Fandango - Star Trek: Beyond Movie Tickets

Interview With Leonard Nimoy – Part 2

In the second part of the TrekMovie.com exclusive interview with Leonard Nimoy, the actor talks about his thoughts on the new Spock (Zachary Quinto), William Shatner not being in the film (as of now) and J.J. Abrams abilities as a director…and ‘technobabble.’

full interview below

TrekMovie.com: What are your thoughts on Zachary Quinto as the new Spock?

Leonard Nimoy: When J.J. sent me a compilation of his work on DVD I was very impressed. He is a very solid actor. To find someone who looks right is tricky enough, but to find someone who looks right and is as talented as he is I think is doubly effective. The danger would be to find someone who looks like me, but does not have the sense of the interior life that is necessary for the Spock character.

TrekMovie.com: So is it true that you and William Shatner have some kind of approval deal for the new Kirk and Spock?

Leonard Nimoy: I don’t think it is accurate to say we have approval as much as consultation rights. And J.J. did consult with me and it was a very easy call. I don’t know what would have happened if I said “J.J. this doesn’t work for me.” That would have been a yellow flag if not a red flag, but not contractually. It is just a question of mutual respect and understanding of what we are trying to bring to this project. But I think I can remember exactly what I said to J.J. I told him “not only does he look like me, but he has an inner life” – which is essential to that character.

TrekMovie.com: So over the last weeks William Shatner kind of let the cat out of the bag regarding your being in the film. He recounted some phone calls between you guys with you ribbing him, but he is known to be a joker so were his accounts accurate?

Leonard Nimoy: Well I didn’t rib him, but what he said was accurate. We spoke on the phone. I had read the script and he asked me if he was in it and I said “no.” And that is pretty much the way it went. You are right he jokes a lot and he said something like “I reached through the phone and grabbed him by the throat” and that sort of thing, but that is just Bill. I know that he is disappointed. I don’t know what the future is. I have no idea what J.J.’s plans are and I know that J.J. said that they are still trying to find a way to put him in the movie, but I am not the person to talk to about that.

TrekMovie.com: Have you talked to J.J. about your thoughts on Bill being in the film?

Leonard Nimoy: It is not up to me. I told J.J. that I was with Bill in Philidelphia last weekend and that Bill was disappointed that as of now he is not in the film. He was reported as being ‘furious’ and that is not accurate at all. I think he is appropriately disappointed, but I think he has come to a kind of understanding. After all, and Bill and I talked about this, the fact is his character did die in [Star Trek:] Generations. He said “ya but you died at the end of [Star Trek] II.” And I said “but I was resurrected…that is the difference between you and I.” [laughs] I also said to him that if I had been in Generations I would not have let him die…and that is a fact. I thought it was gratuitous. I didn’t see why…what was the point? I thought it was a waste of a very important character.

TrekMovie.com: You have said that you are playing the original and now older Spock and you are saying that Kirk cannot be in the film because he died in Generations. The implication here is that you are playing Spock in a future time period after Generations right?

Leonard Nimoy: You are digging for story points [laughs] you are doing a very good job of it but I am not going to comment any further.

TrekMovie.com: Did you see Mission: Impossible: III? As a fellow director what did you think of J.J. Abrams first feature?

Leonard Nimoy: I thought J.J. did a great job. I go to some of these movies today and I have to turn to my wife and say “what is going on here.” [laughs] These movies being made today, like Mission and some of the others…Tansformers which you probably know I was involved in originally. It is amazing to me these back stories are coming out of the closet now. The Mission project, the Star Trek project, the Transformers project…I have been involved with them for a long long time. Anyway, I said to some friends in San Diego that the stories we did in the days when I was involved in making these films and were much more linear than they are today. They are much more complex today. The audiences that go to see these films readily accept the complexities, more than I can frankly. I am not always sure what is going on and what people are trying to do. There is a line in Mission where the heavy says to Tom Cruise something like “it’s complicated.” Where he is explaining to him what the real game is…and I laughed out loud and said “damn right it’s complicated!”

TrekMovie.com: That’s true, but in that film Abrams made an interesting choice with regards to the central plot revolving around the ‘Rabbit’s Foot’ or the film’s MacGuffin. It was never explained. I always thought that was a daring choice to not overwhelm the audience with the technology. Which brings up an issue that has plagued Trek over the last decade or so…the notion that has come to be called ‘technobabble.’ Often on the recent TV series and even films the characters would go on and on about polarizing this and re-aligning that as solutions to dilemmas…

Leonard Nimoy: [emphatically] I agree! I agree! I totally agree. At one point during The Next Generation television series I contacted the Paramount television people and said “I am looking at some of these shows and I don’t understand them.” These technobabble scenes where people sit around a table and pour out information that has no dramatic impact – that is not in character. It is just people putting out information to try and explain what is going on, but it doesn’t explain…it is just boring. I think you are right, Abrams did not do that. He kept this thing moving and some of the scenes were absolutely gripping…gripping. When he gets hold of a scene he knows how to milk the drama out of it and that is one of his great talents.

TrekMovie.com: So you see similarities with this new movie

Leonard Nimoy: Yah…I am not worried about technobabble with this movie I will tell you that. When I see technobabble my blood runs cold.

TrekMovie.com: Well obviously Abrams and his team have a modern sensibility and tend to tell non-linear stories. But in this case we are going back to a 1960s TV show…

Leonard Nimoy: My primary concern is with the characters and the development of them. Abrams is going to tell a story and he is going to tell as story with characters that I am very familiar with. My sense when I read the script is that the understanding and the nurturing and development of these characters is excellent. That is the only word I can think of…Excellent! With that in hand I called him and said exactly that. I said “You have captured these people. I am interested being with them as the audience. I want to see these relationships develop as you have done this. I want to see it acted out. I am looking forward to it and I want to be in this movie.” As far as the adventure itself, there are lots of ways to do a Star Trek adventure. I am sure they are going to do a very meaningful Star Trek adventure. 

PART 1: Read Part 1 of this interview 

(PHOTOS: Albert L. Ortega)

Sort by:   newest | oldest
Jim Loftus
August 2, 2007 12:03 pm

First! Ever!

Tim Handrahan
August 2, 2007 12:05 pm

First! Great conclusion to an outstanding interview. Bring back SHATNER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

Jim Loftus
August 2, 2007 12:16 pm

“These technobabble scenes where people sit around a table and pour out information that has no dramatic impact…”

Mr. Nimoy, you have read my MIND.

My god. Whatever happended to the true essence of TOS? None of the other series seemed to be able to give that to us. The tactical, clever Kirk and Spock solutions to thwart the enemy… the drama… the tension of saving everyone’s ass at the last second!!! And above all else: whatever happened to the SENSE OF WONDER?

Thanks for the interview, well done! I have so much more faith in this concept now that Mr. Nimoy has expressed his enthusiasm and actual participation. I would give my left nut for this to turn out great. CROSS YOUR FINGERS EVERYONE!

StillKirok
August 2, 2007 12:18 pm

Very good interview. Would have liked more answers on Shatner, but you tried. Frustrating to know that it’s possible Kirk’s death may have played a role in Nimoy not being in Generations. He’s right of course as to the lack of meaning of the death. But hopefully, he can help convince JJ to make this happen.

Now if you can get an interview with Abrams…. :D

August 2, 2007 12:20 pm

Great interview – Nimoy’s wholehearted endorsement of the script is most welcome since he was by far the most thoughtful and critical of the original troika with regards to Trek movie plotting. I love Bill Shatner’s work in Trek (excepting Trek V) but, like Nimoy, I’m not sure how he could play a major role in the new movie given his demise in Generations…and how much he has changed physically since that film. If the Shat does get into the new film, I’d want him to play a meaningful role and not just be in for a brief cameo, and I’d worry that multiple TOS actors getting shoehorned into the film would likely create plot holes, etc.

Aaron R. (Spock is the man and Nimoy is ten times as awesome)
August 2, 2007 12:20 pm

Yeah no Shat… I figured as much as did many of us here. It is unfortunate but you know thats what happens when you let them kill off your character in a petty way…. Ergh what do you want Shat you ok’d the whole death thing?!?!? Anywho good thoughts from Mr. Nimoy I can’t wait to see what else happens in the Star Trek (2008) saga……. .. .. ..

Aaron R.

Robert April
August 2, 2007 12:21 pm

#2 “Great conclusion to an outstanding interview. Bring back SHATNER!”

Yup!

lou
August 2, 2007 12:22 pm

woohoo!!

Why isn’t it coming out THIS christmas? :'(

stallion
August 2, 2007 12:23 pm

Good interview.

Agent 47
August 2, 2007 12:28 pm

part two of this interview was as good as part one :)

@StillKirok………….i really hate to say it, but Shatner simply isn’t relevant to Trek anymore, his Kirk is DEAD!!!! there is no feasible way to get him involved, i’d like him back for sure, but realise it’s a lost cause and simply can not and will not happen :( *Generations made sure of that*

but i’m 100% convinced Shatner will not be anywhere near the Paramount set when filming starts………………..all i hope for now then is a damn good movie with an interesting story to tell :)

TechTrekker
August 2, 2007 12:34 pm

Boy does he hit it right on the head!

“You have captured these people. I am interested being with them as the audience. I want to see these relationships develop as you have done this. I want to see it acted out.”

I don’t think the movie could get a better stamp of approval. I hope they stick to their guns and tell a good story and not try to “plug in” anything or anyone that will destroy it for the sake of fan pressure. If this story can reach to the average guy off the street and make trek big again, think about the possibilities for the future!

Peace!

StillKirok
August 2, 2007 12:37 pm

#10, Shatner is more relevant to Star Trek today than ever. He is the biggest name they can get, and can put more butts in the seats than all of the other actors combined.

It’s not that Shatner is irrelevant to Trek, it’s that Trek without Shatner is irrelevant. The demise of the franchise since Kirk’s death shows that.

And Kirk being dead is the least important fact. You want him back? Write him back. It’s not that complicated.

THE RETURN brought the character back. That’s just one way.

You can deny Shatner’s relevance all you want, but the fact remains that Shatner’s status is still the hottest topic.

Aaron R. (Sisko joins in the chant R.I.P. Shatner)
August 2, 2007 12:38 pm

I agree #10 Agent 47! As much as I like Shatner as Kirk I feel his time has passed. He sealed the deal when he agreed to be killed off in the Next Gen era of the timeline. I know we all love Shatner but the way I look at this is you make you bed you lie in it. Kirk with Generations wanted a “meaningful” role and so they gave him a death. Every actor wants to do one great death scene and he took it. What he never realized until far after the fact was that the death was a shallow and petty one not fit for a Star Trek legend this is why he authored his book series to resurrect the character and let him fly again in heroic fashion…. Well thats all good and his books are some good reads but his books are not cannon and the time for a Spock style rebirth from the dead has come and passed unlooked for and not done. I feel that the Shat should sit on his pride and accept that sometimes when you make your bed you just have to lay in it… especially if its a deathbed.

Aaron R.

Craig
August 2, 2007 12:49 pm

How about Spock attending the launching of the Enterprise F and he starts to think about the time when he and Kirk met on the 1701? Could Spock still be around at that time?

Lord Garth Formerly of Izar
August 2, 2007 12:51 pm

Great interview, summed up my opinion of the Next Gen era (minus DS9)
Love Nimoy!!!!!!!! Great photographer too!!!

August 2, 2007 12:56 pm

#12 : “Shatner..can put more butts in the seats than all of the other actors combined.”

Errant nonsense. There’s not one iota of evidence or any good reason to believe that Shatner would attract more people to a theatrical “Star Trek” film than Leonard Nimoy as Spock would.

Shatner’s doing very well on TV commercials and free TV. It’s been demonstrated over and over that this means nothing at all in terms of box office draw. Were it otherwise, Hollywood would belong to David Schwimmer and Matt LeBlanc. :lol:

Agent 47
August 2, 2007 12:59 pm

@ 12 StillKirok

“You can deny Shatner’s relevance all you want, but the fact remains that Shatner’s status is still the hottest topic.”

i’m not denying Shatner’s relevance to Star Trek on the whole,he’ll always be remembered as the man who played the original James T Kirk :) what i meant was is that he’s irrelevant with regards to this particular film.

heck! i’d jump for joy if it was announced a way to get him involved was found, but i’ve accepted the fact it seems very unlikely that his involvement can/will happen,and again i say i’m 100% certain he won’t be anywhere near this movie

i will indeed see this film regardless because it focuses on TOS crew and characters and i like what i read in the Nimoy interview………..although it seems like a Spock biopic, reading the Abrams article

Robert April
August 2, 2007 1:02 pm

#10 “Blah blah blah blah blah…”

I’m sorry, I can’t seem to hear you. What did you say?

Spike
August 2, 2007 1:02 pm

If you think Trek can’t exist without Shatner, you can’t be a complete fan. The concept is boundless. I agree with some of what Nimoy says and not some. For instance, Shatner’s death wasn’t technically “necessary” in Generations, but when is it ever? And the original Trek had technobabble too, so why is it poison now? Spock and Kirk were always hitting a time warp or creating a tachyon bubble or something.

Just because YOU dont get it, doesnt mean what no one would. I’m not an engineer, I’m not supposed to totally get the technics of it, but I was never confused during TNG. What’s with all the TNG bashing these days anyway?

Craig
August 2, 2007 1:03 pm

I forgot to add the Enterprise F could be a set up for a new TV series if Trek XI is a hit.

Michael
August 2, 2007 1:05 pm

I want to put in the counterpoint about the techno-babble that some of you seem to hate. 1st off it really should be referred to as Trekno-babble. I realize that in many cases this was overdone but there really is a fine line between them talking over your head and talking down to you by dummying it down.

I for one became an Engineer because of TOS and Scotty. A lot of care has been taken to make the Trekno-babble sound realistic (or at least consistent) to folks like me that hear and use the real thing daily. Imagine a medical show where they are about to perform surgery on someone and they use terms like “I’m gonna cut him right here under the ear” instead of “I’m preparing to make an incision at the cerotic artery”. I for one don’t want the Trekno-babble removed just keep it to the point that is appropriate and required to move the story along.

Technical issues require technical terms especially if the people delivering them are supposed to be professionals. To do any less ruins the credibility to me even more then the star field being visible through the Doomsday Machine. If I can’t believe what they are saying it might as well be Lost In Space.

Remember – our heroes are supposed to be highly trained professionals; they should talk and act like it.

Sisko
August 2, 2007 1:06 pm

Putting Shat in the film just make good business sense…It will put more butts in the seats like StillKirok said. He is the essense of Trek.

star trackie
August 2, 2007 1:07 pm

Nimoy gets it.
Berman didn’t.
Nimoy believes JJ gets it.

Things are good.

Harry Ballz
August 2, 2007 1:07 pm

It’s interesting about Shatner being in the new movie. We’ve all assumed at this point that Shatner will not be reprising the role of Kirk in the film. But, and it’s a BIG but, as of only a week ago at the ComiCon,Nimoy stated in this interview, “and I know that J.J. said that they are still trying to find a way to put him in the movie”. That simple statement speaks volumes. It sounds like as long as it doesn’t diminish the plot, they are STILL working on pulling off Shatner’s return! I’m not even cautiously optimistic, but let’s just say “there are always possibilities” of a last minute solution!

Sisko
August 2, 2007 1:07 pm

..but if we can’t get Shat then Nimoy would be the 2nd choice

August 2, 2007 1:13 pm

#18: “#10 “Blah blah blah blah blah…”

I’m sorry, I can’t seem to hear you. What did you say?”

A good deal more than you in this instance, and less childishly.

August 2, 2007 1:13 pm

I love this man.

Everything he says makes sense. Nimoy for president in 2008.

Sleeper Agent X
August 2, 2007 1:14 pm

A great second part to that interview, Anthony! And I ‘m glad to see many of the posters here are willing to see this movie even if it doesn’t have Shatner!

As for technobabble, I’m relieved this movie won’t have so much of that. But I actually didn’t mind the so-called technobabble on TNG–at least there the tech talk had at least one foot in real science, so for those of us who had some education in physics or astronomy, the technobabble actually was often enlightening.

By the time Voyager rolled around, though, the technobabble truly was just babbling nonsense, though, and was used as a crutch to finding actual solutions. It was insulting to anyone with even a cursory knowledge of actual science. Bleh.

August 2, 2007 1:16 pm

@19 Spike,

I don’t think the original TOS had NEAR as much technobabble in it.

But, I don’t care. I *LIKE* the technobabble. It’s one of the things that sets Star Trek apart from other scifi. They have their theoretical science down!

Other shows have people float in space and think it’s ok if they just hold their breath. *rolls eyes*.
….
….
Wait a minute, they basically did that in TNG’s Disaster didn’t they!?!?!?! AAARRRGGHHH

Woulfe
August 2, 2007 1:18 pm

I’ll field the why not this Christmas question.
Well, truth is Paramount didn’t want to compeate with themselves.
It’d be a bad move on their part if they did, so they aimed for a release next year.
The second reason for pushing the film into next year, Paramount sold and is selling all their Trek stuff thet’s in storage, so to make a new Trek they have to bulid everything from scratch, again !
You don’t want them to rush though it like they did TMP do you ?

– W –
* Lord knows I don’t want them to rush though it like they did TMP *

Reklar
August 2, 2007 1:19 pm
Good interview. I’m glad they’re not going to be “shunting power to the main EPS conduit” or any of that kind of crap in this movie. What’s funny is that people think that is what Star Trek is these days.: Just a bunch of people sitting around in spandex and talking about stuff that no one in the real world understands or would want to. Watch any original story and you will see practically none of that kind of stuff. Unfortunately TOS was largely ignored or flatout forgotten in the last 20 years. I’m glad that these people are taking Star Trek back to a sense of adventure and fun and not the “maybe if I *tech the *tech the *tech will go faster” garbage that inundated TNG in it’s later years and all the other spinoffs (especially Voyager) afterwards. It always seemed like a cheap gimick and it really hindered the shows and the characters. Technobabble was OK in small doses, but when the synopsis of upcoming episodes in TV Guide went from (ex):”Picard and crew must out-think a man with super-human abilities to save the galaxy” to: “Picard and crew discover a tachyon pulse that affects the starships warp reactor matrix and causes an influx of radiated energy that creates an unstable particle field in the time-space continuum. Meanwhile Deanna gets a visitor from Earth and Data learns to read poetry”. It got flatout boring and pretty weak. I’m glad they’re going back to character driven ideas and… Read more »
Ivory
August 2, 2007 1:20 pm

Glad to hear again that they are still trying to get Shatner in the film.

August 2, 2007 1:26 pm

You know, I have a hard time believing that, at this late date, there is any real question of whether or not “old Kirk” can be included in the film in a narrative sense. If it can be done without damaging the integrity of the story–or if it can’t–then I have to believe that J.J. and the gang already have that figured out. In which case, the ambiguity over Shatner’s involvement is either a ploy to keep us all guessing and surprise us when the film actually premiers, or… Shatner is playing hardball with the negotiations.

I’m not making any predictions or even saying that I believe this myself, but it wouldn’t surprise me if Shatner IS involved and everything we’ve heard to the contrary is just disinformation. “But,” you say, “that would mean that J.J. and the writers and even Nimoy himself are LYING to us!” >>Gasp!

CanuckLou
August 2, 2007 1:27 pm

@Jim #3 Amen Brother!

BTW I hear Nimoy has a talent for reading minds!;)

Sense of Wonder! Bring it back!!!

I don’t want another day at the office vibe.

Great interview Anthony – thanks!

Sleeper Agent X
August 2, 2007 1:35 pm

Re 33:

Or, on the other hand, it’s just as easy to conclude that Shatner is not in the movie, and that while J.J. and his group are still looking at the problem and trying to find a solution, they don’t think they’ll be able to get there.

But by saying now that they’re looking to get Shatner in the film, they’ve laid the groundwork to be able to come back later to say, “we really tried.”

DavidJ
August 2, 2007 1:37 pm

You know, I think the COOLEST thing about this new movie is just the fact Leonard Nimoy is going to be back in the spotlight again for the next year or so. He completely disappeared off the face of the map for a while, and it’s great to hear from him again.

I can’t wait to see him show up on Leno and Letterman and everywhere else next year.

billy don't be a hiro
August 2, 2007 1:42 pm

“I also said to him that if I had been in Generations I would not have let him die…and that is a fact. I thought it was gratuitous. I didn’t see why…what was the point? I thought it was a waste of a very important character.”

Nimoy is a very insightful individual.

Lao3D
August 2, 2007 1:43 pm

You can read a lot between the lines in parts of that interview. Very interesting stuff…

Driver
August 2, 2007 1:43 pm

I do not want the film to look exactly like TOS. But If it doesn’t, then how can Spock recall something that was not ever seen(on TOS)? The new film is an enigma wrapped around a riddle couched in something or other.

Plum
August 2, 2007 1:44 pm

Great interview Anthony! Is this a scoop or what!

Harry Ballz
August 2, 2007 1:44 pm

We’re looking for a movie with a SENSE OF WONDER=SOW. A sow is a PIG. Shatner is a HAM looking for too much money to be in the movie. A selfish HAM is a very distinctive kind of PIG. So, if one were to invoke logic and SOW is the same as PIG, this proves Shatner SHOULD be in the new film because that’s what we’re looking for, namely SOW (SENSE OF WONDER) which, in essence, is the same as PIG. Everybody got that??
Bwahahahaha…………

Robert April
August 2, 2007 1:47 pm

#16

Maybe it is just me, but it seems that most of the BRING BACK KIRK types here want Shatner back – but only if it makes a substantial contribution to the story.

If it doesnt happen I get the sense that there would be great disappointment for BBKers regarding this one single aspect of the movie but that it would not incite a feeling of malice toward the rest of the film.

To the contrary, most seem to think the film will be great even without Shatner.

But I don’t get the same feeling from those who LOATH the idea of Shatner’s return.

If the writers and producers do put Shatner in, will you then say “Oh, they caved in to pressure from fanboys” ???

If the script turned out even MORE awesome with Shatner’s inclusion (backed up by Nimoy’s opinion) would you still refuse to see it?

Your opinion of the creative team seems to be (I am sure you will correct me if I am wrong) that they have come up with a fabulous adventure story that, quite obviously could NEVER have room for Shatner’s participation else it ruin the movie.

I just don’t get all the negativity I am seeing. It is very untrek like.

Kevin
August 2, 2007 1:51 pm
I never had a problem with the techno-babble in TNG or DS9. Yes, you would expect them talk that way. It was usually believable and understandable. They were using techno-babble in TOS. Trek’s always been science fiction. Roddenberry wanted you to believe that they had fantastic technology in the future. As technology advanced and current understanding advanced, so did the techno-babble. Unfortunately, by Voyager they had taken it to a level where even I (who’ve read just about every Star Trek Tech manual and seen several blueprints) couldn’t make sense of it. One minute, our heroes are in peril then someone spouts some techno-babble you can’t really follow, there’s a beam and the day is saved. I’m sittin’ there going, “what just happened?” If I gotta start pulling out reference material to figure out the climax of a story, that’s not good story telling. Don’t get me wrong, I liked VOY. It wasn’t every episdode that did that, but enough of them. On bringing back Shatner. I’d like to see it too. You can’t simply ignore Generations and if you want to then you shouldn’t care about ignoring anything. The Enterprise can have a hundred decks (I’m looking at you Shatner), McCoy’s first name can be changed to Dirk and Spock’s a half Vulcan half Selat. You start picking and choosing what to keep and what not and you start pissing off fans ala Superman Returns. The same people that said to just ignore III and IV and start from… Read more »
Al
August 2, 2007 2:02 pm

Nimoy does not lie and has never played Hollywood games – too old and too rich as he once said – so if he says Kirk/Shatner isn’t in the script, he isn’t. Not to say a way might not be found yet for a cameo, but we know that Nimoy is in this film because it is a role, not a cameo and I think it would very, very, difficult to do that for Kirk too. Don’t forget that in many ways, Star Trek TOS (including the movies) is really all Spock’s story.

Robert April
August 2, 2007 2:03 pm

#35 “But by saying now that they’re looking to get Shatner in the film, they’ve laid the groundwork to be able to come back later to say, “we really tried.””

This would seem to be the case.

#26

In reply to your reply:

Yeah, I can be a bit on the childish side sometimes. Sorry if it offended you. My “Blah blah” post was like a kid trying to taunt another kid on the playground and was certainly unworthy of a reply.

;-)

BTW, your posts often are quite insightful and clearly offer a distinct view of the whole business of making Trek movies.

THX-1138
August 2, 2007 2:05 pm

Shatner and Shatner! What is Shatner?

Good Lord, I am so tired of this Shatnobabble. Can we all just move along with this? FOR NOW, HE’S NOT IN THE MOVIE!

I think what we can surmise from the interview is that Nimoy’s portion of this is going to take place after the events in Generations and that they are going to regard those events as canon, at least to the degree that Kirk is dead. Of course, this is just guessing. This would also lead one to believe that Shatner would not be involved on screen as Kirk as his appearance is just too different from how he appeared in Generations. The story was written without him. He seemed to make a choice to have the Kirk character die. He could have said “Hell no!” but he took the money. Abrams and the writers aren’t going to come up with some monkey rigged idea to change all that so we had all better get used to it. Star Trek IS NOT William Shatner. As some people are fond of quoting from Trekdom, “The good of the many outweighs the good of the few. Or the one.” Change the word “many” with “movie” and I think that makes sense, too.

Harry Ballz
August 2, 2007 2:06 pm

“really all Spock’s story” Oh, really? O.K., I’ll bite. How so?

Kobayashi Maru
August 2, 2007 2:07 pm

Great interview, Anthony! Like many, I am disappointed with the idea of Shatner not returning, but contriving something just to give him face time will be a bigger insult than B,B&G killing the character because they could. Nimoy was right that it was a mistake in the first place, but at least, we are getting back a James T. Kirk in his prime!

Is it just me or is trekkor more embarrassing than trekkie?
August 2, 2007 2:14 pm
Ah, how great has it been to hear from Leonard Nimoy again? It’s been forever since we’ve heard from him properly, and while we’ve been lucky enough to have Shatner grace our TVs and cereal commercials for the last couple of years, it wasn’t Trek and he’s moved on now. Generations really did happen didn’t it? They are respecting canon now, so they are respecting that too – I guess hoping they would cherry pick that too is simply asking far, far too much since only the hardcore of fans is going to get it, let alone most trekkies (I remember over 50% of Americans once claiming that honorific?) So what chance would the non-fans have of working out a post-Nexus resurrected Kirk? So wonderful as these last few days have been, it’s making me sad now. I’ve been in denial about James T Kirk meeting an insignificant end on an insignificant planet to a bridge collapsing. But I guess it “really happened” so it’s time to let go. There’s still “an echo” of him in the Nexus (well, there was an echo of Guinan and she’d been blown away at that point too) but I can’t see any films going in there and pulling him out. Thanks Anthony for an amazing site, an excellent interview and for helping wake up the fanboy that Voyager/Enterprise and the 2Bs had hammered into the ground. 18 months to go? Can we have a countdown timer on the site now please? :-) Oh,… Read more »
mctrekkie
August 2, 2007 2:21 pm

#20 / Craig

No offense,but no bloody Enterprise A. B.C. D. E.or F.

those six letters remind me of another six :

B.E.R.M.A.N.

Sorry

It’s a TOS romp

Even I, owner of the Encyclopedia Shatnerica, am coming around that this might be a really good (althouse shat-less) TOS adventure.

I do think there are rumblings (here on this site) of a trek cartoon set in the far,far [Trek] future for ya. Perhaps Enterprise P?

wpDiscuz