around in tights all he wants and call it high class, but its still not relevant and of no use to these modern eyes.
#61 – Josh
Gee, just when I thought you were a nice guy, you go ahead and do this.
Apologize to the woman… if not for your comment (which you insist was innocent), then at least for the fact that you hurt someone’s feelings.
Be a man… it’s what Shatner would do.
Apologize???
for thinking the character of Captain Picard is substandard and inferior and having that perception twisted into some sort of faux political anti-French diatribe??
HELL doesn’t get that cold.
#77 – Josh
I think I clearly stated what you would be apologizing for, but if you need it stated again in smaller words, here it is:
For hurting a woman’s feelings on an obviously very personal issue.
If you can’t see the civility in that, then I don’t know what your problem is.
# 78
I wouldn’t go so far to say my feelings are hurt, John, but I appreciate your comment anyway. My reaction was more disgust than insult. I expect no apology. I will however continue to call that kind of thing out when I see it.
I don’t care for Stewart as an actor or Picard as a character, but I still don’t think he said anything in this little article that was really slamming Star Trek or its effect on his career.
It really doesn’t matter anyway, since I would bet there will never be any need for Stewart to portray Picard again, outside of maybe some video game.
and we are back to Trek vs. Trek and bashing.
Josh…. I missed it in his statements where he bit the Trek hand that fed him….Honestly, I did. Can you find it in that article?
“I was a different actor after that — doing that kind of play, and finally being able to make truth of an emotional commitment to a role like that in such a small, exposing theatre, with the support of three magnificent actors [Billie Whitelaw, Saskia Reeves and Matthew Marsh], made all the difference to me. The calamity that then happened to me was that I was offered Star Trek: The Next Generation. […]It did change many, many things, and I’m immensely grateful for that. I have worked hard not in any sense to feel they were wasted years —though time is a factor in all of this, and I now have a lot of catching up to do. I feel that acutely — not that there have been lost opportunities, but that there are things I might have done and I’ve got to do a lot of them quickly now.”
I do not see it.
#79 – Canonista
Hey… you gotta look out for your friends, right? :)
It’s pretty clear what YOU are looking out for John N , hah hah.
#81 – He calls Trek a calamity that took his time away from important things. Like bad Cinemax productions and doing Hamlet for the 430th time.
#81
Xai I’m not reffering so much to this particular article but rather a history from Stewart of blatant unappreciation for anything pertaining to Trek and a general dismissal by the man of his experiences with Trek and what it ultimately enabled him to do in his life and career as a direct result of his affiliation and association with Trek, the man is characteristically pretentious and participated in Trek for a paycheck, not out of love or devotion to the propoerty.
I would elaborate further but, I may end up hurting your feelings Hah hah.
I like Patrick Stewart and his acting style personally, but that’s me. Not everyone likes the same thing and I can accept that.
But have some respect, guys. Some of you are really getting out of hand and way too personal with your comments.
I saw no disparagement against Trek from him in that interview. I agree with those who’ve said the title of this news post was misleading and taken far out of context.
#85 Josh… I did ask what he has said… it doesn’t have to in this article. It’s an honest question, not a ploy or a trap. I don’t follow every word from the mouths of actors outside their performances.
But I do believe you owe someone an apology as well.
X
Oh for Gods sake, I believe people owe ME an apology, but I dont think I’ll cry about it for the rest of eternity, God no wonder this society is so Emo.
Re #88: The man has the longest callsign in the history of internet talkbacks and he calls US “Emo.”
Yeah. Right. Okay.
All anti-Stewart posters, please take note: As I said before, Stewart was a well-respected and sought after stage actor well before Trek came along. He was ALREADY successful. If you think his career is defined solely by the parts he’s played in films, then you are being myopic, narrow-minded and ignorant. Frankly, that kind of thinking portrays you as appallingly unintelligent.
Would you like to be defined entirely by the first job you ever had, or for that matter by the biggest or most “important?” No! You’d like to think there’s more to you than just your work, and you want that work to be challenging and engaging. And sometimes, just sometimes, you think about what that job might have kept you from doing. That doesn’t make you unappreciative, callous, or holier-than-thou; it makes you human.
What is holier-than-thou is the uproar from niggling, small-minded individuals who, for some unfathomable reason, think that performers who have been on Trek should consider it the pinnacle of their careers. Whether or not you want to accept it, Trek is just a job to most of these people. A good job with many rewards, to be sure, but a job just the same. And when that job is over it’s realistic to take stock of it to determine what it brought to you and what it took away. Most of us have the luxury of doing this privately. Stewart must sometimes do this in a much more public forum.
Why are some of you so offended by his statement? There is NOTHING malicious or condemning toward Trek in what he said. He’s obviously grateful for all the thingsTrek brought him, but he also believes that he missed some other opportunities because of it and mildly laments passing “the road not taken.” Where is the horrible crime in that, and why has it so incited your derision?
Stewart’s statements have no hint of pettiness or animosity, yet yours are full of both. Of course, I doubt that your opinions hold any weight with him whatsoever, but they do mean something here. That kind of idiotic rancor belittles every single fan of Trek, in all its incarnations, and keeps us all from being taken seriously. You are the kind of fans that the rest of us have to defend ourselves against when we talk about Trek in public, and it saddends me deeply that, after all this time, we still have to.
You should be ashamed of yourselves.
What’s the matter with you people? TNG is the best of the star trek universe. period. Patrick Stewart was the greatest actor ever to grace the series and Picard the greatest character. TOS totally sucks in comparison.
#89
Hi pot, meet kettle
I am most DEFINITELY a TOS fan first, but Stewart is undoubtedly a hell of a fine actor, as is Avery Brooks.
#90.
You can’t be serious.
Other than Stewart’s presence , occasionally Micheal Dorn, and about 10 good episodes, TNG was predominantly a watered down, incredibly TEDIOUS Star Trek incarnation, with lousy 1 dimensional character examinations, the most boring nondescript MUZAK in television history, mind numbingly inane plots drenched in sickeningly sweet 1980’s left wing sensibilities, dripping with saccharin filled feelings of a BORING utopia that promotes ludicrous notions like the idea of little children running up and down the halls of a fat bloated Enterprise with a bridge that looked remarkably similar to the lobby of your local Holiday Inn, complete with that exciting “Shoppers Drug Mart” lighting.
TOS is an exciting, imaginative, dynamic, fun filled, and brilliantly “ORIGINAL” idea. Not some “carbon copy wannabe” complete with shoulder pads and dust buster phasers. TNG will ALWAYS play second banana to TOS just like Pierce Brosnan will always be second banana to Sean Connery.
“NUFF SAID : )
re:90. js
I disagree vigorously
re: 88
“God no wonder this society is so Emo”
What does “Emo” mean?
There are sooo many reasons why Kirk is better than Picard that entire sites have been devoted to listing the reasons. However, I think Stewart is a better actor overall, and adds some sophistication to Trek that was needed.
That being said, in an acting face-off between the two, while Picard is pontificating, a flying-scissors-kick from Kirk would end it all.
yeah,and if Picard was still sitting up,slightly concious,Kirk would clasp his hands together and knock him out.
I love The Shat as a characater. I loved his performance as Capt James T. Kirk. But he was an insecure prima donna back in the 60’s and he made a lot of his follow cast members miserable with his line counting. What really bummed me out about him was the (fairly) recent episode about potentially making an appearance on Enterprise. The show needed help getting an audience. His presence in an episode could have single-handedly done that. The reason it didn’t happen…cash. He had been singing the blues, looking for ways to bring back Kirk, ever since getting killed off in Generations. He had his chance and didn’t take it.
Was it because the story wasn’t up to his standards. Nope. It was being pulled together by his frequenct “collaborators” the Reeves-Stevens. It was his asking price. I guess he hadn’t had a chance to extort a big payday out of Paramount for awhile and he saw Enterprise as his big change. It was just a TV episode for Heaven’s sake. Might have taken up a week of his time. Hell, he should have done it for scale and throw the fans a bone to help keep the franchise alive. But no……
#97
It wasn’t a money issue, the Shat pitched this elaborate idea of a Mirror Universe Captain Kirk escaping exile and all of these political machinations, but sadly his response from Berman: “We want you to be Chef.”
Shatner was protecting the character of Kirk.
#98 – The thing is, though, it sounds like Shatner would have been willing to play Chef if they’d met his asking price. That’s not protecting the character–that’s prostituting it.
exactly, couldn’t have said it better Buckaroo
Kahless, Stewart lacks range? Have you ever seen (or just heard which you can do by listening to the CDs) his one man tour de force perfomance of A Christmas Carol where he reads EVERY part and narrates,
(I’m not talking about the cheesy TV movie) that ran sold out in London and on Broadway for years.
Here’s from the NYTimes review…
“… Because of Mr. Stewart’s virtuosity, the show could be considered a coda to the Royal Shakespeare Company’s “Life and Adventures of Nicholas Nickleby.” The actor offers his solo equivalent of that expansive ensemble act of the imagination, making an audience believe it has entered a magical world dense with character, atmosphere and action.
His supple look and voice enable him to portray the widest range of Dickens characters without altering his costume or makeup. Classically trained, he has the verbal dexterity of Ian McKellen. All this is combined with his own delectation in peformance. In this show, that performance is both Dickensian and Shakespearean, savoring each role as well as the lush descriptive language and, whenever possible, re-creating dramatic encounters…”
yeah, lacks range. Can play virtually any male character from Shakespeare.
In England, acting is considered a profession as well as an art and that’s why you will often see brilliant actors like Michael Caine, Judi Densch or Stewart in movies like Dune. It’s a nice payday.
Where they usually do their real craft is with the classics and in the theater.
To even imply that Stewart would be “nowhere” (your brilliant words) without Trek is about the dumbest thing I’ve read in years.
He’d probably be making a decent living as one of the better working classical actors in the theater.
sheesh give geeks a bad name why don’t you……
“#89
Hi pot, meet kettle”
I’m not surprised that this is the most intelligent response you could muster.
Josh T blah blah… I asked you for information…it was your chance to back up your claims (#87). All I got was crap about the world being “emo”. I gave you an opening….. well?
All I did was ask for info.
X
hey Dave,I just realized we’ve posted in the same Buffy threads over at AVS,small world,ain’t it.I’m the OP of “Joss Whedon Not Doing Wonder Woman”.
Fukn MAJOR TOS trolls here that screw over the rest of trek without hesitation.