Visit The Official Star Trek Shop Now!

Bring Back Kirk Campaign Reacts To Latest News

With all the recent news TrekMovie.com thought it would check in with the ‘Bring Back Kirk’ Campaign and see what they thought of JJ Abrams plans for bringing back Kirk (but maybe not William Shatner). The BBK campaign started in the aftermath of Star Trek Generarations in 1994 by some fans who were not happy with how the character of Kirk was uncerimonially killed off. The BBK claim over a million hits a year to their site, with growing trafic over recent months (for obvious reasons). Although they have never had any contact with Shatner or Parmount they have shown up in some documentaries as well as getting media coverage by various genre sites and mags as well as TV Guide. They may be best known for their elaborate CGI trailers trailers using audio clips from films, TV and audio books to weave together a story around Kirk’s return. Jason Turner (29, freelance web designer from the UK) spoke to TrekMovie.com on behalf of the BBK campign and gave their thoughts on the latest news. 

TrekMovie.com: What is your main objective?
Bring Back Kirk Campaign: We want to see Captain Kirk alive and well beyond the Generations timeline.  We want a happy ending for our hero.

TM: So you want a film that focuses on Shatner as Kirk?
BBK: We’re not asking for them to make Mr. Shatner the center of Trek again.  But we would like to see his inclusion in Trek XI, to let us know the character is alive and well.  It doesn’t actually have to be a part of the plot.  Kirk and Spock in a post-Generations timeline reminiscing about old times would be sufficient.  They don’t need an onscreen resurrection or detailed exposition.  A simple line of dialogue could very easily explain everything. 

TM: With regards to the new film, how do you feel about it being a return to the TOS universe and the character of James T. Kirk
BBK: Right now, mixed emotions.  We’re thrilled that Kirk is returning.  It shows that we finally got the message to bring the character back.  But we are very disappointed at the lack of inclusion of Shatner.  I think that not including him has made a lot of people upset, and probably cost the studio a good chunk of money.  Does this mean the film will flop?  We can’t say.  But I am 100 percent certain that including Shatner WILL add to the box office.

TM: How do you feel about the recasting of Kirk?
BBK: It’s both inevitable and necessary for Trek’s future.  However, it needs to be done right.  William Shatner is a legend.  It is not easy to replace a legend.  Kirk is not Bond, Batman or Superman. They need to find someone that will match the bravado and energy, and that’s not easy.  But more important, another reason to get Shatner in the movie is to add to the legitimacy of the role.  Finally, you will have Shatner passing the torch properly. 

TM: Assuming William Shatner is not in the film, but ‘Kirk is back’ do you see that as a kind of victory or will only Shatner as Kirk satisfy your objectives?
BBK: It’s a victory in that Kirk is back.  But it’s a hollow victory because the death of Kirk still will overshadow the franchise.

TM: How do you feel about Nimoy’s returning?
BBK: Normally, it would be great news.  But notice how the inclusion of Nimoy is overshadowed by the failure to include Shatner.  Nimoy accepting a role means that the script should be good.  But even a good script won’t necessarily overcome the disappointment of Kirk not being there.  To have one without the other is baffling and something we’d like to hear more about from the JJ camp. 

TM: What are you plans for the future?
BBK: We still hold out hope for Kirk’s return.  Even without Shatner, there are opportunities to canonize a return without decanonizing Generations.  We want Abrams to tell this story.  William Shatner is a legend, and wants one more shot at playing Kirk.  We believe it’s win-win and they will be rewarded at the box office with his inclusion and we’ll have our hero back and look forward to more of his earlier adventures.

You can visit the campaign at bringbackkirk.com

Here is their latest trailer

Sort by:   newest | oldest
Stanky (XI Makes me Cranky) McFibberich
July 15, 2007 6:30 pm

Mr. Turner makes some good points.

Thatguy
July 15, 2007 6:33 pm

Its remotely possible that bring Kirk back could work IF they used all the elements at their current disposal. That along with a good reason for Kirk
to be brought back to begin with too certainly has to be otherwise those concerned might as well forget it. CGI (If used) will have to be the very best
so we know it can be done….the big question is….will it? Will enough $$ be spent to make it all right and correct the mistakes of the past (storywise) and the passage of time that all the actors face? We’ll see……

Sleeper Agent X
July 15, 2007 6:34 pm

One thing that puzzles me–most of the Bring Back Kirk types express nothing but HATRED for “modern” or Berman Trek. Yet in their demands to bring back Shatner as Kirk they also demand that Generations remain canon. Why hold onto something you loathe so much? This just makes your goal–Shatner back as Kirk!–that much more difficult to obtain…

last o' the timelords
July 15, 2007 6:40 pm

Well thats too funny, such sincerity.

Ro-Dan
July 15, 2007 6:40 pm

Amazing trailer. It gave me goosebumps. Bring back my hero! Bring back James T Kirk!

chuck
July 15, 2007 6:47 pm

May I quote William Shatner circa 1970 Saturday Night Live
“Get a Life”
I want to see a total reboot. There is plenty of classic trek out there to feed on.

JC
July 15, 2007 6:54 pm

Corney.But there’s a small vocal group of motivated trekkies who want it.Maybe they can do a TV movie to prime interest in the new film where(Nimoy as ) Spock goes into a nexus type thing and meets historical figures such as(Shatner as) Kirk,Plato,George Washington etc.Just an idea to wrap up that Generations mess a little

omf
July 15, 2007 7:32 pm

Regardless of whether or not “bringing back Kirk” is a good idea, what does it have to do with the new Trek movie? Assuming a linear timeline, isn’t it going to be situated prior to the death in Generations?

Reagan
July 15, 2007 7:43 pm

Why don’t they use the timeline proposed in Shatners post generations book for the storylines. The books provide a pretty good hypothesis as to how Kirk could be resurrected. I think the Shatner books would have made for better sequels to First Contact as opposed to the other two “films”.

omf
July 15, 2007 7:49 pm

Oh, and how can people be upset that Nimoy is playing some role in the new movie? For all we know he’s going to be an off-stage consultant, or the voice of the computer, or a Vulcan extra eating a sandwich at a deli or something…

JC
July 15, 2007 7:54 pm

How did You know the whole movie is taking place in a deli?

Buckaroohawk
July 15, 2007 8:07 pm

Oy. 13 years of “bring back Kirk.” Talk about beating a dead sehlat.

New Horizon
July 15, 2007 8:18 pm

They loathe Bermaga, yet propose every tried and true contrivance to bring Kirk back? I just can’t believe this nonsense.

Kirk shouldn’t have died in Generations, but lets just move on already.

My father passed away last year, but I don’t expect to pull him back out of some damned Nexus. The character of Kirk died…humans die. Why can’t they just let it go already?

Orbitalic
July 15, 2007 8:25 pm

Give them their due… they have their opinion.

Xai
July 15, 2007 8:27 pm

Stanky..

Good to see you back, ol’ bud.

Harbinger
July 15, 2007 8:27 pm

Bring back Kirk…..

VOODOO
July 15, 2007 8:32 pm

BRING BACK KIRK!!!

BRING BACK SHATNER!!!

GIVE THIS LEGENDARY CHARACTER THE ENDING HE DESERVES!!!

VOODOO
July 15, 2007 8:33 pm

That trailer alone was better than the last bunch of films and tv programs.

The trailer is what people want to see.

CmdrR.
July 15, 2007 8:40 pm

This trailer is perfect proof that Paramount needs to keep a tight reign on its intellectual property rights. The goal, obviously, was to prove that the makers of this trailer could find a way to Bring Back Kirk. Got it. But, look how long it took for the whole thing to deteriorate into a badly sampled mish-mosh of stolen ideas and stuff blowing up.
Trek needs more than Kirk. It needs fresh ideas.
If you want to make FanFilms, great. Some are OK. Many are pretty awful. Please, don’t ask the owners of the Trek franchise to run in the same small circles. Trek is all about ideas and the future. We’ve had 15 years of repeats masquerading as new product. It’s time to Boldly Go Where We Haven’t Been So Many Times Before…

Stanky (XI Makes me Cranky) McFibberich
July 15, 2007 8:41 pm

15. Xai
The reports of my death were mildly exaggerated.

Jim J
July 15, 2007 8:53 pm

So, I figure in REALITY this is about post # 612 or so. Shatner deserves a final sendoff…don’t make it the main part of the movie or even have him in much of it at all, but make it a nice fringe benefit that comes with this movie, giving die hard TOS/Shatner/Kirk fans a warm fuzzy they can keep forever.

Cygnus-X1
July 15, 2007 9:05 pm

Where’d they get Nimoy’s and Shat’s voice-overs?

I don’t recognise some of their lines.

Sleeper Agent X
July 15, 2007 9:06 pm

Re 18 –

Sorry, Voodoo. But that trailer ties with “These are the Voyage” in terms of the makes-me-want-to-gouge-my-eyes-out factor.

Re 19-

Absolutely correct. I couldn’t agree more about Trek needing new ideas.

Re 21 –

That “fringe benefit” you speak of will get in the way of whatever the real storyline will be, and will sabotage the film. No go.

Jim J (Yes, we should boldly go)
July 15, 2007 9:17 pm

#23-It doesn’t HAVE to, if written the right way and well. That was my point. Frankly, I want the new things many of you speak of. It is time to move on…what better way than giving “SHAT version Kirk” the proper send-off and then letting “new young Kirk” & Co. take us to new places. There are always possibilities…with good writers!

Sleeper Agent X
July 15, 2007 9:22 pm

Re 24 —

I dunno. I haven’t heard anybody suggest anything like a GOOD way of doing it. They all involve maximum fanwankery like jumping out of the Guardian of Forever as it slingshots around the sun, using the Doomsday Machine as a booster rocket and phallic symbol…

That’s NOT the way to bring in the new crowd. Why would any of them be interested in stuff like that? Especially the whole phallic symbol thing?

Robert Bernardo
July 15, 2007 9:23 pm

I agree 100% with what Jason Turner has said.

Robert April
July 15, 2007 9:49 pm

#3 “most of the Bring Back Kirk types express nothing but HATRED for “modern” or Berman Trek. ”

Where do you get this impression? From the vociferous fans who have expressed those sentiments here at TrekMovie.com?

Most BBK fans that I talk to are more likely to enjoy ALL of the Trek shows. It is just that we really do like Kirk.

Shatner’s Kirk.

I am sure that a new actor, if he is good, will be accepted as Kirk by most BBKers provided the director also does his job well.

I am a die hard Kirk fan and a huge “Shatner as Kirk” fan as well but that is not to say I am a “no one else BUT Shatner” advocate. In fact I have thought that if Matt Damon WAS ever cast that he could be great in the role-if he was the same Matt Damon who was in “Good Will Hunting,” not the guy who showed up for “The Brother’s Grimm.”

This movie does indeed need a new direction and I am sure it will have it. But must a “new direction” preclude Shatner, arguably at the hight of his career, in the role he made famous? (Not a call that I would want to make if I was on the production team I might add.)

However this I do know. To have Nimoy without Shatner is like having peanut butter without jelly, cookies without milk. America without baseball…

…Spock without Kirk.

The Lensman
July 15, 2007 9:50 pm

Okay, enough with the “proper send off” BS. Both Kirk *and* Shatner got a proper send off in Star Trek 6. If you don’t like “Generations” then just ignore it….I do. Is it really outside of your ability to do this? I can’t stand the TNG movies, they all suck and as far as I’m concerned, they didn’t happen. I mean really, how hard is it to do that? Not hard at all.

The original Trek is my favorite, but I’m long past giving any kind of damn as to whether or not any of the original actors are in this. Shatner is not gonna make this movie a sucess…Shatner has become a bad parody that’s always “on” and this movie doesn’t need some Diva ruining the show.

Thomas
July 15, 2007 10:16 pm

I can understand why BBK people would want to see Kirk brought back; I remember being eleven or twelve years old and seeing the movie (I wasn’t even a Trek fan then) and thinking he would have gotten a better send-off than he did. That being said, even if Shatner appears in the movie, I’m not hedging my bets on the new movie “undoing” or “fixing” Generations. My bet is that any scenes featuring Shatner and Nimoy will probably be set at a vague point in time that could easily be either pre-Generations or post-resurrection. If the movie is meant to bring in new fans as well as satisfy old ones, I would bet on the former as new fans would likely be confused by any reference (even fleeting) to a resurrection or why one was necessary.

New Horizon
July 15, 2007 10:23 pm

>That trailer alone was better than the last bunch of films and tv programs.

It was a bunch of fan boy, wankerish, amateurish, garbage. Kaboom, kaboom…’fire’…blam blam.

That’s not the basis of the Star Trek I grew up on…it was about exploring new worlds, new ideas…not this constant rehash of good guy vs. bad guy…and can we top the last space battle.

>The trailer is what people want to see.

Not this person. I want to see Trek grounded again, slightly more in reality, no more of these silly resurrections. I want Star Trek to be taken seriously again, and for it to show some reservation and dignity.

July 15, 2007 10:38 pm

19 – I agree as well, and having Shatner and Nimoy in a movie of new ideas is my ideal outcome.

22 – They probably use lines spoken in Trek audio CDs of Pocketbooks original novels. Or perhaps other media by those actors.

As Turner said, a simple line of dialogue and having Shatner/Nimoy (Kirk/Spock) reminiscing would satisfy a lot of people. I myself am not a fan of remakes, because I feel they often disgrace or belittle the original. Reboots I think are even worse. But this sounds like it is a new story, which fits into a place in Trek where the story has not been told. James T. Kirk was heavily backstoried in TOS, but we never got to see any of it. For that, I am intrigued, as well because J.J. Abrams is a great film maker.

The BBK movement has never been a demand to Paramount, but a heartfelt plea, because we love Star Trek, Captain Kirk, and William Shatner. And if Shatner wasn’t as interested honestly we wouldn’t be either. I hate to lay this baggage on JJ Abrams, in fact I don’t want to. I’ve have advocated for years that Paramount should have done a TV Movie with Shatner, Nimoy, other TOS cast members, as a true 40th anniversary special. J.J. seemed to make overtures to both Bill and Leonard, and if they stiffed Shatner without telling him, that is unfair.

sean
July 15, 2007 10:45 pm

After watching that trailer, I have to ask, why exactly after pulling Kirk out of the Nexus was it necessary to find Picard, Sisko, Janeway & Archer and go after the Suliban? Did that tie into ‘the plot’ somehow? And why include Chakotay if you aren’t going to kill him? Talk about something the fans want to see…

This trailer is ridiculous. It’s the same nonesense you see from ‘fans’ all the time – some overblown war scenario that brings everyone together for basically no reason other than the sake of doing it. The war thing was done on DS9 and it was done masterfully. It seems as though these people just want to blow a lot of crap up onscreen for the sake of Kirk being the one pushing the button.

It’s not like Kirk isn’t missed, but good lord. This is so OTT it nearly caused my head to cave in.

Lord Garth Formerly of Izar
July 15, 2007 10:54 pm

New Horizon sounds like you want more of the Berman Era. Grounded, more reality, no good guys or bad guys. Sounds rather bland. I’d take a dozen Shatner renditions of EPlebnista over endless banal scenes of Picard and his exciting band of adventurers droning on around the conference table about diplomacy and technobabel while sipping their tea on their comfey pink easychairs and of course making sure to get the ships theoropist’s opinions about battle strategies. Star Trek was taken most seriously when it didn’t take itself so seriously. Tribbles, Khan, Evil Klingons, Dropkicks, Melodrama, Adventure and romance. And if Shatner can be in it in some capacity I believe most of us would be quite happy.

Robert April
July 15, 2007 11:03 pm

#34 Gotta love those drop kicks!

Robert April
July 15, 2007 11:14 pm

Maybe a little perspective is in order.

TOS was corny but we were young (so was televised science fiction) and didn’t know any better. What the shows lacked in special FX we made up for with our imaginations. (Thank God it was better than Lost In Space in that regard.)

Then TOS hit the big screen and we all went to TMP and thought “Cool FX on the ships but why did they do that to Kirk? Why did they make him out to be an idiot in regard to running his ship?”

Then TWOK goes and hits a home run. Suddenly Kirk goes from being worshiped by legions of nerdy adolescents to becoming a mainstream cinematic hero to millions of moviegoers.

Star Trek IV saw the most widespread audience yet and the elevation of Shatner (as Kirk) to the status of pop culture icon. It wasn’t Kirk who became the icon-it was Shatner AS Kirk!

Even Star Trek V had it’s moments. The camping scene at the end was very well done and served to cement the idea of the triumvirate of Kirk, Spock and McCoy.

For those born after 1986 there may be no real connection to Shatner as Kirk. But to anyone who lived through those times Shatner is practically inseparable from Kirk.

Come on JJ, throw us old space dogs a bone.

toddk
July 16, 2007 1:04 am
Maybe you guy’s werent listening to spiner when he explained why he probably shouldnt portray data any more, maybe you havent seen how old shatner is these days, Everyone should try to let go of the”bring back shatner” thing., I imagine spock , some 20 years after the episode ” Unification” recording his memoirs and the theater audience seeing flashbacks of his first adventures with kirk almost a hundred years earlier. I don’t actually think there would be a “Logical” way to have kirk and spock talking about the old days since both actors look older than their respective appearances in generations and Unification. I don’t think that anyone was seriously thinking about really having shatner in the film. I think that is why shatner isnt acting bitter and is just accepting it. After all Nimoy and Shatner are good friends and nothing would or could change that. How about this though, The new movie opens with Spock (On Vulcan) taking his place as a vulcan elder opposite his appearance in the first motion picture, after the ceremony, Spock is approached by the vulcan that spock has stated that he has not reached Kolinar (or however it’s spelled) and spock then relates to the young vulcan a story to where spock took his first steps towards Kolinar and sock relates how his half human emotions nearly cost him the life of his captain on their first mission. What do you all think? Possible?. If I’m right, This is why Nimoy… Read more »
toddk
July 16, 2007 1:06 am

yeah I spelled spock as “sock” oh well here come all the sock jokes:)

Sleeper Agent X
July 16, 2007 1:14 am

Those people born in 1986 are now 21 and can drink legally! They’re exactly the sort of audience the new movie needs to capture.

So throwing the old dogs a bone is a bad idea if it confuses or puts off the young dogs. I’d rather J.J. puts all his time and effort in making sure the execution on his storyline is as perfect as he can make it, as opposed to slapping on some extra “bonus feature” that will feel that way as well–like something that was tacked on at the last minute.

Thatguy
July 16, 2007 1:24 am

Socko: The Clintons cat while in the white house.
Socko: The sock that the crazy bucked toothed WWE wrestler Mick Foley used
over his hand as one of his many foolish gimmicks.

Al
July 16, 2007 1:25 am

Fascinating that Nimoy’s delivery of Spock is so monotone that it can be sampled and patched so well

4 8 15 16 23 42
July 16, 2007 1:31 am

I actually thought the way Kirk died was perfectly suitable… he sacrificed himself for the good of future generations. Nothing dishonorable or “unceremonious” about it. The fact is, hero, villain, redshirt, or janitor — we all die, there’s no “happy end” to it.

You want to talk about stupid deaths, how about killing Spock off only to resurrect him one movie later, exactly as the person he was, based on the flimsy plot device of the Genesis planet…. Why not trot out Midichlorians to explain it already.

Sleeper Agent X
July 16, 2007 1:33 am
Well, if we are throwing out what our guesses are as to what the new movie might be, I’ll throw my hunches out there: First, I seriously doubt this film will showcase original series uniforms and set designs. That’s just not going to fly with the new crowd this audience hopes to attract. Second, I think the biggest hint we’ve gotten about what the new movie will be about comes from Orci and Kurtzman, when they say the new audience will be seeing one film, but the old fans will be seeing another one entirely. Because of this, I wonder if we won’t be seeing some alternate universe (no, not the mirror universe!) version of TOS. From Abrams and Paramount’s standpoint, this does a lot for them. You can update the uniforms, set designs, etc. without breaking with “canon”–because you’re sidestepping canon in a parallel universe. Furthermore, you don’t have to worry so much about continuity violations, because you’re in a parallel universe! If the new movie is a hit and sequels are demanded, you can take the characters anywhere, and have them do anything, without worrying that Kirk can’t do something or other because he has to be fighting the Gorn right now. For those of you who read comics, this approach is like the “Ultimates” line in Marvel comics. There’s the regular Marvel universe, but then there’s a whole separate “Ultimate” line out there, where Peter Parker is still a kid, Gwen Stacy was alive again for a… Read more »
trektacular
July 16, 2007 4:01 am

Trying to recast Shatner is a horrible idea, I can’t think of anything to compare it to, besides maybe Harrison Ford as Indiana Jones, but even that is a stretch.
Simple fact is you can’t replace Shatner as Kirk, without the recast actor falling flat on his face!

trektacular
July 16, 2007 4:05 am

I’m talking of the remake portion of Trek 2008 of course

StillKirok
July 16, 2007 4:08 am

#3. I would like you to find an example of hatred for Berman Trek from the BBK Campaign itself.

If not, please withdraw that accusation. It’s simply not true. From what I’ve seen, BBK has ALWAYS wanted to work within the Modern Trek world.

Yes, there is plenty of hate for Berman’s Trek, but it never came from the Bring Back Kirk campaign.

#12 & #13, The reason the campaign has gone on for so long is because they never fixed the problem. It’s not small but vocal. It’s a pretty significant group of people whether you choose to accept it or not. I pointed out in the other thread that even if 10 percent of the die-hard fans are turned off by Shatner’s absence in the film, they cost themselves a significant amount of money.

#28, I doubt the BBK campaign would exist if ST6 was the proper sendoff. That proper sendoff was ruined by Generations. Pretending something doesn’t exist does not change that it does.

#32–I love that trailer. I see it as two stories in one. The first part is the return of Kirk, and the next part is shortly after when the Federation is attacked, and has to defend itself. I thought it tied in the Trek universe pretty well, considering they really didn’t have actors doing voices for them.

Sleeper Agent X
July 16, 2007 4:24 am

Re 45 –

Seeing how you’re the biggest modern Trek hater there is, I’m just gonna laugh, StillKirok.

But if you admit you and Voodoo are the same poster, I might consider it!

snake
July 16, 2007 4:25 am

Guess they should have called their site Bring Back Shatner..

re *43*

In fact WHY did they stop TOS movies at VI?? They did it cause they were all too old right? well in 1994 Shatner and Nimoy were only 63 – younger than Ford is now playing Indy…VI was a big success and was critically well recieved – maybe they should have done another….

They could have done a 7th proper final original crew movie for 1993 or 1994 with Meyer or Nimoy directing (or even Shatner)…Which would have then given Berman and TNG cast and crew the time to come up with a decent TNG movie (without TOS crew in it) for say 1996 (their 1st film was rushed into production which is why it has those massive plot holes – they didnt have time to sort out a decent story)

Oh well.

July 16, 2007 4:27 am

That ‘trailer’ is mildly ridiculous; well done, but still ridiculous. If Cassidy couldn’t convince Sisko to come out of the wormhole, how the hell does Picard and Kirk (or whoever it was) convince him within two lines?!

And bringing the Constitution out to fight this new enemy is stupid. And Archer. Archer is useless. Leave him at home.

-TGP-

July 16, 2007 4:28 am

#47 – “well in 1994 Shatner and Nimoy were only 63 – younger than Ford is now playing Indy”

That implies that bringing Ford back to play Indy is a good idea.
-TGP-

Sleeper Agent X
July 16, 2007 4:34 am

I’d just like to point out Shatner and the gang weren’t anywhere near as fit in the 90’s as Ford presumably is today. This is more than about age as a number, it’s about do you look credible punching some Nazi or alien goon’s (hopefully not one of Bermaga’s alien Nazi goons!) lights out.

Though I agree with 49–bringing Indy back has yet to be shown to be a good idea.

wpDiscuz