Return of the Tom Cruise Rumor: Now As Pike! [UPDATE: Rumor Denied] |
jump to navigation

Return of the Tom Cruise Rumor: Now As Pike! [UPDATE: Rumor Denied] August 6, 2007

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Rumor,ST09 Cast , trackback

Remember last fall when crushed the Tom Cruise in Star Trek rumor, when his own people told us it wasn’t true. Well it is hard to keep a good rumor down and now IGN are saying that JJ Abrams wants Tom Cruise to play a cameo as Chris Pike…the captain of the Enterprise before Jim Kirk (originally played by Jeffrey Hunter). cannot confirm or deny this report at this time. IGN has good sources, but some of their previous casting rumors didn’t pan out.

UPDATE: Rumor Denied
Arnold Robinson, a publicist for Mr. Cruise, tells that this story is "not true." has also not been able to get any confirmation of the story from any sources.   

The idea of Cruise as Pike is not that crazy, and not a bad idea actually. Abrams has a good relationship with Cruise (it was Cruise who plucked Abrams from the world of TV to bring him on to direct Mission: Impossible: III). Abrams has since stated that he would like to work with the actor again. In the recommendations for casting last year I suggested Cruise as the villain (and Tom Hanks as Pike). Cruise has done cameos, the latest of which was in Austin Powers in Goldmember. Assuming they could meet his price they would also have to ensure that it doesn’t get the kibosh by Viacom chief Sumner Redstone who unceremoniously ended Cruise’s long-time relationship with Paramount a year ago.

Expect big names in smaller parts reported long ago that that Pike will be in the movie, and it has been told that it is likely that some of these smaller supporting parts will have bigger name actors since the main cast is likely to be made up of lesser-knowns. This was done to good effect in another recent franchise refresh Batman Begins: – which had Michael Caine, Liam Neeson, Gary Oldman and Morgan Freeman). IGN also reported that Paramount are looking at another A-lister for the role of the villain. Right now the producers are deep into casting this film and so expect to see lots and lots of casting rumors and news over the next couple of months.    


vote in the latest poll (right column) on who you would want to see as Captain Pike 


1. Captain Pike - August 6, 2007

I could live with Tom playing me.

2. Harry Ballz - August 6, 2007

Do not cast Tom Cruise, I beg you!! He’ll throw the whole friggin’ movie off, I assure you! THE MAN IS NOT A GOOD ACTOR!!!

3. cd - August 6, 2007

Tom Cruise as Pike?!? I ‘m not seeing it. Maybe I’m a stickler for the new actor looking very much the original actor, but I just can’t see Cruise working as Pike.

4. Srgt. Munster - August 6, 2007

 Tom Cruise…what the hell. Stranger things have happened, and I\’m fine with JJ shaking things up!

5. Buckaroohawk - August 6, 2007

I can see Cruise in a cameo as Pike. I have no problem with the idea whatsoever.

Paramount, on the other hand, might. The break-up between Cruise and Paramount was not an amicable one, and the studio might not someone they consider publicly a bit…what’s a diplomatic term I can use here?…”skittish” to appear in the revival of their tentpole franchise.

My feeling is this won’t happen. I expect to see a major star sign on for a supporting role, but it won’t be Cruise.

Next rumor, please.

6. fred - August 6, 2007

Tom Cruise as Pike sound ok with me after all not going to be a big part, i guess, and it wound bring a lot of press to the probjet ! he can turn in a good performance, so win win just not kirk or any of the other main parts please. not first but who care about that apart a really sad person

7. Guy Fleegman - August 6, 2007

You know who I would cast as Pike? Paul Gross. Yeah, he’s a kanuck. But if you’ve ever seen Due South, I think we could agree that he would have not only the look, but the gravitas needed to pull off Pike. Tom Cruise just dosin’t have the height or the look.

8. Mark - August 6, 2007

Cruise as Pike and Beyonce as Uhura would kill this movie.

9. Harry Ballz - August 6, 2007

The old adage is, “there are no small parts, just small actors”. Yes, but that doesn’t mean you have to be so stupid that you go out and cast the smallest actor you can find! Hey, the one plus side to Cruise being so short? He’s the last one to know it’s raining!!

10. cheer - August 6, 2007

Tom Cruise is not a good actor? Harry, you’re out of your mind. Even if you’re not a fan of MI1/2/3 or War of the Worlds, what about Minority Report? A Few Good Men? The Firm? Jerry Maguire? Rain Man? Born on the Fourth of July?

The guy can act, but I think gets dinged because he’s a pretty boy. I doubt this rumor is for real, but on the off chance it is, I think it would work.

And even if you think he doesn’t have a lot of range, are you telling me that playing a cocky starship captain isn’t right in his wheelhouse? :)

11. toddk - August 6, 2007

I thought tom cruise was good in “Risky buisness” and Interview with a vampire” but I dont care about much else, Since the role only requires his “temporary presence” I will allow this, Who knows, maybe cruise will steal the movie and he will sign on as pike for the next 5 films..Could happen:)

12. Montreal Paul - August 6, 2007

I don’t mind Tom Cruise as Pike. That could work. And having Ryan Reynolds as Kirk would be great too! What do you guys think?

13. Rastaman - August 6, 2007

Tom Cruise as “Fleet Captain” … yuck … I can smell the cheese.

I have a hard time seeing him in the role of Pike. If so, this won’t be Jeffrey Hunter’s Captain Pike, that’s for sure! Hey, why not Matt Damon as Captain Pike?

14. Harry Ballz - August 6, 2007

Sign on for 5 more films? That’s what we’re all afraid of…..Cruise’s acting is the worst!! I’ve seen better acting in high school plays!

15. Charley W - August 6, 2007

Cruise’s $$ demends will probably be too much, even for a brief cameo, to be seriously considered. Plus, as good of an actor as he is (and I personally, do not consider him ‘America’s BEST actor, as some of the publicity claims), he’s frankly a loose cannon with his personal life as he showed all too well a couple of years ago (and how many of you think that that whole business WASN’T a publicity stunt?). That said, however, at least he’s not a $1000-a-day junkie like some I could name.

I do suspect they will have some big-name cameos, since that is the tendacy nowadays.

16. cheer - August 6, 2007

OK, I think I get it…Mr. Ballz is a troll.

Right, moving on.

17. Kobayashi Maru - August 6, 2007

It’s alright, although I thought Cruise and Paramount are not on good terms. How about George Clooney?

18. Devon - August 6, 2007

Nah I don’t see it. His asking price is probably way too much and without sounding presumptious I don’t see the role of Pike as being very big.

19. cheer - August 6, 2007

Clooney seems a bit too old. If you figure that Pike must’ve finished his tour on the Enterprise not long after The Cage (since Spock doesn’t seem to age much from The Cage to Where No Man…), then I don’t think he’s that much older than Kirk. (Cruise isn’t a youngster anymore either, but his babyface helps.)

Or they could go with Gary Sinese…

20. Tobes - August 6, 2007

I’d be okay with it, as long as it’s Pike post-accident.

The thought of Tom Cruise being able to communicate solely through a beep and flashing light is… intriguing.

21. Drew - August 6, 2007

Total BS – Just another Rumor.

JJ and company… Ya might want to cast Ray Liotta to portray Pike. (If the character will be in the movie)

22. Tobes - August 6, 2007

From the IGN article:

“And if you think this Cruise stuff is crazy then you don’t even want to know which A-lister we were told Paramount is trying to land to play the villain!”

… uh oh.

23. 1701 over Gotham City - August 6, 2007

Eh… I can deal with it… but only if the idea of big names surround the lesser knowns. If he’s the only one, he’ll stick out as Tom Cruise, not a character… remember Ted Danson suddenly showing up all pretty in “Saving Private Ryan”? Tom is a bit too smiley for Pike, who really was quite a sourpuss. I think the idea of Tom Hanks is growing on me.

I’d love to see either Tom Selleck or Eddie Murphy anywhere in a small role… both are supposedly big Trek fans, and both were supposedly rumored as considerations way way back for Trek IV. But that’s just a fan thinking silly.

24. Brian - August 6, 2007

Cruise or Hanks as Pike would be cool with me.

25. Duane Boda - August 6, 2007

Tom Cruise may have the looks and might be able to pull it off as Captain Pike but he seems too cocky (immature) for this role. Then again….that might be is his favor. When
I picture this actor I forever see him as a wise-ass in Top Gun and thats not a element that I can see working in the next Star Trek film in any shape or form.
He’s too full of himself and a tad bit weird.

26. Demode - August 6, 2007

Its Ray Liota!!!! C’mon people! He looks just like the original actor, and is the perfect age for the part!

27. Drew - August 6, 2007

Thank You DEMODE!!!!! I agree 100%

28. Harry Ballz - August 6, 2007

Troll? Hardly! I have every right to protest Tom Cruise being cast in the movie. I know when an actor has “it” and, believe me, Mr. Cruise DOES NOT HAVE IT!

29. Miko - August 6, 2007

Regardless of what I think of Tom’s acting ability, I’d rather not have him anywhere near this movie because any character he plays, people will never see his character, they will always see Tom Cruise.

30. South African Dude - August 6, 2007

Wouldn’y it be great, to add to the films humor is we could cast Schwarzenegger as a klingon?

31. Kobayashi Maru - August 6, 2007

Rumor alert!
Tom Cruise will play Alexander, the character from ‘Plato’s step-children’!

32. Smike van Dyke - August 6, 2007

While I really don’t like Cruise, I could imagin him as Pike (as long as the role isn’t that big)…But hasn’t Paramount fired him for good? I’d prefer Ray Liotta though…

33. Jeffrey S. Nelson - August 6, 2007

Tom Cruise would be fine as Pike and lend the project more solid credibility. Maybe we’ll see him get blasted by the radiation…and then Sean Kenney will take over. One beep for yes?

34. Gary Seven - August 6, 2007

I have to say for the first time I’m getting a bit worried about the guys making this movie. First, Tom Cruise as Pike. Even more worrisome is there are the misguided casting instructions that McCoy is to be a character who seeks out danger. McCoy- the everyman, the regular guy caught up in bizarre outer space situations, as DeForest Kelley described the role- does not seek out danger (he is afraid of the transporter, for example).
Of course I expect some changes in a 2007 version of Trek. I want Trek back soooo much- but not if they turn this into something that is really not Trek after all.

35. Penhall - August 6, 2007

I’m all for big names playing the lesser roles and unknowns playing the main roles, but please, NO CRUISE!

I dont see him as Pike, and he’ll just be a distraction, I think. And I just plain dont care for him as an actor….

36. Kevin - August 6, 2007

I was under the impression that Paramount would have nothing more to do with Cruise on account that he’s kind of gone crazy.

I still like Liotta, if he could lower his voice a bit.

37. Shepherd - August 7, 2007

I don’t want Star Trek under the influence of the “Super Adventure Club”. It would spoil the movie in my eyes. And: This guy acts like a bad robot and has no charisma.

38. Sleeper Agent X - August 7, 2007

I don’t mind the idea of Cruise as Pike so much…except that he’s still such a big name star (despite his couch jumping antics) that there’s a good chance he’d completely overshadow the new Kirk.

Maybe that’s the effect Abrams is going for, to portray Kirk as the newcomer who has to prove himself worthy of command, but Cruise still might be too much for the new guy.

I can just imagine young Kirk stepping off the turbolift onto the bridge, looking a bit lost. Cruise/Pike gets up from the command chair and says, “So you’re Kirk, huh?” He then squeezes Kirk’s hand in a bonecrushing grip, with a cocky grin on his face that says, “You pussy!”

39. The Wild Man of Borneo - August 7, 2007

Pierce Brosnan as Captain Pike!

40. Zev Love X - August 7, 2007

Not too keen on the idea of Cruise as Pike. Not seeing it at all…

However, I’m all for exposing Tom Cruise to delta radiation and relegating him to a beeping chair for the rest of his life.

41. The Wild Man of Borneo - August 7, 2007

hahahaha, and once again I turn to the chronology by Michael and Denise Okuda…

According to the Star Trek chronology…


James Kirk is promoted to captain of the Starship Enterprise and meets Christopher Pike (for the first time), who is promoted to fleet captain.


Captain James Kirk, in command of the U.S.S. Enterprise, embarks on a historic five year mission of exploration.

According to this the first time Kirk will meet Pike is when Kirk first gets promoted to captain of the Enterprise. hmmmm, this actually might make sense for once.

::thumbs up::

42. Aaron R. (Fanboys unite: "New Sisko Movie!") - August 7, 2007

I refuse to become involved in casting discussions until they are finalized and set in stone. Rumors are just plains attrocious. They get everyone fired up and people can tend to get very errr ummm edgy… when they are fired up. Now give me real facts and I fire up on all cylinders if its good enough.

Aaron R.

43. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - August 7, 2007

I only want Tom Cruise in it if he gets to do a scene on the bridge of the Enterprise running back and forth in his underwear to the tune of Old Time Rock & Roll by Bob Seeger.

44. Big E - August 7, 2007

I’d rather not have big names in small parts. It will be really distracting and will draw too much attention to otherwise minor roles (subverting the writers’ original intent).
If they want a big name in a substantial part (like the villain), then it’s fine by me.

45. Cranston - August 7, 2007

Eh, Cruise could be OK, but it’s hard for me to see it. If you have to go with a big star cameo, George Clooney is the best idea I’ve heard — he doesn’t *not* look like Pike, and he could certainly play the role well. Liotta looks a lot like Pike, but that’s not absolutely crucial for me.

As for Pike’s age, he should be at least 10 years older than Kirk — “The Cage” was 11.5 years before TOS Season 1, so he should be at least mid-40s, and 50ish wouldn’t be out of line. Of course, they do seem to be casting young for this one….

It would be awesome to see Tom Hanks as a Starfleet captain, but again I don’t think he’s the best fit for Pike.

46. Chuck Amuck a.k.a. Shran from Memory Alpha - August 7, 2007

I don’t really see Cruise playing Pike, but I don’t think it would be a horrible thing if he got the part. Cruise is a good actor, and it is only a cameo. That said, I’m worried that, if he is given the role, his appearance would throw off the whole film – people would be too focused on the actor rather than the character. If he is in the film, it needs to be handled to where that doesn’t happen.

Personally, though, I’d rather not have people that famous in any role in the film.

47. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - August 7, 2007

In all seriousness, now, I think big names in small roles can lend weight to a film – IF! – the roles are not merely perfunctory vehicles for showing off a big name.

Some other positive examples – Ralph Fiennes as Voldemort, Gary Oldman as Sirius Black, and Michael Gambon as Dumbledore in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire and others in the series. In terms of screen time, they are small parts, and only the kids’ roles (necessarily originally played by virtual unknowns) are major, but the characters themselves are integral to the story.

Another positive example – Dame Judi Dench in the recent James Bond movies. Again, in terms of screen time, she only had a few minutes in any of them, but an actress of her caliber really brings credibility to the supporting role of M.

An example of what to avoid – Gary Oldman, William Hurt, and Heather Graham in Lost in Space. That film is one of the prime examples of a horrendous reboot. These were major actors in major roles, and yet the atrocious story made their acting skills irrelevant.

48. trektacular - August 7, 2007

We all might be praying for Berman to come back after we see this ‘Hollywoodized’ Star Trek film.

49. Storma - August 7, 2007

Take Ray Liotta as Pike. He looks almost exactly like him!

50. Miko - August 7, 2007

You’re putting Tom Cruise in the league of Ralph Fiennes, Gary Oldman, Michael Gambon, Jude Dench, etc?

If those actors are heavyweights, it’s because of their acting ability. Tom Cruise is a “heavy weight” because he is a pretty boy that makes blockbuster films, a great deal of his popularity is because of the notoriety and public nature of his private life.

Ralph Fiennes can easily disappear into Voldemort, but whoever Tom Cruise plays, he will always be TOM CRUISE. He’s gotten to that point that you can no longer separate him from his characters. Not only that, it’s just my opinion that his acting ability will never reach even a tenth of any of those English actors you mentioned.

And if you put him in this Star Trek movie, people are NOT going to see his character, but they will see Tom Cruise and his crazy shenanigans. I admit, it’s going to pull in more viewers, and put Star Trek into A-List territory (if JJ Abram’s connection hasn’t already), but I fear it will be ultimately more damaging to the film itself and the story it will try to tell.

51. COMPASSIONATE GOD - August 7, 2007

No. No. …and no. Cruise is a one-note hack more interested in pumping the Cult of Scientology than developing as a performer…and “Born on the 4th of July” worked thanks to the great DIRECTOR, not Captain one-note.

Aside from that, Cruise is toothy, hooked-nosed, short and lacks even a passing resemblance to the late Jeffrey Hunter (and before anyone says “yeah, but its a reboot, so they do not have to match at all”, Mr. Quinto’s looks were a factor in his landing the role of Spock).

Find another.

52. Bryan - August 7, 2007

Neal McDonough, Star Trek First Contact’s Lt. Hawk for Pike. When I first saw him there I thought how he structurally resembled Jeff Hunter.
What about Rob Lowe?

53. David - August 7, 2007

Cruise carries a reputation that Star Trek shouldn’t be involved with. Keep him out, please!

54. jonboc - August 7, 2007

I don’t think they need any “names” attached to this project, but if the powers that be decide that they do….Cruise is a great choice for Pike.

55. Tim Handrahan - August 7, 2007

I am ok with the Cruise cameo as long as it remembered that Star Trek is about the characters, not faces or a popularity contest. A balance of ACTORS and popular faces needs to be maintained in order to keep the dignity of the franchise. Leonard Nimoy has been quoted often as saying “Star Trek is about the people. Without the people, you don’t have Star Trek.”

56. Pizza Hotdog - August 7, 2007

Tom cruise, sure why not. Just use lots of makeup, cover his face with latex ala MI III, do a voice over and that should be fine. I should forget about this by the time the movie rolls into the theatre.

I hope this movie doesn’t become the “In” thing in Hollywood to a be a who’s who movie. The last thing I want is to be distracted by recognizing actors playing a roll.

SIncerely, with all due respect to all the actors, I’m going to gag on opening night if I hear people chattering ……… Oh… there’s Tom Cruise playing Pike, there’s Greg Grunberg playing a Klingon, there’s Zachary Quinto playing Spock, there’s …..(add applicable rumor).

My vote if I have one is to use as many actors with as little notoriety as possible. Sign them all to a three movie deal, and think ahead for more.

Am I alone in saying I want to be immersed in the movie without any recognizable distractions? This may be difficult today, so how about we keep it to a minimum.

506 dtst

57. Adam Cohen - August 7, 2007

I don’t mind this bit of casting one bit. Sure, Cruise is insane in real life, but he’s very good onscreen– love him or hate him, you have to admit that he’s a strong movie actor.

I’ve read a lot of comments above that say “Paramount can’t afford Cruise” etc. I think that given Cruise and Viacom’s falling out over two years ago, this is a genius stroke by Abrams to help broker the peace between the company and its former #1 star. Think about how this will play in Hollywood. Cruise now has United Artists, so he’s landed firmly on his feet, and there was some backlash against Redstone for indulging his trophy wife’s opinion that Cruise can’t sell movie tickets anymore. Whichever side you are on in that situation, you have to admit that Viacom handled it poorly and would have gone about dissolving their relationship with Cruise differently if they had the chance to do it all over agian.

So, Cruise walking back onto the Paramount lot is a way for both sides to bury the hatchet. I predict this casting move is likely to happen. And yes, I too would like to see Ray Liotta instead as well. But Cruise is not a bad alternative.

58. Dyson Sphere - August 7, 2007

I like cheer’s idea of Gary Sinese – he doesn’t have the baggage Cruise has.

The scene – Pike, on the bridge, hands the “keys” to the ship to Kirk, saying “now son, I trust you won’t wreck her first time out. And be home before midnight” then leaves, not to return.

59. Sam Belil - August 7, 2007

Cruise is a HORRIBLE ALTERNATIVE to play Pike!!!! Just when I started to get excited again, this rumor pops up! If true this is not a good news for the movie!!!!! Tom Cruise in no way comes close to Jeffrey Hunter (who was BY FAR a much better actor). Hey lets make Val Kilmer, Kirk! Rihana can play Uhura! Bill Ray Cyrus can play McCoy, and Jackie Chan can play Sulu for than matter — and lets not forget, John Cleese can play Scotty!!

60. Dennis Bailey - August 7, 2007

A “Star Trek” movie would be lucky to get someone like Cruise to appear in it. I certainly hope that this and the rumors about other big stars – especially as the villain – turn out to be true.

The idea that Shatner is a good enough actor to appear in this flick and Cruise isn’t is…worthy of Bizarro World.

61. Tony - August 7, 2007

Well.. at least he kinda looks like Jeffery Hunter.

62. StillKirok - August 7, 2007

Lousy idea.

63. Driver - August 7, 2007

Cruise as Pike=Sure, why not.

64. COMPASSIONATE GOD - August 7, 2007

Dennis, Shatner is one of the key reasons for the popularity of the concept–on of the leading faces of the franchise–on the other hand, Cruise is just some nutjob with a bad reputation a reboot does not need in any way. If J.J. and associates want name actors in minor roles, then cast SERIOUS/TALENTED name actors (someone else accurately referenced Batman Begins), not walking sideshows.

Distractions of that nature serve little purpose.

65. Trevok - August 7, 2007

I ‘m not sure Paramoumt would let him on the lot. I like the idea of big names in cameo roles though. Tom Hanks would be my choice for Pike. With luck we’ll get real info before long.

66. Dom - August 7, 2007

Tom Cruise? Why not? Big names in smaller supporting roles will give the film even more kudos. How about Ken Watanabe or Chow Yun Fat as Nogura? Britney Spears as Yeoman Smith? Samuel L Jackson or Jamie Foxx as Richard Daystrom? Colin Farrell as Gary Mitchell? Robert De Niro as Dr Piper?

Good supporting actors won’t overshadow the main characters; bad ones will!

67. StillKirok - August 7, 2007

Shatner IS Star Trek. He’s 100000000 times more valuable to the franchise than that nutjob Tom Cruise. Lucky to get Tom Cruise? It would get negative press. The guy is a wacko who shoves his opinions and smarmy attitude down people’s throats. You could actually SEE his smugness.

William Shatner MADE this franchise. Tom Cruise might be a star in other genres, but in Star Trek, Shatner is king.

68. Pat - August 7, 2007

Forget Cruise, I’d LOVE to see Tom Hanks as Christopher Pike!!

69. StillKirok - August 7, 2007

Tom Hanks is many things, but he is no action hero like Chris Pike. Another role? Maybe. But if there’s money in the budget for these guys, there sure is money in the budget for Shatner. There is actually a need for and a demand for Shatner. There is hardly a “get Tom Cruise in Star Trek” campaign.

70. Cervantes - August 7, 2007

Sorry J.J., but I think that ALL the roles should be cast with unknown or lesser known actors / actresses, as this Movie should prove to be a hit regardless, if you and the writers do your jobs well, and it will be a “star-making vehicle” for the new principles concerned. I don’t care if he is a mate of yours J.J., if this Tom Cruise rumour is true…and he accepts the “cameo”…then this Movie will have lost a lot of credibility in my eyes, as I will not see “Pike”, but will just see an over-exposed Tom Cruise… In fact I don’t want any “well-known” faces filling out the cast…this Movie doesn’t need that distraction on top of the obvious two roles being re-cast…

71. Matt - August 7, 2007

72. Star Trek: Voyeur - August 7, 2007

Cruise as Pike would garner too much negative press.
Cruise as a red-shirt….everybody cheers!

73. AaronA - August 7, 2007

Seeing as Tom Cruise and JJ Abrams are buddies, why not?

This quote from IGN is equally as *interesting!*

“And if you think this Cruise stuff is crazy then you don’t even want to know which A-lister we were told Paramount is trying to land to play the villain!”

Who IS this A-list actor they are chasing?!

74. Viking - August 7, 2007

I STILL say Robert Patrick would make a good Pike……..and I’d also put money on Ray Liotta.

75. StillKirok - August 7, 2007

If you want a bigger name in a smaller role, they should cast Matt Damon as Gary Mitchell.

76. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - August 7, 2007

Miko, I was referring to putting big names in supporting roles. I do not actually think that Tom Cruise is of the caliber of Ralph Fiennes, Gary Oldman, Michael Gambon, Jude Dench, etc. But he does have some acting talent in certain serious roles (Rain Man, Magnolia, and others)…

Let’s say I give him a 6 out of 10, where 9 is Laurence Olivier and John Gielgud (Can’t think of a 10 right now), and 1 is Edith Massey of John Waters fame. On the same scale, I give Shatner a 3, and Nimoy a 5. Sometimes Tom Cruise is terrible (Top Gun), but in those cases it’s also the fault of the director and/or story, and overall he has shown some grasp of acting depth.

77. munk - August 7, 2007

I feel the need… the need for Warp Speed

78. Diabolik - August 7, 2007

Ray Liotta is the ONLY man in the world that should be cast as Pike. If there’s any justice, or of things happen as they should occasionally, then Ray Liotta will appear as Pike.

79. Diabolik - August 7, 2007

Take a look:

and then tell me who else would be better.

80. Dennis Bailey - August 7, 2007

#64: “Dennis, Shatner is one of the key reasons for the popularity of the concept–on of the leading faces of the franchise–on the other hand, Cruise is just some nutjob with a bad reputation a reboot does not need in any way. ”

Tom Cruise is one of the most popular and successful actors in the world and has been for decades. He does not have a “bad reputation;” far from it. He’s been considered a bit of a flake for the last couple of years, but it doesn’t keep him from working and remaining bankable because he’s responsible, works hard and puts butts in the seats more reliably than just about any actor working (Lindsey Lohan has a bad reputation, just for comparison).

William Shatner is a successful TV actor with no demonstrated marquee value other than in connection with “Star Trek.” There’s no comparing the two – no producer or director would pass over Cruise in favor of Shatner.

81. John CT - August 7, 2007

Ray Riotta is too old to play Pike.

82. Dennis Bailey - August 7, 2007

I never thought Liotta looked like Hunter except in the sense that they were both pretty. Liotta looks Italian, and Hunter had a very white-bread look about him.

83. Scott - August 7, 2007

When I saw this article this morning, I thought “I wish they’d cast Ray Liotta as Pike.” I thought I’d have to defend the choice. Little did I realize that others felt the same way I have for years! Hunter and Liotta have a very similar look and demeanor.

And his age? Hunter was 38 when he filmed “Cage.” “The Menagerie” takes place 13 years later, so that makes the crippled Pike around 51 years old (despite Mendez’s misstatement about Pike’s age). Ray Liotta is 53. Sounds about right to me.

Scott B. out.

84. Driver - August 7, 2007

Agreed, Ray LIotta is too old for Pike of good health, but he could play the disfigured Pike.

85. CmdrR. - August 7, 2007

Hopefully, the thought to put big names in minor roles is another sign that Paramount is committed to making this a big “flagpole” or whatever jargon they’re using now for Christmas ’08. I have nothing against Tom Cruise the actor. It’s Tom Cruise the Scientologist that’s outta control. I think even Sumner would allow it, if there are certain checks in place that we’ll likely never hear about. (Maybe a clause in the contract saying Tom can’t set up Scientology tents on the set like he’s done on past shoots.)

Nice to think of Pike in this flick.

86. Lou - August 7, 2007

oh, for cryin’ out loud!! Tom freakin’ cruise?! GAAAAAH!!!!

his chin isn’t sturdy enough. We need Bruce Campbell as Pike. the voice is somewhat similar anyways.
(btw, I’m not joking. B-movie actor as he is, I think he’d do Pike very well)

87. Demode - August 7, 2007

Ray Liotta is not to old for Pike. The Cage takes place years before WNMHGB. He seems the right age for the role. It seems more appropriate to have an older captain anyways.

88. Ivory - August 7, 2007


I don’t think it’s fair in the general sense to compare Shatner to Tom Cruise. Cruise is clearly the bigger box office star.

I do think it is fair to say that in the context of a Star Trek film a William Shatner appearance would be as big (if not bigger) of a deal as Tom Cruise being in the film.

For the record. I think Cruise as Pike would be pretty cool.

89. Dennis Bailey - August 7, 2007

Shatner’s appearence would be a big deal to the few million Trek fans who will see this movie anyway. Cruise and a couple of other names might get some other potential ticketbuyers to give it a look.

90. Woulfe - August 7, 2007

I second Cruise as a Red Shirt !

He could beam down and trip on a explodeing rock !

* B O O M ! *

Yea, i’d pay $10.00 to see THAT !

– W –
* Smirking *

91. mctrekkie - August 7, 2007

#83 Scott

Hunter was 38 when he filmed “Cage.”

That was the actor’s age, not the characters age.

Since they never said how old PIKE was in the Cage, just go with the Mendez thing.

Either way- the actor playing Pike can be anywhere from 40-50 and it would still work.

Also it seems lots of folks are hung up on the appearance of Spock relative to the other characters. Spock is Vulcan, so his age (and appearance relative to others) would be a wildcard.

Hell, how old was Tuvok and look how young he looked?

re Pike, I’m with #20- Tobes
” I’d be okay with it, as long as it’s Pike post-accident.
The thought of Tom Cruise being able to communicate solely through a beep and flashing light is… intriguing.”

Funniest Post in the thread.

Someone should Photoshop Cruise in the little black chair.

Re Casting in general

My problem is if they make Kirk TOO young. I don’t care HOW many movies they sign the actor for.

The U.S. Navy doesn’t put 27-32 year olds in charge of their Aircraft Carriers, do they? Perhaps in time of war… perhaps a cruiser or a PT boat 109… but not a StarShip of the line.

I can suspend my disbelief a little, but not quite that much.

92. billy don't be a hiro - August 7, 2007

They call this “stunt casting” don’t they?

93. Kobayashi Maru - August 7, 2007

Oh for crying out loud!
Latest cast report:
Neil Patrick Harris… Kirk
Rupert Everett ……… Spock
Nathan Lane ……….. McCoy
Harvey Feirstein ….. Scotty
and George Takei as Admiral Nogura
The ultimate cast list will not make everyone happy, so let’s just see what they’re going to do.

94. COMPASSIONATE GOD - August 7, 2007

#80: “Tom Cruise is one of the most popular and successful actors in the world and has been for decades. He does not have a “bad reputation;” far from it.”

People tend to be defined by their current status–which is now the public preacher for a cult/BS “expert” on psychology/drugs, etc. People love to knock Shatner’s acting, yet it is all too amusing when Cruise himself is (comparatively) historically more at home (historically) in the pages of People magazine than Film Comment . Thanks to the entertainment business shamelessly pushing fluff to giddy masses, T.C. survives, though his body of work leaves much to be desired.

“William Shatner is a successful TV actor with no demonstrated marquee value other than in connection with “Star Trek.”

AH! There you have it! This IS about Trek, and that is where his Trek-ian marquee value counts; there is no stronger representative of the franchise (aside from Nimoy) than Shatner, so it stands to reason that a reboot would pofit more from the participation of one of the franchise’s greatest assests than some fluff with a presense that is no guarantee to place one butt in theatre seats–especially to the Trek fanbase who may not care either way.

95. Dennis Bailey - August 7, 2007

#94: “This IS about Trek, and that is where his Trek-ian marquee value counts;”

As I said above, it matters to a couple of million people almost all of whom will turn out anyway. He’s not worth big money to Paramount in a “Star Trek” movie, which is probably the main reason he and the studio have not agreed on this one.

Cruise is not a star because of “the entertainment business shamelessly pushing fluff to giddy masses.” He’s a star because many millions of people like him based on having seen his previous movies. I know many folks who are fans of Cruise, and there’s no evidence that they’re any more “giddy” or less discerning than you or I.

96. Captain Ucklak - August 7, 2007

Ray Liotta is not too old to play Pike. I just saw him in a stinker of a movie (Wild Hogs), but he looked great! With only a little help from the makeup people, he could easily appear to be in his thirties.

97. migbeil - August 7, 2007

I pray that Cruise isn’t in the movie. I can’t stand that [insert derogatory word here] and he would ruin the movie for me.

98. Shatner_Fan_2000 - August 7, 2007

#88 Ivory summed it up for me. I could take or leave Cruise. Who cares? If he is in it, he isn’t going to be billed as one of the main stars anyway, he’s just a potential cameo. (And it’s true that Ray Liotta would make an awesome Pike; he has an intensity and the authority that the role would require.)

#89 Dennis Bailey, it seems like you’ll take any opportunity to argue that Shatner shouldn’t be in this movie (yes, it is you who brought Shatner into this, in post #60). What do you have against him? COMPASSIONATE GOD is 100% correct. In a Star Trek movie, give me Shatner over Cruise ANY day. You must be the only Trek fan on Earth who prefer the latter.

99. Mark - August 7, 2007

I agree with number 7, Paul Gross for Pike!

100. RaveOnEd - August 7, 2007

#94: “AH! There you have it! This IS about Trek, and that is where his Trek-ian marquee value counts; there is no stronger representative of the franchise (aside from Nimoy) than Shatner, so it stands to reason that a reboot would pofit more from the participation of one of the franchise’s greatest assests than some fluff with a presense that is no guarantee to place one butt in theatre seats–especially to the Trek fanbase who may not care either way.”

OK, so where was Sean Connery or Roger Moore in “Casino Royale”?
Where was Adam West or Michael Keaton in “Batman Begins”?

It would be great to find a way, but it’s simply not necessary. I could see Cruise as Pike, and I wouldn’t mind it at all. I loved M:I 3, and that was because Cruise was playing a character in the movie, not his normal self.

I think Cruise would do a fine job.

101. Hooah Wife and friends » Blog Archive » Star Trek News - August 7, 2007

[…] There’s a rumor, that may have some merit, that Tom Cruise could make a cameo in the upcoming Star Trek movie as Captain Christopher Pike. For you non-Trekkers, Pike was the captain of the Enterprise before Kirk. I don’t think it’s a bad casting choice, but I just don’t think Cruise could fit into a Starfleet uniform without looking totally out of place. This entry was posted on Tuesday, August 7th, 2007 at 9:00 am by Indian Chris and is filed under Indian Chris, Entertainment, Celebrity. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site. […]

102. Demode - August 7, 2007

Ohhhh… Paul Gross would be a great choice. Gross is a fnatastic actor, and would look the part to. When they were casting for Capt Archard for Enterprise, I always thought Paul Gross would be the best choice. Guarantee if they casted him, it would have lasted 7 years, as women eat him up!

In fact… if they ever wanted to do a “Pike” tv series, Paul Gross would be the best choice for captain.

103. TrekLog » Blog Archive » Trek XI - Tom Cruise als Captain Pike!? - August 7, 2007

[…] Quelle: Trek Movie Report (basierend auf Informationen von IGN) […]

104. Tallguy - August 7, 2007

98 – That’s the point. He’s not talking about Star Trek fans. He’s talking about the REST of the movie going public.

Ask your average Joe on the bus about Shatner being in a new Trek movie and the odds are they’ll giggle. “He’s HILARIOUS!” might be a typical reaction. Shatner is best known for being wacky these days. (These days go back a long time, btw.)

Not saying I’m against seeing Shatner in the new movie. Heck, it is a fondest wish that Shatner would be able to get some acclaim again for NOT being funny. For NOT just being The Shat. But I don’t think it’s going to happen.

105. StillKirok - August 7, 2007

If you think the average Joe doesn’t know Shatner as Kirk, you’re quite mistaken. Kirk is still his most famous role. BY FAR.

The average Joe will watch Boston Legal and say, “hey, look at Kirk being funny.”

And the idea that people who want Shatner will turn out anyway is absolutely ludicrous. It’s that attitude that killed Star Trek over the last decade. Berman and Braga turned out a decade of garbage, and everyone assumed that the Trek hardcore fans would still show.

Guess what? They didn’t. There’s a reason ratings declined. The hardcore audience declined.

There’s a reason hardcore fans didn’t turn out for Nemesis.

Star Trek fans will not take stupidity anymore.

The idea that slapping the words Star Trek on something and assuming a bunch of people will buy it will not make for a successful movie.

William Shatner brings with him a much larger audience than anyone else. He IS Star Trek.

Star Trek is associated with William Shatner and vice versa.

Nostalgia sells.

No one would be upset if Tom Cruise isn’t in the movie.

106. Harry Ballz - August 7, 2007

#93 “latest cast report”
I assume your cast list is a reflection on Tom Cruise? Heh, heh, heh….I always enjoy it when people point a finger at the GMD!! For the definition of those initials go to

107. Cervantes ( living under a glorious Scottish sky... ) - August 7, 2007

Do like the suggestion of Cruise in a short-lived RED-SHIRT cameo…a lot…

108. CmdrR. - August 7, 2007

The average Joe will watch Boston Legal and say, “hey, look at Kirk being funny.”

The average fan will watch Boston Legal and say, “hey, look at TJ Hooker with a better rug.”

This is a lot of focus on Pike. I suspect that if he’s in the movie (and there is such a thing as editing) then it will be a small role. He’s never Kirk’s superior officer, is he? He might hand over the keys to the E and leave the Admiral’s office to go see about those troublesome kids playing in the radioactive room..

109. trekmaster - August 7, 2007

What about Patrick Stewart as Captain Pike!?

110. Lord Garth Formerly of Izar - August 7, 2007

Terrific- He might be a flakey wierdo but so are alot of us. I have always enjoyed his work. He’s one of the 5 biggest stars on the planet. He looks like Jeffery Hunter. How the F can anyone complain????

I think some of us seem to have a problem with success, what are you guys afraid of??? Our beloved “ORIGINAL TREK” franchise is one of the three most talked about franchises in hollywood right now along with Indy and Iron Man. We are getting the first superbig budget since TMP, a top creative team, more positve press since Star Trek IV, two perfect Spocks, Seeminly not F-ing with cannon, and they say they are trying to get Shatner in the film in some way (Admiral Komak or Kirk’s Pappy?) And now Tom Cruise, this thing is huge!!! I can understand many bitching about the Shatner thing I am in your camp but everything else is so beyond positive!!! And soon we’ll have our new Kirk (James Franco) and if Anthony won’t do it there will be tons of leaked photos, script info, ect all over the web. So excited.

111. Demode - August 7, 2007

For anyone who doesn’t know who Paul Gross is, here is a picture of him. He is one of the top actors in Canada, and was star of the show “Due South.” He would be another good choice for Pike.

112. Garyp - August 7, 2007

#21 I agree. Ray Liotta as Pike. The resemblance is uncanny. Plus Liotta can portray that aged frustration that Pike was going through in the Pilot.

No villian. Please.

113. Herr von Kodos - August 7, 2007

Liotta should be the new Pike!
Hey fans, what’s more important to you: a Star Trek-film that fits 100% into the Trek-canon, including persons and their faces we’re familiar with, or a Hollywood movie featuring big stars who destroy the image we all have from Strar Trek just to make this movie a success for all the people whose mind is too lacking to understand the Trek-chronology?!

114. Kobayashi Maru - August 7, 2007

On the nosey!
I said last night that they got Cruise to play Alexander from “Plato’s Stepchildren”!

115. Kobayashi Maru - August 7, 2007

Patrick Stewart playing Pike is like getting Alan Rickman for Galaxy Quest!

116. Buckaroohawk - August 7, 2007

Guy Fleegman (way back up there at #7), and the others who have responded to his comment,

Thank you for mentioning Paul Gross here! A great (and underrated) actor who never got his due in the US, would be perfect as Pike. Hell, if this project had come about 10 years ago, I’d be clamoring for him to play Kirk. That’s the kind of inspired casting that this project needs, not silly rumors about big name stars. Speaking of inspired, Guy, your callsign is a great nod to one of my favorite films.

Ray Liotta as Pike? No, I don’t think so. He’s a great actor, but it’s tough to see past the “mob thug” aspect that surrounds him.

Dennis Bailey,
I’m with you on the Cruise/Shatner debate. I don’t think it will happen, but your reasons why it could are 100% sound. People tend to forget that Cruise is a damn good actor. To those who so easily brush this aside, I suggest renting the film “Magnolia.” His performance in that movie is absolutely gut-wrenching. It’s true that he’s been tabloid fodder for a while now, but the man delivers spot-on performances and gives 200% to any project he’s working on.

Shatner really is a good actor as well, and his immense contribution to Star Trek is undeniable, but when your talking about bringing as many people around the world as possible to movie theaters, the name Cruise carries substantially more weight than the name Shatner. The simple fact of the matter is that Cruise being attached to this project would get the attention of more people than Shatner’s involvement.

Of course, this is all just supposition anyway. I’m still of the mind that this won’t happen because of the whole Cruise/Paramount thing. Still,when was the last time there was so much rumor swirling around a Star Trek project? That in itself shows just how much attention this new film is getting. As far as I’m concerned, that isn’t such a bad thing.

117. CmdrR. - August 7, 2007

Speaking of destroying the original image, do you remember what they did to “Mr. Phelps” in M:I 1?

118. Kobayashi Maru - August 7, 2007

Here, here!

119. Herr von Kodos - August 7, 2007

I don’t understand why Paramount doesn’t “revices” the actor’s faces with the help of computer-technology? They did it in Star Wars and Olsen-Bande and every Hitler you see in a movie is made by just that. No-one did ever see any difference compared to the original actor.
It’s really hard for me to accept new faces and voices…

120. JC - August 7, 2007

I think alot of producers are afraid that instead of promoting their movie Cruise will do his Scientology cult schill thing like He did with Matt Lauer.

121. Harry Ballz - August 7, 2007

TOM CRUISE=GMD= ___Midget Dwarf! I wonder what the G stands for??

122. Nelson - August 7, 2007

I won’t say I am for or against Cruise, that’s up to JJ Abrams. But I am thinking that Christian Slater showed up in Trek 6 and it worked out okay. Fun to see George Takei put him in his place.

I realize Cruise is way more known then Slater was at that time, but some ladies in the audience sure noticed. And I’m sure the point here is to cast for appropriate parts.

This is not stunt casting. When the film gets close to premiere, the focus from all the entertianment shows will be on Nimoy and hopefully Shatner and then the new actors reprising the famous crew.

123. enterprise1965 - August 7, 2007

As long as the script is good (as per Nimoy) Tom can pull this off even with JJ at the helm at the same time trek can live on its own momentum even without star power.

124. Pr011 - August 7, 2007

I can’t believe people are talking about BBK yet again – is this going to happen in EVERY thread?

I wouldn’t like Cruise in the film, in any role. He comes across as very smug, as if he knows he’s a good actor and wants to place emphasis on it rather than the character.

And anyway, I doubt Paramount are going to forgive and forget that easily.

125. Jim Loftus - August 7, 2007

Re: the potential “Tom Cruise playing Pike” thing. If this pans out to be true and they are getting top-tier names to play some of the roles (I hope just a few for the lesser roles otherwise it will be SO DISTRACTING), then that tells me the new Trek will be on the lips of almost everyone. Even people like my wife (who could give two shits about Trek) would be talking to her friends at the hair salon if that news broke.

I guess what I’m saying here is, more people atracted to Trek means more people buying tickets means more reason to create more TOS-oriented Trek films. But PLEASE – – DON’T DISTRACT EVERYONE BY PUTTING BIG NAME ACTORS IN THE MAIN ROLES, I DON”T CARE HOW GREAT AN ACTOR THEY ARE.

I would think devoted fans (like me) would be happy Paramount is actually bringing our beloved TOS back around with a script blessed by Nimoy.

One more thing: I just watched Shore Leave again last night. Who’s gonna play Finnegan? : )

126. CanuckLou - August 7, 2007

Isn’t there a minimum height requirement for Captain types that Cruise can’t pass?

127. Dennis Bailey - August 7, 2007

#113: “Hey fans, what’s more important to you: a Star Trek-film that fits 100% into the Trek-canon, including persons and their faces we’re familiar with, or a Hollywood movie featuring big stars who destroy the image we all have from Strar Trek just to make this movie a success for all the people whose mind is too lacking to understand the Trek-chronology?!”

More important? A movie that enough people actually go to see so that it turns a profit and the studio decides that maybe “Star Trek” isn’t as dead as it currently appears to be.

#120: Producers aren’t “afraid” to hire Cruise at all. As far as promotion is concerned, doing a cameo in “Star Trek” doesn’t buy the studio much of anything in the way of Cruise promoting the film. If he were starring or featured then he’d do the promotion circuit.

128. Thomas Jensen - August 7, 2007

Cruise could work just fine. It’s good to see Pike is in the film.

129. Jim Loftus - August 7, 2007

“Hey fans, what’s more important to you: a Star Trek-film that fits 100% into the Trek-canon, including persons and their faces we’re familiar with, or a Hollywood movie featuring big stars who destroy the image we all have from Strar Trek just to make this movie a success for all the people whose mind is too lacking to understand the Trek-chronology?!”

My answer is C) a Trek movie that makes me feel like I did when I walked out at the end of The Wrath of Khan. Blown the F— AWAY!!!

Dennis, I agree with your answer too.

130. COMPASSIONATE GOD - August 7, 2007

105 StillKirok: “And the idea that people who want Shatner will turn out anyway is absolutely ludicrous. It’s that attitude that killed Star Trek over the last decade. Berman and Braga turned out a decade of garbage, and everyone assumed that the Trek hardcore fans would still show.”

“Star Trek fans will not take stupidity anymore.”

True. Trek fans are not puppets with no sense of quality, otherwise they would have praised Voyager and made Enterprise and the last two TNG films hits instead of abandoning the franchise..leading to the “NEED” of a reboot.

“Star Trek is associated with William Shatner and vice versa.”

“No one would be upset if Tom Cruise isn’t in the movie.”

Again, true. No offense pro-Cruise members, but the thought of Cruise–or HIS general sort of fanbase (every performer has one) being attracted to a project (many within that fanbase probably never caring about Trek at any time) is pretty erroneous.

100. RaveOnEd”
“OK, so where was Sean Connery or Roger Moore in “Casino Royale”?
Where was Adam West or Michael Keaton in “Batman Begins”?”

Poor analogy. The Trek reboot’s plot–from what we know–has the old actors looking back at their past, or acting as bookends, whatever. Batman Begins was not a flashback involving ANY performers previously behind the mask, or continuity establlished in the 1966-68 William Dozier TV series, or the 1989 Burton film…the same with Bond–the two recent productions in question were complete reboots with no real association with older projects.

131. General retired. - August 7, 2007

oh heavens above….what further insanity will follow this report…

First…IT SEEMS….There will be, what…no older Kirk w/Shatner!?

now that IGNORANT loudmouth cruise as our beloved Pike???

tHE QUESTION IS….what more can Abrams do to destroy the Star Trek original, is what i’d like to know?


….He is ill mannered in his POOR choices thus far.

REGARDS from one very upset TOS “fan” who want to see Kirk/Shatner back along with the younger one!

..Star Trek TOS is about Kirk and his adventures…NOT SPOCK!

132. towerpower3000 - August 7, 2007

I would rather have an unknown play Pike than Tom. Paul Gross does resemble Jeff Hunter.

133. cLa007 - August 7, 2007

He looks the part but I agree with Sleeper Agent X he is just too big of a star for Pike. It will just make who ever they choose for Kirk seem strange.

134. Plum - August 7, 2007

My only question…

Does this mean the character Pike is in the movie? All arrows point to “yes”. Which I think is pretty exciting. Tom Cruise? Maybe. But I bet Tom Hanks just picked up the phone (or someone should tell him of the part). ;p

135. star trackie - August 7, 2007


making changes to give “Star Trek” mass appeal is only desirable if you want change and want Trek to conitnue, regardless of what shape it may take.
I’m just playing devil’s advocate here, because I am truly looking forward to this new movie….BUT if a movie were being made and changes were taking place to such a degree that it doesn’t resemble what I admire and enjoy in Star Trek ……well, to me it’s not Star Trek anymore so what do I care if it continues for a more “modern” hip audience? If they bastardize it just for the sake of appealing to new crowds and continuing it, which I don’t think they will…. but if they WERE going way out in left field with it, I’d say let it die.

136. Norbert - August 7, 2007

Please don’t! Pleeeeease don’t!!!!

137. Dennis Bailey - August 7, 2007

That “hard core” Star Trek fans abandoned the Franchise is a myth based on anecdotal “me and my friends waited for the DVD” stuff. The few million folks who tuned in to the last “Star Trek” series until the end and the millions (yep, millions) of people who saw “Nemesis” in the first weekend *were* the hardest of the hard core. No one else bothered.

The “Bring Back Shatner as Kirk” crowd is hundreds of people. They’re loud on the few Internet sites where they can command attention.

What Trek fans have demonstrated beyond doubt is that they don’t represent enough dollars to make “Star Trek” worth the studio’s effort. Hence, a new approach. If this fails, well…don’t hold your breath; maybe you’ll get a cartoon or something after a few years.

138. Ellie - August 7, 2007





139. Demode - August 7, 2007

“Bring Back Shatner as Kirk” crowd is hundreds of people. —- ????????

…Think again, my friend. Think again… Not everyone posts on the internet like people on this site do. My father doesn’t go on the internet at all, and he got super excited when I told him Shatner might be in the next film. If you did a public poll, you would find most people would want to see Shatner in the film.

Shatner is the Elvis of Stat Trek!

140. Roger - August 7, 2007

Watch “Collateral” then ask yourself if Trek deserves to have an actor of Tom Cruises’ caliber in it? If anything he’s over qualified. No teeth flashing in that flick, just his gun. He was a cool and deadly cat in that Michael Mann movie. Maybe not as Pike (he looks nothing like Hunter) but as a captain gone bad
or maybe as Capt. Garrivick. The man does have talent but he could be a distraction in this setting.
Put down the crackpipe all you Tom Hanks as Pike fans.

141. Xavier - August 7, 2007

Tom Cruise or Tom Hanks as Captain Pike? – I really don’t see it, if they want a big name for Pike I suggest George Clooney. He has almost the same demeanor and wit as Jeffrey Hunter, and I am guessing will be more the appropriate age for the character of Captain Pike.

142. THEETrekMaster - August 7, 2007

I agree…Ray Liotta as Pike.

143. Dennis Bailey - August 7, 2007

#140: ““Bring Back Shatner as Kirk” crowd is hundreds of people. —- ????????”

Yep. Present something more solid than an Internet petition to prove otherwise.

144. GraniteTrek - August 7, 2007

How about Patrick Stewart for the villain? When he gets killed off at the end it’ll be one big ironic joke! :)

145. Dennis Bailey - August 7, 2007

#145, That’s not bad, actually. :lol:

146. StillKirok - August 7, 2007

You are very ignorant of the numbers Dennis. There are a lot more pro-Shatner people than you realize.

Hardcore fans wouldn’t watch Star Trek for FREE, let alone pay to see it in the theaters.

Other movies and franchise manage to have hit box office and hit ratings and sell DVDs. Star Trek failed horribly in the post-Shatner era.

Hundreds of people. Ha.

The people that don’t represent enough dollars to make the Trek worthwile aren’t the Trek fans. It’s the people that drove the Trek fans away.

People aren’t buying what the studio was trying to push off.

Yet through it all, Shatner remains popular. Like it or not, the man has legions of loyal fans that want to see his return.

Tom Cruise doesn’t have that kind of following in Trek.

147. Jeyl - August 7, 2007

If I had an option as to have a Trek movie with “Enterprise” references or a Trek movie with Cruise as Pike, I’m going all the way with Cruise. He’s not my favorite and I think his religion is silly, but watching him in Collateral really did show that he could get into a part.

And come on. They casted The Rock in a Voyager episode. This can’t be that bad.

148. Jeyl - August 7, 2007

And ya. I always thought of Ray Liiota whenever I saw Pike.

149. Kev - August 7, 2007

Cruise would have been fine as Kirk; he has the required presence and self-assuredness. Kirk would have been a big enough personality to “hide” his superstar baggage in. Their Kirk choice will have to be good. To me, though, this film is begiining to sound like something which won’t be Star Trek by the time they’re finished with it. The very idea of peppering the show with big names and not having Shatner shows where the priority is; but they may be miscalculating that big names in ST will draw crowds. What do I know, anyway. The “villain” is another thing. Rarely has that worked without other story elements, ie. Genesis.

150. StillKirok - August 7, 2007

#148, no argument. The stunt casting isn’t that big of a deal, though I personally can’t stand Tom Cruise. His holier than thou arrogance is a drawback. It wouldn’t be the end of the world to have him in a minor role, but clearly it is far more important to cast Kirk correctly and bring in Shatner as that is far more directly related to Star Trek.

151. RaveOnEd - August 7, 2007


Nope, not a poor analogy at all. A “reboot” is one type of movie and one only: a complete restart of a series (I don’t like using the word “franchise”, sounds like a Wendy’s), with a possibility of changing some points of origin or a complete re-telling of an established story.

If this movie is about Kirk first taking command of the Enterprise, this is not a reboot, as this story has not been told or shown before on screen.

Orci was right: the term “reboot” is not applicable, or something to that effect.

152. Oceanhopper - August 7, 2007

I very much hope this is another rumour that has no basis in fact.
If that nasty, odious little s**t is in this movie I will not watch or buy the movie. He is a thoroughly unpleasant mouthpiece for a contemptable little cult that is about as antithetical to what Star Trek is all about as the Third Reich.

Sorry for the strong langauge but let’s not mince words here.

153. Shatner_Fan_2000 - August 7, 2007

#137 Dennis Bailey, you seem to be more obsessed with Shatner than anyone! Here in this thread, you’ve brought him into the discussion yet again, when people were staying on topic and discussing the subject at hand. Did you have some traumatic childhood experience that centered around the Shat?

It’s pretty short-sighted (that’s the nice term I’ll use) to think that only a few hundred people in the world would like to see Shatner in Star Trek. As Star Trek fans playing around on the internet, we represent a unique bunch who are split as far as which incarnations of Trek we prefer. To the general public, it is much simpler: STAR TREK = TOS. And TOS to them is largely William Shatner. No doubt about it. You actually require proof? How much more proof do you need than the overall direction of this new movie? TOS is shining as bright as ever today, while everything that came after TNG, as good as some of it might have been, rates a footnote in pop culture history. And Abrams, the writers, and Nimoy have all said they want Shatner back.

I’m not against Cruise being in the movie, if that even pans out. As Anthony observed, IGN has had some pretty bogus “scoops”.

154. Anthony Pascale - August 7, 2007

Kirok you are going to get banned again, every thread is not another opportunity for you to flame people and spam for your personal campaigns…last warning…next time is permaban

155. Anthony Pascale - August 7, 2007

and everyone else….I have had it with the shatner derailments….really really had it…there is a shatner article…talk about him there but this has to end. There are a number of posters here that seem to only be posting about one thing over and over regardless of thread topic. I know other websites have had to ban them all…I am considering doing the same.

This site is not part of a campaign and I do not want it turned into any campaign.

I want the man in the movie…i support it, but I will not have this place turned into that

OH and no more ALL CAPS please

156. Ivory - August 7, 2007

Dennis: 137

Why are you so anti Shatner?

It seems you go out of your way in every post to put down the idea of his return.

If he is such a small part of the franchise why does this (and every other board) light up when his return is mentioned?

I simply don’t buy your premise that only a several hundred people would want him back. On the contrary. I think the majority of people who would pay money to see this film would like to see the most popular actor/character of the entire series.

How is it ok for you to just throw random numbers “hundreds of people” out there, but if anyone else does the same thing you are all over them?

I’m not saying that Shatner is the be all and end all of Star Trek,but he is a major part of it. Perhaps the biggest part of it.

Why can’t you just respect the many people who would love to see his return instead of attempting to minimize Shatner’s contribution in every post?

Dennis, I think you may be too close to what is going on to understand what the average fan (who remember little more than Kirk and Spock) feels about Star Trek and it’s recent (at least decade long) decline

If many people are saying they want Shatner back. It may mean that many people really do want Shatner back and that you are not correct on this subject.

157. Shatner_Fan_2000 - August 7, 2007

#151 RaveOnEd … yes, you did make a poor analogy. The recent Batman and Bond films, aside from character names, really had no association with the older projects. This new Trek film supposedly meshes with the established universe, and features Shatner/Kirk’s other half – Nimoy as Spock. Plus … how many actors have played Bond, how many have played Batman? William Shatner has been the sole individual associated with Kirk for 40 years. There is MUCH more of an argument for including him in this new movie than bringing back Roger Moore or Michael Keaton.

158. StillKirok - August 7, 2007

Anthony, I’m not the one making false claims based on nothing. It seems a bit one sided. The flame baiting is certainly coming from people like Dennis Bailey too.

I’ll try to temper it. But it’s tough to read false claims like “there are only hundreds of people that want Shatner back,” and not respond in kind.

Also it’s not really fair to accuse me of waging a personal campaign when the first mention of Shatner in this thread came in post #60. There are two sides to every story and it wasn’t the pro-Shatner crowd that brought it up. For whatever reason, Mr. Bailey has some vendetta against Shatner.

If you’re going to warn me, then all I’m asking is that you look at the whole picture.

Again, the first post on Shatner in this thread was #60.

159. Ivory - August 7, 2007


I just responded to Dennis (whom I respect on every other topic) before you put your last post up.

I’m not trying to beat a dead horse,but rather respond to Dennis who seems (as others have mentioned) to have an axe to grind with Shatner + the many people who desperately want his return.

I hope I didn’t get anyone (you or Dennis) upset with my thoughts.

160. Jackson Roykirk - August 7, 2007

The media circus that would surround this film should be concentrated on this film — not the whacky actor playing a secondary character (or any whacky actor playing any character for that matter).

This buzz about this film needs to be strictly about the film and the characters — nothing else. I don’t mind a few stories about , for example, Leonard Nimoy, but those stories should be about what Nimoy is bringing to this film, not about his personal life.

161. DavidJ - August 7, 2007

I’ve always liked Cruise and I think he’d actually make a great Pike. He’s got exactly the kind of charisma you need for a starship captain.

But like others have said, he would COMPLETELY overshadow the guy playing Kirk. Unless they cast Brad Pitt as Kirk, but somehow I don’t think that’s very likely. lol

162. Ivory - August 7, 2007

I disagree.

I think Cruise’s star power would be great for the film. Besides the man is a great actor.

163. Jackson Roykirk - August 7, 2007

Oops! I hit the “say it” button before I was done.

To continue….I just feel that if Tom Cruise were part of this cast, the media would be talking about Tom Cruise’s personal life rather than what he brings to the character of Chris Pike — and I think that would only be detremental to this project.

164. last o' the timelords - August 7, 2007

Jim Caveziel for Pike if you want the gravitas that Cruise lacks.

165. sean - August 7, 2007

Getting back on *ahem* topic, I don’t know that this is the best idea. There was a time when having an A-lister like Cruise could help, but Cruise is no longer A-list. He’s not exactly B-list either, he’s just sort of in his own category of public embarassment. His presence hurt MI:III – an otherwise quality flick, contrary to what any Cruise haters may say. I’d also have to agree with someone else that mentioned his falling out with Paramount. I doubt they’d be getting back together so quickly after such a public disagreement.

For me, the best Pike candidate is Ray Liotta. Not only does he have Jeffrey Hunter’s piercing blue eyes, but he’s a good actor that can immerse himself in the role. Cruise does tend to play Tom Cruise regardless of the roles he takes (exceptions being his earlier work like Interview & Risky Buisness) so I’m not sure he could really disappear into it, even if it is only a cameo.

That aside, it wouldn’t bother me personally if Cruise played a cameo.

166. Shatner_Fan_2000 - August 7, 2007

Anthony, at the risk of sounding like a schoolyard kid pointing the finger of blame, Ivory and StillKirok are right … Dennis Bailey Shatnerized this thread. I’m a defensive, rather than an offensive, contributor. I’m not here to fight; I think everyone should be allowed to hope for whatever will make them happy. But I will step up and offer a strong defense when I see someone being as negative as Dennis has been.

167. Dr. Image - August 7, 2007

BAD idea. Lame stunt casting.
Besides, lots of people in the industry now hate the guy.

At least ASK Liotta, guys! He’d be ok, but I’d prefer an unknown.

Lots of name actors in replacement roles is distracting. That’s something they can’t afford.

168. Harry Ballz - August 7, 2007

#152 [Cruise] “nasty, odious little s**t”
He also stinks for the one-note actor that he is, but hey, I like the way you think!!! Sing it loud, baby!!

169. jkerouac59 - August 7, 2007

Dunno about Ray Liotta – his age may work against him as well as some of the more “manic” nature of some of his roles. He does, however, has an edgy presence that is reminiscent of the “caged” Pike seizing the Keeper and threatening to choke the live out of him.

Tom Hanks is an interesting choice – I can easily see him doing a “turning the keys” over scene with a young Jim Kirk, giving him pointers on the challenges of command: Kirk, the would-be galaxy beater and Pike, the wizened veteran. A warm, paternal veneer with a streetsmart, worldy guy beneath, a la Mr. White in “That Thing You Do”.

I can’t get my head around Tom Cruise in the role, though. It just doesn’t seem a good fit for what we know of Pike’s character. It might work but would not be my first choice.

What I absolutely cannot see is James Franco as young Kirk. He has alway struck me as about as wooden as Anakin the Manikin.

170. jay-ceperley - August 7, 2007

I seriously doubt that he’ll have a role in the movie since Tom and Paramount are no longer in business together and by the way their partnership ended, I doubt that he’ll ever be back in another Paramount film. If they get a Tom in there, it has to be Hanks, not Cruise!

171. StillKirok - August 7, 2007

See I really don’t see Hanks as Pike–not based on what we’ve seen. Pike is maybe 75% Kirk/ 25% Picard. Hanks doesn’t fit the bill for me.

Pike may not have quite the swagger of Kirk, but he has a macho swagger. Hanks is a GREAT actor. But Pike isn’t really right for him.

Liotta, when he was YOUNGER, might have been a decent choice, but he’s not fit enough for the role.

Ben Browder’s name has been tossed around every so often. Right age, right style.

172. Laura Stainthorpe - August 7, 2007

hi there first timer here been reading and lurking on this website on and off since the site started, afraid to post given the responses i often see on here but what the hey.

tom cruise is not as important as the story. christian slater was cast in a minor cameo in star trek 6 so why not. it didnt detract from the story. and i doubt his casting would make any difference to the box office, much like connerys casting wouldnt have saved star trek 5. besides cruise is popularly poked fun at and in some cases hated due to scientology. he’s not the A-lister he once used to be.

whether or not kirk is in the movie with shatner, im more concerned with the quality of the script. if hes there great if not, no loss if its a decent flick.

im more into next generation, but i do like william shatner esp boston legal and im probably not the only one sick of reading dennis baileys constant slamming of the actor at every opportunity. its like his hobby horse. okay we get it you dont like shatner. i do. and id be embarrassed for the man if he ever read your comments in the chatbox. you talk about hardcore star trek fans when you come across as a hardcore william shatner basher.

i see kirk people got a warning for bringing the subject up on non-shatner related threads. i think the same should apply to you mr bailey. or is nasty shatner sentiment tolerated as well? i can only assume you are friends with the site manager or co-run this website which is why you never get a warning.

right back to lurking again ive said my piece :-)

laura s, england

ps – it would be great to see a teaser trailer even without the credits rolling

173. COMPASSIONATE GOD - August 7, 2007

Verily, if Shatner–or his contribution/public value was as minimal as some would like to suggest, explain why –after four decades and dozens of new faces added to the franchise–do we still see Shatner’s Kirk (and Nimoy’s Spock) still used as the primary character image representing the entire franchise? Why Shatner’s Kirk and TOS still hold the lion’s share of official Trek merchandising–from the low end, to the expensive. For example, I do not see rereleases of old TNG action figures, but this fall, we will see the reissue of Mego’s 33-year old Kirk and Spock figures, along with more statues, high-end figures, and on and on and on.

There is a clear, fact-based reason: certain actor’s and their characters have left such a deep impression on popular culture, that the PTB know the how they are going to earn the majority of their profits from the ancillary market…and that majoriy has little to do with Stewart/Picard – Bakula/Archer.

Oh, and if you remember the various articles on Enterprise, fans abandoning the series was cited as the #1 reason for the limping Enterprise’s cancellation. Furthermore, the fans’ disinterest in the NG films led to the final TNG film (Nemesis) coming in dead last in series box-office dollars at $43,254,409–earning far less than the generally blasted Final Frontier, with $52,210,049!

Obviously, the fans’s interests/sense of quality was not respected/addresed as evidenced by the historical evidence above, hence the death of the franchise.

174. Agent 47 - August 7, 2007

hmmm, i’m going to throw the name Jerry O’Connell in to the mix

for some reason i can see him as Cpt of the Enterprise, but alas he’s 33 now :(

as for Cruise, if it’s only a cameo what harm can possibly be done :)

175. DavidJ - August 7, 2007

Assuming Pike is in the movie, I really do hope he’s not just there as the “baton passer,” and we get at least a glimpse of Spock’s years serving with him on the Enterprise. It would be cool as hell not only to see TOS reimagined but the very FIRST incarnation of Star Trek too.

176. Herr von Kodos - August 7, 2007

For me, Star Trek is basically the Enterprise instead of Kirk, Spock and Bones. So Abrams would have better decided for a movie that takes places in the years of the very first mission of the ship with Robert April commanding and Kirk’s father as a crewmember. He wouldn’t have the stress with the re-casting-thing now but he could really re-write the Trek-history as he claims to do…

177. Harry Ballz - August 7, 2007

Hello Laura, welcome to Wonderland! Good comments and, hey, no need to lurk in the shadows, keep on posting!

178. RaveOnEd - August 7, 2007

I was thinking that Billy Crudup might do OK as Pike, looks close to the character, with maybe enough aging to be convincing as a Captain leaving command.

He was also in M:I 3, and someone Abrams may want to tap for the role.

Plus, he’s not overwhelming a star to eclipse the movie, like Cruise.

179. Herr von Kodos - August 7, 2007

“Assuming Pike is in the movie, I really do hope he’s not just there as the “baton passer,” and we get at least a glimpse of Spock’s years serving with him on the Enterprise. It would be cool as hell not only to see TOS reimagined but the very FIRST incarnation of Star Trek too.”

Yeah, right David!

180. Herr von Kodos - August 7, 2007

JJ A once said he loves the Star Trek novels. Based on that, I think it’s really likely that we’re gonna see Pike in the movie at all.

181. Sleeper Agent X - August 7, 2007

Re 181:

Are you sure that was J.J.? I think that was Orci and Kurtzman, the two screenwriters, who said something to that effect.

182. Greg2600 - August 7, 2007

Well I actually like Tom Cruise as an actor, although he is quite the oddball. However, if you cast him, he will overshadow the entire movie. That’ll be a good one to explain to my friends. Yeah go and see this new Star Trek movie about the old characters, but with Tom Cruise not William Shatner.

183. StillKirok - August 7, 2007

#177– I think that idea of Captain April, First Officer George Kirk and that crew of the newly launched NCC-1701 would work better as a series than as a set of movies. I always thought that had they gone with that crew instead of Enterprise, it would have made a better prequel series.

I still think that. Enterprise didn’t fail because it was a prequel. It failed because it was a lousy show that didn’t respect continuity. That’s a big reason the fans bolted. I think that had the season 4 Coto/Reeves Stevens staff had the show from development, it would have been much better.

There are 2 Diane Carey novels that deal with Captain April. They are excellent.

But I really believe that when it comes to a movie, you need the familiarity that only comes with Kirk and crew. Abrams made the right call on that front.

184. Herr von Kodos - August 7, 2007

StillKirok, I see we both understand each other. In every Trek-forum I’m in I’m trying to convince the people that the idea of a prequel is great, but Ent was just… not Star Trek

185. Herr von Kodos - August 7, 2007

@StillKirok : There are two novels released? I just have one ( The first Mission ). What’s the titel of the other book?

186. Herr von Kodos - August 7, 2007

Would it be too expensive to re-create the faces of the old crew (and making them look younger ) on PC and putting them on the shoulders of new actors?

187. Jeyl - August 7, 2007

Come on guys. Let’s all look at the bright side to this. Tom Cruise is going to play a guy who gets fried by Delta rays and becomes a muted vegetable. What’s not to like about that scenario?!

188. Plum - August 7, 2007

… I guarantee Dennis Bailey is far, far, more aware of the reality of Trek Fandom than anyone else here, and most likely for another 20 miles.

Dennis is just trying to let folks in on what’s happening in reality, as opposed to accepting wild speculations from yet another trekkie who has no clue how many decades Dennis has been a trekkie himself and posting trekkie facts online.

189. IrishTrekkie - August 7, 2007

lol , some funny comments , and they do not even need to have a starship in the movie as tom cruises brain is already in deep space, and if he is in the movie does that mean the federation and klingons are fighting the evil lord xenu and the *cough* “church” of scientology

190. CmdrR. - August 7, 2007

from IGN: And if you think this Cruise stuff is crazy then you don’t even want to know which A-lister we were told Paramount is trying to land to play the villain!

from my feverish imagination because I’m bored with Cruise:
DeNiro for the villain, baby!

191. TOS Fan Forever - August 7, 2007


‘Nuff said. Tom Cruise is too short to play Captain Christopher Pike. Don’t go down the MI:3 trail again.

192. Herr von Kodos - August 7, 2007

#190 That’s not the point! All my friends (Star Trek fandom Berlin) and I myself think that every big Hollywood-star could endanger the “Star Trek-feeling” Just imagine what a bad movie Star Trek IV could have been if Eddy Murphy would have get a role in it!

193. Anthony Pascale - August 7, 2007

I have updated the story, Cruise’s publicist denies it is true…for what that is worth

194. Robert April - August 7, 2007


“Don’t mince words, Bones; tell me what you really think.”

-KIRK speaking to McCoy in TWOK


195. Oceanhopper - August 7, 2007

Re: #188

Only as long as he uses “the method” and we get to hear him scream. For a long time.

196. Herr von Kodos - August 7, 2007

Much more important than the actors could probably be the whole feeling of the movie. Remember, The Search For Spock was really boring because it was all about Spock, there was no danger for millions. That’s why I’m a fan of The Motion Picture, a movie about living or dying and a vessel that almost destroyed the Earth -> a vessel mankind built. THAT was not only Star Trek, it was GREAT science-fiction

197. Oceanhopper - August 7, 2007

I meant #187. oops!

198. CmdrR. - August 7, 2007

192. Herr von Kodos – August 7, 2007
#190 That’s not the point! All my friends (Star Trek fandom Berlin) and I myself think that every big Hollywood-star could endanger the “Star Trek-feeling” Just imagine what a bad movie Star Trek IV could have been if Eddy Murphy would have get a role in it!

no need to imagine, just find the TNG ep with Joe Piscopo.

199. StillKirok - August 7, 2007

#185– The second novel is called Best Destiny. I don’t know if I would so much call it a sequel to Final Frontier, but you could.

A prequel would have been fine in the right hands. They went too far back though.

200. CmdrR. - August 7, 2007

I’d still like an a-list villain. If not DeNiro, who would you guys like to see?

201. Sleeper Agent X - August 7, 2007

Re: 186

Yes. Also, the results would look like crap.

Sorry, but we’re not yet at the level of technology where we can just replace people onscreen the way they did in “Running Man.”

202. Kobayashi Maru - August 7, 2007

Everybody is throwing around the name of 50yr. olds like Liotta and Hanks.
I still like the idea of George Clooney.
I think a big name is a good idea in this part because:
A) It won’t be a large part…
B) We need instant telegraphing about the qualities of this character.
Clooney radiates intelligence, compassion, self-possessed charm.
Pike needs these qualities so we understand instantly that Kirk is stepping into big boots.

203. StillKirok - August 7, 2007

#200–hard to comment on who would make a good villain without knowing what kind of character he is.

If it were me, I would want Matt Damon as Gary Mitchell, make him the villain. The guy is a god, and could have possibly survived WNMHGB. He would not only have reason to hate Kirk, but would have the power to bring him back just to torture him. He also has a connection to Kirk as far back as the academy days and could serve as a bridge between the two big eras.

The writers would have a fun time trying to make him beatable.

204. Sleeper Agent X - August 7, 2007

Re 202:

I see Clooney as a heck of an admiral or commodore. I dunno about Pike so much, though. Same with Hanks. I’d love to see Admiral Hanks, but I don’t see him as Pike.

205. CmdrR. - August 7, 2007

Everybody is throwing around the name of 50yr. olds like Liotta and Hanks.
I still like the idea of George Clooney.

Clooney is 46.

206. StillKirok - August 7, 2007

#204–actually Clooney as Pike isn’t that bad. Maybe not so much as the guy we saw in The Cage, but the guy 10 years older? Not a terrible choice.

207. Herr von Kodos - August 7, 2007

#201 Unfortunately here in Germany the people like to watch old nazi-stuff films (I cannot understand why) and the Hitler there was made by a really actor who got a mask on his face and later they took Hitler’s face on that mask. Don’t ask me how that works, I’ve just seen a making-of…

208. Jeyl - August 7, 2007

196. Herr von Kodos: Remember, The Search For Spock was really boring because it was all about Spock, there was no danger for millions.

Oh, no way! In my observation, Star Trek III had more references to the original series than any other Trek movie ever made.

And why keep having world wide threats all the time? Why not the Klingon homeworld? Or the Romulan homeworld? Why the heck does it always have to be Earth? Nemesis was the worst of it all. Everytime Earth was brought up I kept asking myself “Why?”. How can destroying Earth cripple the Federation? Isn’t it like a compilation of hundreds of planets? And since Earth has been in danger so many times, don’t you think they’d have some other place for a back up in case something like Earth blowing up would happen?

And come on. Those Klingons and Romulans have had too many free rides. Put their home worlds in danger for a change. For some reason every race in the galaxy wants Earth more than any other planet in th galaxy. It’s so repedative. Khan didn’t even think about conquering Earth. He wanted the whole universe!

Anybody remember the preview for the remastered episode of “The Doomsday Machine”? Remember how it said “The Ultimate Weapon is headed for Earth”. When and where in the episode did they state that the Doomsday Machine was headed for Earth? Not only is this whole “Earth in danger” a cliché plot device, they put it in stuff where they don’t even exist!

209. Herr von Kodos - August 7, 2007

Did that famous actor who played in the new Star Wars episodes (ironically I forgot his name, he played a character named Mace Windoo or so…) an important role, or did the people go to the cinemas just to see him? No, they went to see Star Wars, and we will go there to see Star Trek. It’s kinda brand-name that stands for itself and not for Hollywood-stars!

210. Doug L. - August 7, 2007

I have to wonder at 207 comments on this thread and 34 on the Shatner article…..

Could Cruise as Pike be more relevant than Shatner as Kirk??

Stirring up controversy to the last…. dl

211. Herr von Kodos - August 7, 2007

#208 I didn’t mean that a vessel should come to blow Earth away…But I mean that we don’t need a film full of clichees: the Klingons are the bad guys, Kirk gets the girl and the Federation is kinda USA. That’s too black and white, like the whole third season of Enterprise, which was a justification of the USA to have a war against terror. I just don’t want that, but really good science-fiction with a little self-irony like in Insurrection

212. Harry Ballz - August 7, 2007

#187 “Tom Cruise is going to play a guy who gets fried by Delta rays and becomes a muted vegetable”
And we can tell the difference how?? Talk about typecasting!!

213. Jim Loftus - August 7, 2007

Think of THIS, BAY-BAY!

Laughing histerically like he did in The Hitcher.

Would you not love to see this happen, OMFG, come on.

214. Dennis Bailey - August 7, 2007

Okay, so the Cruise rumor is denied now. On with the business of living! :)

215. Robert April - Catch a falling star and put it in your pocket... - August 7, 2007

…save it for a rainy day.

Tom Cruise is a movie star. Arguably a FALLING star.

If you want a movie star (instead of a REAL actor) in Star Trel XI, then by all means bring Tom Cruise on board Mr. Redstone.

But you had better ask your wife first!!

216. Herr von Kodos - August 7, 2007

I’m sure you know the fan-film series New Frontier? I don’t get the feeling that these actors should be Kirk and Spock. And that’s exactly my apprehension for the next movie.

But I’m feeling relieved that Cruise doesn’t get a role.

217. Diabolik - August 7, 2007

I just wonder if we’ll see a “young Spock” scene like this:

218. CmdrR. - August 7, 2007

217 – That looks like something Mr. Cruise would enjoy.

219. THEETrekMaster - August 7, 2007

Counts hours before Anthony threatens to ban people suggesting Ray Liotta as Pike. LOL!!!!

220. THEETrekMaster - August 7, 2007

Why do we have to have a “villain” in this film? Trek is at its best when it’s about exploring strange new worlds…and seeking out new civilizations! Let the story conflict come from THAT! Even Trek VI worked great without a “villain” — rather, that one was about the situtation. The situation was the villain!

That’s great writing.

Almost every time we’ve had a “villain” in these films, it’s sucked! The exceptions being the Khan, General Chang, and the Borg Queen.

When it’s gone wrong it’s been abyssmal — Sybok, Soran, and the rest…

I would actually prefer the film be a return to the TMP, Doomsday Machine, Immunity Syndrome story structure — where there is a force that must be overcome. And no, it doesn’t have to be a “save the Earth” story to work!


221. RaveOnEd - August 7, 2007

Look, Liotta IS Pike. I don’t care what anyone says, Liotta HAS to be in this movie, or it can not be called Star Trek.

; )

222. THEETrekMaster - August 7, 2007

Ooh…ok, I take back my request for Ray Liotta…

Has anyone SEEN this guy lately?,%20Ray

223. CmdrR. - August 7, 2007

No way Liotta. Bring back Hunter as Pike. I don’t care how moldy he is. If this movie doesn’t have Hunter as Pike, it will bomb.

224. THEETrekMaster - August 7, 2007

ahem….in post #220, I meant to say Star Trek IV worked without a villain.

225. Harry Ballz - August 7, 2007

#218 “That looks like something Mr. Cruise would enjoy”
Ooooh, you’re nasty! Are you trying to….um….imply….that…you know who…er….might be…..a little “light in the loafers”?? Bwahahahaha….

226. Anthony Pascale - August 7, 2007

RE: Trekmaster
let me make this clearer one last time. My issues are not with the subjects, but with the derailment and staying on topic. Certainly people have decided that all discussions should be diverted about one thing. This is the same thing as my ban on political diversions. I am not being partisan one way or another…just like things to not get diverted. Even when I agree with the posters.

When the forums are open people will have more opportunities to creat threads on topics of their choice.

RE: Liotta…he would be fine, but as I said I prefer Hanks.
Regardless I do like the idea of some stunt casting for cameos

227. RaveOnEd - August 7, 2007

#222 – Maybe Liotta as the crippled Pike, then?

228. THEETrekMaster - August 7, 2007

Yep, I agree, Anthony..:-)

229. THEETrekMaster - August 7, 2007

#227 — What’s with Liotta’s face? He doesn’t look right…

230. Harry Ballz - August 7, 2007

Anthony, when you said, “stunt casting” for cameos, maybe the powers that be thought you said, “runt casting” and immediately Tom Cruise came to mind!

231. Diabolik - August 7, 2007

Uh… Liotta hasn’t aged well, has he? Too bad, I guess ten years ago he would have been perfect. Kind of like how Billy Zane ten years ago would have made a perfect Superman or Batman.

Entrophy sucks. Even if it does define time.

232. Harry Ballz - August 7, 2007

Hey, without time everything would happen at once!

233. ObiWanCon - August 7, 2007


234. ObiWanCon - August 7, 2007


235. VOODOO - August 7, 2007

Tom Hanks is great actor,but I can’t see him as a Starship Captain.

236. VOODOO - August 7, 2007

This is kind of off the topic, but I wonder who the big name actor is that people have been talking about for the main bad guy?

237. COMPASSIONATE GOD - August 7, 2007

231. Diabolik: “Uh… Liotta hasn’t aged well, has he? Too bad, I guess ten years ago he would have been perfect.”

Agreed. Back in 1997, a friend was looking at the cover of my laserdisc (remember?) of The Cage, and noted how Liotta was a near-dead ringer for Hunter, save for difference in the nose structure. He would have been perfect, but let’s face it gang, he’s far too old (visually speaking) to make a believable Pike around the time he hands the 1701 over to Kirk, or any time around that period.

I think finding unknowns is the best option…and for God’s sake, new Trek PTB PLEASE do NOT take influence from George Lucas’ horrible “solution” in using a ghoulish fright mask on a guy as a stand-in for the late Peter Cushing as seen in Revenge of the Sith! Just say no!

238. JC - August 7, 2007

Vodoo .I nominate Christopher Walken

239. Anthony Pascale - August 7, 2007

i have added a pike poll

240. jonboc - August 7, 2007

I love Hanks. I really do, and he’s always excellent. He’s lovable, funny, sad, charismatic…but he doesn’t have the commanding, on-screen presence, to come off well as a strong, hardened starship captain. Too much sensitivity. Commanding Apollo 13 is one thing. A brief, first impression cameo of Pike is something completely different. He just doesn’t have the presence to convey the character in a quick throw-away scene.

241. tin man - August 7, 2007

About Liotta as Pike? remember, the strains of command can prematurely age a person, so the actor’s age may not be that big a factor after all?

242. TJ Trek - August 7, 2007

My big thing for any of the characters is that they should not be super star A-list Hollywood types. They should be actors who are damn good and newer to the movie scene, or actors like Stewart who have a strong theater back ground. Alot of the classic Trek Characters have shaksperian elements too them, and the theater acting brought that out to great effect.

Of course, this is just my opion,

and….no Cruise, please. Way to Hollywood, and I can’t see him taking the back seat in a movie.

243. Doug L. - August 7, 2007

BBP… nuff said. dl

244. THEETrekMaster - August 7, 2007

Yeah, agreed…I think Liotta would have *been* a great Capt. Pike…but he’s too old looking now….

245. Driver - August 7, 2007

No Cruise for Trek. But is the character Pike in it? Time will tell. How about Moesha as Uhura?

246. Captain Pike - August 7, 2007

“I could live with Tom playing me.

I meant Tom HANKS , of course!

247. THEETrekMaster - August 7, 2007

Moesha!? Bwahahahaha!!! Hey, what about Whoopi Goldberg? HEHEHEH!!!

248. flier1701 - August 7, 2007

Tom Hanks would be preferable to Tom Cruise. Besides, wasn’t Hanks supposed to be in First Contact but was contractually obligated to another flick?

Although I could live with Cruise as Pike, it would certainly not be preferable. I hope this turns out to be just a rumor.

249. Dom - August 7, 2007

I’m just glad that this film is being perceived as big enough to attract stars like Tom Cruise!

250. Bobby - August 7, 2007


251. Shove Shatner In!!! - August 7, 2007

I have noticed that Dennis Bailey (the know it all of the Star Trek community) has not shown his face since he was shown up by some previous posters.

Bravo to them.

Dennis, after some searching I discovered you were part of the Berman regime. Is it any wonder that you don’t want Shatner involved? His success and their failure will be yet another nail in the coffin of your version of Star Trek.

Like the rest of the people who hate TOS you have no idea why the Kirk era was the most popular and groundbreaking.

Mr Bailey, Shatner as Kirk is an icon. Don’t you get it? This isn’t Voyager we are talking about here. He represents Star Trek to the masses. He and the character meant something to many people.

You are 100% ignorant as to why Star Trek is no longer popular. Don’t you think that the characters and actors might have had something to do with Star Trek’s popularity?

Please stop insulting the people who have a vested intrest in this character.

Why don’t you try and bring Data back or something.That is what you want isn’t it? You want YOUR version of Star Trek and you don’t understand why people want their version of Star Trek.


252. Sleeper Agent X - August 7, 2007

Re 251:

Ughh, this thread has been the victim of more hijackings than TWA.

Enough with the Dennis bashing, Shovey. He makes a lot of good points.


253. Dennis Bailey - August 7, 2007

#251: “I have noticed that Dennis Bailey (the know it all of the Star Trek community) has not shown his face since he was shown up by some previous posters.”

Dennis Bailey has some other things in his life besides posting on message boards (unlikely though that sometimes seems). I also thought I’d try to abide by Anthony’s injunction to drop the Shatner talk, which you seem intent on continuing ad nauseum.

Anyway, good luck with your campaign to…prove whatever it is you’re trying to prove by posting personal insults based on wrong guesses about someone you don’t know anything about. :lol:

254. THEETrekMaster - August 7, 2007

Hey, Dennis is cool! Backoff on Dennis, bloke!

255. THEETrekMaster - August 7, 2007

Forgot to say, Tin Man is one of my fave TNG eps. So, BACK OFF THE D-MAN!!!!

256. gorgon - August 7, 2007

I know!…I know who!

Iman as Uhura!

David Bowie as Pike….the perfect couple!


257. Hanson - August 7, 2007

#254–I’m sure a dozen people agree with you.

258. THEETrekMaster - August 7, 2007

Hey Dennis, I am new to Starship Exeter…but DAMN….YOUR work on that is A-maz-ing!!! Best CGI work I’ve seen next to Daren’s. Awesome work, man…

Congrats! You should be working on remastered. Compared to your work, theirs looks like gaming graphics.


259. Dennis Bailey - August 7, 2007

Thanks, THEETrekMaster. I’ve learned a few things by watching both Daren and Trek Remastered – I really like both of them.

Hopefully the next part of “Exeter” is just around the corner…I mean sooon… ;)

260. THEETrekMaster - August 7, 2007

I really look forward to it! Your cgi work looks very much like miniature work.
I like remastered as well…especially the digital mattes…but they could learn something from you and Daren on the ship shots.


261. Dennis Bailey - August 7, 2007

Thanks again.

The overall look of the CG in “Exeter” is only partly my doing. I deliver the elements as separate layers to Jimm Johnson, and he puts it all together in Aftereffects or some other program – he does a lot of tuning of the color, and contrast, and some other things he’s explained to me but which make me go “duh-huh?” that help to take the curse off the CG.

262. THEETrekMaster - August 7, 2007

Yeah, you really have to do that to take away the CGI look but it’s worth the effort…as you and Jimm’s final results prove…

263. jonboc - August 7, 2007

More Exeter soon? Nice.
While I’m no fan of TNG or your episode, (sorry, just not my cup of tea) I’ve enjoyed the hell out of Tresaurian. The previous accusations about your “not understanding TOS” were clearly unfounded. While I certainly prefer the mindset of the 23rd century over the re-worked Nu-Trek of the 24th century, you seem comfortable and certainly competant, telling tales in both. I’m really looking forward to the next installment, thanks for the heads up!

264. Dennis Bailey - August 7, 2007

I like most of what’s been called “Star Trek,” and have been watching the whole thing evolve ever since “The Man Trap” premiered. Thanks for the kind words about “Exeter.”

265. Norbert - August 7, 2007

Rumor denied? Thank you! Thaaaank youuu! :-)

266. John Trumbull - August 7, 2007

I know this probably just a stupid internet rumor, but PLEASE GOD NO Tom Cruise in the movie. Let’s keep his overexposed nutzo Scientologist couch-jumping ass out of Trek, please.

Ray Liotta as Pike would be cool, especially if they use Pike in a manner similiar to the first DC Comics Trek Annual.

267. garp - August 7, 2007

Bruce Campbell, especially if he could lose a few pounds would be who I would want for Pike. I thought so when I first saw Army of Darkness.

He looks the part, and I even seen him play serious parts. Homicide: Life on the Street.

268. trekker77 - August 7, 2007

Liotta. No other choice needs to be made. Let’s lend a little thespian credibility to this thing.

269. Bryan - August 8, 2007

Neal McDonough, Star Trek First Contact’s Lt. Hawk for Pike. When I first saw him there I thought how he structurally resembled Jeff Hunter.
What about Rob Lowe?

270. Apex 1701 - August 8, 2007

Using Cruise would be a smart move from the stand point of international box office where TREK has been a big, bad joke. Unless this movie does well in that arena, it will flop! Look at MI3. Poor domestic returns, but was a solid hit internationally, thanks to Tom. If Paramount is planning on making an epic, expensive film, it will need this kind of clout to at least justify a 150-175 million production, so I see this rumor, if true, as a bold, wise move.

271. the quickening - August 8, 2007

Ray Liota won’t be able to put seats in the theater, especially internationally, Tom Cruise will. Liota seems to be a favorite here, but I think only ’cause he looks like Jeffrey Hunter. That’s the wrong reason to cast him. A good actor can play the role. Tom is a good actor. Those who think Tom can’t act, need to take a look at a film called Magnolia. He was superb! Go with an actor who can play the role AND put people in the seats. Cruise can, Liota can’t.

272. THEETrekMaster - August 8, 2007

Liotta doesn’t look like he did in, say, Goodfellas anymore. Take a look at that recent pic I posted…he mouth looks all weird…he just doesn’t look right for the part anymore.

I am no fan of Tom Cruise, but meh…wouldn’t bother me if he played Pike…

There might be better options out there though.

273. Dennis Bailey - August 8, 2007

#270: “Using Cruise would be a smart move from the stand point of international box office where TREK has been a big, bad joke. Unless this movie does well in that arena, it will flop! Look at MI3. Poor domestic returns, but was a solid hit internationally, thanks to Tom.”

This is certainly true.

274. Anthony Pascale - August 8, 2007

this issue of playing in foreign markets is important. Hollywood now thinks very globally. Trek plays well in the English speaking countries and Germany…and that is about it. I hope that in addition to finding a way to broaden Trek’s appeal to action movie fans and younger audiences domestically, Abrams and his team find a way to make it work well in foreign markets…especially the growing Asian market.

275. GraniteTrek - August 8, 2007

It sounds to me from the comments on this thread – the on topic ones – that they should cast Tom Cruise as the villain. It would certainly bring a big round of cheers from a lot of the posters when our heroes knock him off at the end of the movie (me included)! :)

276. Harry Ballz - August 8, 2007

How can Cruise play the villian? It’s a little hard to feel threatened by a 5’6″ pipsqueak who can’t act! And don’t mention Collateral to me; As Robert Duvall once pointed out (speaking of Cruise), “hey, in film you can keep trying with take after take, until even a limited actor gets one ‘in the can'”. That’s Cruise’s career in a nutshell. You let even a hack like him do 50 takes and one of them is bound to be half decent! My gawd, even any of us could DO THAT!!

277. Dennis Bailey - August 8, 2007

#276: ” It’s a little hard to feel threatened by a 5′6″ pipsqueak who can’t act!”

You’re managing to do a fair impression of it. :lol:

278. Anthony Pascale - August 8, 2007

ballz enough with the personal insults…we get it you dont like him….you dont need to say it a dozen times and get so personal

279. Harry Ballz - August 8, 2007

Sorry, Anthony…I’ll behave!

280. No Way - August 10, 2007

I have hated everything Cruise has been in. Smug SOB

281. anon - August 13, 2007

More support for Paul Gross as Pike! Sure, he’s not an A-lister, but he was damn good in Due South (his voice might be a little too high-toned, though). I wouldn’t mind supporting the Canuck in any Star Trek role. Plus, he looks a lot more like Jeffrey Hunter than Tom Cruise… Not to mention that the whole Cruise eccentricity would much more likely hurt the film (if not creatively, then at the box office) than aide it in any way – if you’re going to cast a big star as Pike, pick one that people don’t cheer *against*.

I’m not totally against big-names in Star Trek; in fact I’ve been wanting Tom Hanks involved in Trek for ages (in a different role perhaps). That guy got a lot of respect from me for Apollo 13 and particularly for From the Earth to the Moon.

Ray Liotta does look a lot like Hunter.

282. Cervantes - August 13, 2007

#74 Viking

Like your idea of Robert Patrick as Pike by the way…if we can’t have Ray Liotta…

283. Dave Hardin - August 13, 2007

Keep Tom Cruise away from the Star Trek franchise completely! His stupidity over mental illness doesn’t hold up to “Trek” standards of fairness to all life forms!!!

284. Cervantes - August 14, 2007

#102 Demode

And also like your suggestion of a ‘Pike’ era series…as that would give us TOS imagery without recasting a ‘Kirk’ crew which would conflict with the new Movie(s) Kirk crew that we will be getting used to, and would not be able to commit to a series no doubt…

285. Cervantes - August 15, 2007

#213 Jim Loftus

I’d root for the “Rut” to appear in some capacity in this Star Trek Movie too…he’s great. :)

286. AJ - August 20, 2007

#276..Sounds like how Nick Meyer directed Shatner in TWOK…many takes per scene simply to calm him down and get the line spoken and not shouted.

287. Guairdean - September 11, 2007

Are they going to install a couch on the Enterprise so that Cruise has a place to jump up and down? Tom Cruise’ name is a box office turn off for me. I’ve been a fan since the original series premiered, but the presence of Tom Cruise in the series will end my interest.

288. Aja Bierbower - September 6, 2011

Iron River, WI 54847} is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.