Shatner Discusses Latest Rumors [UPDATED - More Video From Shatner] | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Shatner Discusses Latest Rumors [UPDATED - More Video From Shatner] October 18, 2007

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Shatner,Star Trek (2009 film) , trackback

The following ShatnerVision video was shot Thursday afternoon

UPDATE: See Part 2 Below

So there you have it. Just as reported by TrekMovie.com yesterday Shatner is still not in the movie – and it appears he doesn’t expect to be in the movie. In the video Shatner was talking about the latest story on Hollywood.com which was from the WENN entertainment news wire service. After WENN put out the latest rumor TrekMovie.com confirmed again today that no definitive decision has been made regarding Shatner. WENN are probably just picking up on the AICN rumor. Remember WENN are the same outfit that made up the ‘Tom Cruise will be in Star Trek’ rumor (which TrekMovie.com also debunked). And no this is not some elaborate prank or hoax…he simply is not in the movie. However, there is still a chance that he might be. Hopefully by the end of this month there will be some kind of definitive statement one way or the other regarding this whole thing.

Comments

1. nimoyrules - October 18, 2007

first – i guess

i dont usually post but i really hope shatner is in this movie. I would love to see nimoy and shatner together one more time. i do not understand wha the plot of this movie will be but there should be a way. I do not want a rehash of generation though leave that horrible movie alone

Maybe spock could partner with Uhura to save kirk somehow off the walls uggestions but i would love to see thsoe two as well

2. Shatner_Fan_2000 - October 18, 2007

BOOOOOO!!!!

3. ShawnP - October 18, 2007

:-(

4. Son of Sarek - October 18, 2007

Unfortunate. Only time and the creative minds behind this and future Trek projects will tell whether Shatner as Kirk is finished. All good things… In any event, I have confidence that Pine will be be a fine successor.

5. Vinceman - October 18, 2007

It would be great to get off the fence about this. As good as this film my turn out to be, without Mr. Shatner, there would be a big, and very hard hole to deal with. Either way, I’m so looking forward to Dec 2008

Still hoping.

Vinceman

6. Paul Lancaster - October 18, 2007

I have loved Trek since childhood as well as in my grown up years and i say it is an outrage to have Leonard Nimoy in the film but not William Shatner. Kirk is arguably the most popular character in the franchise and to leave Shatner out in the cold on this is beyond ridiculous.

7. Dennis Bailey - October 18, 2007

So, basically we have to go through this for another several weeks until it’s clear one way or the other.

What do you suppose Shatner’s point in continually making these announcements is if 1) the issue isn’t settled and 2) there’s not a conspiracy between him and the producers to hype up an already-done deal?

This little bit of video is a remarkably fast turn-around on rumor control regarding an unsourced bit of business like the WENN report, after all.

The blinking White House doesn’t do spin this quickly.

8. Scott - October 18, 2007

If they hire Shatner, there goes the money for the Iceland location shooting! It’ll be cycloramas and styrofoam rocks all around! Plus they’ll have to spring for hazel contacts for Pine.

Seriously…I’d love to see Shatner in the film, however they want to do it, storywise. It’s not a demand, just a fan’s fond wish. Once more unto the breach, dear friends…

Scott B. out.

9. Amanda - October 18, 2007

UGH! JJ Abrams — WHY?

It just makes me sad to watch that clip :-( Poor William Shatner. It’s kind of disappointing and puts me off when I see this. His presence isn’t there at all apparently, and apparently no support of Chris Pine as Kirk either. It makes me wonder if they even asked him what he thought about it.

10. girl6 - October 18, 2007

There are always possibilities…

11. MichaelJohn - October 18, 2007

I guess I’m a bit disappointed that Shatner seems to close the door on being in this movie in a cameo role. He seems to be saying either give me a big starring role like Nimoy, or I’m not interested.

That’s a shame because I myself would like to see him, and the other surviving TOS members, take one final curtain call in the next Trek film.

Swallow your pride Shat and take a cameo role if it’s offered to you!

Mike :o

12. seangh - October 18, 2007

#7 – Dennis –

I think Shatner’s ego is what is driving these announcements. I’d love to think this is all a media game, trying to convince fans Shatner is not in the film, then suddenly the BIG ANNOUNCEMENT that he IS in it.

I don’t think the latter is the case at all.

I’m speculating that Spock will appear in the beginning of the new film and will recount the early days of the Enterprise and her crew. He’ll probably will be giving some lecture to academy students – ripple dissolve to……

13. USS SANTA - October 18, 2007

Knowing how upsetting this will be If he is NOT in the movie, do you think that Paramount would risk insulting, William Shatner, or the fans by excluding him? Remenber, if there is ever a chance at bringing him back it has to be now, not in part II, or III. If I was the Shat i’d offer them a fair price now, and if they decline, to hell with ‘em. Next movie charge them triple.
To whom this may concern,
William Shatner IS James T. Kirk. He made the character what it is, and he is the only person in the universe that can pass the torch to his counterpart. Anything less would be a disgrace.

Hailing frequencies ‘closed.

14. Demode - October 18, 2007

#8: I can live without Iceland…lol… But I can’t live without SHATNER!!!

SHATNER = $$$$$$$$

Regardless of what it costs to get him in, the movie will make tons more just for him being in it. You don’t go cheap on a dime when it brings you back in a buck, now do you?

15. Camaro 09 - October 18, 2007

Shatner means more to S.T. than J.J. Abrams vision of the project.

If the man wants into this film he should be given a role. Especially when you consider that Nimoy is being brought back.

There is no reason Shatner is not in this film + don’t give me the “we can’t find a role worthy of him” crap.

They simply don’t want him + they are shutting the door on many,many people who want to see him in this film.

This news is very upsetting.

There is still time to get Shatner in. There is no excuse if he is not included.

16. Dennis Bailey - October 18, 2007

#15:”Knowing how upsetting this will be If he is NOT in the movie, do you think that Paramount would risk insulting, William Shatner, or the fans by excluding him?”

Paramount, as in the people running the studio?

Yes, of course they would.

Studios said “no” to much bigger actors than him, after all. Did you notice that Shatner explicitly described this as “a business decision?”

There’s no way for most of us to know, right now, whether or what limits there may be on the producers with regard to negotiating with Shatner. The assumption that Abrams and company have the wherewithal to simply decree that whatever Shatner Wants, Shatner Gets may correlate with the truth – or, it may not.

17. Demode - October 18, 2007

BTW, i don’t think Shatner expects to have as big a part as Nimoy in this film, since he knows his character ‘died’ in the last film he was in. I do think he expects to have a memorable role in the film though, and his resurrection at the end of the film will be just that.

Look at “Khan” in ST II…. He really wasn’t on screen all that much, but he was mentioned by name throughout the entire film. Same will probably go for Shatner’s Kirk in this film.

18. Camaro 09 - October 18, 2007

#7 Dennis Bailey

What do you think his motives are? You don’t seem to be taking him at face value.

Am I missing something?

Where are these rumors of his return coming from?

19. DavidJ - October 18, 2007

#9

Oh give me a break. I love Shatner too, but he’s being INCREDIBLY unfair here. Yes it’s “science fiction,” but these new writers shouldn’t feel obligated to completely rework their story just to undo the mistakes that were made in someone ELSE’S movie!

If they HAVE found a way to fit him in, fine. But I’m really getting sick of everybody here acting like Shatner is some poor, innocent victim being disrespected and spit upon by JJ Abrams.

He already made his bed by agreeing to be killed off in Generations. No one forced him to be in it, and he read the script beforehand. It’s not Abrams or the new writer’s fault that the movie sucked.

20. Jason Lee - October 18, 2007

What’s gets me about this is the ongoing, seemingly never-ending uncertainty, particularly on the part of Shatner himself. I just find it really hard to believe that Shatner would be so far out of the loop about something like this as he professes to be. Even if he really isn’t in it, it’s almost inconceivable to me that J.J. Abrams–or Nimoy for that matter–wouldn’t have at least given him a definitive answer about it by now. And if they really are still trying to find a way to include him, it’s hard to believe he wouldn’t know something about THAT. This movie starts filming next month and it just seems like everyone involved is being too coy by half over the whole involvement–or lack thereof–of Shatner. If I were him and these guys were just using me to stretch out the the suspense and garner extra publicity, I’d be pissed.

21. Jeffrey S. Nelson - October 18, 2007

Could the hold up be money? Shatner may want to invoke favored nations clause to match Nimoy’s paycheck…yet Nimoy as Spock presumably has a much larger role. Rumored plot involving Spock going back in time to stop the Romulans from killing young Kirk would leave open the possibility of seeing old Kirk at the end…and that may be the “cameo” that Shatner isn’t satisfied with. J.J. Abrams on record as wanting Shatner. Isn’t it about time we heard definitively from J.J. or Mr. Orci??

22. Dennis Bailey - October 18, 2007

#18:”#7 Dennis Bailey

What do you think his motives are? You don’t seem to be taking him at face value.

Am I missing something?”

I don’t have answers; just questions and hypotheses . In terms of “missing something” – yeah, don’t you think there are big pieces of this puzzle that aren’t being communicated (for their own good reasons) by Shatner OR the producers OR the people running the studio?

23. Harry Ballz - October 18, 2007

Cost? Hell, I’m willing to watch a guy in a Gorn costume with a zipper up his back if the Shat can be factored into the movie!

Make the deal for more appeal!!

24. garen rhome - October 18, 2007

Shat is acting here. This clip seems like a cunning bit of improv to me. i think we’re being put on…for fun and to protect a surprise.

It seems very Spinal Tapish, doesnt it? anyone?

I think he knows he has a part (of some kind) in this film…but they are keeping it tight lipped. so much so as to have Bill deny any knowledge.

im not usually one for conspiracy theories…but something seems fishy here. the woman doing the interview seems a little TOO uninformed.

25. Dennis Bailey - October 18, 2007

#20: “If I were him and these guys were just using me to stretch out the the suspense and garner extra publicity, I’d be pissed.”

Shatner is not a victim in “stretching out the suspense” or in whatever negotiations may be happening. He’s a participant.

26. Camaro 09 - October 18, 2007

The women is his daughter and clearly knows the answers to the questions before she asked them.

Why is he trying to get this news out to the public so soon after the rumors broke?

27. Jason Lee - October 18, 2007

That, of course, is the other possibility: That Shatner was offered a role but not one that was big enough or high-paying enough to meet his demands. I have always liked Shatner but the man does have ego to spare and I wouldn’t entirely put it past him. If there really is some negotiating going on and it doesn’t pan out, I imagine we’ll find out why eventually.

28. Camaro 09 - October 18, 2007

Dennis:

What does your gut tell you about what is going on?

Do you think in the end Shatner will be in the film?

I’m confused + a little upset at this point.

29. Jeffrey S. Nelson - October 18, 2007

24. That’s Shat’s daughter Elizabeth doing the interview.

If Nimoy and Shatner are such pals as both profess, Shatner’s gotta know more than he’s telling.

30. Unidentified Flying Toupee - October 18, 2007

There are two sides to this….
and his side is the only one talking at the moment. I think he’s still negotiating, not liking what he’s being offered and in response is acting a little disappointed and making people feel bdd for him, trying to drag the movie down.

People will still flock to this film if done well.

31. Dennis Bailey - October 18, 2007

The thing that militates against this whole thing being a false controversy cooked up between Shatner and the producers to generate publicity for the eventual announcement of his participation – which a few people at various sites have hinted at – is that if one presumes that the “right thing to do” is to sign him then the current “strategy” consists of casting the producers and the project in a negative light on Shatner’s behalf.

That’s not clever publicity; it would be self-destructive on the part of the producers.

So whatever’s going on, I tend not to think that it’s something that’s been gamed between the parties for our benefit.

32. Jason Lee - October 18, 2007

#25: “Shatner is not a victim in “stretching out the suspense” or in whatever negotiations may be happening. He’s a participant.”

That was basically my point, that if things are as we’ve been led to believe then Abrams and the powers that be–and Nimoy!–are all showing Shatner some pretty serious disrespect, which just doesn’t make sense unless he did something to deserve it… or it’s all just a massive disinformation campaign.

33. Mark Zimmerman - October 18, 2007

I believe ‘the woman’ doing the interview is, in fact, Shatner’s daughter, is she not? Not exactly a hard hitting journalist, I’d imagine. Also, the main venue for these videos is Shatner’s official website. On which things are sold. So, as horribly capitalistic as it may sound, there are very good reasons for these videos to be made (traffic) other than as a massive disinformation campaign.

34. Unidentified Flying Toupee - October 18, 2007

#19 David J..
BINGO!

you beat me to those basic points..thanks.

35. Dennis Bailey - October 18, 2007

#28: “What does your gut tell you about what is going on?

Do you think in the end Shatner will be in the film?”

Gee, just out of the blue sky I think that when apparently simple things get this complicated to explain it’s almost always actually about The Money.

What the circumstances surrounding that are in this case, I have no idea of. We could sit here and fabricate three or four plausible scenarios and one might turn out to have some truth to it, but we’d be guessing nonetheless.

And in the end…I have no idea whether Shatner will be in it. I do suspect that if *he* knew for sure, one way or the other, that video wouldn’t be on ShatnerVision right now.

36. Michelle - October 18, 2007

Eh, I could care less if Shatner is in this movie or not. I’ve never been a fan of his even though I love the TOS (Spock and McCoy were by far my favorite characters, much more so than Kirk). I find it arrogant of him to just brush his death in “Generations” aside and say since it’s Science Fiction, they should just come up with some contrived way to bring him back.

He got paid to be in Generations, and he agreed to the death scene. The script that’s written for this movie doesn’t involve him. If they can find a way to work Shatner into the movie that isn’t disruptive to the story and adds to it, that’s great, but if they can’t come up with a way to do it,, then let them make the movie as it is.

37. diabolk - October 18, 2007

He’ll be in it, I’m telling you. It’s a major story point and they don’t want the resolution known until the end. Remember, “Nimoy as Spock” was NEVER announced when “The Search For Spock” was being produced.

38. Jason Lee - October 18, 2007

So, hypothetically, the uncertainty of all this might be attributable to ongoing negotiations or a dispute over money or the size of the role or whatever, except THEY’RE A FREAKIN’ MONTH AWAY FROM FILMING! If so, I hope they wrote TWO scripts, one with Shatner and one without, because I’d hate to think they’d have to scramble for what I assume would be a pretty major rewrite either way at this late date.

39. Dennis Bailey - October 18, 2007

I remember that very well – and the non-announcement was pretty much done with a wink at the fans. It was *not* a successfully-kept big secret that Spock would show up by the end of that movie.

Really, the idea that the producers plan to keep Shatner’s participation a secret for the next YEAR by going along with him occasionally whipping his fans up into resentful snits against the movie because of his being “shut out” is ridiculous.

Look, two things:

1) If Shatner is in the movie and knows that for sure, he has no reason to encourage disappointment or anger on the part of his fans a few weeks before production starts (and likely no more than a few days before the announcement of his participation).

2) If Shatner *isn’t* in the movie and knows that for sure…well, he doesn’t seem like the kind of person who sulks in public about his career and business affairs.

Either way, there’d be no reason for him to put this video out today if the the situation were completely settled. There’ve been rumors off and on for weeks about whether he’s in it or not, so the fact that there happened to be one reported on WENN and AICN in the last day or two isn’t really something he’d need to jump on.

40. Paul - October 18, 2007

For Dennis;

Bill isn’t on Ain’t it cool news posting comments that he is in the movie and then having a flurry of news reports online trumpet it based on that one little comment as if it was gospel.

As for WHY it was done today; I was scheduled to film Bill today and the timing of the Pine signing and these news stories were just timely. If you don’t believe me go to the WilliamShatner.com board and see my post asking fans what Burning issues they have as I was going to be filming the next segment of ShatnerVision.

The double edged sword in this is; i Bill doesn’t comment on the movie rumours – fans post he’s hiding something and think he’s definitely in the movie
We post a defacto, definitive video saying “No he’s not” and fans still post that he’s ego driven to be in the movie or that it’s some big charade and he really is not in the movie.

It’s ultimately a game that can’t be won. With ShatnerVision we give the audience what they want and leave it to you to interpret but I think it’s pretty clear that as of 1PM PT today – William Shatner did not consider himself to be in the movie.

Why isn’t Ain’t It Cool putting a huge story up? Didn’t they scoop everyone in this? Instead it’s a footnote commentary on the Pine announcement and there’s been NOTHING else since.

Maybe because Bill Shatner is NOT in the movie???

That would be a real revelation; wouldn’t it?

41. Dennis Bailey - October 18, 2007

So, you’re saying definitively that this is settled and that no conversations are going on at all between Shatner and anyone at Paramount about this movie?

He’s not going to be in it? Period?

Or, “as far as *I* know, he doesn’t consider himself to be in it as of today and I’m not privy to whatever his business conversations are with *anyone*?”

42. DavidJ - October 18, 2007

I really doubt this is just an act by Shatner. We’ve all seen Shatner be coy and evasive in interviews before. He’ll say stuff like “Well, I can’t really say, but you never know…”, all the while having a little grin on his face and winking at the camera.

43. VOODOO - October 18, 2007

Something odd is going on here.

Why would Shatner care about some rumors hitting the media about his appearance in this film?

He clearly has some type of motive for putting this video (and others like it)
on his site.

That is his daughter throwing him those softball questions that he WANTS to answer for some reason.

There are several possibilities here:

a) Shatner was not offered a role (that would be ashame) and he is using his site to rally his fans to get the producers attention.

b) He was not offered a big part + feels slighted.

c) He was offered a part that is nothing more than a cameo that will not offer him a big check + he is playing hardball with the producers over money.

d) He is lying to protect the fact that he will be in the film. Perhaps in a cameo at the end that will reveal Kirk survived the nexus + provide the big emotional end to the film.

I highly doubt that Shatner + the producers are doing this to drum up publicity as some had mentioned. If they wanted to do that why not simply have a press conference that would be a media circus. So I would pretty much rule (d) out

To me the two most likely scenarios are.

1/ They haven’t asked him to be in the movie yet (Anthony said that a decision has yet to be made) + he is truly upset over this + is using his site to rally his fanbase. If this is true (not saying it is) shame on them.

2/ He is playing hardball about money as he did with the producers of Enterprise. If this is true (not saying it is) shame on him.

The truth may be somewhere in the middle. It is always tough to read Shatner + his motives, but why respond now within 24 hours of the rumors breaking?

I believe Anthony when he says that a decision has not been made about Shatner. I also believe Herc at AICN when he says Shatner is in the film.

I think this may mean that a cameo has been written for Shatner, but he wants a bigger role (he mentioned he doesn’t do cameo’s in the video) and more money.

Ultimately this is all guess work on my part.

I hope it can all be worked out and we get to see Shatner as Kirk one more time. If it is simply the writers not finding a part for him that is pretty weak.

If Shatner is holding out over money that is equally weak.

Guys (I’m talking to all of you Mr. Shatner, writers, producers) lets get this done. The Kirk character is bigger than all of you.

44. Jason Lee - October 18, 2007

And another thing just occurred to me… If this whole Shatner thing really is just a massive disinformation campaign, if he really is sitting there and bald-faced lying to the camera, then all bets are off. Absolutely everything we think we know about this film, probably excluding the casting announcements, could be fake, which I have to admit wouldn’t totally surprise me.

Not so long ago, I teamed up with Anthony on releasing an April Fools Day design sketch of the Enterprise for Trek XI, which was specifically designed to tweak the fans in all the ways I knew woud get the best rise out of them, and it succeeded beyond my wildest expectations. I’ve been thinking for a while now that time traveling Romulans from the future, uber villains named Nero and other such things had a decidedly similar tweakish feel to them. Abrams strikes me as the kind of guy who, more than just being secretive, might just make it a primary endeavor of the film production to throw everyone COMPLETELY off the track of what he is really doing. The whole Shatner thing could be part and parcel of that.

Or not. Who the hell knows?

45. Anthony Pascale - October 18, 2007

when did this site become a conspiracy theory hangout?

sometimes a cigar is just a cigar

46. Multitrek - October 18, 2007

The guy’s knows this business damn well… He knows how to play his cards right… And he’s upping the ante. He’s more of a tactician than Kirk ever was. He knows this mess about him being in the movie or not has a direct influence on the movie’s success. Just look at all the posts it generates here.

Either that or the rumors are true and he’s already signed to be in the movie.

Either way, he’s got one hell of a poker face…

He should have been in politics.

It would be a big loss for the movie not to have him in it. The day they officially announce he’s not in it, they’ll be loosing half their audience.

Google Ads revenues for this site will also drop dramatically.

A Star Trek movie IGNORING Shatner’s interest to be in it… is NOT a Star Trek movie.

It’s like Harrison Ford being ignored for a Indiana Jones movie or Sylvester Stallone for a Rocky movie. In fact… it’s even worse!

Come on Paramount, do you really want to invest that much money on this reasoning? If I was head of Paramount I’d halt production until the script has a decent place for Shatner.

Their best cash cow has plunged steadily since Kirk’s death. Now they have a chance to fix that and start fresh at the same time.

It just makes no sense to exclude him. Bad business decision… It looks more like someone pulling the ropes has a score to settle with Shatner and enjoys humiliating him for personal reasons.

Would you change director, change scriptwriters or exclude Shatner to make a Star Trek movie? The answer seems obvious to me… Get a new script if you have to, get a new director if you have to… But Shatner and Nimoy have to be in the movie, as do the other surviving actors.

Shareholders should smell the coffee… This is just more of the same nonsense management that has tainted Star Trek in the last 10 years.

It’s as simple as that… no respect for Shatner… no 10 bucks from me and many more. But hey… I guess some people like to bet risky.

47. Jason Lee - October 18, 2007

And if it IS just a cigar, so be it, but how hard is it really for the people involved here to make up their minds and agree on whether it is or isn’t? Are we to believe that Shatner couldn’t just pick up the phone, call JJ and say, “Look, am I in it or not? I’m starting to look like an idiot out here and so are you, so what’s the deal?”And JJ wouldn’t tell him?

I honestly have no idea whether it’s a disinformation campaign, a conspiracy, a high-level ego feud or just a freakin’ cigar. All I DO know is that it’s weird.

48. Dennis Bailey - October 18, 2007

#46:”It would be a big loss for the movie not to have him in it. The day they officially announce he’s not in it, they’ll be loosing half their audience.”

Not nearly that many.

“If I was head of Paramount I’d halt production until the script has a decent place for Shatner.”

It appears that the “head(s) of Paramount” have a different take on the situation based on their experiences.

49. Paul - October 18, 2007

Dennis, how much clearer of a comment do you need?

I’m the one who brought the hollywood.com story to the shoot (you can hear my voice in the video) don’t you think that if it was a contrived piece that Bill and his daughter would know where the story came from?

The way we shoot ShatnerVision is that I bring a set of topics I would like to see covered and Lisabeth sorts them out and asks them. The agreement is that if Bill doesn’t want to talk about it; we move on (that’s never happened, btw) and what you are seeing and hearing on the video is the answer from Bill after hearing the question for the first time. We don’t do retakes; it’s all very candid and raw.

When he says he’s not heard any offer and with fiming starting next month and presumably rehearsals starting in the next few weeks; it doesn’t look like they want him.

Again, you didn’t even address the Aint it cool comment – where is their BIG story??? It’s all out there now, isn’t it? So tell me why it was a footnote and not a lead story.

In tomorrow’s ShatnerVision video; Bill continues the conversation and talks about why he feels that it is a poor business move not putting him in the movie.

Somehow if Paramount were courting him; I don’t think he’d want to talk about that.

50. DavidJ - October 18, 2007

#43

On the contrary, when I watch these interviews I get the impression Shatner isn’t all that INTERESTED in talking about the movie. He always seems totally unenthused, and has this look on his face, like “oh lord, here we go again with a question about the new Star Trek movie.”

Yeah I’m sure on SOME level he’d probably like to be involved, but he’s already got a great role in a hit TV show, he’s winning emmy’s left and right, and in his mind he’s moved ON with his life. Star Trek was a great gig but I don’t think he’s nearly as obsessed with it as we fans like to think he is.

That’s what I see from him when I watch these interviews anyway.

51. VOODOO - October 18, 2007

I am going to take Mr Shatner at his word when he says he has not been asked to be in the movie. At least as of now.

If Mr. Shatner is not asked back when he clearly wants to be involved there is something wrong with the mind set of the writers + producers of this film.

I also believe Anthony when he says that his sources tell him a decision has yet to be made one way or the other.

My answer to that is why don’t they just pick up the phone + tell Mr Shatner this? If we know this why doesn’t he?

Mr. Shatner’s video was upsetting for many longtime ST fans.

52. Dennis Bailey - October 18, 2007

If this really is as definitive an end to the question of Shatner’s involvement as Paul thinks it is, then great – let’s move on.

Everyone agrees that this is settled and that Shatner is definitely not going to be in the movie? Anthony? Mr. Orci?

Or…something else?

53. Mulder - October 18, 2007

#45, Really? Then why are some flying saucers described as ‘cigar-shaped’? And then covered up?! It’s a conspiracy I tell you!!! :p

54. Paul - October 18, 2007

#51

My take on the writers and producers (and this is just a personal opinion) is that why wouldn’t they want to keep us guessing on whether Bill is in the film or not.

You have the Comic Con statement of them promising to try to put Bill in the film.
So they write the script and Leonard Nimoy (who has read the script) tells Bill on stage at a couple of conventions that he’s read the script and Bill isn’t in it.

So let’s play out this scenario: you don’t have plans for Bill Shatner to be in your movie but you have all these loyal fans of Shatner who you WANT to become interested in this new movie.

Wouldn’t you keep up the pretense that you are still trying to put Bill in the film? Roberto Orci restated the Comic Con promise recently in an interview here.

Don’t you think that one month before shooting that the script is pretty locked up at this point?

How do you keep the fans interested though?

Answer: You keep restating that you are trying to get Bill in the movie and hopefully garner enough interest to make fans want to see it anyway – even if Shatner isn’t it.

At that point, though – you’ve put a lot of spin and used the cache of Bill Shatner’s name to get fans interested in the movie.

Is that fair?

I understand that the video is upsetting but it’s the honest truth and fans do at least deserve that much.

That’s why I personally think that nobody has contacted Bill. It would seal the fate and you may as well get as much tread out of the spin doctoring as possible before you have to reveal your hand.

That’s just my own opinion of the situation. I don’t know JJ or Roberto or anyone associated with the movie. It’s just my vile speculation and a theory on what is happening.

-Paul

55. Driver - October 18, 2007

Shatner’s dreaming if he thinks any old Sci-Fi writers twist should resurrect Kirk JUST because “Hey, I’m William Shatner and you owe it to me and my fans. So, just do whatever it takes to bring me back.” SIGH!! The arrogance of some Hollywood elitists.

56. Anthony Pascale - October 18, 2007

one logistical point about the script. in two weeks the WGA are likely to go on strike and Orci and Kurtzman are not allowed to write anything else. For over a month all of Hollywood has been operating based on the assumption a strike will happen.

btw Dennis did you vote to strike?

57. Dennis Bailey - October 18, 2007

#54:”So let’s play out this scenario: you don’t have plans for Bill Shatner to be in your movie but you have all these loyal fans of Shatner who you WANT to become interested in this new movie.

Wouldn’t you keep up the pretense that you are still trying to put Bill in the film? Roberto Orci restated the Comic Con promise recently in an interview here…

…I understand that the video is upsetting but it’s the honest truth…

That’s just my own opinion of the situation. I don’t know JJ or Roberto or anyone associated with the movie. It’s just my vile speculation…”

Indeed it is.

Can anyone parse that as something other than “I think Shatner is telling the truth and the producers are liars?”

I mean, without throwing something out of joint from all the contortions.

58. LTCmdr Lucas - October 18, 2007

Seriously, guys… get over it! I’d love to see Shatner back on the screen, even if not in the center chair… but if it doesn’t happen, it doesn’t happen!

I know its not exactly the same thing… but can you imagine if people clamored for Adam West to be involved in the original Batman movie like this? I mean, if we’re going to talk about wonderful, if campy, TV shows from the 60s, you can’t ignore Batman. It didn’t fit into that new idea of Tim Burton’s.

And I know, I know, Nimoy is involved – that’s wonderful! But he’s the only one, so far… and I still think he’s one of the best links to TOS they could have chosen. Sure, Kirk was the Captain, but I can guarantee a lot of people wanted to be Spock – he kicked ass, was a helluva smart guy, and could pretty much stand up to anybody – even Kirk.

So freakin’ get over it already! We’ll know if he’s really in the movie or not once it comes out in 2008!

59. Dennis Bailey - October 18, 2007

#58:”And I know, I know, Nimoy is involved – that’s wonderful! But he’s the only one, so far… and I still think he’s one of the best links to TOS they could have chosen.”

As a friend on another board observed, in a way it’s fitting that Nimoy/Spock – the only TOS “regular” who appeared in the very first Trek episode – should be the last of the original cast to appear in a Trek production.

60. New Horizon - October 18, 2007

You know…I’m sick of Shatner. He’s just baggage for this movie. Nimoy works with this movie, because he is such an understated actor, but Shatner is a ham and has to be the center of attention. He had his chance to bow out gracefully, but instead he went for the ever so fantastic death scene. It’s his own fault that he chose to let Kirk die. Leave it alone already and let this new team make a GOOD movie…not just some contrivance to resurrect Shatner as Kirk.

61. AC - October 18, 2007

i thought he was playing capt. kirk’s father, and make a cameo?

62. SirMartman - October 18, 2007

“The word has not yet,,,,come down”

Theres still a chance,,,

*crosses fingers*

*crosses toes*

*croesses eyeeeyss*

63. Dennis Bailey - October 18, 2007

No. Walter Koenig plays Kirk’s father in a cameo.

Nichelle Nichols and Grace Lee Whitney play his aunts, and George Takei plays a cranky guy who keeps complaining to Daddy Kirk that the kid cuts across his yard every day and is killing the azaleas.

64. Harry Ballz - October 18, 2007

Face it, we’re ALL going to see the movie whether Shatner’s in it or not….HOWEVER….the only plausible way to have Kirk come back from the dead is to have the timeline altered so he didn’t die in the first place. That way you could have an elderly Spock (after returning from the past) meet up with him at the end of the film a la Michael J. Fox + Christopher Lloyd in Back To The Future. Everyone would get a sense of closure, a fond farewell to the originals, a sweet upbeat ending AND the symmetry of coming “full circle” in the first 40 year cycle of Star Trek!

If done right, the “word of mouth” on this film when it opens could be through the roof!!

65. Pragmaticus - October 18, 2007

Paul – could you get Bill to offer his comments on Chris Pine? And will Bill reach out to Chris Pine?

66. ZoomZoom - October 18, 2007

Perhaps Orci and Co’s imaginations aren’t as good as we have been led to believe? Seems like they just can’t do the business on Shatner.
Poor show guys.
And I thought Bill looked genuinely upset- but, of course, disapointment isn’t going to be a hard push for such a fine actor….. so I continue to hope.

67. Dennis Bailey - October 18, 2007

“Hey, did you hear? Kirk comes back to life in the new Trek movie!”

“Does what? Was he dead?”

“Yeah, he died in that movie with the bald captain. God, what, fifeen years ago?”

“I saw him on that law show last week – the one with that guy from ‘Stargate’ on it. He’s not dead.”

68. Gallifrey1983 - October 18, 2007

This is disappointing and frustrating. There is no benefit to be gained by prolonging this. Shatner should be in the film.

The time is now, this may be the last chance. Logan and Spiner wiated too long — they wanted him in a Nemesis sequel. Berman could not get him fro Enterprise season 4, said maybe season 5 — and got cancelled.

I keep thinking about the end of Star Trek III. Kirk to Spock -“You would have done the same for me.” That is the untold story that needs to be told, and would be a perfect way for Nimoy and Shatner to cap their involvement in Trek.

69. roberto Orci - October 18, 2007

66.

I would respond to you accusation of a poor imagination if I could think of something.

70. DavidJ - October 18, 2007

#64

Of all the wacky ideas I’ve heard, that actually sounds like the best. It’s simple and elegant and would be a great way to end the movie.

Unfortunately I just don’t think Shatner would be up for doing a cameo.

71. Michael Hall - October 18, 2007

Orci–

If that really *was* you, that was classic. :-)

72. Multitrek - October 18, 2007

69.

You should write movies… that was a great line. ;)

73. DavidJ - October 18, 2007

lol, welcome to the DARK side of Trek fandom, Mr Orci. ;)

74. Unidentified Flying Toupee - October 18, 2007

#40 and 41

Ok, he ain’t in it… next subject

75. Cervantes ( The haggis is in the fire for sure... ) - October 18, 2007

The way some of this casting has gone, only an appearance of an older, still alive and well Kirk can salvage this for me, as when I see Leonard Nimoy on screen, it will only remind there’s a gaping William Shatner-sized hole in this Movie if not…

76. Harry Ballz - October 18, 2007

“William Shatner-sized hole in this movie”

Jeez, I hope they go for a wide-angle shot!!

77. Jeffrey S. Nelson - October 18, 2007

69. Mr. Orci on Shat

You’re as tigh-lipped about this issue as an Aldebaran shell-mouth.

78. Kobayashi Maru - October 18, 2007

Business decision?
“How many yachts can you water ski behind?”- Bud Fox, Wall Street.
If this almost assured great moment from Star Trek is going to fall apart simply because a deal can’t be reached, I say to hell with William Shatner, and I would say this with a very heavy heart because I have been very vocal about how truly great I believe his participation in XI would be!
Money can’t be that much of an issue at this point in the game, and the Shat would be stacking quite a bit of Q points by doing it just because it would be really cool to see.
Even Sean Connery was lured back to Bond, and when he got the salary he felt he was entitled to, he gave it to charity, out of sheer principle.
I know that Mr. Orci has been kicking this one around, and it is quite evident that he is aware of all the ideas floating in exchange on this and other sites, so finding the story solution can’t be the factor.
I want more than anything to see one more iconic exchange between LN and WS, but if it’s a hard thing to remember that all he has springs from all of this, well, there’s a new Kirk in town, and his name is Chris Pine!
Good luck, Chris!

79. me - October 18, 2007

Kirk is dead. There is no place for Shatner. Spock can get older, but Kirk not. Shatner never will look as he looked at ST7. There is no place for him in the movie.

Except of playing a small cameo as grandfather of kirk maybe.
But that would be irrelevant for the story. Nimoy also wasn’t there in ST7, so now ST11 will become a only-Nimoy movie for exchange. What’s the problem?

80. Kirky - October 18, 2007

Everybody with me!!! We want te Shat, We want the Shat!!!

81. flier1701 - October 18, 2007

Although I would loveto have the Shat in this film, I came to terms with the fact that we would “never” see him as Kirk again a long time ago.

His involvement will not effect me either way.

82. Steve - October 18, 2007

I agree with #79. Kirk died, and to bring him back would mean a gimmick that would require too much of the focus. I’m looking forward to plenty of Nimoy time anyways – he’s a fine fine actor and his Spock character is easily the best of the original cast.

83. Etha Williams - October 18, 2007

I’m sorry, but just because something is science fiction doesn’t mean that you can just do whatever you want with the storyline. Sure, in-universe laws make it possible to do that — but what if it interferes with/distracts from/takes away from the main storyline? IMHO, it doesn’t matter whether that story is scifi, fantasy, biographical, or anything else — the elements have to fit.

I feel like just based off of how worked up people are getting on this board about the topic, if they off-the-cuff resurrected Shatner and then went on to the story, everyone would be focusing on Shatner and not the story. (If he’s actually an integral part of the story, playing a role no one else could — well, that’s different.)

It doesn’t take much imagination to figure out how to throw the Shat in, but it might take nothing short of a miracle to make it work with what the story that Orci, Abrams et al have already chosen.

84. Trekee - October 19, 2007

I have to say that if I were making a decision as to whether or not to include His Shatneriffickness in the film I’d consider a couple of things:

Can you put him in, in an optional cameo and not make it look like a cheap gimmick (Starsky and Hutch anyone?) We would all go NUTS if it looked like a marketing sop!!! And don’t say we wouldn’t because we would.

So he’d need a bigger part and is the film about ‘OLD’ Kirk? Could you have him in without having 30 minutes devoted to Nexus stuff that wouldn’t be a complete cop-out? Star Trek 2.0 is going to have to be more than a soothing balm on the still open fanboy wound of ‘Generations’. (I suppose , *sniffs*).

And if you did that, would the New Shiney Star Trek Franchise be all about William Shatner, or all about the new guys? It HAS to be about the new guys.

We’ve had one poorly recieved handover already – if it can work, then great. I’m sure Mr Orci is far more aware of the commerical difficulties of balancing what would be a large salary demand with giving it the meaning which such a salary demand would entail with not totally unbalancing what is essentailly an ‘Origins’ movie.

So, back to the first point, I think it just HAS to be a cameo. If Nimoy/Spock is talking to someone off camera and Shatner/Kirk hoves in to view I would accept WITH NO EXPLANATION NEEDED:

Spock: “Aren’t you dead?”
Kirk: “There are always possibilities”.

[Credits]

Otherwise the whole movie is about bringing him back (well, for fans anyway who don’t have the attention span of… hey look shiney warp cores…)

And could you write a story based on that without knowing that Shatner would sign up? I agree with Dennis on an earlier post, it SOUNDS like it’s about money, but I think it’s also about keeping the film in balance. I think Bill Shatner will have strong views about his part and not fancy a cameo (since Spock has a larger role in comparison) and TPTB will want to stay focused on Eomer and Co.

Hell, make Star Trek Babies II about how they go into the future to save future Kirk who is needed to save the future future of Picard if you like, but I’m the ‘Origins’ story needs to be about the new crew so it rules out it being about the post Nexus rescue of Kirk.

If you are still reading Mr Orci, if you REALLY want to bake our noodles, make it a cliffhanger and DON’T explain why old Kirk is still around…

Just chuck him in the last scene, pay him for Iceland and promise him the sequel is Star Trek 2.1 The Search for Kirk.

Then just sit and lurk on this site for awhile afterwards… it could be very funny.

85. Admiral_Bumblebee - October 19, 2007

It is disappointing if he is not in the movie. Imagine all the great scene he could have with Leonard Nimoy, the chemistry between them. It would be incredible. I think there would be something amiss without Shatner. I hope the people in charge know that they are missing out on a great one-time opportunity if they don’t include him…

86. Penhall - October 19, 2007

If the movie is a time travel thing and alternate reality or whatever, I see no reason why they couldnt have written a role for shatner if they really wanted to.

And why wont they just come out and say he’s not in the movie?

We keep hearing things like “We’re trying” or whatever, and the fact of the matter is that the movie starts shooting next month. Of course he’s NOT gonna be in it, so why keep up hanging? Just come right out and tell us. I dont believe all this “conspiracy theory” stuff or anything either.

I think its a missed opportunity not to have Shatner and Nimoy together again. With the two of them onscreen one last time, it could have been an “EVENT” The publicity would have been enormous.

I still think the movie will (hopefully) be good, and I’m glad Nimoy is in it, but I’m disappointed by no Shatner.

87. Moonwatcher - October 19, 2007

Lets all just face the facts. The film script is a Nimoy/Spock driven story that would have to be horribly tweaked to include a Shatner/Kirk. If Mr. Nimoy says it’s a great script , then by god don’t screw with it. Art is not made by a consensus of the many… but by the few…or the one!!!!

88. Trekee - October 19, 2007

I’ve changed my mind.

New Kirk chockes on a pretzel in the acadamy and dies. Timelines in ruin, fanboys howl!!

So:

The whole story has to be about Old Spock telling New Spock to travel forward in time to steal the 2nd Genesis Device (the one they kept under sink in the galley for emercencies, watch scene 48 again and you can just see it – it’s in the extended cut) just before the Reliant explodes, take it forward in time and nuke Veridian III with it but instead of protomatter, use the chicken soup that Kirk gave to the 1960’s Earth Fighter Pilot.

Old Shatner appears, but the chicken soup matrix makes him get younger. they take him off the planet just before he reaches 28, mind melds occur and the balance is restored.

It’s a win/win, lets face it. It’s a cameo, but a MEANINGful cameo. and the film is all about the Trek Babies.

More or less.

Did I miss anything?

89. trekker77 - October 19, 2007

I want Wiliam Shatner in the movie. I think that he, of all people on the screen who have ever represented Star Trek, he is the most important. To have him still around, willing and able to be in this movie (just like Nimoy) and NOT have him in the movie, to me, shines a negative light on the producers… whether or not it’s their fault.

83.– I’m assuming you didn’t have a problem with Harve Bennett bringing back Leonard Nimoy in Star Trek III or did you think it interfered with/distracted from/took away from the main storyline?

After all, the elements have to fit.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m really looking forward to seeing Star Trek 11… on cable some day.

90. JD - October 19, 2007

It’s possible that Mr. Shatner and Mr. Abrams have some secret deal and the older Kirk will appear as a surprise — but I doubt it. Given what little what we know about the plot of the film, and the writers’ apparent adherence to continuity, it doesn’t make sense for Kirk to appear the way it allows Mr. Spock to. Kirk’s death, the actors’ ages and physical dissimilarites (the DirectTV ads notwithstanding) from the last time we saw them together in VI . makes them appearing together, outside of a dream or “unreal” sequence, problematic at best. We must trust the producers, who have a fine record creatively, to make the right narrative choices.

91. JD - October 19, 2007

As an aside, I must stress that Mr Shatner is, to me, and to so many of us, something unique. And a genuinely terrific actor.

I can’t wait for John Laroquette’s character, Carl Sack, on “Boston Legal” to say to Shatner’s Denny Crane “I thought you’re going to kill me.” To which he can, in character respond…

92. Cygnus-X1 - October 19, 2007

I must admit, it would be nice to have Shatner involved.

At the very least, he could advise Pine on how to play his character.

And, the idea of redeeming Kirk’s meaningless death in Generations, as was done with Tasha Yar’s death in “Skin of Evil,” is very compelling.

I can’t think of anything that would rock more than that.

But, I can also imagine a hundred reasons why it wouldn’t be done.

Funnily enough, it wouldn’t be so disappointing to have Shatner missing from the film if Nimoy wasn’t in it. But, to have one without the other does make me long for the one left out. Heh.

It doesn’t look like it’s gonna happen this time around, but the show must go on!!!

93. Pr011 - October 19, 2007

36. Hear hear.

94. leony - October 19, 2007

# 68 “I keep thinking about the end of Star Trek III. Kirk to Spock -”You would have done the same for me.” That is the untold story that needs to be told, and would be a perfect way for Nimoy and Shatner to cap their involvement in Trek.”

If memory serves since I saw Generations only once, Kirk never ever did even mention Spock or asked Picard what had become of him in the meantime. Yes, Spock would have moved heaven and hell to find and rescue Kirk. Generations botched that story. They not even had the decency to have Kirk at least talk about his best friend Spock even after Nimoy declined to be in that film. On YouTube is a clip from a convention where Shatner talks about Kirk’s death in Generations and Nimoy’s answer is that if he had been there, he’d never let him die (to a lot of ahhhhs from the crowd present and Shatner kissing him). So when Nimoy says there was no Spock role in that movie, he is right, since Spock would have to have an active part beyond the cameo appearance at the start of the film. A dynamic that the producers of TNG didn’t get.

Many years have gone by since. Spock might have gotten old as Nimoy got old. Older even. Vulcans have what – twice the lifespan of a human? Everyone from the Enterprise is dead then. No Shatner as Kirk nor other actors from the original series would have a natural place in that movie then. In Shatner’s own movie ST V he has Kirk say that he knows he would die alone and that is what has happened. In a way it was fitting. Let him rest in piece.

95. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - October 19, 2007

I’ve been against bringing Shatner back in for ad hoc, nostalgic reasons from the beginning.

I think Shatner put his finger on it when he said it’s a business decision, but I would add that it is a matter of a good story. And having a movie about bringing someone back from the dead is CORNY, plain and simple. Moreover, it’s been done, it’s called Star Trek III: The Search for Spock, which was indeed CORNY and over the top.

When Shatner says, it’s Science Fiction, I get what he means… you can do anything in Science Fiction. But that’s part of the problem with the genre… it is so often dismissed by folks as not serious, and why? Because there is too much BAD writing, too much CORNY, sappy, not believable writing.

I am confident JJ Abrams will do right by this film.

I’ll say this for Shatner: kudos for not accepting a cameo, or even conceiving what good such a thing would do. Shatner does not need to be in the film just to show his face.

96. Cenobyte - October 19, 2007

Shatner is their ace in the hole i tells yah! We have thirteen months until “Star Trek”… give it time.

PS i could be wrong :P

97. Chris Pike - October 19, 2007

I’m sorry to see His Shatness being so shut out of this production, he clearly has heard nothing from anyone – especially after Leonard has (so rightly) been embraced so warmly by the team. From his body language here, I would say he has a certain feeling of being “left out” to say the least! And I really don’t think there’s any wierdness or conspiracies going on here.

98. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - October 19, 2007

#83 — Etha Williams said it nicely and succintly — “If he’s actually an integral part of the story, playing a role no one else could — well, that’s different.” Yes, that’s the word: integral.

Bringing Kirk back just to bring Kirk back would be the nail in the coffin of the Star Trek franchise. Either JJ and Orci breathe new life into it by means of a good story, or it is over and done with.

99. Admiral_Bumblebee - October 19, 2007

But, didn’t he only say that he doesn’t have a cameo in the movie? This does not rule out that he will have a big part in it ;)

As for there not being a natural way to fit him into the story. here is what I would do:

I would do it similar to the TNG episode “Yesterdays Enterprise”. A rift in time is opened (maybe by the enemy) and Kirk is suddenly there. Just like Tasha Yar was there in “Yesterdays Enterprise”. Spock is the only one who sees the changes in the timeline and he and Kirk travel to this rift and then back in time together. Old Kirk begins to realize that he is helping Spock to restore a future in which he is dead which could bring up some conflict between them. They defeat the enemy (which had some kind of crystal on him that was used to create the rift – young Spock then takes this crystal and keeps it. And this crystal is responsible for Spock being the only one able to see the changes in the timeline). At the end someone is putting a letter into young Kirks jacket reading “Do not open until the maiden voyage of the Enterprise-B.” Spock asks Kirk if he wants to go back to the future or travel with him through time forever, righting things that went wrong. They vanish.

Why is Kirk alive in the future, when the enemies try to assassinate him in the past, you ask? ;)
The changed future, Old Spock saw, was the one he created by going back in time not the one the enemies made. Logical, huh? :)

100. Daskill - October 19, 2007

That’s a shame. Poor old bloke. All joking aside, he seems pretty downcast about it. It really is a shame to have a movie called Star Trek without Mr Star Trek in it.

101. kenoki - October 19, 2007

okay how about this: spock and kirk are (insert scenery) reflecting and sharing a laugh. thus inspires the flashback. enter chris pine and crew. in the end spock gets up and leaves only to reveal that he spends a great deal of time in a holodeck with an image of kirk, whom he still misses many, many years later. problem solved. jj, i accept paypal.

102. Jeffrey S. Nelson - October 19, 2007

I hope Shatner’s big enough to accept what realistically is a cameo. The script is the thing, wherein we’ll catch the conscience of the… this is a Spock-driven plot. The new cast needs the chance to prove itself. I’m the biggest Shat fan around, but he’s not carrying this movie based on the script. A final scene with Shatner as Kirk is worth all the bigger screen time Nimoy wlll have. Let’s not count lines.
As for Boston Legal, wouldn’t it be great if Denny Crane dressed up as Captain Kirk for Halloween?

103. Chris M - October 19, 2007

Like most Star Trek fans I would love to have William Shatner in the movie. Having said that there is only one character that he should play in the movie and that is James T Kirk. I don’t wnat him playing Kirks father or have a bit part as a nothing character. Better he not be in the film at all if that is the case.

As it would seem the script has been well and truly written by now and it is obvious that it does not include an older James T Kirk.

I have a feeling I am gonna love this movie and the writers, producers, directors etc are going to do Star Trek proud.

It’s just a shame, as it would seem, that William Shatner doesn’t get to play Captain James T Kirk one last time!

104. leony - October 19, 2007

You can see a fan-artists imagination of the new Kirk at

http://karracaz.deviantart.com/art/The-New-Captain-Kirk-66268538

105. Iowagirl - October 19, 2007

You’re right: “The show must go on”. Because this film will be nothing but a meaningless “show” without Shatner als old Kirk. And its biggest exhibit will be Abram’s and Orci’s arrogance. Shatner was absolutely right in the video saying that his identity was in the film. The production team of ST XI must no longer withhold from Shatner what is his, and not from us what is ours.

Mr. Abrams, Mr. Orci, stop this unreasonable “show” now!

106. Ty Webb - October 19, 2007

I think it’s a shame Bill feels disappointed he’s not in it, although it’s equally a shame he’s not able to accept that his character was killed off, and would be quite happy for his character to be brought back in some hockey sci-fi way.

107. Tim Handrahan - October 19, 2007

I am still hopeful. If it does not happen, It would be an ABSOLUTE SHAME!

108. Iowagirl - October 19, 2007

You’re right “The show must go on”. Because without Shatner als old Kirk, this film will be a meaningless “show”. And its biggest exhibit will be the production team’s arrogance. Shatner was absolutely right when saying that his identity was in this film. Abrams & Co. must no longer withhold from Shatner what is his and from us what is ours.

109. Iowagirl - October 19, 2007

sorry for the double post – my computer had problems

110. VulcanBabe - October 19, 2007

#106. It doesn’t have to be a “hockey sci-fi way”. But why not end the movie with old Spock coming to rescue old Kirk?

Spock somehow manages to change time so that Kirk never dies (which happily coincides with the script leak), and then the two meet up in the last scene…and have one of those witty, poignant conversations…

Roll credits.

111. leony - October 19, 2007

I quote from that same convention video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljHAJvIZyhs) I cited earlier:

Nimoy to Shatner: “Being loud at me doesn’t make you right.”

Iowagirl, repeating your statements doesn’t either.

112. StillKirok - October 19, 2007

The problem is that if I truly make a post detailing my disappointment and opinion, I will be accused of having an agenda, a conspiracy, being obsessed, or my personal favorite, spamming.

However, I know Mr. Orci reads these comments, so I have some questions for him.

1. Why do you say you’re trying to get Shatner in the film, yet did not write him in the script?

2. I may not be a Hollywood expert, but when you are trying to get someone involved with you, how can you do that without talking to him?

Shatner hasn’t even SEEN the script.

Look, if you have no intention of using Shatner, please just say so. At this point, I’m so tired of the back and forth and the lack of the producers actually being straight forward that there is no way I will pay to see this movie unless the producers do the right thing and put Shatner in it.

You can get Nimoy, you can get every actor in the book and recast the movie all you want, but the constant false hopes about getting Shatner has really grown old. It would be nice to have JJ Abrams address this once and for all.

113. leony - October 19, 2007

Upps, sorry, got to see post #109 only after I send my comment and the site renewed. My apologies.

114. Ty Webb - October 19, 2007

110. Rescue him for what though? Old Kirk is an old man now. The franchise was already stretched to it’s limits when Spock was brought back. I think it undermines the premise and credibility of Trek if we start to play God whenever we feel like it and bring back dead characters. Maybe show him in a flashback and make him look a bit younger like they did in that direct TV commercial, that would work.

115. Bono Luthor - October 19, 2007

I had a lot of goodwill towards this project and it has really started to fade since I watched that video.

I am not a Trekker just someone who was a big fan of the adventures of Kirk and Spock when I was growing up in the eighties.

I have not seen a Trek movie in the cinema since First Contact. I

I’m there opening night for this if Shat is in with Nimoy and think JJ is a very talented guy, but that video kind of made me fell like: Auto-destruct sequence on-line.

Please guys. Do it. Just make it happen.

116. Iowagirl - October 19, 2007

#111

read 109 – saying sorry ONCE should do

117. Iowagirl - October 19, 2007

#113

ok, my apologies – now it was me being late…

118. Bono Luthor - October 19, 2007

Hi. I have had two posts vanish. Are there probs or should I take it personally. I didn’t say anything nasty? : (

119. Cervantes - October 19, 2007

Boy, these sure are nervous times aboard the good ship Trekmovie.com…

Here’s the ‘Scotty’ I ended up with for this Movie…stop laughing there at the back…
http://www.tipos.com.br/media/12/20051118-jardineiro_willy_blog.jpg

But will I end up with something like this for this Movie’s ‘Enterprise’?…as it sure doesn’t sound like I’m getting the original series design…
http://jedi.org/blog/archives/N.S.E.A.Protector-The.Visual.Effects.of.Star.Trek.II.png

And am I also getting a Bridge to match?…
http://www.dreamworksfansite.com/galaxyquest/gallery/Crew_Aboard.jpg

Only one thing can give me hope now…somebody please own up soon if William Shatner is REALLY in this, however briefly…and if so, is that appearance as an ‘older’ Kirk, rather than a ridiculous ‘cameo’ where he plays his own dad or such like…

120. jonboc - October 19, 2007

Me thinks Shatner is playing us like a fiddle…and JJ wrote the music.

Not that I mind one bit, I love surprises.

121. Cervantes - October 19, 2007

There’s always one isn’t there?…
That Bridge link should have been this…

http://www.dreamworksfansite/galaxyquest/gallery/Crew_Aboard.jpg

122. CanuckLou - October 19, 2007

@64 – I totally agree with your post.

And Shanter balking at doing a cameo – sorry dude, if you didn’t agree to die in Generations then your character would be in a better position for continued use.

123. Cervantes - October 19, 2007

Last time!

http:/hollywoodjesus.com/media/galaxy05.jpg

124. Cervantes - October 19, 2007

aaargh

125. StillKirok - October 19, 2007

If he is in the movie, it won’t be as his dad or something ridiculous like that. Any actor can play another character. If they’re going to get Shatner, the only role for him is as older Kirk. There is no way an intelligent producer would waste Shatner in another role, and for the most part, no way the audience would accept that.

But the constant false hopes are going to hurt the grosses more than some people believe. Bottom line with a $150 million budget, they need butts in the seats, and Shatner as Kirk will put butts in the seats.

The endless stringing along has got to stop.

126. Jon - October 19, 2007

they put the original(1950’s) Lois Lane in a cameo in Richard Donner’s 1977 “Superman” as The new Lois Lanes mom on the train when Clark ran by.So Shatner could do a cameo of Kirk’s dad or such.

127. Jay - October 19, 2007

He’s lying… I love the man to pieces but he’s lying. “I wouldnt do a cameo… a cameo” bull… he wants to be in this movie, he would do a cameo.

he looks like a man under pressure to lie… notice the stutters and the un ease at answering simple questions, he looks like a man that is choosing his words very carefully as to not give away the truth.

“The word… is no, so were doing it anyway” (ST:III)

128. StillKirok - October 19, 2007

There is no reason to believe he’s lying.

#126–And Noel Neill’s cameo ended up on the cutting room floor. Plus, in no incarnation of Superman did the characters actually age. Completely different situation. Plus, it’s not like they had other actors from the 1950s show playing the same role, like they do here. If Shatner is in the movie, it would have to be as Kirk.

But it doesn’t matter, since the producers desperate efforts don’t actually involve talking to Shatner or even sending him the script. Yeah, they’re trying hard.

129. Jay - October 19, 2007

*128…. there is every reason

130. StillKirok - October 19, 2007

#129–no there really isn’t.

The reaction to Shatner’s lack of involvement is mostly negative and filled with disappointment. If Shatner actually had a deal in place, the producers are not foolish enough to tell him to lie about it and drag their movie down. It wouldn’t make sense.

This isn’t the type of thing that could be kept in the dark. It’s not something that would be a surprise. The only way that happens is if the producers haven’t told HIM yet, and that’s highly unlikely.

There are no benefits to lying about it.

So many people want Shatner in this film. It’s terrible what’s going on. I know I won’t pay to see it at this point.

131. 1701 over Gotham City - October 19, 2007

Shatner is Kirk. Simple.

Do not have him cameoed as somebody else…
It simply will stick out as a sore thumb, and would really be awkward, considering that Nimoy is Spock in the film.

Would you cast Somebody else as Indiana Jones, and then have Harrison Ford playing the bad guy? Or worse, Jones Sr?? Doesn’t work.

Shatner should be in the film… and to be honest, I’ll be astounded if he is not.

132. StillKirok - October 19, 2007

I think the worst part of all this is the silence from the producers. Abrams hasn’t said a word since July, and Orci merely parrotted that statement last week. If they truly intend to put Shatner in the film, it’s time to pick up the phone and call the man. At least fax him the script and an idea. Trying to get someone in the film requires communication.

133. New Horizon - October 19, 2007

#131 –

Don’t be so narrow minded people. Shatner was an actor employed to play the character of Kirk. Shatner is an actor, Kirk is a Character. Big difference. I’m going to be highly disappointed if the writers buckle under all of this resurrect Kirk non-sense. It was bad enough that they back tracked and spent 2 movies bringing Spock back up to speed, but now people are begging the writers to short change this new cast of characters, just so Shatner can undo something he shouldn’t have done in the first place? He’s successful, he’s on a hit show….I think he can afford to let the new crew take the spot light.

He accepted the decision to kill Kirk. Nimoy wisely stayed out of that movie. The undiscovered country was the original crews farewell. Remember that movie? They went out on a high note. Now people just want to keep belaboring the exit. It’s like a band that keeps having reunions after the farewell tour.

Enough is enough.

134. Craig - October 19, 2007

I wonder if Shatner saying this Scifi was a hint that Shatner will be in the movie and they are going to do something to bring Kirk back after Generations so it wont effect Kirk helping Picard and his crew on Veridian III?

135. Mike - October 19, 2007

Why is it so hard for Shatner and his fans to accept the fact that this movie is an attempt to move the franchise forward to a NEW generation of actors? All iconic characters in movies and TV get replaced eventually. From Superman to James Bond. Sorry, thoses are the facts. Eventually the umbilical cord, must be severed from the old and the new. It wasn’t required for Sean Connery to appear in ‘Live and Let Die”, when Roger Moore replaced him as Bond. Nor was it necessary for this to happen in any film or TV series I know of. Get over it. TREK is no different, though some fans are deluded enough to think there is. The filmmakers open themselves up to this when they wrote Nimoy in the movie. I don’t think he should be in it either. It’s time to move on, folks. I hope the fan base is mature enough to accept it.

136. StillKirok - October 19, 2007

#133–it’s science fiction. Anything can happen. It’s NOT a problem to bring the character back. We all know it. So the whole Kirk died argument doesn’t hold water. If it did, the producers wouldn’t even give the lip service and Shatner wouldn’t even be talking about it.

The original series did NOT go out on a high note because Generations spoiled it. And yes, Shatner shouldn’t have taken the role, but he did, so yes, they should spend time in the movie making sure that the central character–the captain–isn’t dead.

#135–Shatner is ready, willing and able to play older Kirk. You don’t see people arguing against the idea of a new cast. But we want Shatner in the movie to deal with that ridiculous death and put the franchise back in a positive direction. Kirk’s death lingers over this movie. They are already including Nimoy which shows an intent to reach out to the fanbase, but it’s not enough when Shatner wants in so badly. There was no “bring back Spock” campaign. Not that it isn’t great to see Nimoy. It is. But the demand has always been about Shatner.

It’s not about an unwillingness to replace Shatner. But this is the last, best chance to finally give Shatner’s Kirk a sendoff worthy of it. Bring the character back, and pass the torch right. It’s all that’s being asked.

Then film all these sequels with the new cast for as long as you can.

The problem is the character. Hell, I could even accept putting Chris Pine in older makeup and bringing the character back that way. Not my first choice, but it’s better than nothing.

137. Iowagirl - October 19, 2007

This is the most absurd scenario I’ve ever encountered in my whole Trek life. Nothing ever has come near this.

If they don’t involve Shatner as Kirk, they will still make their money, but they will destroy the transcendental factor of ST that made ST much more than just another SciFi series. They will destroy the magic.

I am beginning to realize now that Abrams & Co. really just want to make another popcorn movie for the young masses. This is fine, let them do it – they will find enough ticket buyers and bill payers for that. But as for all you people out there who got into ST and especially TOS for the REAL surprises at the right time, the unique mix of drama, action, continuity of characters, legendary friendship and emotions – there certainly will be other films to watch in 2008.

138. Pragmaticus - October 19, 2007

104 – Pine is Kirk, not Vogel.

139. andrea - October 19, 2007

Probably JJ want let old kirk presence in this movie, like one of the big surprises…for us…. i would like to discover just in the theatre during the movie that Shatner is there! i love spoilers…but i will love this kind of surprise remain secret until the movie go to the theatre…. what do you think?

140. Admiral_Bumblebee - October 19, 2007

#135 Then why include Nimoy? Why not simply create a movie that plays entirely in the past, detailing the first adventure of the TOS-crew that leads into more movies?
If this movie belongs to the new actors and the new adventures then Nimoy will diminish that as well. So it wouldn’t matter if Shatner would be in it, too. In fact, it would be even better. Having Young Kirk and Young Spock as well as Old Kirk and Old Spock. The old versions would help their young selfs and send them off on their adventures.
Face it, this movie is not about the new crew because Nimoy is in it.

I still hope that this is all a big secret, that Shatner has to lie because they want to have the surprise of him being in the movie until either the trailer hits the cinemas or the movie itself.

It simply cannot be a story issue. As Shatner said himself, this is sci-fi. Everything is possible.

141. The Master - October 19, 2007

This how shatner should appear the film:
McCoy is telling Savik a story about Jim Kirk back on the genisis cave waiting to get rescued. Then the correct version is told by Spock to Savik after they are rescued from the Genisis cave. *LOL*
Or it could be one of the falsh backs that was used by spock’s brother to forment the pain. *LOL*

However, sine this is allgedlly a time travel story there are a slew of possiblities, that can be done. becuase ther eould be various alternate time lines. ( How about as an old aging bad Kirk from the Mirror Mirror Universe, wher he has become Emepror??)

142. Ivory - October 19, 2007

143. ACR - October 19, 2007

I have to say that I wouldn’t be disappointed if Shatner weren’t in this movie at all. In the early going he was a pretty cool character, but eventually he just became a parody of himself (can anyone watch ST VI and not feel like he is wink wink nudge nudge at the audience the whole time??? Compare that performance to the character in TMP and ST II which are much more fleshed out and honest).

Spock has remained an interesting character through the whole series. Even in ST V and the poorly worked T.V. comeback on TNG, Nimoy’s performance preserved some sense of the real Spock. The result: who cried when Spock died in TWOK? Who cried when Kirk died in Generations?

Since the late 80s, much of Star Trek was overproduced, taking on a Disneyland like gloss. Lots of bright colors, lots of over the top, operatic performances, but very little to ground it in reality. If the team’s work on MI:iii and Lost are any indication, this movie could feel like its in a real future. This could be the first time since 1983 that we believe that Kirk is a real starship captain (and not just Shatner in an ever increasing belt-size).

JJ and crew have to be left to tell the story that they want to tell. If that story can credibly work in Shatner, then thats a good nod to the old school fans. If not, then quit being jerks about it. Get over it and watch the billion hours of t.v. and film that already have Shatner’s Kirk in it.

Now, I’m not a Shatner hater. I was a kid when TMP and TWOK came out, and I loved those movies. Kirk in those films was visceral, cocky, loyal and clever – everything a real ship captain would have to be. And I’ve definitely enjoyed much of his work in the original series. But you can have Star Trek without him, and you don’t need to waste a great opportunity running around trying to raise Shatner’s Kirk from the dead.

Make a great movie with Chris Pine and crew. Everything else will work out from there.

Thus endeth the rant.

144. Gary Lee - October 19, 2007

If JJ is trying to keep a secret that Shatner is in this movie or not. And not wanting to spoil the ending knowing that Shatner is, there is no way people talk if it’s true or not. We all are trying to guess what the movie is all about and someone will get it right. We got about a year so what’s your guess?

145. Ivory - October 19, 2007

Roberto Orci:

If you are out there would you be kind enough to make a definitive statement as to whether or not Mr. Shatner will be in this film.

I hate to put your feet to the fire like this, but you do seem to genuinely care what the fans are thinking and since J.J. Abrams was the first to bring up the subject at comic-con I don’t think the question is out of bounds.

If you can’t answer the question for whatever reason (non-disclosure, want to keep it a secret, plot points..etc) I will completely understand + will not press the issue.

On the other hand if Mr. Shatner is not going to be invited back why not just say it?

Thanks.

146. Bono Luthor - October 19, 2007

I have said it before and I say it again. If you don’t have Shatner as older Kirk in this movie many people will regret it for a long time to come.

Even, at some point in the future, Paramount.

147. Trek Nerd Central - October 19, 2007

Oh, fercryinoutloud, people, it’s a MOVIE. Let’s all get a grip here. Unless and until George W. Bush comes out and says the casting for J.J. Abrams’ Star Trek reboot will determine the future of Iraq, I think we should all calm down.

I don’t think Shatner is up to anything sneaky — I think he wishes he were in the film, and he isn’t. He posted the video to correct an erroneous piece of reporting, to express his disappointment and — I suspect — to needle Abrams & Company into giving him a part.

I mean, why shouldn’t he? It’s his right. He’s been playing that part for 40 + years. Of course he wants to be in the film. What’s the mystery, here?

If he’s in it, that’s cool. If he’s not, everyone should be able to live with it.

That said, I think Abrams ought to cast him as Kirk’s Grampa or beloved Great Uncle Bo, or something. Then Pine & Shat can have one significant scene, maybe a goodbye, in which the older fellow sends the younger fellow on his way — blessing him on his voyage, or whatnot. It would require no narrative gymnastics to wedge it into the movie (whatever the plot), and it would provide psychological closure for everyone — Shatner and the fans. It would just be nice to see the two actors onscreen together before Shatner fades to the background.

Just a thought. As I said, I don’t think the fate of the world rests on Star Trek XI.

148. StillKirok - October 19, 2007

Another thing–if this is some sort of super duper surprise, why have Shatner do a video at all? Just be silent. This news only upsets people. Why upset the audience? Clearly all this news has accomplished is making people angry and frustrated.

There’s no gain in that.

Captain Kirk needs a happier ending.

149. ZoomZoom - October 19, 2007

#69 I bet that sounded funny in your head? I hope the ‘humour’ you have put in the script is somewhat better?

150. TK - October 19, 2007

I just want Bill in the movie. Period. This might be the last chance. Is there no way to put him in it without messing up the story line: Mr Orci?

To have Bill shatner as some other character in star trek is out of the question, IMO. I’d be completely distracted.

151. GaryS - October 19, 2007

if he is in it i doubt they will tip their hand this early

152. Trek Nerd Central - October 19, 2007

So, judging from these posts, Shatner HAS to be in it, he HAS to play Kirk, it HAS to be canon and it HAS to correct the ignominious end of “Generations”? That’s a whole lotta imperatives. We’re a whole lotta whiners.

Once again: IT’S! A! MOVIE!

153. konar - October 19, 2007

Sorry — I don’t have time to read the whole thread right now — but I think I have a theory about why it is so difficult for them to find a way to incorporate Shatner.

I will try to articulate what I think is going to be the main device of this film, and it hinges on the statement that they are “honoring canon.” Well, if this were simply going back to the beginning and starting earlier, then the only way they could honor canon is to have exactly the same things happen to the crew as time goes on. So where would they be with regard to sequels to this film — even though this movie is set before the five year mission, they will very very quickly be into the same time period as TOS. Are they going to rehash old episodes? No. Something happens in this first film that “resets” the timeline, allowing them to honor canon and still have the freedom to do whatever they want.

Prediction: In this film, Spock will go back in time and save “young kirk” with the help of “young spock” — and will end with the presumption that as we go forward in time, “young spock” will have a secret mission — to try to steer the timeline in generally the right direction despite that fact that he now knows something about the future. And that is that Kirk is absolutely essential to something that happens in the future and has to be protected at all costs. So, if Shatner is in this film, we will know that Spock succeeded, when maybe they want it to be a cliffhanger… Maybe Shatner already KNOWS that he will be in a future film — but he can’t say because not only would it be a spoiler for XI — but for XII as well.

Just a theory.

154. Gary Lee - October 19, 2007

Here a guess that will upset you. Old Kirk shows up at the end giving Spock a big hug but it’s a back shoot of Kirk with a Shatner look- alike from the back and thats it.

155. Scott - October 19, 2007

Shatner will be in the movie! JJ said back at Comic Con that they we’re trying to find a way to put him in. Sounds like Shat has no desire to do a cameo. So this is really about screen time. Shatner just wants a bigger part. So give it to him! Not having him in the film will have nothing but negative affects & shave millions of dollars off the box office.
Some people simply won’t go to the movie.
Tell Paramount they might get some of the Trek old customers back.
Ya know they ones they lost after Generations.
JJ & team, please do not be fools, give Shatner what he wants.
People like my parents will go. It will be a big event of 2008.
Having Nimoy is a good start, but not anuff.
You got to have both NIMOY & SHATNER.

156. ZoomZoom - October 19, 2007

#154 No, its in Nimoys contract going way back- NO BODY CONTACT WITH ANYBODY BUT SHATNER. NOT EVEN A LOOKALIKE. Shatner has a similar stipulation- NO BODY CONTACT WITH ANYBODY BUT SHATNER- BUT A SHATNER LOOKALIKE IS OK. AS LONG AS WE KISS.

157. Thomas Jensen - October 19, 2007

I’d love to see him in the movie. However, the story has to serve it’s characters, if they include him just to appease the fans, without a substitive reason, it would just weaken the whole deal.

Personally, I find his physical appearance precludes just working him into the story anywhere they might otherwise, because he doesn’t look like he’d fit in to any time frame except perhaps, being trapped in the nexus and aging normally.

Perhaps we’ll hear his voice, but also we might find that the story will set-up a change in the ‘future history’ of trek and we might find at the end of the story that Captain Kirk is alive once again..

158. fellow_canuck - October 19, 2007

As an aspiring writer, there is one thing I haven’t read yet, which I feel is important to point out:

Namely, if they don’t change the timeline now, then they’ll have to do it in future movies because there will never be a point where Kirk is in “danger”. We know he’ll survive at least until the Nexis.

If the timeline changes…and Kirk is brought back: anything goes once again – for any memeber of the crew.

BTW…I DO want kirk back

159. CmdrR. - October 19, 2007

Someone needs to tell Shatner that if he set fire to the pile of cash he’s made from Trek over the years (including all the margerine commercials he got because of Trek) he would still be basking in its warm glow until his demise, many years hence.

I really hope this isn’t about money, but I suppose it is. This is why movie tickets cost ten bucks now, and most of the movies are not wonderful events.

I’d love to see BS back in uniform again. But, there’s obviously a lot of BS going on behind the scenes.

160. ZoomZoom - October 19, 2007

#158 But they’ll not make the mistake of killing Kirk again anyway! Look at the mess of trouble doing it before threw up! lol

161. dalek - October 19, 2007

How long is the stalemate of “maybe” going to last? It’s frustrating to those who do want him in; its frustrating for those who DONT want him in. Everyone’s frustrated now.

#54 Paul, thanks for your continued video updates. I have no reason to doubt the Shat, he’s the only one saying definite “no im not in it”. It’s clear no one is talking to him. It must be just as frustrating for him as it is everyone else.

I’ll be mighty upset if this “maybe” has been a publicity stunt all along to hide the fact they never had any intention of putting him in the movie.

Mr Orci, please give us a hint other than “we are looking” because the script as far as we are aware is written and you shoot next month. He’s either in it or he isn’t, which is it, i beg you to end the speculation or give us at least some hope other than the comic con thing. Please :)

162. ZoomZoom - October 19, 2007

it is very pleasing to know that Roberto is lurking around in general and particularly pleasing to know he’s lurking (and posting when suitably encouraged ;) ) around this story. Seems he’s as interested in Bill as we are. Understandable.

163. Diabolik - October 19, 2007

I am telliong you folks, this is all part of the effort to keep some important plot points a secret. Same exact reason Nimoy was NOT named in the role of Spock before ST3:TSFS was released. Keep people in the dark as tothe outcome… and the outcome will be, KIRK IS ALIVE.

Bank on it. The Shat will be in this film, even if we NEVER hear about it till the movie is out.

164. StillKirok - October 19, 2007

#163–that’s what so many people WANT. But there is no reason to believe that is what IS. None. And the animosity and bad will they are building doesn’t seem worth it.

As of now, I have no reason to doubt Shatner.

165. Red Shirt - October 19, 2007

So, Bill doesn’t like the idea of playing James Kirk’s father? Too small a role? Sounds good to me. Sounds perfect to me.

166. Gary Lee - October 19, 2007

153# You got it!!! That’s best theory I have heard. Why would you want to do the old episodes again we know the ending already so all the Star Trek movies now and sequels to come would be new because the time line will be changed and the five year mission will be different and new. Sounds like Spock as a job to do.

167. ZoomZoom - October 19, 2007

#166 That assumes we are bothered about Pines Kirk biting the big one? Time will tell on that one- we may all end up cheering on the bad guys yet!

168. doubleofive - October 19, 2007

159.

I’d be in Star Trek for free.

Just saying.

169. Jay - October 19, 2007

Why would the makers of this movie ignore the wishes of the majority of the fans? isn’t that suicidal?? Especially if they want huge ratings and the chance to make the sequel, even non-fans think that having Nimoy without Shat is STOOOPID

Mr Orci: You are either very smart or very silly… i will have to reserve judgment until after Christmas 2008 where i will be dazzled by a masterpiece or asking for my money back.

This is a big deal.

170. Jon - October 19, 2007

Shatner called Kirk his “identity”.He seems to have the same problem separating himself from the role as some trekkies.I think He should play a cameo ,most likely as Kirk’s father.Physically,He’s unrecognizable as Kirk,so another character wouldn’t be too distracting.

171. Jay - October 19, 2007

*153 just read your post…. interesting but wouldnt that be a huge gamble as they need this film to please everyone so they actually get the nod for the sequel?

just a thought

172. Dr. Image - October 19, 2007

This is all about creating “buzz.” Nothing more. Don’t fall for it.
Remember, it’s show BUSINESS we’re talking about.
BTW, anyone going to Vulkon, Cleveland- my neck of the woods?

173. Jon - October 19, 2007

…and ,by the way.The original (1950’s)Lois Lane actress WAS used in Richard Donner’s Superman movie (for a few seconds) as Lois Lanes mom.Lois Lane was the little girl in the train who did a double take as Clark Kent ran by.Why not use Shatner THIS WAY?In another role.It would be a nice homage.Especially if He plays an elder admiral giving charge of the Enterprise to the Chris Pine (new Kirk),my suggestion.That would be a classy transition.

174. Shatner_Fan_2000 - October 19, 2007

#170 “Physically, He’s unrecognizable as Kirk, so another character wouldn’t be too distracting.”

Except for the fact that the entire world knows he IS Kirk. For the last time, in a film where Nimoy is Spock, having Shatner play anyone but Kirk would be stupid and confusing. I’d rather not have him in it at all, than to see him play a cheap stunt cameo as some nobody.

175. flier1701 - October 19, 2007

Off topic, I know, but…startrek.com seems to officially confirm that Captain Pike is in this film

http://www.startrek.com/startrek/view/news/editorials/article/2310513.html

There’s a poll, too. So now that this whole Who will be Kirk thing is done:

Tom Hanks for Captain Pike!

176. Jon - October 19, 2007

174 Not the whole world.You have to look at it from the perspective of the average cinema goer.To them Shatner is ancient history.I think having him play a clever cameo would be a good homage.And remember.This is Nimoy’s legacy film (where Nimoy says “Good bye”.Shatner’s was “Generations” where he concluded his legacy.

177. konar - October 19, 2007

Jay — it really isn’t much of a gamble… the movies made money even when they appealed mostly to fans — now they are going after a new audience, while they’ll likely retain the existing audience (except for the 9 or 10 people who won’t see it if Shatner isn’t in it (insert smilie emoticon)) — so it can ONLY be bigger than what has come before, unless it’s a complete disaster… and come on… no one REALLY believes that will happen… including the writers, the studio and half the doomsayers here.

My opinion and guess.

178. Shatner_Fan_2000 - October 19, 2007

Having Shatner play a role other than Kirk would be like a hypothetical present-day concert featuring Lennon & McCartney, in which Lennon was in the spotlight the entire time while McCartney was in disguise as a member of the backing band! In other words, lame.

Plus, you heard Shatner here. He’s having a hard time envisioning a cameo as KIRK. It is therefore extemely unlikely he’d want to do a cameo as Kirk’s football coach…

179. StillKirok - October 19, 2007

He is NOT unrecognizable as Kirk. He IS Kirk. And Generations did not conclude his legacy. It created unfinished business and a black mark on this franchise that still exists. And anyone who thinks Shatner’s absence will affect just 9 or 10 people is fooling themselves.

If the movies were such moneymakers, Berman would still be in charge and Trek XI would be TNG.

180. ZoomZoom - October 19, 2007

#176 but most agree that Shatners ‘goodbye’ sucked and blew. THIS is a great opportunity to correct that.
I don’t want it to distract from the new team- and if Bill will accept a smaller, indeed cameo, role then I think he should- As a gift to the fans for his part in the mistake that was allowing Kirk to be killed.

181. Kev-1 - October 19, 2007

This is beginning to sound like the Enterprise series debacle over his being in it. I’m glad he wouldn’t be chef. Don’t understand why people say he can’t be in it but it’s OK to reinvent the whole show with different interpretations of the same characters. And have Romulans we shouldn’t be able to see. And change the timeline. Was the Zephrem Cochrane of First Contact the same as Metamorphosis? This movie needs all the positive press it can get, they should find some way. If they can’t, they can’t. I don’t think the producers are prolonging this, it’s just that people keep asking about Shatner. I’m a big Kirk fan, but I’m not sure I efen want him in this.

182. Jon - October 19, 2007

This is Nimoy’s legacy piece where He will be ending His involvement with old Trek. Shatner shouldn’t use the fans to muscle in.A cameo as a different character would be tasteful as this is Nimoy’s legacy piece.

183. Frank Shiers - October 19, 2007

Dear Mr. Orci and Mr. Abrams,

Honestly, how hard would it be to bring Kirk back? This hard:

Spock– (Lifting one eyebrow) “I thought you were dead.”

Kirk– (With a little smile) “I got better.”

Please, for all of us hardcore TOS fans, bring this iconic figure back from the dead. He should have never been killed in the first place.

184. konar - October 19, 2007

I’m not arguing that they were successful — only that they were successful enough for sequels.

And — speaking for myself, and only myself, with no disrespect intended to those who REQUIRE Shatner to be in this film — I would really rather they base the decision as to whether or not he is in it on the needs of the story… not as some kind of homage or quid pro quo. I also think Shatner, as he looks now — including his physical shape — is not true to what Kirk would look like in old age… he’s too old and out of shape… it would say something about the charactor of Kirk to see him looking like the Shat. It would say something about the state of healthcare and medical science.

Finally, another reason why I beleive that there is something planned for the future is that by making a big deal about not being in it for a cameo, Shatner is making himself look small and self-centered at a time when he is enjoying a popularity boost. I don’t think he would do that so vocally if there was not an agreed-upon punchline in the future somewhere.

185. ZoomZoom - October 19, 2007

#182 Shatner isn’t using the fans- certainly he hasn’t emailed me! I WISH! No, its genuine fondness and desire to see him afforded an opportunity, if only a small chance, to give something back to his many fans.
If he doesn’t want a cameo- as older Kirk (I couldn’t accept him in another role as I think that would demean him) then we can’t make him.
Equally we can’t force the writers to put his Kirk in if it doesn’t work for them. It will be sad- but it will have to be accepted i guess.
and… Roberto, sorry about the ‘No Imagination’ dig earlier! I really hope I don’t have to come back in a year or so to rescind the apology!
:)

186. J C - October 19, 2007

Let Kirk come back in some cheesey Next Gen reunion film .They’re the ones who killed him.Them and Shatner.

187. Shatner_Fan_2000 - October 19, 2007

#182 “A cameo as a different character would be tasteful”

You mean like when original Lost in Space castmembers appeared in the 1998 movie? Or when Adam West wanted to appear in the Burton/Shumacher films as “Uncle Batman”? I rest my case.

Also, Shatner is not “using the fans to muscle in”. As #40 already explained to us, Shatner is simply answering questions people want to know about. And the fans are giving their honest reactions to the disappointing news. People want him in this movie. It would finally make this whole re-start/new cast experience feel totally acceptable.

188. Scott - October 19, 2007

Bill may just be serving up another helping of Shatner style BS!
Lets hope that is what this is! More Bill stand up!
He is so funny about this stuff on his videos.
Liz is funny too. I find all of this very entertaining!
At first my heart drops & I get sad when Bill always says he is not in.
But then after a few hours go by & I watch the video again, it becomes clear to me this is just more Shatner BS. JJ said they are trying!
Bill just wants a meatier role. I have been watching Shatner as Captain Kirk since I was 3 years old, so I get emotional about this stuff.
To some Shatner is everyones SCI-Fi Dad & Kirk’s death hurt us in 94. So when we heard that he could come back to life, the hopes went up!
So FYI to Shatner & JJ, this whole thing is messing with our emotions.
Its like eveyday we live through Kirk’s death again & again.
Please bring Shatner’s Kirk back to life! Shatner is a North American treasure & would bring so much to this universe again.
For being 33 years old with a job, cats, music & a girlfriend I should have better things to do with my emotional energy then to worry about this.
Its been going on way too long. Stop the saddness & the maddness!
I need to move on with my life! Everyday that Shatner is not confirmed is everyday I am a little sad. Please JJ, call Shatner, I promise I will do my part for the word of mouth advertising. We love Shatner! Give the guy who helped make Star Trek what it is today, a resurrection!

189. ZoomZoom - October 19, 2007

#188 Scott- great post. Very well said.

190. Bono Luthor - October 19, 2007

188 Well said Scott.

I’m one year older than you and I feel pretty much the same.

Amen!

191. Ivory - October 19, 2007

#183

You said it all.

If Kirk wasn’t killed off in such a meaningless way nobody would care.

Kirk is the reason why many (if not most) people watch Sta Trek.

Granted, Chris Pine will be playing a version of character (and I truly wish him + the others wel. I think they will do a fine jobl) in an alternate timeline, but we all know it won’t be the same.

This may be the only chance left to see the Kirk we grew with have the ending he deserves.

192. Ivory - October 19, 2007

Scott#188

You said it all.

193. Bono Luthor - October 19, 2007

We just have to keep making our feelings known.

Hell, I am no big Trekkie or Trekker or whatever, but I feel REALLY strongly about this.

194. Ivory - October 19, 2007

Shatner clearly wants in.

Most people want him.

What is the problem?

195. TB - October 19, 2007

I think I know the answer here. I think most of us are all in agreement that in order for this film to be a success a lot depends on it’s ability to reach a broader audience than just us ST freaks. Shatner has been on TV very regularly in his Priceline commercials & for the last 3 or 4 years is now synonomous with his character of Denny Crain. What do you think is going to happen to Paramount’s profits when Shatner’s face comes on the screen & many in the audience shout, “hey, it’s Denny Crain!” That will provide spontaneous laughter during what might have been a serious & dramatic scene. Enough, perhaps, to ruin the entire film. I remember this happened to Ed O’neil who is himself a fine actor. He had a pivitol role in a major motion picture, but when they showed it to a test audience everyone started laughing & pointing, “hey. it’s Al Bundy.” Needless to say, O’Neill’s scenes were cut from the movie. It’s a totally different story with Leonard Nimoy. While he’s stayed active with a lot of voice work over the years, he’s rarely in front of a camera anymore, & the role he’s most closely identified with is Mr. Spock.

196. Pragmaticus - October 19, 2007

195 – I’d agree with that except that I think 95% of the world knows that he played Captain Kirk. The only way that would happen would be if he wasn’t playing Captain Kirk.

197. Dennis Bailey - October 19, 2007

#194: “Shatner clearly wants in.

Most people want him.”

Most potential ticket buyers don’t know a thing about this and haven’t expressed any opinion whatever – they’ll start to get interested in the existence of this movie when they start seeing trailers for it at the theaters and on television.

It’s not even true that “most people” expressing opinions about this on the Internet are demonstrably and solidly in the “get Shatner into the movie” camp. So your whole premise is invalid, there.

198. ZoomZoom - October 19, 2007

#195 “I think I know the answer here.”
And then you go on to show that you don’t!

199. StillKirok - October 19, 2007

#184–it’s more than just requiring Shatner to be in the film. It’s the awful treatment we’re getting. For over a year, we’ve been left hanging on this issue. They aren’t stupid. They know Shatner sells. They know how badly a significant section of fandom hates Generations and wants to see Kirk return. They keep promising and promising that they are trying to get him in the film.

And they don’t even show him the script? You would think that if one is trying to put someone in the film, at the minimum, they’d fax him the storyline. Or how about a phonecall?

I think Paul hit it on the head. They are using his name to promote the film. Unfortunately, by not delivering Shatner, and just as important, not talking about it in detail for almost 5 months, they are really mistreating us as fans almost as badly as they are mistreating Shatner, without whom there wouldn’t be a Star Trek legacy that lasted over 40 years.

My attitude might have been a little different had they just said that they weren’t writing Shatner in the film originally. Maybe. I would still be disappointed, but at least the positives that they do have wouldn’t be so badly overshadowed by Shatner’s obvious exclusion and mistreatment.

The silence from the producers is terrible. Mr. Orci says the right things, but where are the actions to back up the words? Shatner hasn’t even seen the script, and they aren’t talking. That frustration is worse than the bad result. So not only are is the actor not included, but the fans have been mistreated. I’m not going to reward that behavior with my money.

If they are truly trying to get him in the film, how about a phonecall?

200. TK - October 19, 2007

I’m with you #188!

I guess the fact that JJ hasn’t contacted Bill *at all* is good news in my view, he hasn’t said yay or nay, which gives an indication that they are *still* trying to figure out what to say to (how to/ not to involve) Bill. Next time JJ contacts Bill, he will have the definitive answer. Surely JJ would have to deliver a definitive answer to Bill at some point? Until then, we are left hanging…….. Well, the filming goes on until next march doesn’t it? So we still have some time. Am I wrong? After 40 years I’d imagine that it wouldn’t be that difficult to step into Kirk’s character again, would it?

I’m usually very impartial about what goes on in the entertainment industry, couldn’t care less, but this one I *just cannot* ignore!!!!

201. Shatner_Fan_2000 - October 19, 2007

An important thing to remember here is that shooting is scheduled to run through Spring 2008. Maybe even later if there are reshoots required. Nimoy even said he was shooting his part this Fall … and then returning for more in March, I believe. That could be when it happens.

Shatner himself was called back late in the game to reshoot the ending of Generations after it fared poorly with a test audience. Maybe JJ & co. have secret plans to include Shatner when Nimoy is back on set next Spring. It’s possible.

202. Etha Williams - October 19, 2007

#89 — “I’m assuming you didn’t have a problem with Harve Bennett bringing back Leonard Nimoy in Star Trek III or did you think it interfered with/distracted from/took away from the main storyline?”

I actually had mixed feelings about TSFS…although I wouldn’t say that bringing back Nimoy interfered with/distracted from/took away from the main storyline, since it was the main storyline, I do think that resurrecting characters tend not to be very strong storylines in the first place as they tend to take away from the finality and impact death is supposed to have. I do think Nimoy & Benett did a pretty good job with the film in showing how deeply Spock’s death impacted everyone (and also by leaving the success of his resurrection slightly unfinished/uncertain at the end of the movie — you weren’t really sure if Spock would ever be back to his “old self”).

Whether another such movie — all about bringing Kirk back — could work is a matter for speculation. I would be afraid that we’d end up with a copy-cat film. In addition, I would say that III was only able to work because it was relatively close in time to II in terms of release date (2 years), whereas XI will be released 14 years after Generations — quite a long gap for people to remember. In any case, though, it’s pretty clear that this isn’t the movie that JJ, Orci et al have been working on, and I don’t expect a whole rewrite.

#170 “Shatner called Kirk his ‘identity”
As others have said, if he associates that character so closely with himself, he really shoudln’t have let them kill him. It was always up to him, and if he thought, “Oh, hey, I’ll just be in this movie, let my character get killed, and then wait for hollywood to clean up the mess because it’s science fiction,” then that’s a new height of arrogance.

203. flavaflav - October 19, 2007

the lady conducting this interview talks too much. She gets on my nerves.

204. TK - October 19, 2007

#203 she’s Bill’s daughter Liz!!

205. ZoomZoom - October 19, 2007

#204 and she is gorgeous!

206. Mark Anton - October 19, 2007

I’ve never commented about the William Shatner-in-the-movie controversy before. First up, I want to say that i think that Shatner was (and is) simply awesome as Captain Kirk. He will live on in the movies, and especially in the wonderful remastered TOS Star Trek. Shatner created one of the greatest characters in television history. That being said, I don’t think that Shatner should be in the new Star trek movie. For one thing, his character (unfortunately) is dead. He looks significantly older than when he filmed his death scene in Generations. It wouldn’t really make sense for him to play his character before that time period. I’m not clear exactly how Leonard Nimoy’s character is going to be used. I’ve certainly read rumors and reports about time travel, flash backs, etc. It will certainly be great to see his character, Spock, on the big screen again. Of course, his character is still “alive,” so I’m assuming it will all make sense. If only Shatner hadn’t agreed to have his character killed off. I’m guessing that he would definitely be in the movie if he hadn’t signed off in Generations. Looking at the issue from a different perspective, I’m really looking forward to buying into this fresh take on some classic, old characters. I honestly think it will be much easier to buy into the idea that Chris Pine is Kirk if Shatner isn’t peering around the corner. Shatner will not be an easy actor to replace. He really is Kirk, kind of like how Sean Connery is the James Bond. I would not want to see Connery in an upcoming James Bond movie. It would be distracting, and it would also remind me that what we have on screen isn’t as good as he was. And fortunately I have enjoyed the latter-day incarnations of James Bond. I’m looking forward to enjoying this newer version of Kirk too. I hope what I’ve just written sounds logical, especially if the great William Shatner winds up reading this. I think it would be fantastic is Shatner served as a consultant for the film, and be a mentor for Pine the way Nimoy is for Zachary Quinto.

207. Rastaman - October 19, 2007

William Shatner strikes me as a egotistical pre-madonna who is stirring up controversy in order to butt his way into the production. This is a perfect example of his manipulative behavior. Most any other actor would be more professional than this and have dropped further discussion altogether.

I suspect JJ has offered Shatner more than one option for how Shatner could appear in the film; however, Shatner has declined these options until they make him the starring vehicle. I wouldn’t have even offered Shatner a cameo, and I wish JJ would just deaden this debate now before it flames up even more.

As the old saying goes, “If the camel once gets his nose in the tent, his body will soon follow.” If they let Shatner even get his foot in the door on this production, his ego will transform him into a pariah on the set. Nimoy and Kelley are the only ones that could tolerate Shatner from what I have read. He pissed off Takei and Nichelle for sure, and I would bet he would be as toxic to this new cast as he was to the old cast.

DO YOU REALLY THINK THAT SHATNER CAN SHARE THE LIMELIGHT WITH CHRIS PINE?

Absolutely not. He would most likely find passive aggressive means to belittle Chris or otherwise sabotage his work. The same way he belittled and sabotaged Nichelle Nichols and George Takei. I love the old James T Kirk, but I do not want an over-priced Shatner mucking up the production anymore than he already has.

208. John Trumbull - October 19, 2007

For me, the bottom line is: Shatner and Nimoy are getting older. This could very possibly be the LAST chance we have to see them onscreen together as Kirk & Spock. I’m THRILLED that Nimoy is in the film, but the fact that Shatner apparently hasn’t even been directly contacted about the movie is just… sad.

For me, the most telling moment in the vid is Shatner’s flat-out “I don’t do cameos.”

209. Shatner_Fan_2000 - October 19, 2007

To all the people saying Shatner shouldn’t have agreed to kill Kirk in Generations – it is true that should never have happened. But I also think it is important to remember that at the time, Shatner couldn’t have known there would be an opportunity for one more onscreen Kirk adventure, 14 years later! TNG was hot in 1994, the Paramount suits were eager to get Stewart & co. on the big screen (too eager, they rushed it), and Shatner’s co-stars in the Big 3, Nimoy & Kelley, were declining to appear again. From Bill’s POV, it must have certainly seemed like the final chance to play the role. So he made the choice to give a “definitive” end to the character of Kirk, instead of leaving it a mystery.

Again, not saying he made the right call, but I can at least understand what he was thinking.

210. GraniteTrek - October 19, 2007

Maybe they want to save Shatner for the sequel to this movie!

211. Dennis Bailey - October 19, 2007

#210: “at the time, Shatner couldn’t have known there would be an opportunity for one more onscreen Kirk adventure, 14 years later! ”

This is how all of us make our life decisions – every human being does. Then we live with the consequences.

212. RJO - October 19, 2007

HAS ANYONE EVER HEARD PUBLICITY SELLS???? THE LONGER THE PUBLICTY IS SHATNER IN OR OUT ,THE BIGGER LINES WILL FORM FOR THE PEMIERE OF STARTREK NEXT CHRISTMAS!!!! I WOULD IMAGINE THIS TO BE THE LAST TIME YOU WILL EVER SEE BOTH THE ORIGINAL KIRK AND SPOCK TOGETHER AGAIN. WITH THE RIGHT SCRIPT THIS COULD BE AN AWSOME MOVIE!!!! AS FOR THE WAY KIRK COULD BE BROUGHT BACK REMEMBER ASHES TO EDEN??? IN ANOTHER SCENERIO SPOCK COULD RESCUE KIRK FROM VERIDIEN 3 BEFOR KIRK MEET HIS DEATH FROM THE FALLEN BRIDE IN GENERATIONS . SPOCK COULD GO THROUGH TIME USING THE GATE KEEPER THEY USED IN THE ORIGINAL STARTREK. SOUNDS CRAZY BUT YOU NEVER KNOW?????? KEEP ON TREKING!!!

213. Scott - October 19, 2007

Hey #203,
She’s cool!
Shut Up!
If anyone gets on my nerves its Flavor Flav.
The crack head who makes P.E. look bad everyday.
Has tons of kids he never sees, because he’s too busy
flurting & picking up Hookers on basic cable.
Thats what he is doing when he is not smoking crack!
Flav is a true fool who gets my nerves!
Nice role model!
How is that working out for ya?

214. konar - October 19, 2007

207 — right on. Thanks for having the dilithium crystals to say it.

215. Iowagirl - October 19, 2007

In one of his interviews, Roddenberry said that when he invented Kirk he imagined a combination of Hornblower and Hamlet. Orci stated in his current interview that Kirk and Spock have become Shakespearian characters. Obviously, Roddenberry’s vision has come true.

Who do Abrams & Co. think gave us the Shakespearian quality? Do they think it was just there, out of the blue? A gift from an alien power? Abrams & Orci had their future made for them and now they adorn themselves with borrowed plumes. And by not bringing back Shatner as old Kirk, Orci allows his own words to lose any relation to his upcoming film.

216. Admiral_Bumblebee - October 19, 2007

This is really a no-win-scenario for either faction, the Shatner-haters (and yes, judging from your comments you must clearly hate this man from the depth of your heart) and Shatner-fans.
Those who do not want to see Shatner again in a movie are so narrow-minded and obsessed with their opinion exactly like the Shatner-fans.

I think it is sad that so many people do not want to see him again as Captain Kirk and I do not accept things like “he is too fat, he is too old”. This is disrespectful of the man who had such an impact on Star Trek.

And if you think it wouldn’t have an impact on the box-office-ratings if Shatner would be announced as returning as Captain Kirk, then you are blind.
If in the trailer Shatner would be shown as Kirk, the masses would go crazy.
Why? Because when people think of Star Trek, they think of Captain Kirk and William Shatner.

217. Dennis Bailey - October 19, 2007

Typing “the masses would go crazy” and “when people think of Trek, they think of Kirk” does not make those things magically true. They’re true for some. Most people simply don’t care.

218. Pragmaticus - October 19, 2007

Shatner and Nimoy aren’t getting any younger. Once they hit 80, you’ve gotta start worrying about how many more opportunities they’ll have to work together.

219. JBS (hailing frequencies open from Issaquah, Washington) - October 19, 2007

I have not shared my opinion on Shatner being in the new movie, until now. I grew up watching TOS, and it is by far my favorite Trek, but I don’t think we have to have Mr. Shatner in the new movie. The important thing is that they make a really good movie that appeals to a lot of different people, not just diehard trekkies. Otherwise, there will not be anymore Trek movies or series. If you want to Nimoy and Shatner together, then you can go to the conventions or go to youtube (they do interviews together almost yearly, and there’s the commercials, etc.)

I am going to see the movie whether he’s in it or not.

220. Dennis Bailey - October 19, 2007

#220: “I am going to see the movie whether he’s in it or not.”

As will most people. Shatner’s participation isn’t make-or-break for either the movie or for him.

221. StillKirok - October 19, 2007

Trying to minimalize the disappointment also will not make it true. And Shatner is Trek, and Kirk. Trek is famous because of Shatner. He was the star. The man in front of the camera. And yes, there was great writing, and great co-stars and he didn’t do it alone by any stretch. But Shatner is the face of the franchise, whether a few people choose to minimize it or not. He’s also still on top and as popular as ever. Businesswise, they are making a mistake. They haven’t just blown off Shatner, they’ve blown off fandom. It will cost them ticket sales. Again, with a $150 budget, they need all the audience they can get. Shatner puts butts in the seats, even if one or two people don’t want to acknowledge it.

222. Scott - October 19, 2007

#217,
Dude, just look at the numbers.
How many asses in the seats did they loose after Generations?
How many people did they have for Star Trek movies 1-4 & 6?
The facts clearly show that Paramount lost Star Trek fans after 1994.
The MLB strike caused a major loss of its own fans.
The same thing with Star Trek.
People left the Star Trek universe because they killed Kirk!
That choice cost Paramount millions in the long term!
Good job Rick!
Its a matter of getting some old business back!
Bring back Shatner’s Kirk & double the fan base.
Validate Pine & the others in the process.
Pine could help Star Trek for sure.
However if the torch gets passed incorrectly, it will be a stain.
If JJ really is the Anti-Rick that the Star Trek Bible says, then they will get Shatner at any cost!

223. Belar - October 19, 2007

Money, that’s what this all about Money.

He wants more then they want to pay him…or can afford to pay him.

It’s as simple as that

224. konar - October 19, 2007

Better to be disrespectful to the man than to the character and the franchise — even though I think disrespect is too strong a word. In the end, the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few — or the one.

(been trying to find a way to work that in!)

I really do not feel that strongly about it either way — despite what I’ve said, I will love it either way. It’s a slow day, and well, you know…

I am constantly puzzled by the people who think that this movie would possibly, in any way whatsoever, reference anything that happened in Generations. I am sure that any references to any specific plot points in the films of the past are going to be very vague and broad in a way that “winks” to us but doesn’t confuse the new audience. They have a story to tell, and every second counts, so rehashing exposition from any other movie — especially the amount that would have to be rehashed to address Generations — would simply be a waste of time. If some kind of peril to Kirk is truly the premise of this film, it will be some kind of peril that comes before the five year mission — in other words, it will be within the context of this film, no one from years ago that the majority — vast majority — of the audience may not even be aware of.

If you ask me, the creative team has already done an amazing amount to please the fans than we would have any right to expect in a reboot… and I think they are correct to do it…. They didn’t have to include Nimoy… they certainly didn’t have to make any effort at all to cast actors that look like any of the original actors (although some might argue that they didn’t try hard enough)… but they have.

Just thought of something else regarding the possibility that Shatner might show up at some point in this or a future film — they went out of their way to cast a new Kirk that bears more than a passing resemblence to the young Kirk — which would not be absolutely necessary if we were never going to see them together.

225. Dennis Bailey - October 19, 2007

#221:”Trying to minimalize the disappointment also will not make it true.”

Oh, some people will be disappointed. No question about that.

Such is life.

226. Ty Webb - October 19, 2007

221. “And Shatner is Trek, and Kirk. Trek is famous because of Shatner. He was the star. ”

I’ve said this before but I actually think Spock is more culturally identified with Star Trek. Maybe it’s even stevens between them, but Spock is enough IMO.

227. Alex - October 19, 2007

I have a SIMPLE solution to bring back Kirk, that won’t make it cheesy, that won’t need a Generations rewrite and that will make everyone happy.

Before Spock leaves, he tells his younger self to warn Captain Kirk about the Enterprise-B, the Nexus, Veridian 3 but we don’t go into details because it would be a waste of time. He just gives him an chip that contains a few details (not to alter the timeline too much), saying “He saved me once, it may not be the logical thing to do, but I owe him” kinda thing.

Spock goes back forward in time, post Nemesis. Now is the interesting part.

Kirk’s death in Generations has spawned many reedits. If you look up YouTube, you realize the whole scene is interchangeable in order. Add the stock/unused footage and you can completely rewrite Generations. An other example is this:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=M2JeKeVynbY

You make a short montage of about 30 seconds, flashes of that scene in black and white. Kirk’s voice echoing in the background: “There are always possibilities”

Spock arrives in the future, and finds the Shatner Kirk in the last 2 minutes of the movie. Kirk is happy but asks Spock why he altered the timeline, Spock SMILES and says “you once did the same for me.”

And fade out. Justice done.

It would save having to redo a 30 minutes dedicated solely to Shatner, would not outshine the new cast and would send new and old fans back home happy.

228. Harry Ballz - October 19, 2007

Okay, time to draw a line in the sand. Tell Shatner all he gets is a cameo…..no glory-hogging, no hissy-fits, no posturing and stealing scenes,no egomaniacal ravings for more screen time! That’s it, and in return he gets the same paycheque as Nimoy who is making a bigger contribution to the film! The Shat SHOULD be happy with that! Enough is enough! Sheesh, what an ego!! So there! ‘Nuff said!!!

229. Woulfe - October 19, 2007

Roberto…..

I’m so sorry you had to see all this stuff =P

Welcome to the dorkside of Star Trek Fandom…..

I don’t care if Shatner is in it or not, I just want a good Star Trek movie….

That’s all I want.

230. Derek Evans - October 19, 2007

Lets face the FACTS….For over 40 years—40 years…William Shatner has been the face of STAR TREK…He is a true Hollywood Survivor/Legend–having appeared in movies and TV since the 1950’s…from the Twilight Zone to Rescue 911 to Boston Legal…If he WANTS to be part of this Freakin Movie—THEY SHOULD BE THRILLED TO HAVE HIM IN IT…There I said It!!

231. Ty Webb - October 19, 2007

We’ve been flooded by the BBK site it seems.

232. Scott - October 19, 2007

#223,
This is not about money!
This is about a meatier role!
This is about Shatner’s legacy!
Or as some would say his ego.
Shatner has anuff money!
He just wants to be Captain Kirk again!
Like a lot of people do!
If this was about money, why all the videos?
This is about getting a better part in the movie & thats all!
It is not as simple as that!

233. Rastaman - October 19, 2007

re: #214

Thank you Konar. And as proof of Shatner’s toxic ego one need only look to the video posted above. The film was supposedly filmed yesterday, and NO MENTION is made of Chris Pine as the young James T Kirk. Nimoy immediately endorses Spock, Takei endorses Cho, Nichelle want to support Saldana, but all Shatner can talk about is the fact that “I DON’T DO CAMEOS.”

The guy is megalomaniac. Another quote: “HERE IS THIS SHOW, THAT MOVIE THAT’S GOING TO BE MADE, WITH MY IDENTITY IN IT …”, excuse me Mr. Shatner, but Captain Kirk is not YOUR “identity”. Kirk is a fictional character you were asked to perform as a professional. Shatner will never be satisfied with Chris Pine because he will view Chris as “stealing his identity”. I am certain Chris is just as fine (if not better) an actor than Shatner is. I wouldn’t even invite Shatner to consult with Chris.

Before I hear any more from Shatner about wanting to be in this film, I would like to see from him the same maturity his former castmates have displayed by endorsing Chris Pine or at least wishing him the best of luck.

234. Harry Ballz - October 19, 2007

It could be argued that Shatner deserves a role in this new movie, but certainly not a MAJOR one! Too distracting!

235. konar - October 19, 2007

#222 — it’s just as likely that the numbers went down after generations because of the bland “next generation” dynamic… also, it’s not just Kirk that died in Generation — it was the last gasp of the TOS storyline. So people that liked the old trek might have stopped seeing the films because they liked the dynamic of TOS as compared to Next Generation — not just because Kirk died. This film will try to recreate the TOS dynamic that was so missing in Next Generation. It will be an adventure, not a conflict management training film.

I’m a hard core Trekkie (not afraid to say it) and I stopped seeing the films in the theater after Generations not because Shatner was no longer in the films, but because I didn’t think the Next Generation crew and adventures were worthy of the big screen.

So it’s all in how you look at it — we each see it from our own perspective. All I can say is that no matter what, this is one Trek film that I will see on the big screen — and I’ll take it from there.

236. Trek Nerd Central - October 19, 2007

Regarding # 207:

The word is “primadonna.” As in “first lady,” i.e., the star soprano in an opera.

A “pre-Madonna” would be a precursor to Mary, the Mother of Jesus.

Shatner isn’t either one, in any case.

237. StillKirok - October 19, 2007

#225–you’re right–but that’s not the way to go in a movie. I highly doubt anyone will not see the movie if they INCLUDE Shatner. But Kirk’s death has been a black mark on the franchise for too long. If disappointment is inevitable, might as well err on the side of including the legend.

The reason Shatner is a legend is because he has legions of fans and was a major factor in this franchise’s success.

#228–given that they didn’t bother to show Shatner the script or get in touch with him, it’s kind of hard to draw the line in the sand. I doubt the two sides even have any animosity other than Shatner being frustrated just like the rest of us. In order to offer him a cameo, you gotta call the guy.

238. CmdrR. - October 19, 2007

Jurrasic Part? (comparing Kirk’s resurrection to dino cloning indeed)

Yes, I love Shat as Kirk. I have for 40 years. I want him there. But, the baton needs to be passed. He can’t just intro Chris Pine and then hang around in the wings distracting us from the movie that’s supposed to draw us into a whole new Trek chapter.

IT MUST BE A CAMEO. NIMOY, TOO.

Make it classy, but keep it brief. I think that posturing aside, Nimoy just wanted to make sure his presence made sense in the film. I hope Shatner gets that, too. If the prologue/flashback drags on at the start of the film, it’ll kill the pacing. Say HI, flashback and step down. See ya at the Oscars.

239. Trek Nerd Central - October 19, 2007

Meant to add – Alex’s idea in #227 is brilliant. Orci and Abrams take notice.

240. Michael Hall - October 19, 2007

“I highly doubt anyone will not see the movie if they INCLUDE Shatner.”

Well, speaking only for myself, I’d be less inclined to see it–or see it more than once–if Shatner were included just to satisfy his ego, or the emotional needs some have for emotional “closure” regarding a character who never existed, in a movie that premiered fifteen years ago.

If a Shatner appearance serves the story (assuming in the first place that it’s a good one) that Orci et al have concoccted, fine. Anything else is just a stunt, and not worthy of Trek’s legacy. And to their credit, I think the current producers get that.

241. USS SANTA - October 19, 2007

There is only one logical reason why Kirk ended up in the ‘Nexus’. The same reason why ‘B-4′ was created. To give the characters a way to come back. I have faith and trust in the writers and producers to bring us all a wonderful holiday surprise. I believe that Spock, and the awesome array of actors will not only adorn the holiday Star Trek tree, but William Shatner will be there to place the star on top…just as he did in the second pilot.

Red Alert
[Sung to that famous holiday jingle]

Warping to the stars- We are the Feds of outer space.
Exploring strange new worlds with the logical friends we’ve made.
Bells and klaxons howl- “Romulans off our bow.”
“All senior officers to the bridge, there is enemies on the prowl.”

Red alert. Red alert.
“Sulu, raise the shields!”
“Mister Spock, get a sensor lock on their engines gravity field.”

Red alert. Red alert.
Enterprise on the way.
They’ve been too far gone for way too long-
But they’ll be back on Christmas day.

HO,ho,ho,ho,hoooooo

242. Iowagirl - October 19, 2007

#217

Typing “Most people simply don’t care” just does not make this opinion magically true, either.

243. New Horizon - October 19, 2007

- Meant to add – Alex’s idea in #227 is brilliant. Orci and Abrams take notice.

It’s hardly brilliant. It’s another contrivance.

People die…it’s a fact of life. I found Star Trek really took a lot of the realism out of it when they started screwing around with resurrections and rebirths. I would really love to see this new movie series get off to a good start and play it real. I used to feel these characters were real, and meant something…but the movies made them Caricatures of their former selves. Playing it real doesn’t have to make it seem dour. Star Trek is about extraordinary things, happening to ordinary people. They shouldn’t be painted unrealistically as super heroes…just people who rise to the occasion. Gah.

244. BrandonR - October 19, 2007

If what he said in that video is true and he really has not been approached to do “Star Trek”, then he really needs to get over himself. Regardless of whether or not we as fans believe that killing off Kirk in “Generations” was a good idea, Shatner obviously approved of it. If he didn’t, he could of easily said “thanks but no thanks” when they asked him to be in the film. He obviously was happy about returning as Kirk. Nimoy obviously wasn’t whining that he wasn’t in the film with Shatner because, as a matter of fact, he turned it down! He said that he did not want to be in a film where Spock served no purpose. If Shatner cared more about the character of Kirk and less about his own ego, he would realize that there is no reason to bring back Kirk from the dead. He has his “Shatnerverse” novels and he should be content with that. This is the Original Series. His time is done.

245. StillKirok - October 19, 2007

#236– Since Shatner did come out with an album before Madonna, maybe he WOULD be a pre-Madonna.

Looking things over, I think everything that needed to be said has been for now. Judging by #231, despite the fact that the anti-Shatner crowd makes up a good chunk of the conversation, the time has come to accuse fans of having an agenda, or attacking the Bring Back Kirk campaign, even though this is a relevant topic.

As far as I know, there are no organized groups here. I know I’m speaking solely for myself, even if a lot of people share my opinion.

But the bottom line is before false accusations of attacks and spamming start, I’m going to bow out of this thread, barring any comment from one of the producers that actually answers some of the lingering questions.

I look forward to part two of Shatner’s video.

246. John N - October 19, 2007

#233. Rastaman

I found it more than a little odd that he didn’t mention anything about Pine either, ESPECIALLY after how quickly the other original cast members came forward to express their support.

247. Scott - October 19, 2007

#243,
IMO your wrong! Alex’s idea is good.
Its better then a lot of TNG movie stuff.
The last two movies stink up the place with ideas much less creative.
Star Trek 9 is the worst movie ever made with lots of bad ideas.
There was some rebirths in TOS of sorts.
Bring back Shat! Save the ship from sinking further.
Back in 1995 my band wrote a song regarding the poor decisions made by the producers in killing off Kirk in Generations!
Its about a person who steers the ship in the wrong direction.
A ship everyone one loved. The old captain dies.
The new captain sails the ship through a sea of shit & sinks it cold!
Whether Rick drove a sports car, I will never know. But it sounds good.
Confessions Of A Evil Bloated Empire.
Here it is:
http://www.cringe.com/redhour/mp3/MWBM_C.O.B.E..mp3

248. Dennis Bailey - October 19, 2007

#242:”Typing “Most people simply don’t care” just does not make this opinion magically true, either.”

Doesn’t have to, because it is. Shatner ain’t Christ or Santa Claus.

249. Pragmaticus - October 19, 2007

Paul, seriously, can you get Bill to do another ShatnerVision where he offers up his thoughts on Chris Pine? I think that’s bigger news.

250. Iowagirl - October 19, 2007

#248
Thanks for your convincing answer – next time I’m running out of arguments, I will just say “..because it is”.

#245
– But the bottom line is before false accusations of attacks and spamming start, I’m going to bow out of this thread. –

So will I, StillKirok, because I don’t see any sense in feeding this kind of “discussion” any further for the time being. This will not do justice to the subject.

251. dalek - October 19, 2007

#248 In Star Trek, Christ and Santa are no Shatner.

252. Driver - October 19, 2007

#243 That “song” is more annoying than a roomful of cats being strangled.

253. Jeffrey S. Nelson - October 19, 2007

228. Harry Balz

You summed up what I was trying to say in my convoluted manner in an earlier post on this thread. Nimoy has big part. Shatner offered cameo…pay ‘em the same. If only Shatner’s ego will allow it.
Dark side of fandom? Just economics. “Sunk costs are irrelevant.”

254. Lord Garth Formerly of Izar - October 19, 2007

“Shatner Bells,,,,Shatner Bells,,,,, Shatner all the way,,,,, Oh what fun ,,,it is to ride with Shatner in his sleigh……

In nome du Padre,, du Shatner and the holy spirit,,,, Amen

255. Dennis Bailey - October 19, 2007

#250: ” next time I’m running out of arguments, I will just say ‘.because it is’.”

Which is pretty much the gist of the “It’s important for Shatner to be in this movie” assertions, so that’s not new.

256. Shatner_Fan_2000 - October 19, 2007

#248 … Dennis, I must say, the amount of time and energy you spend trying to argue the unimportance of Shatner is truly remarkable! At least in my case, I’m talking about someone I really admire, so it’s fun. What you’re doing requires REAL commitment! Starfleet commendation for Mr. Bailey! ;)

The problem with saying “Most people simply don’t care” is that that is the sorry state Rick Berman left the franchise in. By the time of Nemesis in 2002, you’re definitely right – no one did care!

Now TPTB are trying to get people to care again. So they’ve gone back to TOS, recognized as the REAL Star Trek in the eyes of the general public. Good. Smart. They’ve hired Nimoy, who most people remember as Spock, one of the central characters of TOS. Also smart. So you’ve got a TOS setting … you have Nimoy as Spock … and … ? What, in the minds of Joe and Jane Public, do you think is going to stand out like a sore thumb as missing from all this?

I’m not saying the movie will bomb without Shatner. On the other hand, this movie franchise hasn’t had a hit in over a decade! If they really do want people to care again, there’s no way that having Bill’s support wouldn’t help. Imagine the reaction to a 4 man press conference:

“Shatner & Nimoy Pass Torch to Star Trek Successors”

It’d be HUGE.

257. RDL - October 19, 2007

Assuming the plot actually involves the Romulan Nero (why not Caligula?)
going back in time to kill Kirk’s parents, kill Kirk at a younger age, destroy the earth, or whatever…

So, let’s say the “present” in ST terms is around 2385…Spock is still living in the pro-Vulcan philosophy underground on Romulus. He finds out about Nero’s plot and goes back in time to stop if from happening.

So, Spock is now back in the 2250s or very early 2260s…and before he goes back to his own time, he tells the Chris Pine Kirk not to join the maiden voyage of the Enterprise-B. Okay.

So in 2293 (the approximate year the first part of Generations takes place) Kirk isn’t on the Enterprise-B. Kirk lives. What happens to Scotty & Chekov because of this, we don’t know. Anyway Kirk is alive. Spock is back in 2385 having stopped Nero.

If Kirk is STILL alive in 2385 …he is 152 F***ing Years Old. He wouldn’t have spent any you-don’t-age time in that god awful plot device we like to call the Nexus.

Now if Spock tells the young Kirk to enjoy the Nexus but avoid the bridge
scene when he leaves the Nexus, then Kirk will have aged about 8 years or so. This could sort of work, since Shatner is actually 13 years older than he was when he told us, “It was….fun.”

They could make the “present” for Spock even later which would add some additional years to the rebooted Shatner/Kirk.

Time travel, cloning, any of the plot devices considered to bring Kirk back have the ancillary effect of making every circumstance in life a dress rehearsal. If in the 23rd or 24th century, time travel is so easy, why does anyone give a flying f**k what happens? Hey Bob, if I die tomorrow in a hail of phaser fire, please use the new Sony time machine to warn me.

258. ZoomZoom - October 19, 2007

#229 He doesn’t *have* to see ‘all this stuff’ he chooses to! For some bizarre reason he seems to spend much time in here. Inspiration perhaps?! ;)

259. Ivory - October 19, 2007

#195

I think it’s safe to say that the vast majority of people know Shatner from ST not Boston Legal.

260. roberto Orci - October 19, 2007

# 229

No apology necessary. I love it here. I, too, just want what is best for
Star Trek

261. Harry Ballz - October 19, 2007

Oooh, Mr. Orci’s here!

Tell us, no plot points, but if you really read the majority of these posts, do any of them make you laugh (with our corny humour?).

262. roberto Orci - October 19, 2007

261

loved the “pre-madonna” exchange.

A truly good debate happenning here.

263. CScott - October 19, 2007

Roberto
SO…with the whole Shatner thing taking the spotlight..can I sneak in a question ?? how cool is the new enterprise..and when we see it ,will we think..yeah that’s the enterprise.!!..different..and updated…but that’s her alright…

264. DRE - October 19, 2007

“The facts clearly show that Paramount lost Star Trek fans after 1994.”

I have to interject for a minute, because I have read this totally FALSE statement far too many times.

I do believe that the second most profitable Star Trek film to date was released in 1996 (That’s after 1994, for the uninitiated) and it did not include nor reference William Shatner at all.

Those of you who wish to support your “It died after Shatner” theories by intentionally ignoring that First Contact was successful are really blinded by either your hate of TNG or your obsession with Sir Shatner, and it’s really pathetic.

Now, I will say that Trek lost fans after FC, but if you go by the ratio of fans that went to Generations (Excluding the Mainstream spike from FC, because they were not going to stick around anyways) it only lost about five million dollars worth because that’s exactly the amount Insurrection made less than Generations, and I’m willing to bet that was the amount of fans who left because of Shatner’s departure. Nemesis was a victim of a whole set of other creative reasons and bad timing.

In the end, I would love to see Bill Shatner in JJ’s version, but only if it logically served the story and not solely to undo something that should have been done right the first time or not at all. The message here is simple, through all its ups and downs after 1994, Trek has survived without William Shatner and it will continue to do so.

265. Clint Colesmith - October 19, 2007

I love William Shatner and I hope he is in the movie. If he is not however, I still expect it will be great. Mr. Orci’s interview fills me with confidence. I’m crossing my fingers for Bill to show up though :)

266. FlyingTigress - October 19, 2007

#259

I was thinking that it would have been from the “Promise” margarine commercials, the “Barbary Coast” and “TJ Hooker”…

(smile)

267. MichaelJohn - October 19, 2007

#264 DRE…

Good comments. I agree with your post.

Mike :o

268. konar - October 19, 2007

266 — don’t forget loblaws

269. Michael Hall - October 19, 2007

A bet I’d love to lose: 5000 quatloos says that CScott’s question will coyly go unanswered.

270. Scott - October 19, 2007

Thanks #252! Kaos is what its all about.
Hey #264 I like First Contact too for the most part.
However I was not talking about how much money a film made.
The attendence of the film is what I was talking about.
How many people went to the movies.
What was the Star Trek buzz like in Pop Culture Land during a films release? How many people numbers wise got exciited?
By the way two dumb ass rappers just called for you.
They want they’re names back!

271. FlyingTigress - October 19, 2007

I’d, personally, prefer to see the Shat one more time…

… but, if it meant budgetary compromises that resulted in a poor Trek 2008, I’d rather see a great “Trek” movie — even without him.

He did make a decision for ST:Generations, and, the potential for a hokey/contrived (no disrespect to R.O. and company, since it would be IN SPITE OF their best efforts) clever plot device (hmmm… shall we say, an “Ellen Ripley”?) to explain-away his character’s return could be the infamous final nail in the franchise.

Sorry, William. You’re important to this Trek-fan from back in the days of watching on a 14″ diagonal B&W TV — and not seeing Trek in color until syndication.

But, I’d hate to see that ” the straw has come out clean” for that reason alone.

272. John N - October 19, 2007

#270 Scott

Silly question here…. How can a film make money if people didn’t go to the movie?

273. RDL - October 19, 2007

What if they treated the “rescue” of Kirk as something that already happened?

In other words, the film begins in 2385 or thereabouts…the “present” according to Spock. He finds out about the Romulan time travel plot, whatever that may be. But, before deciding what to do about it, Spock decides to seek the advice of a friend. McCoy is STILL alive? No. Picard?
No. It’s Kirk.

Their dialogue only hints at what happened…that Spock rescued him from Veridian III by going back in time, not long after that event. Make up might make up for the fact that while Kirk would be about 8 years older, Shatner is actually 13. Ambassador Spock got in hot water for doing it, and now he wants to do it again — go back in time and prevent Nero from accomplishing whatever it is he plotting.

No detail filled explanation of how Spock rescued Kirk just a matter of fact recognition that Spock did it because, at the time, in Spock’s words this time, “the needs of the one, outweighed the needs of the many.”

274. Jay - October 19, 2007

Roberto is such a legend for writing on here… its not everyday we get to speak with someone like Mr Orci

275. Harry Ballz - October 19, 2007

#268 Loblaws

Oh, my God…it’s only us Canadians who would remember that! Back in the early 1970’s I watched them film a Shatner/Loblaws commercial at one of their stores (in Toronto) in the middle of the night. One of the young actors was so flustered at working with the Shat, he kept blowing his lines. I clearly remember Shatner good-naturedly patting the kid on the back and saying, “so, you thought showbiz was going to be easy, eh?”

That one comment lightened the mood for the rest of the shoot that night!

276. DRE - October 19, 2007

#270 Scott – “By the way two dumb ass rappers just called for you. They want they’re names back!”

In the words of one Captian James T. Kirk…

I’m not sure how to take that.

277. Scott - October 19, 2007

#272,
I never said anything about a movie not making money.
What I was trying to say was after Generations, attendence for Star Trek films went down. Sure First Contact made money. It performed better then Generations, so you guys might have me there.
However the point I was trying to make was the number of people (not money) who went to a Original Trek movie is greater then post Generations Star Trek Films. First Contact was released in 1996.
Ticket prices in 1996 were higher then they were in the 80’s.
The whole point was about attendence.
How many people went to the movies that year to see a Star Trek film.
A Star Trek film that is made 20 years from now could be the Highest Grossing Trek Film ever & still have the lowest attendence.
Its called inflation. “The Highest Grossing Movie Ever” title is BS if the numbers are not adjusted for inflation. A dollar in 1982 is not the same as a dollar in 1996.

278. Etha Williams - October 19, 2007

All discussion of Shatner’s personal qualities aside, it is true that Shatner has a very domineering stage presence — probably why many people on this thread tend to associate him so much with Trek in general. And this could be a really great problem in Trek XI if he were to be including.

During the entire scene in the Nexus in Generations, Shatner’s presence was completely overshadowing Stewart’s (though I suppose people who dislike TNG could argue that that’s Stewart’s fault). By comparison, during Unification, Nimoy, the guest stars, and the TNG cast all shared the stage very well. It’s obviously not a perfect comparison, but I think it gets the idea across.

If Shatner is in this movie, there’s a good chance that he will completely dominate the scenes and take away any presence the younger crew would have — not necessarily through better acting, but just because of his stage presence. This could be detrimental not just to this movie but to the prospect of any sequels. Shatner said it himself — this is “his” identity. I don’t think he would take well to sharing it on screen, even if he tried to do so gracefully.

279. Scott - October 19, 2007

#276,
That two rappers named Dre are dumb asses.
And maybe, just maybe you could pick out a better name for you handle?

280. DRE - October 19, 2007

#279,

What does that have to do with all the Earl Grey on the Enterprise? I know a few dumb asses named Scott, but I’m not gonna call that out to you as a subtle insult, as you did sir.

And maybe I chose this name because it IS my name, and I’d rather go by my own name than Klingon Battlecruiser 1.

Do I have that right in this free country?

281. Jon - October 19, 2007

You old school guys should just let Chris Pine be Kirk.Can you imagine how disheartening it would be to get this role and then have to perform (compete)under the shadow of a 77 year old who thinks the role is his “identity”.How much gravy does paramount need to throw at this guy?He did his legacy piece in “Generations”.Now it’s Nimoy’s (He’s coming out of retirement)turn to do his Legacy piece and Shatner’s using the fanboys to muscle His way into the picture as KIRK!!!after the script has been written? What a bombastic idiot.Shatner needs to accept a cameo or perhaps if the role of Kirk’s father exists to accept that,or do some other cameo.

282. JBS (I like to vote, don't you? Yes or No) - October 19, 2007

I agree with Etha #278. I like Shatner, but he is a dominating, larger than life character.

283. DRE - October 19, 2007

#270,

First Contact’s admissions did in fact rise above those of Generations:

Admissions:

Star Trek – The Motion Picture (1979): 33,303,018
Star Trek II – The Wrath of Khan (1982): 26,841,143
Star Trek III – The Search for Spock (1984): 22,759,239
Star Trek IV – The Voyage Home (1986): 29,572,272
Star Trek V – The Final Frontier (1989): 13,085,225
Star Trek VI – The Undiscovered Country (1991): 17,788,360
Star Trek – Generations (1994): 18,546,844
Star Trek – First Contact (1996): 20,820,789
Star Trek – Insurrection (1998): 14,965,428
Star Trek – Nemesis (2002): 7,457,656

And yes, they fell after FC but if you look at the TOS films they fluctuated also. Until TNG has six films, none of it can be accurately declared. Either way, the TNG film series did not die because Shatner wasn’t there, it died because it had a man named Rick Berman in charge.

If JJ Abrams or Bryan Singer were doing a TNG film now, it would stand the same chance of success as “Star Trek 08″ does, because it is being treated and hyped as a true film and not as just another Trek film.

284. brady - October 19, 2007

Im actually hoping we never find out till out arses are in the seats…I remember what a kick it was to see Sean Connery in the very end of Costners Robin Hood……..noone knew about it and the net wasnt around to ruin it for us!!

285. Scott - October 19, 2007

#280,
You can call yourself what ever you want.
Yes its a free country & free speech is all around.
Sorry about insulting you, but with a name like DRE
what do you expect. Using the name DRE is not any more
creative then using a Star Trek term IMO .
Nobody’s real name is DRE.
And its my guess its not your real name either.
Yeah sure I agree anybody can call themselves what ever they want .
And making up a nickname for yourself however lame is not against the law either. Just like a rapper named doctor is not really a doctor.
Or ripping off some the name of some cartoon or comic book character is not original, but is not against the law either. Its still un original & dumb, like most rappers today.

286. Rastaman (aka Roberto's Jester) - October 19, 2007

ROBERTO SAYS-
“loved the “pre-madonna” exchange.”

Personally, I hate it when people nitpick grammar online. But I’m not surprised a professional writer would find such typos amusing.

;-)

In all seriousness, glad your onboard with us today and happy to make you laugh at my expense …

Keep up the hard work!

287. Stanky McFibberich - October 19, 2007

Having Mr. Shatner in the movie would tip the scales in favor of me giving a hoot about it. Regardless of what “Mr. Box Office Bailey” thinks, I agree with Mr. Shatner that whatever they would pay him to be in the movie would generate more than enough to justify it. I don’t know if a Shatner salary has anything to do with the fact he has not been signed to be in it or not, but it is something that shouldn’t be overlooked. I don’t understand why Mr. Nimoy wanted to be a part of this, but if they can find what they say is a good story which includes him as an older Spock, I would think they could come up with something even better if it also included an older Kirk. Quite honestly, I wish both of them had stayed out, but as long as it is going to be, I would be much more interested with both of them in it. I would think that playing up that angle would be good publicity.
There isn’t one piece of casting or other news that has made me think this is a good idea. In fact, the more announcements they have made has made me think even less of it.

288. brady - October 19, 2007

Im just wondering if THE SHAT is wanting more for a cameo than they’re payin NIM for the entire pic…….that would be Classic Shat (if you’re reading this Billy dont be mad you’re still the Captain to me ‘;)

289. Viking - October 19, 2007

Yo, JJ, Bob, et al: c’mon, guys, it’s The Shat. Think asses filling theater seats. You could write him in wearing a Devil’s Rain mask and speaking his lines in Esperanto (again), and he’d still deliver big coin. Plus, you’d be righting a Heap Big Cosmic Wrong, solidifying your permanent demi-god status within that perpetual cottage industry known as ‘Star Trek’.

(Anyhoo, it’d be worth it to wipe the smirk off Malcolm McDowell’s face and give Harlan Ellison a fit of apoplexy. LOL :D)

290. Darkowski - October 19, 2007

Too bad….
Shatner says he’s disappointed not being in the new movie… and he should be. I think he has the right to be in the new Star Trek.
He was there since the beginning. Shatner IS Star Trek. Hiring only Nimoy isn’t fair and he shouldn’t be in the movie in the first place if both veterans can’t have a roll.

It’s like shutting the door to William Shatner’s face after 40 years and saying ‘you’re not part of Star Trek anymore’.
I find there’s a little lack of respect to Shatner from the producers, having only Nimoy in…

291. Thomas - October 19, 2007

I’m starting to lean toward the side that wants a definitive answer on Shatner’s involvement, but I can also understand why JJ and company may be keeping silent. They may be trying to create something that enjoys as much mutual satisfaction from the producers and Shatner as possible, or he may not be in the film at all. They have said they would like Shatner’s involvement, but his non-participation (if that is the case) will not stop them from making this movie. Until we see this movie (or until JJ and company choose to disclose anything), I am not drawing any firm conclusions. And I don’t care what anyone says, I still plan on being there Christmas Day, 2008.

292. brady - October 19, 2007

God i’m talkative today lol…Im old enough to remember when Clayton Moore got dissed when the New lone ranger movie came out and they put a restraining order on Clay wearing the lone ranger mask….hope they dont diss Shat the same way.

293. TK - October 19, 2007

anthony, shatnervision has the second part of the interview up.

294. StillKirok - October 19, 2007

Since he responded, I can as well. Mr. Orci, could you please answer some of these Shatner questions?

And #264–the ratings declined in every Trek show, every year since 1994. The rankings of the movies declined as well. FC had a larger budget, and while it did better, did not do nearly as well as the earlier TOS films. Star Trek’s popularity’s decline started when the news of killing Kirk came out. Not saying that was the only reason. It wasn’t. But that’s the shark jumper.

Part two of the interview is up. Nice to hear Shatner saying the same things we say here.

Mr. Orci–at least you like the debate. Usually the pro-Shatner group gets accused of spamming, trolling or the like.

But could you PLEASE respond to Shatner’s comments?

It would mean a lot. Something more than parroting what JJ said in July. or at least ask JJ to address this issue.

Your film has a big negative on it right now. Too many people want this to ignore, despite the claims of one person to the contrary.

295. Thomas - October 19, 2007

I’m curious: Does anyone here really remember when the whole discussion started that this movie should be used to “fix” Generations? Was it when we found out the movie was set in the TOS era? Was it when we found out Nimoy was cast? Does it even matter when it started? Am I a fool for asking?

296. Kirk: The Jack Bauer Of Space - October 19, 2007

I STILL think Shatner will be in it. Gut feeling. Hunch. Whatever, I still think he will end up in it.

If not, and I’m wrong, then they better damn well put him in the next one, assuming we have a hit again, and sequels are in the offing.

KEEP SHATNER HEALTHY!! He might have to wait a couple more years….

297. brady - October 19, 2007

Yes

298. roberto Orci - October 19, 2007

286

I usually don’t like typo nitpicking either, I just laughed at pre-maddona meaning before Jesus’ mother.

299. JBS (I like to vote, don't you? Yes or No) - October 19, 2007

#285 Scott: You are being way too negative and getting off subject. I suggest you go take your meds and take a nap. There is nothing wrong or offensive with Dre’s name, but there is definitely something wrong with your attitude.

300. StillKirok - October 19, 2007

Could you at least tell us why you aren’t saying anything? Why hasn’t Shatner even been given the script if you are trying to get him in the movie?

With filming starting next month, Shatner not being contacted, a writer’s strike looming, are you still trying to get Shatner in the film, and if so, how do you do that without talking to him?

301. JBS (I like to vote, don't you? Yes or No) - October 19, 2007

StarTrek.com just announced another for Menagerie:

UPDATE: Due to popular demand, Fathom Events, organizers for the special screening of “The Menagerie,” has added a second date on Thursday, November 15! This new date will feature two screenings: 7:30 p.m. and 10:30 p.m.

302. StillKirok - October 19, 2007

Oh and please don’t take that as confrontational. I don’t mean it to be. You said you were enjoying the thread. If JJ asked you not to talk, and you say that, ok. But Paul in comment #54 made some interesting points, and he works with Shatner. I would think it would be worthy of a response, especially combined with Shatner’s videos.

303. Nelson - October 19, 2007

I don’t think we can expect an answer on this from Mr. Orci. They don’t have to tell us anything. The time will come when all the dust will clear and we’ll hear the full story. But for now, they have to do what they have to do to make this movie.

As for Shatner’s video. I just see him doing it to address the questions that will eventually come his way based on the Hollywood.com story, straight and simple. I don’t see it as a ploy or means to send a message publicly. Call me naive.

It would be great to know if Mr. Shatner is really in the movie. It would sure make a lot of people, myself too very happy. But if they can’t make it work for story reasons, then we just have to accept that pill.

304. Anthony Pascale - October 19, 2007

Hey guys…Part 2 of Shatner’s video where he makes his pitch for the business reasons for him to be in the movie.

This second part should put to bed any theories that this is all some kind of hoax.

305. Nelson - October 19, 2007

Okay, saw the second part of the Shatner video. Maybe he is negotiating publicly.

306. VOODOO - October 19, 2007

Roberto:

Look at the passion Shatner brings to Star Trek.

Yet another rumor about Shatner returning to Star Trek has over 300 posts in less that 24 hours.

While conformation of the new Kirk (Chris Pine) only has120 posts.

Doesn’t that speak volumes as to why Shatner should (at least from a commercial point of view) be involved?

This is the one topic in the S.T. universe that brings the old passion for ST back.

Nobody cares about modern day Trek. People want the real thing.

307. VOODOO - October 19, 2007

Anthony:

I don’t understand why anyone would say this is some type of hoax. I take the man at face value.

All the more reason for Mr. Orci + company to reach out to Shatner.

The heart and soul of Star Trek wants to be involved with this new film and for some reason nobody even has the respect to give the man a call.

Kirk needs a better ending. This is the one chance to give it to him + make the original series complete.

How can tptb not see this?

Roberto, please find a role for many people’s childhood hero.

308. Rastaman (aka Roberto's Jester) - October 19, 2007

“I usually don’t like typo nitpicking either, I just laughed at pre-maddona meaning before Jesus’ mother.”

Word. That got me laughing too.

309. Ron Mosher - October 19, 2007

It seems to me after reading alot of the posts that alot of you seem to forget that Star Trek does not revolve around William Shatner.
Don’t get me wrong I’d love to see him play Kirk again but even if that doesn’t happen I’m cool with it because I know that it’s just not meant to be and to try a “fix” just to get him in the film would dimish the story.

310. Ty Webb - October 19, 2007

306. “Roberto: Look at the passion Shatner brings to Star Trek. ”

And the ego. Look I love the shat, but he’s starting to look ridiculous talking about how his popularity as Denny Crane is something that could be used to this films advantage. In fact his ego could probably unbalance the film which is what the producers are concerned about. I’m starting to see what some of his old trek cast mates saw through these videos he’s making, a sort of relentless slightly misplaced arrogance about how important he is.

311. StillKirok - October 19, 2007

Shatner is a promotional machine. To date, he has got more press and publicity for this movie, and more people talking about it, than all the stars in it combined.

Shatner is more popular than ever, and coming off yet another emmy nomination. He would be all over the place for this movie. He’s a popular talkshow guest, a natural entertainer, and this is the role that made him an icon.

There is no way that having the original Kirk and Spock together wouldn’t enhance the story. You would have to try to write it bad. It’s a no lose situation–unless they decide not to use him. Then we all lose.

312. Ty Webb - October 19, 2007

311. “There is no way that having the original Kirk and Spock together wouldn’t enhance the story. ”

Depends what kind of Kirk he would give us. The well played Kirk from movies I-IV. Or the jokey over assured sparkling parody that he gave us from movies V-VII.

313. JCool - October 19, 2007

We got the answer.

Lets move on.

314. Jason Lee - October 19, 2007

All I know is that the longer this goes on, the more ridiculous everybody involved is starting to look. The only reason I can imagine why they haven’t just put this whole thing to bed is because negotiations ARE taking place, Shatner’s denials notwithstanding, and one or both sides are being difficult about it. Frankly, it wouldn’t surprise me to see all of this ultimately turn into something fairly bitter and nasty, which is a taint I would think they ALL would prefer to avoid.

315. StillKirok - October 19, 2007

Kirk in Treks V and VI were fine. Trek V wasn’t very good, but the acting wasn’t the issue.

Generations was an abomination. Horribly written. That part wasn’t Kirk. It could have been a different character played by a different actor, with the exact same dialogue (minus the one line for Spock). But Shatner’s acting was great.

He was a true pro. Shatner and Nimoy together will draw in a larger audience than Nimoy alone. Nostalgia sells, and I have enough confidence that the writing would work. But in order to do that, they need to contact him.

And 313–the only good part about that video is that Shatner didn’t close the door on it. The summary is that he is not in the movie as of now, hasn’t heard squat from the producers, and given that it starts filming in a month, believes he’s excluded. He said he hasn’t got a call yet.

Mr. Orci, please start dialing. You won’t regret it. But if you don’t, a lot of people will.

316. Christian Moran - October 19, 2007

Perhaps those of us who want Shatner back in should start a campaign to donate money towards his salary for the film, since that seems to be the big problem. That way Paramount wouldn’t have to pay as much out of their pocket since we would be supplementing his salary. This would send a strong message to both parties, since Paramount would see we are willing to help finance part of the film for Shatner, and Shatner might bring down his asking price since everyday people would be helping out….

317. Jon - October 19, 2007

315 Good point .Nostalgia sells.Nostalgia for a limited number of old Trek fans who will be drawn in.Newer audiences,the ones who will decide if future Treks are made ,will stay away.They’ll dismiss it as a fanboy nostalgia movie.

318. Greg2600 - October 19, 2007

Wow, 300+ comments in less than a day! Shatner makes a good point about it being science fiction, that writing his return shouldn’t be that hard. I guess they just don’t have the space in the script for Shatner. Very sad.

As for the writers strike, I wonder if this movie is being fast tracked so quickly because of that. I hope it doesn’t suffer as a result.

And finally, did I hear Shatner right, we’re about to make Dinosaurs??!?!?!?!?

319. Ty Webb - October 19, 2007

My biggest problem is that I no longer see William Shatner as James Kirk. I see William Shatner as William Shatner.

320. Jon - October 19, 2007

If the new Kirk doesn’t make a bigger impression than a Shatner performance,which will be super-distracting and invite comparison,Trek 2008 will lose steam and putter out.Shatner will undermine Pine.

321. Jon - October 19, 2007

319 I agree.He’s bigger than Kirk.He’s like a Milton Berle kind of actor.It’s always Milton Berle and the character is a schtick

322. New Horizon - October 19, 2007

I have absolutely all hope that Trekkers have any common sense at all.

Shatner is being a bully…”I’m good publicity..I’m very popular…I’ll make you money.” He’s saying all the wrong things…his angle doesn’t show any concern for the artistic integrity of the movie, he just thinks…hey, throw me in and people will come…regardless of whether or not the movie is shit or not. Leonard on the other hand has been retired for several years, and had absolutely no obligation to be in this film, but he’s in it because he believes in it. There is such a vast difference between the kind of men Shatner and Nimoy are.

As I’ve said many times over. Shatner has made his bed and he should suck it up and live with…rather than trying to shame the producers into putting him in the movie. If all he cares about is whether or not it’s good business that he be in the movie, then I REALLY don’t want him in it…more than ever!

I just wish other Trekkers had the common sense to see that too.

Mr. Orci, I truly hope you’re reading….don’t sacrifice the integrity of the story by tacking Shatner on just to appease the rantings of those who can’t move on. Just make a good story.

323. JCool - October 19, 2007

Mr. Orci,

Hows the rehearsal going so far?

chemistry in the air?

324. StillKirok - October 19, 2007

#316–there is no evidence salary is an issue. And with the budget that movie has, it can’t be. You can’t get to salary discussions if the producers haven’t contacted him.

Shatner isn’t being a bully. He’s telling it like it is. He’s a money maker. Period.

A billion dollar franchise exists largely due to his work. Others certainly were involved, but he was the star and the franchise blossomed when he was the top bananna.

Does he have an ego? Sure. But that ego helped make a franchise legendary and without that ego, this site, and this movie, would not be possible.

Shatner hasn’t done a thing wrong. He hasn’t even been contacted.

325. jonboc - October 19, 2007

320.

“If the new Kirk doesn’t make a bigger impression than a Shatner performance,which will be super-distracting and invite comparison,Trek 2008 will lose steam and putter out.Shatner will undermine Pine.”

Oh boy, you Shatner bashers are tap dancing all over the place to justify why he shouldn’t be in the movie. At least be honest and say its because you dont LIKE him. It’s not hard to figure out who has problems with the Shatman and who doesn’t.

But the fact is, he wants to be in the movie. You can bet your Romulan Mego that a part exists for him. Mr. Orci and company are professional writers and I’m sure they have contingency plans in place to cover ALL scenarios, including the presence, or absence of Mr. Shatner as well as Nimoy. They had no idea Nimoy would come on board. These types of details would have been thought out and worked out a LONG time ago.

I’m sire there is a place to Shatner in this film, providing the two sides can come to an agreement. The devil is in the details..which may or may not be worked out. For everyone involved (except the bashers or course) I hope they can come to terms, it would be a nice star atop our Trekkie tree on Xmas day..

But don’t think for a moment that he won’t be included because he’s too fat or might overshadow Pine. Nonsense.

326. jonboc - October 19, 2007

…and to those who think Mr. Orci is going to confirm or deny anything…you need to lay off the synthehol!

Ain’t gonna happen.

327. Ty Webb - October 19, 2007

322. You speaketh the Gospel truth. Amen.

You hit the nail on th head about the artistic stuff. Shatner hasn’t shown any concern about what the story might be other than how his illustrious presence will make people see the movie. I don’t think so Bill.

328. Jay (Jim) Leylando - October 19, 2007

*325 Well put… They must have backup plans, what if for example (and god forbid) The Shatman or Nimoy passed away?

329. Thomas - October 19, 2007

Having just watched the second video, it does seem clear that Shatner does want in, but it also seems clear that money is the big sticking point. His return would mean a great deal to the franchise, and he clearly knows it. It seems to me (and this is just my opinion) that he is using this to get what he wants out of Paramount, which is either a more substantial role, more money, or both.

330. Kev-1 - October 19, 2007

I don’t believe this thread. So much animosity directed at an actor who spent decades performing a beloved character. As if this isn’t serious business with millions of dollars at stake. This kind of bickering won’t be good for the movie or the fans.

331. Jon - October 19, 2007

325.Wrong you are.I like Shatner but not at the expense of my own opinion .Don’t call Me a Shatner basher.I’m a fan who disagrees.

332. Ty Webb - October 19, 2007

329. ” His return would mean a great deal to the franchise, and he clearly knows it.”

I’m not convinced he cares about making money for the studio or the franchise. It’s just his ego. ‘A TOS movie without me? How dare they.’ Is more the picture I’m getting, his composure is faltering though and as mentioned already it feels like he’s trying to bully his way in. Let’s not forget this is a man that threw a fit during the shooting of Doomsday Machine when Nimoy had a few more lines of dialogue. Which he then fixed on set, with no regard as to whether removing dialogue would affect the storyline.

333. Mr. Atoz - October 19, 2007

If he’s in the movie, great!
If not, no big deal. I love the Shat, always have, but he’s probably pulling one of those TOS moments where he’s saying, “Hey, I’m the star right?”
“the story should always revolve around me right?” “Because I’m the star.”
That’s what I think is going on here, or at least something close to that.
No?

334. Levois - October 19, 2007

Perhaps the old guy still wants to be Kirk. I do think he should be in the movie however. Though he should not be Kirk.

335. StillKirok - October 19, 2007

329–how can money be the sticking point when they haven’t contacted him?

He hasn’t seen the script. He has no clue what the producers are doing, and it doesn’t look like he has much more information than any of us. Paul said the video was made to simply quash all the rumors that he was in, because, well, he isn’t.

There’s no secret deal, no surprises, no meetings, nothing.

There is a lot of Shatner bashing, which 330 points out. The man created one of the most beloved characters in TV history, and that character was a childhood hero for a significant chunk of this audience, and that chunk is upset.

How could that be good for the movie? It’s overshadowing everything. We all want this movie to do well, but clearly, the producers need to say something.

That’s the biggest problem. They’re not only well aware of the issue, they’re reading this thread.

They say they are trying. But how? It’s a fair question.

336. Jon - October 19, 2007

I say do a clever cameo/homage to Shatner’s Kirk (with Shatner)that doesn’t distract from Pine.This movie will be judged on the strength of the new cast,not the reliance on old stars.

337. Jon - October 19, 2007

336.By that I don’t mean Shatner as Kirk.

338. New Horizon - October 19, 2007

The assumption now is that those against having Shatner in the movie hate Shatner. BAH. Rubbish. Captain Kirk was my father figure, my own father was a drunk and physically abusive. I looked up to Kirk on a weekly basis and helped shape who I am. He stood for nobility, fairness, and integrity. I could never hate Shatner, I loved the man when I was a child…the show gave me hope.

That being said. Shatner is NOT Kirk, and seeing what he’s doing here leaves me sick to my stomach. He shows no concern over whether or not it makes ‘artistic’ sense to be in the film, he’s only concerned with financial sense.

People….isn’t that part of what has gone wrong with the Trek franchise over all these years? Berman and co. pulling one sily stunt after another to try and generate more money, without any respect for the integrity of the franchise? Here are the very same people who spoke out against Berman, asking JJ and his creative team to resurrect Kirk, regardless of whether or not it completely undermines this story.

It just makes no sense. Personally, I’m ashamed of Shatner and his attitude and it makes me sad that the man I looked up to, holds none of the integrity of the man he chose to kill off in Generations.

I’ll be going to see this movie for the new cast, not because Nimoy is in it. I want to see these characters live and breath again…in a way they haven’t lived in YEARS. I want to feel a sense of wonder again, I want them to boldly gone once more. I’m ready to accept the new cast as these characters…my mind is wide open. I don’t want to be stuck in the past…treading the same tired story lines over and over again.

It pains me, it truly pains me that Shatner is such a shallow manipulator.

339. Jay (Jim) Leylando - October 19, 2007

Shatner is STAR TREK… let him have his glory

340. Pragmaticus - October 19, 2007

Shatner’s become a caricature of himself. If he puts his ego aside for two seconds, he’ll accept a cameo.

341. Michael Hall - October 19, 2007

Jesus. Why should anyone here, of all places, despise Bill Shatner, his work, or his contribution to Trek’s legacy? Some of you people really need to lighten-up.

That said–yes, I unequivically contest that Bill Shatner is Star Trek. Or that the character of Kirk is Star Trek. As to whether the show would have eventually flourished without him (remember, it was initially a critical and financial failure)–well, who knows? Kirk was great, and watching TOS-R after many years has brought back to me just what a charismatic figure the character really was, but from the evidence of “The Cage,” Jeffrey Hunter would have brought something interesting to the role of Enterprise captain as well, as would presumably many other A-list TV actors who were considered. (With the exception of Jack Lord, who was just a stick.) But to give Shatner the lion’s share of credit for Trek’s eventual success is just presumptuous, if not downright absurd–though Shatner himself would almost surely agree. The one time in my life I saw the man in person, when asked the perennial “Why is Star Trek so popular?” all he could do was admit that he himself hadn’t a clue, and speculate that in a few years we might be seeing T.J. Hooker conventions for all he knew. (And no, I don’t really think he was kidding.) To which all I could do was shake my head and think: This Guy Doesn’t. Get. It.

I honor him for the work and the indelible contribution he made to a franchise that’s been so important to me and millions of others. But as someone previously pointed out (and which Shatner’s co-stars in so many projects have confirmed repeatedly), with Nimoy, it’s about the work, and with Shatner, it’s always about him. Any other actor’s career might have crashed-and-burned on that sort of reputation long ago, but fortunately for him, he still has the goods.

342. StillKirok - October 19, 2007

Ashamed of Shatner? What did he do but answer the question that was put toward him? Shatner did nothing wrong.

The producers have fed this with their comments about wanting Shatner in the film. They could have ended this months ago, but instead, they keep insisting that they want him in the film.

But they haven’t contacted Shatner at all. They haven’t shown him the script.

Who’s manipulating whom?

I think it’s time to wait again for Mr. Orci. The anti-Shatner crowd is in full force, and the pro Shatner crowd will likely get blamed.

343. VOODOO - October 19, 2007

What about the contract Shatner signed a while back? Nimoy signed the same contract if I recall.

Didn’t Abrams at one point say he wanted Shatner in the film?

344. Unidentified Flying Toupee - October 19, 2007

Best line in this thread…
102. Jeffrey S. Nelson – October 19, 2007

“As for Boston Legal, wouldn’t it be great if Denny Crane dressed up as Captain Kirk for Halloween?”

345. VOODOO - October 19, 2007

New Horizon

No offense but lighten up.

“You want them to boldly go”

“I want to see the characters live + breathe again in a way they havent lived in years”

Please spare us the poetry.

Why would you care more about a cast you have never seen (nothing against them) that Shatner + Nimoy?

346. Lord Garth Formerly of Izar - October 19, 2007

What no one liked my Shatner X-mas song or my clever Shatner blessing??
Boy most of you have become a bunch of uptight stiffs!!!!

And … More importantly don’t you realize that Butters was unable to stop the Taliban from blowing up the barrier between good imaginationland and evil imaginationland we could all be seriously screwed !!!!!

347. Camaro 09 - October 19, 2007

How could someone (New Horizon + others like him) care more about actors he has never seen take over the roles that other people made part of pop culture?

I for one would prefer to see the real thing than yet another reboot/remake. I just don’t get it.

348. jonboc - October 19, 2007

344- Denny Crane dressed as Kirk. That would be great..and yes, Shatner is Shatnerific in the show, hence the emmy nods and wins.

#338- “That being said. Shatner is NOT Kirk, and seeing what he’s doing here leaves me sick to my stomach.”

I beg to differ. The character did NOT EXIST prior to Shatner’s portrayal. He has played the character in his 30’s, in his 40’s in his 60’s and hopefully we will see KIrk once again, in his 70’s. How often has one man played one character over the span of 40 years?. Every TOS movie ever written was with the voice of William Shatner. His perfomance on teh TV series helped give the writers a voice to write “To”. He developed the character by association alone not to mention his creative contributions. It was Shatner’s the mannerisms and delivery that the writers locked onto writing the series. Every fictional book written is written with the mind’s voice of William Shatner. When you read a novel, your mind plugs in the one and only voice of Captain Kirk, William Shatner. Some of you may plug in the voice of Patrick Stewart, but I wouldn’t admit it if I were you. All action figures and artistic renderings on book covers, bedsheets and comic books feature (some better than others) the likeness of William Shatner.

Sorry, but William Shatner, love him or hate him…is James T. Kirk.

And might I suggest a teapsoon or two of Klingon blood (Pepto Bismol) for that stomach, it does wonders!

349. Camaro 09 - October 19, 2007

Most people who are casual fans of Star Trek would be excited to see William Shatner + Leonard Nimoy one more time.

Those are the people who you need to get interested. Not the people on this forum.

Shatner in this film can only be a good thing.

Even Leonard Nimoy said the movie would be better with Shatner in it.

Perhaps, the fans should listen to him.

350. Robogeek - October 19, 2007

There are two things that bother me here.

1.) I’m frankly a little taken aback (though sadly not surprised) by Shatner’s assertion that “from a pure business point of view” he should be in the movie, and that “it’s not a reasonable business decision” to not include him in it. Actually, it is _entirely_ reasonable (First Contact proved you can have a successful Trek movie without him, as long as it’s good), but that’s almost beside the point, because whether Shatner should appear in the movie as Kirk or not should be a _creative_ decision, not a business one. To suggest otherwise is short-sighted and more than a little crass (and, heck, is one of the reasons why Hollywood makes so many crappy movies).

2.) Most of the hard-core “Shatner MUST be in the movie” fans here also seem to be the ones who are most die-hard about the film conforming to canon/continuity – which is inherently hypocritical. Kirk never lived to his 70s; the character died when the actor playing him was 14 years younger than he is now. And the suggestion that the movie should somehow “correct” the “mistake” of killing Kirk off in Generations? FOUR MOVIES LATER? Get over yourselves. Unless that’s at the very heart of what this movie’s story is about – ancient, future Spock trying to change history so his long-lost friend and Captain might live to see old age (what? huh?) – then what place does that have in this movie? NONE.

The bottom line for me is this:

The book on Kirk’s story is closed; the book on Spock’s story is tantalizingly still open (and has been since Unification).

That’s why I’m excited to see this movie.

351. Camaro 09 - October 19, 2007

I meant to say the writers not the fans.

352. Jeffrey S. Nelson - October 19, 2007

344.

Thank you, Unidentified Flying Toupee!

353. CashCrowe - October 19, 2007

I’m sure this comparison has already been made, but being a Shatner fan, his comments make me cringe and remember all the press regarding Adam West being bitter when the first Batman film came out in 1989. It was pathetic.

354. Michael Hall - October 19, 2007

*Sigh* Camaro 09, it’s not about which cast we “prefer.” Of course our affection lies with the originals. If I had my choice, we’d go back to 1969 and the original cast would get to make another seven seasons of the show, only this time with a top budget and the best SF and TV writers available. (I’d also get my pre-high school body back, would make a fortune on the stock market, and would get to warn humanity about AIDS, global warming, Al-Queda and George Bush–but that’s another story.)

But it isn’t 1969, it’s 2007, and De Kelley and James Doohan are lost to us now. The circle of the original cast is broken forever. J.J. Abrams, having demonstrated his bona fides on so many other projects, has been given the keys to the kingdom, as it were, and has settled upon the concept for this film and the story he wants to tell. If participation for Bill Shatner arises naturally from telling that particular story, as apparently it did for Leonard Nimoy, no one here has any objections to that.

We all want what’s best for this film. The difference is, us “Shatner-bashers” don’t necessarily believe what’s best means shoehorning an appearance in this film for him regardless of whether it fits in with the writer’s vision or not. Since we’re all speculating in the dark anyway, I think it prudent to let the people in charge do what they think best, just as Nick Meyer was given a chance to do 25 years ago. At worst, there’ll be plenty of opportunities to second-guess their decisions after Christmas ’08.

355. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - October 19, 2007

#283 — Dre: THANK YOU for posting these figures:

Star Trek IV – The Voyage Home (1986): 29,572,272
Star Trek V – The Final Frontier (1989): 13,085,225

That’s a loss of more than 50% viewership while Shatner was STILL AT THE HELM as Kirk. Proof that Shatner does not make Star Trek (thank god).

Booyah, Mofos! Bringing Shatner back = killing StarTrek.

356. VOODOO - October 19, 2007

Michael Hall:

It is 100% about the cast we prefer.

You can’t go back in time + do those things over, but we can can Shatner + Nimoy one more time.

That’s the magic of film + imagination. They allow us to forget about our every day boring lives.

In Star Trek “there are always possibilities”

357. VOODOO - October 19, 2007

355:

Those #’s are true only because ST V sucked.

I think it’s opening weekend was the biggest of the bunch up to that point.

358. Unidentified Flying Toupee - October 19, 2007

JJ and Orci have said they would love to have Shatner.
Shatner said months ago he was contacted.

It was reported that Shatner has some sort of contract, but I don’t recall clearly, so I won’t push that.

Accusing the studio or the production team of disrespecting, hating or lying about Shatner is just dumb. They want a good movie AND big box office receipts. They’d put Bugs Bunny in if they thought it would sell tickets and work in the film. Shatner’s not part of a promotion ploy with these videos, but I find it unlikely he’s giving us all the information, just like Orci can’t.
Contracts have non-disclosure clauses and they have big financial penalties attached. No amount of pleas and pointed questions are going to get Orci or others to give up private information if it means their livelihood.
Speaking of pleas… another poster had a good point. Not picking on the Shatner fans exclusively, but don’t you think if Orci’s reading all these posts he and other GOT your point? You want Shatner…they KNOW! More than half of the people you call “Shatner-haters” would not comment about him and their concerns over his participation if there was less fuel for the fire. And ALL of it IS spamming, both sides, regardless what some think. Anthony’s site is not here to promote your agendas.
There’s no vendetta against Shatner there…or in here. Some people don’t think they want him in there..it’s their opinion, just like some want him in. Both sides of the opinion need to take a breath and step out.
Please keep in mind there are two sides to every story and we aren’t going to be privy to every piece of information. In other words… don’t assume anything based on one man’s word unless he’s walking on water.

359. Michael Hall - October 19, 2007

“It is 100% about the cast we prefer.

You can’t go back in time + do those things over, but we can can Shatner + Nimoy one more time. “

No. Two actors are not a “cast.” They’re two actors.

Obviously, what “it” is about is different for everyone. Seeing those two actors together one last time would be great, no question. They were the heroes of my child-and-young-adulthood. I’d love to spend a couple of hours with them again. But this should aim be an entertaining and provacative film, not a class reunion.

For me, what’s it’s about is a good, original story–one that revitalizes Trek’s essential sense of wonder, exploration, and hope for the future for a new audience in a time that sorely needs it. If Shatner’s participation can fit within that context in the view of the creative people responsible, fine. But that’s a lot more important to me than the class reunion.

YMMV, of course.

360. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - October 19, 2007

Yes, STV sucked, and by the way, STV was the only one that Shatner WROTE.

Shatner is not a panacea at this point, he is a poison.

I like him as Kirk in TMP, TWOK, and STVI, but his mere presence in Generations bugged me. The baton has been passed. It is over, done with, finito.

They could mess STXI by having Nimoy in it, but I am confident they have written him in in a sober, non-cheesy way. All of these ideas for bringing Shatner back are CORNY. They represent all that SPOILS Sci-Fi.

361. New Horizon - October 19, 2007

- How could someone (New Horizon + others like him) care more about actors he has never seen take over the roles that other people made part of pop culture?

Because I’m willing to ‘let go’ and see what someone else has to offer. Maybe that comes from having been with my father when he passed away last December. I just have a different outlook I guess. You have to let go…if we ever expect to grow as beings, then we have to let go.

If there were a ‘good’ way to have Shatner in the movie GREAT, but if it’s just a shoehorned contrivance, then absolutely not. It’s not that important to have Shatner in the movie. If it is to some of you, then…well, I don’t know. That’s your right.

362. VOODOO - October 19, 2007

361

I think we can all agree we don’t want Shatner writing ST XI.

Anyway, I’m going out tonight + can’t spend my life arguing over the virtues of William Shatner.

In short. I think the film would be:

a) Better with Shatner in it
b) Would generate more ticket sales
c) Could bring Shatner + Nimoy (and the entire TOS era ) to a close everyone would enoy.
d) could give Kirk the ending he deserves.

Now if you would all excuse me I am going out to get drunk.

ps: If my friends + wife knew I was posting this stuff I would never hear the end of it.

363. Jeffrey S. Nelson - October 19, 2007

Spock restores the timeline. And we Spock and Kirk at the end of the film in the 23rd century. Not the 24th. Forget about the Nexus. So, we may see an older Spock (Nimoy) in the 23rd and 24th centuries (just a little grayer in the 24th). A nice cameo for Shatner that I hope he’ll do.

364. Unidentified Flying Toupee - October 19, 2007

#362 VOODOO

and what’s your wife’s number?
;)

365. New Horizon - October 19, 2007

- The baton has been passed. It is over, done with, finito.

Yeah, that’s how I feel about it too. I said goodbye to Kirk and Spock with the undiscovered country. They passed the ‘baton’ gracefully with the closing monologue….’boldly go where no man…where no one…has gone before”. That was a respectable closing for the characters, the fanfare at the end…the signatures of the Cast on the screen. It had a sense of dignity and finality to it. Yet, Berman decides to belabor the point further and get one more movie out of it. Here we are, on the verge of seeing a new group breathe life into these wonderful characters…and people are here bitching and fighting about finding a way to bring a dead character back from the dead. A death that could have been completely avoided if the actor playing him were more interested in promoting the integrity of the character that he was in the pay check.

I’m sure I’ve infuriated a lot of folks, and I’m sure I’ll be villified, but that’s life, I’m not too concerned. I’ll see the movie, and if they do put Shatner in…it had better be done in a way that isn’t just a sell out to appease Shatner…or his minions of weeping fans.

366. Xai - October 19, 2007

359. Michael Hall – October 19, 2007

“For me, what’s it’s about is a good, original story–one that revitalizes Trek’s essential sense of wonder, exploration, and hope for the future for a new audience in a time that sorely needs it. If Shatner’s participation can fit within that context in the view of the creative people responsible, fine. But that’s a lot more important to me than the class reunion.”

That should be repeated as many times as the plea/demand for Shatner’s return.

Sorry Anthony, it won’t. I know better.

367. Sean4000 - October 19, 2007

Denny Crane dress up like Captain Kirk….I love that one!

368. Gary Lee - October 19, 2007

How tall is Karl Urban? How tall is the new cast? I hope Urban isn’t the tallest. SPOCK should be tallest, Kirk,McCoy,Scotty should be about the same height.

369. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - October 19, 2007

#362 — Voodoo: What, you mean, have a life? I’m not sure that is consistent with canon ;-) Here in California, where I am, it is early yet, not quite time to go out and carouse….

#365 — New Horizon: I agree, it was stupid to have a movie that *literally* passed the baton — Generations. Why did they feel that putting the two captains in one film, united by some absurd plot-device called the Nexus, would be in good taste? And then, to top it all off, kill off Kirk to “seal the deal” of the baton-passing?

To be honest, I blame the producers more than I blame Shatner for that one, however.

So, I don’t like how they killed off Kirk, but unlike the BBSers, I don’t think the solution to that is to bring Shatner back for STXI. Rather, STXI should be unsullied by nostalgia and campy “heartwarming” reunions. STXI should avoid the mistake perpetrated by Generations, and LEAVE WELL ENOUGH ALONE.

370. girl6 - October 19, 2007

Dang!

I tried to resist being pulled into the dorkside (loved that–so using it all the time now). I have to change my name to ‘Assimilated Dork’.

Or not.

*cough*

Anyway. Anything could happen in the Nexus right? What if the Kirk that died was just *one* Kirk? What if there was more than one Kirk in the Nexus? I mean, didn’t Guinan say that she still exists in the Nexus as well as in the present universe? Did I dream that? If I did, it was a good dream.

And if we *must* have Shatner, why can’t whatever happens that allows older Spock and newer Spock to cross paths or Older Spock reminising about the good ol’ days or whatever, why can’t that happen pre-TNG? While Kirk’s still alive?

Kirk could walk in and be all like, “Sup?”

And Spock would be all like, “Dude! I was just thinking about you. Remember that time when Uhura’s–“.

Could happen. Just saying.

I think they could have Kirk and Spock at an Academy graduation or some Starfleet function or other and have them shooting the shit about back in the day. That’s less gimmicky than some time travel crap.

Or they could just put Shatner in the movie any old kinda way–just like in “Generations”–so you could all walk out and be all like, “That sucked like something that sucks.”

371. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - October 19, 2007

#368 — Look at the Karl Urban thread, I believe. I saw a post where someone tallied up the actor heights, and it all worked out correctly. ZQ is by far the tallest.

372. Magister - October 19, 2007

Roberto,

It’s time, my friend. Time to ease their pain.

373. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - October 19, 2007

#370 — girl6 AKA Assimilated Dork: Oh, baby, you’re the girl of my dreams, where can I find you? ;-)

But seriously, that scenario of Kirk walking in in a pre-TNG scene is spoiled by the fact that Shatner now looks older and considerably heavier than at the point of Kirk’s deaths (I say “deaths” in plural because he ‘died’ for Scotty and that lot at the inauguration of NCC-1701-C, and for canon on Veridian III).

Also, I would add, putting Kirk in the way they did in Generations would give the result of “That sucked like something that sucks a** out of a straw”. You know, just for a hint of hyperbole.

374. ZoomZoom - October 19, 2007

~326 “and to those who think Mr. Orci is going to confirm or deny anything…you need to lay off the synthehol”

thats not a very nice thing to be calling Orci! And I’m fairly sure that spelling isn’t correct.

375. Harry Ballz - October 19, 2007

These two respective arguments concerning Shatner have been beaten to death. To paraphrase a great line, if these two camps continue to argue ad nauseum, then the rest of us reading the posted comments should be cautioned,
“Resistence is futile, you will become one with the BORED!!”

376. Jeffrey S. Nelson - October 19, 2007

373.

Don’t need to match Kirk to Generations appearance. Just altered timeline with Kirk alive in present time (23rd century) and no need to consider the girth factor. Never got sent to Never Never Land of the Nexus.

377. Kobayashi Maru - October 19, 2007

Shatner tipped his hand in Part II, he obviously wants in and, as I’ve said in the past, probably balked at the size and place that his role plays in the story.
I would submit, with all due respect to Mr.Orci, Mr. Shatner was unhappy with what was being offered and now he is using the fan outcry to plead his case.
I’m sure I speak for many when I say that even the smallest cameo would be satisfactory, if only to indicate that “older” Kirk, as we now regard him, survived the travesty known as “generations”.
C’mon Bill, play nice!!!

378. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - October 19, 2007

#376 — I was responding specifically to #370:

And if we *must* have Shatner, why can’t whatever happens that allows older Spock and newer Spock to cross paths or Older Spock reminising about the good ol’ days or whatever, why can’t that happen pre-TNG? While Kirk’s still alive?

She asks about a scene that would take place Pre-TNG, not in the “present time” of the 23rd Century, and while Kirk is still alive, i.e. not ignoring the events of Generations, which, while I do not like them, I accept as canon.

379. Butters - October 19, 2007

#346

Hey! Lord Garth, could you get me out of Imaginationland? My parents are gonna ground me if I’m not home soon! Besides, I got school on Monday. Please? Pretty Please?

Aw, hamburgers! There goes the barrier! AAGH!!!!

380. Etha Williams - October 19, 2007

I’m not a conspiracy theorist, but I do have to say that with all Shatner’s talk about “salary” in his second film, it does sound like his agents, if not him, have put it out there that they are holding out for not just more than a cameo, but more than a cameo salary.

In any case, responses to a few posts.

#290 — “He was there since the beginning. Shatner IS Star Trek. Hiring only Nimoy isn’t fair and he shouldn’t be in the movie in the first place if both veterans can’t have a roll.”

Actually, if you want to get down to the nitty-gritty, Nimoy was there from the beginning. Shatner wasn’t. In any case, I really don’t understand the argument that it’s “unfair” to have Nimoy and not Shatner. I can understand people who argue that the Nimoy scenes will be dead without the chemistry between Nimoy and Shatner (although I would disagree), but “unfair”?

#306 — “Look at the passion Shatner brings to Star Trek…Yet another rumor about Shatner returning to Star Trek has over 300 posts in less that 24 hours…While conformation of the new Kirk (Chris Pine) only has120 posts.”

This may be just the problem — if Shatner ends up on screen with more than a cameo (or possibly even just a cameo) at the same time as Pine, Quinto, and the new cast, who are you really going to pay attention to?

#348 — “Every fictional book written is written with the mind’s voice of William Shatner. When you read a novel, your mind plugs in the one and only voice of Captain Kirk, William Shatner.”

I’m assuming you’re talking about trek novels, because it would be ridiculous to read, say, Crime and Punishment or a Danielle Steele novel with William Shatner’s voice. But I have to say that as an avid trek novel reader, the only times I have found myself reading with Shatner’s voice is when Shatner was the main character/focus of the book. Nor was it Patrick Stewart’s voice in my head. Maybe YOU read everything with Shatner’s voice, which is fine, but don’t project.

381. Roberto Magana - October 19, 2007

I would feel sorry for Chris Pine if Shat takes up the screen with his big body leaving the newbies and poor Leonard Nimoy out.

382. Kobayashi Maru - October 19, 2007

William Shatner is the only person preventing William Shatner from participating in this movie!
By the way, has anyone been able to dig up any response by the Shat on his opinion of Chris Pine’s assuming the role?
Leonard Nimoy, (class-act that he is) had much praise and enthusiasm for his successor
Granted, being in the film is going to motivate his opinions, but the very fact that someone else will be playing Kirk, one would think, would at least garner some response, positive or otherwise.
One gets the feeling that Shatner isn’t even aware of the news, so caught up in his campaigning, that he is!.

383. Lord Garth Formerly of Izar - October 19, 2007

Butters!!!!!!! You are so grounded young man!!!!

384. Lord Garth Formerly of Izar - October 19, 2007

And for the love of GOD!!!! Why no outrage that the grossly obese Jon Frakes and Brent Spiner have yet to recieve contracts for the film, for the love of all things holy a reckoning is coming!!!! Mark my words a reckoning is coming!!!!

385. Harry Ballz - October 19, 2007

Shatner would appear to be playing hardball with a project that can proceed quite nicely without him! The second video displays a tone of desperation from him that seems fuelled by either wanting too big a role in the new film, too much money, and/or probably both! God, ego-driven posturing like this is difficult to watch and even harder to stomach!

Bill, your day has passed, try to behave with a modicum of dignity and grace……….if that’s possible……

You could start by extending your best wishes to Chris Pine, but that would require focussing on someone other than yourself!

386. Smitty - October 19, 2007

Let it go Bill.
Let.
It.
Go.

If he doesn’t get cast will he start a boycott campaign?

Oops looks there’s one already starting up!

Go sit in the corner with Sirtis and Dorn, misery loves company!

-cs™

387. Penhall - October 19, 2007

Some of you people drive me crazy.

Shatner has been a part of Trek for over 40 years, he helped BUILD the franchise. And now here’s the new movie coming out, and guess what? He WANTS to be in it. He misses it and he wants to be in it.

Instead of bashing him and saying he just needs to “Let it go” why dont you put yourselves in his position?

He’s DISAPPOINTED for God’s sake. I’d be too if I were him.

And stop with this crap about him being greedy. If he was never even included in the damned script, why would the whole paycheck issue even come about?

Dont blame Shatner for being disappointed that he’s not being included in the new Trek movie.

388. Shatner_Fan_2000 - October 19, 2007

#380 “This may be just the problem — if Shatner ends up on screen with more than a cameo (or possibly even just a cameo) at the same time as Pine, Quinto, and the new cast, who are you really going to pay attention to? ”

That’s the funniest thing I’ve ever read. All this new talk about Shatner overshadowing/undermining/overpowering/ blowing the new cast off the screen is RIDICULOUS! Talk about grasping at straws. Do you nerds realize what you’re now saying? You’re saying, in essence, that Shatner is TOO ENTERTAINING for his own good. My God, it’s people like you who really deserved the worst pablum Berman had to offer, and probably lapped it up, relishing it like Tranya. I truly have heard it ALL now.

OF COURSE Shatner is over the top! He is also one of the most charismatic, engaging, WATCHABLE actors of his time. His Larger Than Life persona, stage presence, call it what you will, is a BIG part of what made TOS great, in case you have forgotten! It’s what made even bad episodes fun. Weak script? Low fx budget? No problem. We had Shatner (and Nimoy & Kelley) to make it worth our time. Roberto Orci said it himself, Kirk is a Shaksperean chararcter. And as my friend Iowagirl already observed, that didn’t happen by accident! If Gene Roddenberry had cast a reserved bore in the lead role of the series, it’s highly doubtful any of us would be here talking about it today. Yes, you better damn well believe Shatner DOES have a way of dominating the screen (notice how poor Patrick Stewart seemed to disappear once Shatner showed up in the Nexus). That’s why the man is still working after 50 years, commanding bigger paydays than ever, and winning awards even as a senior citizen – because he continues to be amazing at what he does.

So I don’t want to hear any of this rubbish about him being too dominating to appear in the movie! If that is a concern for some, then I’d say the other actors need to make sure they bring their A games to this, instead of worrying about the guy who ALWAYS delivers! The new movie would be lucky to have him.

389. Admiral_Bumblebee - October 20, 2007

Let’s look at the issue from a story perspective.
Wouldn’t it be cool if old Kirk and young Kirk meet? Put aside William Shatner, just look at it from the story perspective.

People saying that old Kirk would take away the focus from young Kirk is really ridiculous, because it is the same character. It would be Kirk on screen, period. How can the same person take the focus away from itself?
I think the writers/producers should jump at the opportunity to have old Kirk and young Kirk as well as old Spock and young Spock together on screen. It may be the last chance…

390. girl6 - October 20, 2007

#388

Word. Mostly. Except the part about nerds. That’s “dorks” to you, buddy.

391. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - October 20, 2007

#388 — It is very easy for “Larger than Life” acting to be equal to HAMMY acting, and Shatner has indulged in that trait many a time. I do not agree with the people with whom you take issue, but Shatner’s presence would distort the purpose of this film, and that is to launch fresh faces in familiar roles. I can barely imagine a script that can accommodate old Spock and new Spock, but it could work because of certain features particular to the character of Spock. But Kirk too? Stretch this script too far, and it will break.

392. Iowagirl - October 20, 2007

Dear Mr. Abrams, Dear Mr. Orci,

We are all a bit weary by now. So, just lend me your ears and eyes for a couple of minutes.

All these emotions, all these posts, even from people who say they couldn’t care less. I don’t know whether you rejoice in them or not, but let me just tell you one or two things and I’ll be off until further, hopefully better, notice.

When accepting to do a ST film covering the TOS area, you must have known what you inherited. There is a considerable number of people who still believe in cultural heritage, in continuity of legend. Mr. Orci, you said yourself that Kirk IS Star Trek. It is not yours to decide which part of the icon you are prepared to give us. We do not just want the young half, we want all of him. In return, we will not buy just half of the ticket, we will pay for the full ticket.

The fear that Mr. Shatner as old Kirk might weaken the script could only hold its ground if this was a film in the hands of people not capable of preventing that. And if this is a business decision, think about whether it’s your turn to make advances to Mr. Shatner who is in this business for more than 40 years and portrayed the character you are going to “use” just as long, or whether it’s his turn to make advances to you who just started to deal with TOS and have access to everything that was laid out for you long ago.

And as for real life – well, we all appreciate Star Trek’s approach to real life, but what made ST and especially TOS even more fascinating was its vision, its “what-if” scenarios, its glimpse of things to come, in fine its “fiction”.

Gentlemen, you will surely make a successful film without bringing us back old Kirk, as your primary target group of 15-year-olds probably does not care that much about it. It is not mine to decide what your real intention is or what you should do with your huge budget. But since the character’s death the franchise is occupied by a negative connotation for many of us. By not including Shatner as old Kirk you are not only being disrespectful to the “source” for one of your main characters, you also let that character die for the second time.

All I am asking for is that you back-pedal for a moment and think of what you destroy by not making the return of Shatner/old Kirk real.

As Spock said in ST II
„As a matter of cosmic history, it has always been easier to destroy, than to create.”

Show us that you are able to create.

Thank you for your time.

Iowagirl

393. Shatner_Fan_2000 - October 20, 2007

#391 … So you’re saying that in a 2 hour+ movie, there’s no room, not even one or a few scenes, for the man all of America remembers as the real, original Captain Kirk? I disagree. Did Godfather II suffer for having both DeNiro and Brando play Don Corleone? Hell no.

Look, if this movie is a hit (and that’s IF … we’re 2 strikes at this point) and becomes a trilogy, then Abrams and Pine will be spending the next decade at least with these characters. They’ll have more than enough opportunity to “make it their own”. Time to use Shatner is limited. The time is NOW. And if they let it pass, a lot of people are going to regret it.

Go back and read my post #256. If a press conference were held tomorrow with the headline, “Shatner & Nimoy Pass Torch to Star Trek Successors” … it would attract more press coverage than anything the current team has managed so far, and we all know it. Shatner could absolutely help “launch the fresh face” by endorsing the new guy, and he should be given the chance just like Nimoy has. In that situation, EVERYONE would win – new cast, old cast, and fans.

(#390 I hear ya, girl. “Dorks” it is. :))

394. SD - October 20, 2007

I’ve been a Kirk fan for ages. Today I’m even a Shatner fan. But…

…I could live without him in this movie as long as it’s a great movie that will revive the original characters for a new generation of fans.

I can always keep watching Shatner in his brilliant Denny Crane role, or put TWOK into my DVD player :)

395. trekee - October 20, 2007

ah almost @ 400-seems a shame to stop now but Harry is right, not much new in the debate :) I can’t watch flash on this device so does WS say much new in part 2? It could @ the end of the day be as simple as WS won’t do a cameo. Except if it’s airplane2. . .

396. raffie - October 20, 2007

IMO Shatner is acting like a jerk because he didnt get what he want.

397. Michelle - October 20, 2007

Dear Mr. Abrams, Dear Mr. Orci:

Please don’t feel pressure to shoehorn Shatner unnecessarily into your movie or cave into Shatner’s excessive demands for a part to be written in hastily that’s more than just a cameo. There are plenty of Star Trek fans out here that don’t give one whit if Shatner ever plays Kirk again. This particular Star Trek fan actually never cared much for Kirk in the first place, and doesn’t even particularly like Shatner that much as an actor.

If you can find a way to work Shatner in that further enhances your already existing story, that’s wonderful! I hope you work out an agreement with Shatner to everyone’s satisfaction then. If it’s not feasible though, please just try your hardest to bring us a greatly enjoyable and interesting Star Trek adventure. Please, ignore the howls of complaints that Shatner is the only way to make this movie a success. These claims are blatantly untrue as we’ve had a successful Trek movie before without Shatner (First Contact). I have every bit of faith that another one can be made.

Spock/Nimoy is just as iconic part of Star Trek as Shatner’s Kirk, arguably even more so despite the fact that some people would have you believe that “Kirk IS Trek”. For many people like myself, Shatner’s Kirk was just a small part of what made us love Star Trek. Those of us who appreciate and enjoy the entire milieu of characters and stories that Star Trek has offered us for over 40 years, we will enjoy watching a well acted and entertaining story regardless of Shatner’s presence.

Live long and prosper!

Michelle

398. Rod - October 20, 2007

If you don’t write Bill into the movie, you’re going to regret it. It’s the perfect opportunity to repair the damage done by that shocker of a movie, ‘Generations’ (as far as the Kirk character goes). No matter how much you have to pay him, it’s only money after all. In ten years, no-one’s going to give a shit about how much it cost, they’re only going to remember whether or not the movie is good or bad. Come Christmas 2008, people all over the world are going to walk out of the theatre and say that it was great or that was shit, no matter how much time, effort and money was spent on it.

For all of our sakes, put Bill in the f’cking movie! It’s the last chance to do the right thing … please.

All the best with it.

A lonely fan from New Zealand.

399. Shatner_Fan_2000 - October 20, 2007

#397 “These claims are blatantly untrue as we’ve had a successful Trek movie before without Shatner (First Contact).”

Yeah, 1 out of the last 4 was successful. 3 steaming piles for every hit; awesome track record!

“some people would have you believe that ‘Kirk IS Trek’.”

Uh … you mean people like Orci? He said that last week! And you’re addressing your message to him. So you’re asking him not to believe himself! LOL!

“For many people like myself, Shatner’s Kirk was just a small part of what made us love Star Trek.”

Yes, a small part that was the STAR of the original series … without which, nothing else – including and especially the remake known as Star Trek 2008 – would exist!

400. J. Alec West - October 20, 2007

Just a thought … and a comparison.

I’m 57. And I grew up not only during the TOS years but during the early years of REAL manned space exploration. I witnessed, via TV, the first successful flight of Yuri Gagarin, the U.S. Mercury program flights, Gemini program flights, and Apollo program flights. And sadly, I witnessed the transformation from the excitement of “going where no man has gone before” during those years to the more down-to-Earth “what’s in it for me” ambience of manned space exploration subsequent to Apollo.

Mind you, I don’t mean to take anything away from our Shuttle program astronauts. But, while their bravery and spirit for discovery remains similar to our original Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo astronauts, the “feeling” and “interest” is just not the same. Those of you who were also alive during the early years can remember almost EVERY launch pre-empting regular TV fare. But now, launches capture only a few videobytes out of the larger stream of videobytes. And in many my age, this generates a desire for nostalgia to recapture the feelings and ambience of the earlier years.

What I feel toward the REAL space program is similar to what I feel toward the Star Trek universe. And it’s why I feel more closely tied to the Star Trek New Voyages fanfilm project (startreknewvoyages.com) than I do to all the subsequent spinoffs and movies.

It would be nice if William Shatner appeared in Star Trek XI. But, to me, it would have all the feel of astronaut John Glenn’s shuttle flight … just to show that the geriatric astronaut still had the “right stuff.” But given the choice of watching video footage of Glenn’s shuttle flight or Glenn’s historic Mercury flight (Friendship 7) in 1962, I’d prefer the earlier footage.

401. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - October 20, 2007

#393 — Shatner Fan 2000: Let’s assume for a moment that “a few scenes” does not equal a cameo, which Shatner has expressly (and IMO rightly) said he wouldn’t do. How can these few scenes fit in an organic way, not just thrown into the script, but integrated in a narratively satisfying way, and at the same time honor the canon set down (whether we all like it or not) in Generations? I think it would take a few scenes just to explain the context in which Shatner is reappearing, let alone work him into the script in a suitable way — again, suitable in the sense of good narrative, not in the sense of a gratuitous, ad hoc insertion.

In good writing, it is the story that mandates the existence of characters, not the other way around. How can Kirk be essential to a story now that his demise has been detailed, however much we all dislike it.

What Generations broke, we can’t fix without a dedicated film, the express purpose of which is to bring Kirk back (like the Search for Spock did for Spock’s death), and such a film is not going to come into being, for many reasons, not the least of which would be that it would be uninteresting. So, that story is done — botched, yes, but done. Too bad.

402. Roberto Magana - October 20, 2007

If you slap Shat in the beginning it will take AWAY from Nimoy’s older Spock personal journey back in time. Either a cameo at the end, or not at all is the only logically thing. I do not want to watch a two-hour movie with an out of shape great-grandpa trying to relive his glory days. It will hurt the box office.

403. Cygnus-X1 - October 20, 2007

Captain, my speculation receptors are overloading….

I don’t think I can take any more….

404. trekee - October 20, 2007

I had to go and get the laptop to watch part 2… :-)

This is weird, in part 1 – which was less than 2 days ago, he says he’s not been approached. In part 2, he says he is saying to the writers and directors that he should be in it for commercial reasons and implies they should pay an inflated amount of money for that?

I take it that he can be saying it through the medium of Shatnervision, which will lead to here, and we know that at least one of the writers comes here so I suppose that it could just be some bargaining-at-a-distance but it did feel like he’s had *some* form of discussion, else how could salaries have come up?

I’ve not seen a quoite from JJ which says “We’d get the Shat, but he’s WAY too expensive these days after those All Bran commercials”…

Sorry to labour an already laboured thread, but is he just holding out for lots of moolah, and threads such as this are just another way of finding out the audience and hard core trekkie value that is placed on him enough to give either party more bargaining power?

I’ve now got a mental picture of Mr Orci and Mr Shatner (or one would hope, their respective gofers) sitting with a sheet of paper with 4 columns on it…

1) Won’t go if no Shat
2) Won’t go if Shat doesn’t get to have major part, steal show, great heroic death scene
3) Will go regardless
4) Doesn’t give a monkey’s…

Personally, for the sake of the film, I’d prefer a cameo at the end. He’s done enough of them in the past and he’s not too proud to do cereal commercials dressed as Kirk, so a respectful cameo, ideally one which wiped the bad taste of the end of Generations away, would be just fine.

I don’t want to see him in the whole film. I don’t want Leonard Nimoy in the whole film either.

I want to see what the new guys are going to do in a new film with a new cast, a huge budget (spend it on locations and not 30 minute battle scenes please) and I want my fanboy moments with my old crew cameos and jokes about tribbles.

I can’t find the post, but someone said they weren’t upset about Kirk’s death in Generations and I just remembered that I got choked up when he died on the Enterprise B, but that was at James Doohan’s reaction as much, and it was all so damned heroic. At the end when he fell off the bridge, I really didn’t feel anything other than disappointment that it was so badly done.

I think he’s had his big death scene, like Spock in WoK, so I don’t even feel he needs another, I just don’t want the end of Generations to be it.

If they can fix that with a cameo, then I’ll be indebted and Ronald D Moore owes them a beer.

I do think though that we can prepare for the worst, that The Shat will price himself out of the film, for monetary or artistic reasons, and that’s his right.

Kirstie Alley did it, and I think we felt the repercussions all the way through to ST VI with Valeris (who should have been Savvik played by Alley, lets face it) so there is enough precedent.

The problem was that Savvik was a high profile part in TSFS so a recast was essential. It looks certain that Old Kirk’s part hasn’t been written to be pivotal, so can be dispensed with if agreements cannot be made, and that weakens the commercial and artistic position of His Shatneriffikness.

Sorry, this is a long post and I suspect we’ve all had enough now so I won’t post again on this.

Got to say though, this one topic is the most compelling aspect of the whole thing so far, even in a week where the main cast are finalised.

Gotta hand it to Shatner for being such a showman…

405. raulpetersen - October 20, 2007

what really bothers me was there was no vocal protestation when they made generations I.e: WE WANT A STAR TREK MOVIE WITH BOTH CREWS AND BOTH SHIPS TOGETHER NOT A PADDED OUT TNG EPISODE WHICH CONTRADICTS CERTAIN TNG EPISODES!

frankly it was lame and we should have taken them to task but we didnt and look what we got for our troubles – more of the same!

what a wasted oppourtunity!

406. simonkey - October 20, 2007

look guys,you all know deep into your hearts that trek wont be the same again ,the success of the series was the actors!kirk is shatner spock is leonard ,the new actors allthough they look like the original cast will change everything,as for the reimagination ………forget it !the best thing that happened to star trek is new voyages ,if shatner play in new voyages for an episode people will go crazy although i think he wont.for me star trek stopped in tng
as for the movies i ll watch them all 6 of them again and again.

407. Iowagirl - October 20, 2007

#399

“some people would have you believe that ‘Kirk IS Trek’.”

– Uh … you mean people like Orci? He said that last week! And you’re addressing your message to him. So you’re asking him not to believe himself! LOL! –

Well, that was my favourite bit of 397, too! Adds an interesting spin to the expression “ad absurdum”…

408. simonkey - October 20, 2007

i ve just watched a fanmade trailer on you tube!well although i dislike him as a person shatner rules!!!!!!!!!!!!as for the uss enterprize dont change anything,youll make a big mistake ,you know that mr jj!!!!!!

409. Tom - October 20, 2007

I hope Anthony is right about this being resolved soon. It really is getting ridiculous. If they are in negotiations then just say so. I am tired of Shatner saying he knows nothing. I am tired of the team saying we are trying , we are trying , we are trying. I think that they have had so much casting to do they put Shatner behind all of that . Now they possibly offer him a cameo and he is just being Shatner. This should have all been done.

410. Star Trackie - October 20, 2007

This is my theory on things.

Many moons ago Orci and company construct a TOS idea that allows for multiple scenarios.

They write a script anticipating Nimoy and Shatner’s involvement. Nimoy’s part is larger than Shatner’s.

Orci and company stand by with another script or re-write idea in the wings, in the case that Nimoy and Shatner are NOT participating.

All this is done before it is even presented to Paramount to greenlight.

Preliminary meetings are held, to feel out the actors who “might” or “might not” be involved.

JJ meets with Nimoy and Shatner. Nimoy loves it, he has a decent integral part. Shatner less so, his role is not as meaty. But he’ll take the part for some crazy amount of money. His rational being, the studio is paying, not for the acting, but for the publicity of having him in the film, which would be the primary advantage to him appearing in a small role. And Shatner would be 100% right. The studio wants his name on it more than his acting ability. So the negotiations go on and on to the point where they are at today. Both sides really DO want Shatner in the movie but Paramount wont cough up the $ to make it happen.

That leads us to where we are today. It’s not a matter of wanting. It’s not a matter of what if? It’s not a matter of good story telling. That’s already all been decided. I think the bottom line is this, IF the studio will pony up the cash, Shatner is in. Simple as that. We are much too late in the game to talk about “putting” someone in n the fly. The storyline has to exist with that possibility written in, to even consider bringing in Shatner this late in the game.

If the sudio plays ball we’ll get what everyone from JJ to Orci to Shatner wants. If not, then the Shatner bashers can rejoice, despite the fact that putting Shatner in IS what every one else, including the production, team wants. All we can really do is wait.

411. trektacular - October 20, 2007

If Shatners in this or not this film will make money

412. Tom - October 20, 2007

#410
That sounds like a very likely scenario.

413. Mike - October 20, 2007

To 398
Rod

Movies are not produced to repair or correct past bad films. Better to spend more money getting Tom Cruise or Brad Pitt, actors who can boost domestic and international box office. Shatner is a waste of time.

414. VOODOO - October 20, 2007

Wow,

I go away for a night + guys (#362 Flying Toupee) are asking me for my wife’s writing me asking for my wife’s phone # and this thread is already over 400 posts.

Shatner’s rumored return thread = 410 posts (this is the 1,000th story about Shat’s rumored return)

Chris Pine’s conformation as Kirk = 121 posts (has been up a day longer)

Shatner attracts passion + attention.

415. VOODOO - October 20, 2007

410:

Your theory makes sense except that Shatner claims nobody has contacted him at all.

416. Trek Nerd Central - October 20, 2007

You know what? Ages ago, I mean years ago, it crossed my mind that the Original Series characters were so good — so fully realized in human and archetypal terms — that the Trek franchise ought to go back to the beginning and re-take everything with new actors in the old roles. Because nothing in contemporary pop storytelling (in any media) beats the Kirk-Spock-McCoy triumvirate.

When I heard that Abrams planned on doing this, I thought, “Hallelujah. Finally somebody got the point.” The fact that the cast includes Nimoy is gravy. If Shatner makes it in, too, well, that’s great, but I’m frankly most interested in seeing what Abrams & Orci make of the young characters themselves.

Let’s give them a chance, I say. Don’t decide now whether the film is worth seeing, or likely to make money, or anything else. And for heaven’s sake, don’t base everything on Shatner’s participation.

My two cents.

417. VOODOO - October 20, 2007

I not only want to hear from Roberto Orci. I want to hear from Hercules over at AICN.

Herc, was the one who started the latest rumor. Yet we have yet to hear his response.

Maybe he doesn’t know as much about this movie as he claims.

I believe Shatner is being honest in his latest comments.

418. ZoomZoom - October 20, 2007

I love Shatner, I love Kirk, but…..

Right here, right now, I’m more interested in England winning The Rugby World Cup tonight- Go Jonny GO GO GO!
and Lewis Hamilton finishing the job and becoming F1 Champion tomorrow! Go Lewis!
As for being jerked around about Shatner being in or not, I’m bored and just a bit irritated.

419. New Horizon - October 20, 2007

- 389. Admiral_Bumblebee – October 20, 2007
Let’s look at the issue from a story perspective.
Wouldn’t it be cool if old Kirk and young Kirk meet? Put aside William Shatner, just look at it from the story perspective. –

That’s exactly why it’s a bad idea. That’s fan movie wankery. I’ve already seen it in many fan made productions, and it’s cheesy. JJ has said that he wants to make this movie feel as realistic as possible, I just don’t see that happening if there is some kind of literal ‘meeting of the kirk’s/spock’s’.

I just don’t understand this rabid desperation to shame the producers into putting Shatner in the movie.

Personally, I’m sick and tired of time travel in Star Trek. It’s like that’s all people think it’s about these days. Oh, just screw with the timeline….that’s exciting.

The Star Trek I grew up with was mainly about exploring. Yes, there was a time travel story here and there, but it wasn’t a given. Star Trek isn’t Doctor Who.

420. Leonel - October 20, 2007

Over 400 comments. Wonder if that’s nearing some sort of record.. and surely the free publicity resulting from “is he? isn’t he?” is being enjoyed by Abrams & company.. not to mention Shatner.. ;-)

421. Bono Luthor - October 20, 2007

Put him in the damn movie!

Come on England in the rugby!!!!!

422. Tim Handrahan - October 20, 2007

Over 420 posts!

The message is clear!

BRING BACK SHATNER AS KIRK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Everyone wants, even those who say they don’t. What self-respecting Trek fan would not get a lump in thier throat or a tear in their eye once they see Shatner and Nimoy on the screen once more.

I know the end is coming for them to portray thease characters and that the next logical step is to have new actors play the roles. But if there is a chance that they can appear once more, then I believe it should happen.

Let’s get it done and end the madness!

423. King of the Tribbles - October 20, 2007

Wee weee wee,squeak,Shatner Wee wee squeak ,purr.

424. VOODOO - October 20, 2007

Bob Orci’s silence is deafening.

I’m not saying that he doesn’t have valid reasons for not saying anything. I’m quite sure he does have very legit reasons for staying silent on this subject, but he could end all of this speculation with one sentence either confirming Shatner’s role or explaining why he is not included (the wrong answer by the way)

I would like to add that as I take Mr. Shatner at his word when he claims that he has not been contacted recently. I also take Mr. Orci at his word when he claims to be “desperately trying to find a way to include Shatner”

I’m not a big conspiracy guy. I take people at their word.

If they truly didn’t want Shatner wouldn’t Mr. Orci just come out and say it?

This leads me to believe that there are still things going on behind the scenes that we have no idea of.

Perhaps, they haven’t yet written a small part for Shatner yet, but will be in contact with him shortly. The writers did say “they still want him as part of the shoot”

Perhaps. Herc is right + they did write a small cameo for Shatner + he wants a bigger role and more money?

Perhaps Shatner asked too much $ at first (it is confirmed that they had meetings months ago + Abrams told him he wants him in the film)

Bottom line we still don’t know exactly what is going on, but I believe both sides.

– Shat wants in
– The writers, producers + directors claim to want him.

This can still + should get done especially if they only need Shatner for a couple days of shooting.

Shatner needs to drop his $ demands (if that is an issue + I’m not sure it is) + be happy with a small cameo.

That small cameo could still be a major role. Think of Leonard Nimoy”s extended cameo in ST III.

Mr Orci, Mr. Abrams + Mr Shatner let’s get this done so we don’t have to keep talking about it.

Even I’m tired of it.

V

425. Pragmaticus - October 20, 2007

I’m sure Shatner’s been written in by now. The Shat’s just haggling over money now. And another thing – how much time would he have to miss filming Boston Legal to go film on Star Trek? That’s something no one has asked yet. They had to work it out with Quinto to get him from Heroes. So maybe that’s a problem as well.

426. Dennis Bailey - October 20, 2007

#424: “If they truly didn’t want Shatner wouldn’t Mr. Orci just come out and say it?

This leads me to believe that there are still things going on behind the scenes that we have no idea of.

Perhaps, they haven’t yet written a small part for Shatner yet, but will be in contact with him shortly. The writers did say “they still want him as part of the shoot”

Perhaps. Herc is right + they did write a small cameo for Shatner + he wants a bigger role and more money?

Perhaps Shatner asked too much $ at first (it is confirmed that they had meetings months ago + Abrams told him he wants him in the film)

Bottom line we still don’t know exactly what is going on…”

That all makes sense.

427. Harry Ballz - October 20, 2007

Have any of you EVER seen Shatner talk about anything OTHER than himself??

Boy, it’s amazing how fine a line it is when a person crosses over from being a self-promoting showman to a self-absorbed pr***!!

Which one is the Shat again??

This guy is an ADORATION JUNKIE!!!!

428. Lord Garth Formerly of Izar - October 20, 2007

Oh my !!! Many of you apparently missed the opportunity at some point to become outstanding trial lawyers (Baristers four our Limey friends) …… or ……perhaps many of you are redundant dullards you love to repeat yourselves stuffing each post with more hyperbolie to make your selves sound even smarter (doesn’t really work)
In any case you bore me. Repeating yourself 15 times does not make your arguement more potent.
Shatner will likely be in the film in some capacity, and all this handringing will be mute.
And some of you who insist on (not so subtley) kissing Anthony’s ass every time you post by saying sorry Anthony for saying this or Anthony certain people are not following the rules here- for God’s sake you weasley, suck ass, douches, get some self respect!!!!!

Finally I would ike to announce that I will be making my very special Spaghetti Carbonara this evening and watching Gamesters!!!! Remember you jello-heads, Gamesters is on today, great Kirk-centric episode and no one is paying F-ing attention!

429. Etha Williams - October 20, 2007

$388 — Being as over-the-top, entertaining, and charismatic as Shatner is doesn’t make you a better or worse actor. However, such an actor is suited towards some stories and not towards others. From what I’ve heard about this story, I’m leaning towards thinking this might be one of the ones that he isn’t suited for. It has nothing to do with Shatner being “too good” OR “too bad” an actor.

430. Gary Lee - October 20, 2007

(#410 That sounds about right about Shatner) Shatner said he doesn’t want a cameo in the movie. I bet you he wants a equal part with Nimoy, so both old Kirk and old Spock can be the heroes in the movie. So when Spock is traveling back in time will stop at the end of Generations and beam up Kirk just before he hits the gound from his long fall and not to change the Generations time line. Then the two of them go back further in time to stop the Romulans in the new Star Trek movie. I can remember reading that Shatner had something written up that he would always have more lines than anyone in a script even more than Nimoy in Star Trek. .

431. John N - October 20, 2007

Wow… part 2 of the video really comes across as Shatner asking for a mountain of money to be in this film.

Crazy.

432. Katie - October 20, 2007

Well,i’m not going if he’s not even going to play a small part…..
sure I wanna see the movie but i don’t want to see just spock,you know…..

Shatner needs to get off his high-horse though.

433. Iowagirl - October 20, 2007

Mr. Abrams, Mr. Orci: More thank 400 posts – I’m not saying that quantity is all that matters and the posts are controversial, but controversy keeps adding fuel to the fire, whether people want to admit it or not. Furthermore, the figure gives you an idea of the extent of involvement with the subject. And this is ALTHOUGH we are all tired. Whatever the reasons for your silence may be, Mr. Shatner is still a very successful person who will attract additional viewers – putting him in can only be a win-win-scenario. So, please break the silence now and give us a chance to rest.

434. Harry Ballz - October 20, 2007

#433 “controversy keeps adding fuel to the fire”

Yeah, Tom Cruise’s jumping on Oprah’s couch REALLY helped the box office of MI:III………….NOT!!

435. Iowagirl - October 20, 2007

#434

Yeah, Tom Cruise is a madman and some of us most certainly are as well. Will it help, will it not – you’ll never know. Maybe it’s just Abrams having a knack for miscasts that did not help…

436. Shatner_Fan_2000 - October 20, 2007

#429 “However, such an actor is suited towards some stories and not towards others. From what I’ve heard about this story, I’m leaning towards thinking this might be one of the ones that he isn’t suited for.”

Absurd. The day that William Shatner “isn’t suited” for a TOS Star Trek movie is a day that I, as a fan, hope to NEVER see. His eventual passing or the short-sightedness of producers/writers/directors might negate his appearance, but the man who elevated Captain Kirk and Star Trek into legendary status is more suitable than anyone.

437. Blunt, Daimon (retired), Ferengi Alliance - October 20, 2007

Leaving hooman Shatner out of Star Trek movie would be a most unprofitable failure on the part of the Federation.

Give him enough latinum and put your lobes to work by scheming and plotting a non-cameo role for Kirk.

For example:
Spok retreives Kirk from the Nexus with some creative transporter misuse, plus controversial genetic egineering whatever.
This Kirk displays a grim, disillusioned personality, quicky breaks with Starfleet and Spok and everyone who knew him.
Kirk makes his living by running a night club in an “offshore” planet under umbrella of Ferengi Alliance. The visitors are all sorts of “businessmen” from nearby territories – Ferengi, Romulans etc.
Notable part of Kirk profits comes from smugling Romulan Ale to Federation and similar operations. Once a week the top of the evening show in the club is a wrestling fight between Kirk and his business partner – an old Gorn captain.
Kirk uses his business contacts with the Romulans, bribes and extortion to get some info about upcoming Romulan covert op against Earth.
Of course, Kirk is actually working for section 31.
Further, Spok is the current chief of 31; his coldest and sharpest logic combined with selflesness and huge experience in politics makes him perfect for that “very dirty, very bloody business”.
Once Spok get the word from Kirk about the Romulans pereparing to attack, he devises a plan of his own…

438. Iowagirl - October 20, 2007

#429

– However, such an actor is suited towards some stories and not towards others. From what I’ve heard about this story, I’m leaning towards thinking this might be one of the ones that he isn’t suited for. –

Shatner not suited for a Star Trek story – sounds like a good lead-in to some sort of Monty Python sketch to me…

439. New Horizon - October 20, 2007

Kirk doesn’t need to be resurrected in this movie, the resurrection of Kirk requires a complete movie on its own to do it any justice. It took Spock 2 movies to get back to business after Trek 2, yet there are people here who unrealistically expect the writers to devote a ‘few scenes’ that are supposed to suffice in wrapping up a resurrection of Kirk? It’s preposterous, and unrealistic. That’s why I’m against having Kirk resurrected in this movie. It undermines the new cast, and it undermines Kirk himself. If he’s going to be brought back, give it an entire movie unto itself. If Shatner can’t pry himself away from his ego long enough to allow his friend Leonard, and the young cast have this movie for themselves…perhaps he should fund his own ‘return of kirk’ movie.

440. John N - October 20, 2007

I love how the posters on this site are so convinced that they speak for the masses, whether you’re FOR or AGAINST Shatner being in the film.

I think that those who consider 440 posts on a site dedicated to Star Trek to be significant need to take a step back and get some perspective.

Is it a hot topic amongst Trek fans? Yes and no… I had to INFORM my best friend last night of what was going on, and he’s more of a Trek fan than most other people I know… obviously not a die hard fan, but he was there for the opening night of Trek VI.

So, yeah… it’s a polarizing topic amongst us die hards, but please let’s not get delusions of grandeur, especially when most of the 440 posts are from repeat posters.

441. VOODOO - October 20, 2007

#439

It all depends.

If this is a film that travels various time lines + includes time travel (as rumors suggest) it may not be as hard as you think to alter the time line just enough to allow Kirk to live in a single scene.

I think it can + should be done.

442. karanadon - October 20, 2007

#227 – LOVING your idea. Mind you we still haven’t any details, so maybe it IS what they’re gonna do. The idea is that good!!

443. Greg2600 - October 20, 2007

Wow, now over 400+ posts! I feel like The Count, aah ah ah ah ah.

The second video was very humorous. Let’s give Bill credit for poking fun at his own expense (old fat Captain Kirk). Saying Bill is doing this to shame or bully the producers is completely ridiculous. Or that this is his ego. Come on, grow up. The man has down a dozen Star Trek books, appeared video games, a Futurama episode, and keeps doing tons of conventions well into his 70’s. Shatner enjoys playing Captain Kirk, and he wants to again, and doesn’t want to get left out. It’s genuine excitement, not ego or greed. I have no problem if he continues to publicly make these feelings known.

As for the nay sayers, again, this is a movie. It’s fake, it’s not real. If they do time travel, or use a coupe old guys, or don’t follow canon…… WHO Cares! If doing so makes the movie more fun to watch, then it doesn’t matter how they get there.

444. Dennis Bailey - October 20, 2007

#410: You make a lot of sense.

Of course, when Shatner says that “no one has contacted” him he doesn’t bother to mention the early meetings he and Nimoy had with the producers and which he’s referred to in the past.

445. TK - October 20, 2007

oh my god, zoomzoom I’m with you!!! We have GOT to score a try like, NOW!!! 15 minutes left!!! GO England!!! GOoooooooooo (sorry, I’m too occupied with Rugby World cup right now)

446. Pragmaticus - October 20, 2007

I’d love Shatner to be in it, so long as he doesn’t upstage Chris Pine. And again, Paul, please get Bill to do a ShatnerVision wholly focused on Chris Pine.

447. Jay - October 20, 2007

don’t be a cheating South African

BRING BACK KIRK!!

448. Jay - October 20, 2007

*437 i’ll have some of what your taking!

449. Caspar - October 20, 2007

Kirk is dead as of Generations. He was so hot to get into a ST movie at that time, that he actually let them kill him off — twice. As Nemoy said after rejecting his role as a cardboard stand-in on the bridge for Generations, “If I had been there, I would not have let you die.”

But we don’t need to resurrect Kirk or change a timeline to get him into this picture. Spock has lived a lot longer than his friends, including his own father, why could he not be struggling to deal with all the loss inherent in his long life? Then he could use a holographic Kirk. I don’t know, Kirk could very easily be in this picture with holograms.

I’m really more concerned about the TNG crew getting a worthy send-off here than Kirk.

450. Jay - October 20, 2007

*449 thats just crazy… Kirk brought Spock back… now its only fitting that Spock brings back Kirk

451. VOODOO - October 20, 2007

#446

Who cares if Shatner upstages Chris Pine?

Are you saying they should not have an actor who the know will nail the role because another actor may not be as good?

If Pine can’t hold the screen as well as Shatner (I”m not saying that will be the case) so be it.

452. New Horizon - October 20, 2007

450. Jay –

Technically, the genesis effect brought back Spock…Kirk just gave him a ride to Vulcan. The way Spock came back, while a contrivance it worked rather effortlessly with the established story. There is really no easy setup to bring back Kirk at this point.

453. Blunt, Daimon (retired), Ferengi Alliance - October 20, 2007

448: Have some Romulan ale.

This Shatneric ordeal is getting tiresome. I was just letting steam off.
Some of the casting choices also look like a bad joke.

454. ObiWanCon - October 20, 2007

LOOK WILL PEOPLE JUST LET SHATNER GO FOR GOD’S SAKE IT’S GETTING SILLY.

455. King Anthony - October 20, 2007

Bill, do yourself a favor and…

1. Steer clear of message boards.
2. Steer clear of JJ’s ticking time bomb.

Sincerely,

Anthony

456. pizza - October 20, 2007

No doubt this thread will exceed 500 posts.

I’ve read a lot of passion and a lot of wind from a lot of the previous posts. Most of the bring back Shatner posters think by having the ‘last word’ or by flooding these threads with their views will have an effect with the producers. (It doesn’t) I find it boring!

I wish those of you who do this, would have your say then take a pill. It is the quality of your wind that makes the difference, not the quantity.

Mr. Shatner’s use of leverage in the past doesn’t cut it now. The boys in charge now don’t have to take his crap like the previous boys had to.

Fact is that Mr. Abrams, Mr Orci and yes, Mr. Shatner have all said they want Mr. Shatner in the movie. Well, if that is the case, and he is not. Then what is left? He either doesn’t like the part they are willing to give him, or he doesn’t like the money they are offering. Since I am not privy to what is going on behind the scenes, my money is on the 2 possibilities mentioned. Which points to Mr. Shatner’s ego.

This franchise is being resurrected and the last thing we need is an ego that prevents us from going forward with fresh ideas.

432 dtST

457. roberto Orci - October 20, 2007

403#

LOL

458. KennyB - October 20, 2007

IMHO–with The Shat it has ALWAYS been about the money……..In the ’80’s and early 90’s when the TOS movies were in full effect they had to pay his demands……Now they don’t. I think the same thing happened to his rumored guest spot on Enterprise. Just like pizza says in post 456 if everyone wants him and he wants to do it–HE has to be the reason it’s not happening.

459. Harry Ballz - October 20, 2007

Mr. Orci…..without giving a hint of which side you’re on, regarding the BBK debate, do you find the repetetive arguments engaging or tiresome?

460. JCool - October 20, 2007

I know trekkies who don’t give a rat’s *** if Shatner’s in it or not .. they only care about what the enterprise will look like…and are very concern about the design.

BTW Enterprise is a beautiful lady…with beautiful classic curves

She is not a man…please don’t treat her like one!

461. Dennis Bailey - October 20, 2007

I’m interested in the quality of the film and the story.

The producers are far more qualified at this moment, by virtue of their positions and training and talent, to determine who are the best actors to cast in this film than fans posting on the Internet are. Fans can only lobby for their favorites based upon enthusiasm and, in many cases, apparently untreated obsessive-compulsive disorders.

Clearly there are Shatnerholics who don’t give a rat’s @$$ about such things, as long as they get to see William Shatner dressed up as Captain Kirk. And if his “part” in this flick consisted of stopping the action to lead a group of Klingons in the Promise Margarine Pledge, they’d take out ads in Variety campaigning for an Oscar nomination on his behalf simply because he did it.

The ability or tendency of an actor to “upstage” another is not a measure of the self-aggrandizing actor’s talent so much as their ego and lack of respect for their fellows.

462. Thomas - October 20, 2007

410. Well said. It always seems to take an absurd amount of posts before anyone really says much of anything that isn’t one side railing against the other.

463. KennyB - October 20, 2007

461. Damn it Dennis-The Promise Margarine Pledge? You got in Mr. Peabody’s “Way Back” machine for that one! Almost shot Coke out my nose. ;-)

464. Jay - October 20, 2007

*452 – What about STIII TSFS – The SEARCH for SPOCK… Ok the genesis device ultimately did the deed of actually bringing Spock to life… but the Shatman did fire his coffin onto the forming planet in some vague hope that it may bring him back, it was the whole point of TSFS to go back to that planet and see if his gamble had paid off – with the help of Sarek who informed Kirk Spock wasnt fully dead… not to mention McCoys odd behaviour he then risked his ENTIRE career by going renegade etc etc we know the story.

My point… (not being made entirely clearly perhaps) is that the powers that be would have let Spock die on Genesis (without knowing he was there) but Kirk had been given the low down from Sarek and witnessed McCoys odd Spock-like behaviour which confirmed his previous hopes when he fired spocks coffin into the culminating genesis effect that spock could be brought back from the dead, and after all of this confirmation, nothing stood in the way of him helping his best friend. Also Kirk did say at the end of TWOK that he must “Return to this place” in the context of hope that spock would be alive some how.

In conclusion, it is a pivotal part of the Star Trek story that Kirk helps to SAVE SPOCK, all i ask is that SPOCK SAVE KIRK!!

as ive said in countless threads the writing is on the wall to do this!! EXAMPLE:

Kirks previous movie quotes:

“Ive always known i’d die alone” (he wasnt alone, Picard was present)

Spock: “You came back for me” Kirk: “You would have done the same for me”

Roberto….Friends…. this has the potential to be a classic modern trek, we just need the SHATMAN!!

BRING HIM BACK!!!!!!!

465. Dennis Bailey - October 20, 2007

463. “Damn it Dennis-The Promise Margarine Pledge? You got in Mr. Peabody’s “Way Back” machine for that one!”

Hey, I remember very well getting all excited every time one of those ads would come on during my friend’s daytime soaps, back when I was a kid – because that was the only place you could see Captain Kirk in those days. That and the occasional “Columbo” episode.

I got over it. ;)

466. Pragmaticus - October 20, 2007

Just finished watching the Special Features for Transformers. If there’s one thing I got from that, it’s that Orci and Kurtzman are total nerds. I think Roberto understands how passionate the fanbase is on this subject, and I think he wants Shatner in the film as much as any of us. I think Shatner’s part has been written already, and we’ll see what happens in theaters.

467. Shatner_Fan_2000 - October 20, 2007

#461

“The producers are far more qualified at this moment, by virtue of their positions and training and talent, to determine who are the best actors to cast in this film than fans posting on the Internet are.”

Which, boys and girls, is how we ended up with pure cinematic genius such as Hayden Christensen making the poutiest Darth Vader ever, and Kate Bosworth playing grownup as Lois Lane. And I’m sorry, I like much of the Star Trek XI cast, but unless Pegg REALLY blows me away with his performance … Paul Mcgillion would’ve made a much better Scotty. The fans aren’t always wrong.

“Clearly there are Shatnerholics who don’t give a rat’s @$$ about such things, as long as they get to see William Shatner dressed up as Captain Kirk.”

Untrue. We want a good story as much as anyone. And after being stuck in a bad marriage with Berman and having to endure Insurrection, Nemesis, and much of Enterprise, God knows we all need one! With the current storyline rumored to involve time travel and altering timelines to create altered futures … all that plus one Leonard Nimoy … the Shatner aspect seems like it could feasibly happen and provide a very happy ending for the original, Roddenberry era of Star Trek. Period.

“And if his ‘part’ in this flick consisted of stopping the action to lead a group of Klingons in the Promise Margarine Pledge, they’d take out ads in Variety campaigning for an Oscar nomination on his behalf simply because he did it.”

Now Dennis, I already awarded YOU the Starfleet Commendation for Unswerving Attempts to Discredit Shatner. So I’m afraid I’m all awarded out at the moment. We’ll talk again after your next attempt. :)

“The ability or tendency of an actor to ‘upstage’ another is not a measure of the self-aggrandizing actor’s talent so much as their ego and lack of respect for their fellows.”

And yet, the vast majority of viewers have thoroughly enjoyed watching that darn ol’ meanie Shatner’s performances for decades. How does such a man keep getting work? Go figure.

468. Jay - October 20, 2007

Almost 470 posts…. getting the idea Roberto :P hehe

469. GraniteTrek - October 20, 2007

469!

470. Michael Hall - October 20, 2007

“How does such a man keep getting work? Go figure.”

As I said earlier, he continues to get the work because he still has the goods. Which doesn’t mean his prescence is appropriate for this film, and speaks to why the producers are, in fact, in the best position to judge what’s best for their movie. Counter-examples regarding Hayden Christensen and Kate Bosworth would only prove something if you could demonstrate that no film where fans had a creative say would ever suffer from equally bad decision-making. Good luck with that one.

As William Goldman once famously said of Hollywood: “No one knows anything.” Abrams, Orci, and company will take their best shot and will succeed or fail accordingly. My advice–not that they need it more than all the other advice they’re getting here–would be to pay as much attention to fan caterwauling as Nick Meyer did back in 1982, trust their instincs and not second-guess, and to just get on with it.

“I think that those who consider 440 posts on a site dedicated to Star Trek to be significant need to take a step back and get some perspective.”

Amen to that, brother.

471. Dennis Bailey - October 20, 2007

#467: “Which, boys and girls, is how we ended up with pure cinematic genius such as Hayden Christensen making the poutiest Darth Vader ever, and Kate Bosworth playing grownup as Lois Lane. ”

Unlike the thousands of hours of quality mass entertainment produced by the fanboy elite, eh?

Show us how it’s done.

472. GraniteTrek - October 20, 2007

Okay, sorry, I couldn’t resist..

Here’s a thought I want to throw out there. I’ve read some folks who’ve said that Shatner IS Trek, or IS Kirk, and somehow it can’t be Trek without him (at least in the TOS setup – we’ll forget there were four other series without the Shat Man in it for the moment). My thought is that it was a bit of casting luck that Shatner wound up as Kirk, since he was the third shot at the captain’s seat – we all remember Jeffrey Hunter as Pike, but don’t forget Lloyd Bridges was offered the role, and turned it down. Suppose he had taken it, in some alternate universe? Remember him in other roles, particularly as Commander Cain in the original BSG – can anyone else see that he could have made a good Kirk too, if he’d taken the part?

My point is that we could easily have wound up with someone else as Kirk, who would have put his own stamp on the role (within the confines or how the character was defined by Gene Roddenberry and the writers), and we’d be saying “Lloyd Bridges IS Kirk/Trek” instead. I certainly think that Bill Shatner has some unique qualities as an actor that helped define the Kirk we know today, but I also think there are other actors who, if they’d gotten the part, would have done well too. You can’t just discount the writers and the other actors in the series when you discuss what made Trek, it wasn’t a one man show. I’d like to see Bill Shatner in the film, but if he doesn’t get in it, I’ll still give the movie a shot. I’m already sure it’ll be different than we saw it on the original series, but that doesn’t mean I won’t like it, or that it won’t be what I think of as “true to Trek”.

BTW, I wouldn’t have been saying that a few years ago, before the new BSG, which I strongly opposed having enjoyed the original (and still do), changing my mind. Maybe I don’t know everything after all ;) ….

473. Camaro 09 - October 20, 2007

#467

Well said.

474. Camaro 09 - October 20, 2007

Dennis Bailey

Dennis you are one of the most articulate + well thought out regular posters around here. I always enjoy reading what you are thinking, BUT it seems you really have to ax to grind in regards to Shatner + his fans.

I noticed you nearly got into an argument when talking to Paul (I think that’s his name) from Shatner’s official site when he didn’t agree with you.

I think you should at least respect the fact that many people (including the writers and producers of this film) want to see Shatner return as Kirk and give the character a happy ending.

After all these new actors are strangers to us. Shatner and Nimoy and their characters are like distant family to just about all of us.

Please don’t take this as an attack. I truly value what you have to say on all things Trek, but I think your off base on this subject.

475. Etha Williams - October 20, 2007

436 & 438 —
Although I (obviously) disagree with you, this brings up an interesting point — can we fairly call this a TOS movie? On the one hand, it is 23rd century & contains the Enterprise and our favorite crew, but it will have a different cast, at least some change in the visual fx, possibly an alternate universe even. So — is it fair to call it a “TOS movie” and insodoing group it with a set of movies filmed during the 70s & 80s with different cast and cinemetography? I would be inclined to put this (and any future movies with this cast) in a different category, but it’s hard to say.

451 —
“Who cares if Shatner upstages Chris Pine?…Are you saying they should not have an actor who the know will nail the role because another actor may not be as good?”

Just because someone upstages someone does not necessarily mean he is more talented.

464 —
Spock: “You came back for me” Kirk: “You would have done the same for me”

This quote is being thrown around a lot, but you have to remember that Kirk was originally coming back for Spock’s -dead- body so that he could reunite it with Spock’s katra and bring it to Mt. Seleya. It was only AFTER he reached the Genesis Planet that he found out Spock’s body was alive, and only when they reached Vulcan that they found out about the possibility of the fal-tor-pan ritual.

Spock has no reason to think that he can resurrect Kirk, nor is there any apprent ritual he needs to carry out with Kirk’s body, so the comparison, while superficially compelling, is logically invalid.

476. New Horizon - October 20, 2007

- Just because someone upstages someone does not necessarily mean he is more talented.

You can say that again. Shatner has been known to mug the camera so much, he should have a handle on the side of his head.

477. Dennis Bailey - October 20, 2007

#474:”I noticed you nearly got into an argument when talking to Paul (I think that’s his name) from Shatner’s official site when he didn’t agree with you.”

Nope.

I asked some clarifying questions, for which specific answers aren’t forthcoming. He did get a little testy about being asked questions rather than taken at face value, but those are his responses.

478. Harry Ballz - October 20, 2007

Dennis, I’m curious…..getting away from Trek for a moment……could you share your thoughts on which GREAT movies have come out of Hollywood in recent years. It’s all subjective, but I’d be interested in hearing you cite three or four CLASSICS produced in the last few years. I, personally, haven’t been impressed by much out Hollywood in a LONG time, so I’d like to get your take on it!

As a simple example, I thought Forrest Gump was very well done.

479. Pragmaticus - October 20, 2007

One more reason why Roberto Orci is clearly a fan of Star Trek – just finished watching Transformers, and noticed that he and Kurtzman (I’m guessing they’re responsible) threw in a clip of Uhura saying “Message from Starfleet”. He’s clearly a fan, and I think he has the franchise’s best interests in mind. If he can’t find a way to fit Shatner in without messing with the fabric of the film that’s been written, he won’t shove him in. He’s gonna be respectful of the franchise.

480. dalek - October 20, 2007

#477 Perhaps because Paul and the Shatner people are the only people actually saying something definite. No maybe. No yes it’s a possibility, a straightforward: No Shatner has not been approached, he is not in the movie.

It’s understandable Shatner’s people feel like they do because everywhere else is reporting either “yes” or “maybe” whilst they have a big fat silence which equals NO.

Mr Orci won’t break the silence which either means there are negotiations to be had; or as speculated by Shatner’s people and a lot of Star Trek fans, it’s all a publicity ruse and there is no intention to have Shatner in the film other than to use his name to keep people hoping longer as means of positive publicity.

My own theory: I tend to agree with Paul and Shatner’s people. JJ Abrams is playing a game. I only hope its in the favour of the outcome being positive rather than negative.

I think it’s time to break the silence tho. Everyone’s frustrated about it now. It serves no purpose now being silent.

481. Harry Ballz - October 20, 2007

Maybe, as a nod to all Trekdom, Abrams is willing to “sandwich” Shatner into the film, but Paramount isn’t happy with the number of zeroes they’d have to write on the Shat’s cheque!!!

482. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - October 20, 2007

#449 — Caspar: Shatner would never agree to appear as a hologram remembrance type thing — that would be a cameo… and a small, meaningless one at that, since it would be a canned message from when he was alive.

But that gives me an idea: Shatner should sell the rights to his likeness so that the CG people can assemble a 3D model of him to be used at will in any future Star Trek productions. Old Kirk can be like Yoda in Star Wars Episodes II an III, fighting with bad guys as nimble and sprightly as ever… NOT.

Now, then, ahem…

THE MESSAGE IS CLEAR MY A$$. Even if Shatner’s portrayal as old Kirk wouldn’t detract from the movie (because I’m not so mush of a hater that I think he is inherently, uncategorically hammy), the sheer narrative exertion and screen-time required to insert old Kirk meaningfully into the story, while respecting the canon set down in Generations, would kill the story completely and negate the whole purpose of relaunching Star Trek with fresh faces and new ideas.

Let’s see if this is clear enough for you: DON’T POISON THE ONLY CHANCE OF STAR TREK TO LIVE — KEEP SHATNER OUT OF IT!

483. Shatner_Fan_2000 - October 21, 2007

#474 “Dennis … it seems you really have to ax to grind in regards to Shatner + his fans”

You mean … gasp! … I ain’t the only one who’s noticed?? Hey, give Dennis credit. It takes more time, energy, and resolve than most of us have to keep the anti-Shatner flame burning as long as he has! I place him right up there in the superman category along with Khan. :)

#475 “can we fairly call this a TOS movie?’

Well, I suppose we could call it a “TOS ripoff movie”, if that makes you feel better.

#482 “DON’T POISON THE ONLY CHANCE OF STAR TREK TO LIVE — KEEP SHATNER OUT OF IT!”

Oh my. You poor fellow. Hey, Trek has been pumped full of posion for years. You might call it Bermacide. It seems TPTB wised up somewhat and now feel the antidote lies in a little known show called Star Trek (the original series). Which owes a sizable chunk of its success to its star. Whose name is Shatner …… any of this registering yet?

484. roberto Orci - October 21, 2007

459

Engaging. Debate rages within us, too.

485. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - October 21, 2007

#483 — You’re not paying attention. I’m all for bringing the TOS era back, but with new talent. Shatner had his day, I am happy to say I experienced his glory days, but now they are over.

Do the words “graceful exit” mean anything to you? Does the phrase “beating a dead horse” mean anything to you?

I recognize that the B&B team outlived their welcome, but that hardly implies that the answer is to trot Shatner back out. On the contrary, new talent in every department is the only way to go. Nimoy is in, but mark my words, the writers have brought him in for calculated effect, not just for nostalgic back-patting.

486. MichaelJohn - October 21, 2007

I have always been pretty neutral about Shatner and Nimoy being in the next Trek film. It really didn’t matter to me one way or the other. But after watching those two video clips, I’m a bit disappointed with Shatners attitude toward the whole project. His emphasis on the next movie making lots of money and having big box office sales (with him in it of course) kind of turned me off frankly. I could care less how much or little money the next movie makes, just as long as they make a great and memorable Star Trek film.

I think having Shatner in a cameo role would be an excellent idea, and just because it would be a small part doesn’t mean it would be meaningless or unimportant. A scene or two with Kirk and Spock together could very well be the most memorable and wonderful part of the next movie. Unfortunately, Shatner doesn’t seem to be open to that idea, and it’s my gut feeling that his refusal to even consider a cameo appearance will, in the end, keep him out of the film altogether. That would be a pity….

I also think it would be wonderful and appropriate to see all the other surviving TOS actors in small cameo roles too. For all we know they may have already been approached about the idea. (I hope so anyway.)

Anyway, if Shatner doesn’t end up having a role in the next Trek movie, I can just imagine the kinds of posts we will see on this site. The anger and fury coming from the keyboards of the “Shat Brigade” will be something to see..and read! Stay tuned!

Mike :o

487. Admiral_Bumblebee - October 21, 2007

For me Star Trek died, when Captain Kirk fell off that bridge. I had hopes that TNG would be a worthy successor in the cinemas, but for me it wasn’t. I did watch DS9 occassionally, I watch next to nothing from Voyager and Enterprise. When I heard that William Shatner would maybe reprise his role as Captain Kirk in Star Trek 11 and be on screen with Leonard Nimoy as Spock again my interest in Star Trek was re-awakened. I had high hopes that this would bring me back to Star Trek. If Shatner isn’t in it, my interest will fade away again. Maybe I will watch the movie nonetheless on TV like I did with Nemesis… This is no boykott, just disinterest.

488. Iowagirl - October 21, 2007

“A successful person is one who can lay a firm foundation with the bricks that others throw at him or her.” (David Brinkley)

489. Kirk, James T. - October 21, 2007

There are so many oppertunities to bring Shatner back its almost a crime not too.

If this film is indeed about the Romulans going back to assasonate Kirk with older Spock folowing them back but also needing help – why doesn’t he go back to the time before Kirk had to die in Generations and save him so that Shatners older Kirk could help older Spock in saving their younger selves.

Another oppertunity is to have Shatner play Kirks dad, or uncle.

Having said this though, i think this movie is good enough not to have Shatner in it and maybe that alone will get people into the cinema’s wondering if it is still a good movie without the Shat.

490. Camaro 09 - October 21, 2007

#485

Kirk did not get a graceful exit.

That’s the point of this argument for most people.

Kirk was essentially used as a prop by Rick Berman. There was no reason to include Kirk in “Generations” to simply have him fall to his death from bridge for no reason.

Can’t you understand why so many people feel the character (the centerpiece of Star Trek) was given such a poor ending?

That ending could + should be altered. Especially when you consider the writers have expressed interest in having him in the film.

491. Camaro 09 - October 21, 2007

#487

“For me, Star Trek died for me when Kirk fell off that bridge in Generations”

I couldn’t agree more.

492. pizza - October 21, 2007

Mr. Orci, (Anthony or Dennis) not sure if you can confirm this, or anyone else for that matter. But I recall a long time ago, that the death of Kirk in Generations was originally rewritten. Supposedly there was a prescreening of Generations and the audience(s) did not take too kind to his death. So it was rewritten. I would really like to know how it was originally written or filmed.

Anyone?

431 dtST

493. pizza - October 21, 2007

More fuel for the fire: Read it for yourself here

http://mario.lapam.mo.it/films/st7.htm

William Shatner: “When Rick first called me and told me about wanting to knock off the Captain, it really didn’t bother me at all. Not one bit. In fact, I got really excited, thinking ‘Well, if this really is going to be Kirk’s last hurrah, what better way to close the book?'” Shatner tentatively agreed to the project, pending his approval of his role in the script.

Shatner also had concerns about the film when receiving his script.
William Shatner: “My friend James Tiberius didn’t quite seem himself. He had no overall theme, no thrust, nothing that made this part uniquely and absolutely Kirk’s. With that in mind, I began meeting with Rick and the writers, suggesting a few changes and rewrites.” The script was modified until it met Shatner’s approval and he officially signed onto the film.

Also my answer to the previous post.

As originally filmed, Captain Kirk’s death scene was somewhat different than what is seen in the released film. Most notably, Kirk died as a result of a phaser blast in the back from Soran (Malcolm McDowell.) When that scene didn’t go over well with test audiences, the actors were brought back on location and a new ending was filmed. In the new ending, Kirk died as a result of falling with a collapsed bridge – a metaphor for the bridge of a starship, where many felt Kirk should have died in the first place.

In any case Mr. Shatner approved the original phaser blast in the back. He himself said “Close the Book”.

So close the @#$%^& book already

431 dtST

494. Camaro 09 - October 21, 2007

In the original ending (on the dvd) Kirk was given an even worse ending that what is in the film.

In the original Soran simply shoots Kirk in the back + Kirk dies.

Instead they threw Star Trek’s greatest character off a bridge.

495. Greg2600 - October 21, 2007

Again, I think this constant revisiting of the motivations and whatnot for Generations is not relevant. Star Trek was run by Rick Berman in 1994, who made it clear that TOS was over and done with, and he was moving Trek along. I’m sure that if Bill had the foresight to see that TOS was not dead and that fan interest is still very strong even now, he would not have agreed to his character’s death. Now that notwithstanding, you cannot, I say again, cannot tell me that the reason William Shatner has been absent from TV or Film versions of Star Trek is simply because his character is dead? No, Rick Berman wanted nothing to do with him. This film is a chance to bring back William Shatner, not simply Kirk per se. They are already bringing Nimoy out of the mothballs. It just seems right to bring back Shatner. Now I am completely sympathetic with the writers on this one, and the dilemma of finding a way to get Shatner into the script. I do. My only critique would be to ask why Shatner’s role wasn’t thought of in the first place? Why write a script centering on only Nimoy? Now I know there are arguments for and against, but IMO, previous guest spots by TOS cast have never looked or felt quite right when they do it alone. You need at least two of them, so you get the feeling of the team of TOS. That’s what this is about for me. Not writing a wrong, or Shatner’s desires, or fans or whatever. I just strongly feel, as Nimoy has said, that this film just won’t be right without Shatner and Nimoy together.

496. Shatner_Fan_2000 - October 21, 2007

Shatner has stated (at a convention this summer) that Abrams met with him TWICE! The writers, including Mr. Orci, have met him too. Now why would they do that? There are really only 2 possibilites: They were considering using Shatner at one time and decided against it – or, they still are going to use him and simply haven’t given him the definite word yet. I believe it’s the latter. He’ll be there.

On a related note, when Shatner told the story about initially being contacted by Abrams, he demonstrated his reaction by smiling broadly and saying, “Star Trek! Yesss!!” Say what you will, but I believe the man really does love the franchise.

497. Lord Garth Formerly of Izar - October 21, 2007

Another Transformers Trek nod was when the decepticons hack the defence network, scene was very similar to the one in TMP when Vejur probe takes control of computers , earth defenses, starfleet strength.

Transformers looked awfully good in HD on a 65″ screen. a lot of fun and Bay sure does know how to show off our gorgeous military hardware. He may not be Johnnie To but know one on the planet has the big CGI -Military action flair that Bay does.

Robert is that Trans 2 script all over the internet an accurate first draft ???

498. Sam Belil - October 21, 2007

I have not posted any comments in a long time but the passion about this move is so inspiring I felt I had to say something: Shatner has made so much money in his career I don’t think for a second that this about the “Dead Presidents”. As someone stated prior ,for some 40+ years he has been the face of the Star Trek Franchise (with ALL DUE RESPECT to Leonard Nimoy). This movie without Shatner would be a travesty. Hey, this is science fiction, so “there are always possibilities…..” FYI, Noelle Neil was NOT the original Lois Lane it WAS in fact Phyllis Coates. Hey #94, Leony — you NEED to pay BETTER ATTENTION. Kirk DID MENTION SPOCK, when he first met Picard , “OF COURSE IF SPOCK WERE HERE, HE’D SAY I WAS BEING AN IRRATIONAL, ILLOGICAL HUMAN BEING FOR WANTING TO GO ON MISSION LIKE THAT….SOUNDS LIKE FUN”. I hope Chris Pine will be James T. Kirk that was a bit more serious in season #1 of TOS.

499. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - October 21, 2007

#490 — The graceful exit was STVI, Generations was already a step too far, and anything else now would just exacerbate things. And like I said before, you cannot just stick a scene or segment about rescuing Kirk from the Nexus, in some cursory and facile way — you would have to build a whole story around it, a story that would take up at least half of a feature length film. That is not what Star Trek 11 is here for.

500. pizza - October 21, 2007

William Shatner: “I did it. I killed Kirk and I think I killed him well, using all of the emotions I’d denied for so long in allowing the man to battle, then ultimately accept his impending death, while simultaneously peering into the greatest mystery of all.”

501. Nelson - October 21, 2007

Just to break out of this long thread for one second…..

An interesting editorial is on startrek.com right now that briefly and simplistically discusses the process of casting and making a film. It touches on the subject of this thread and about the process of the deal and the need to keep these things quiet as they work out the deal. It was addressing the Shatner thing no doubt and mentioning a well informed “independent” website that covers the “news and gossip” of Trek that tries to post and “unofficially” name the people who will be in the film.

http://www.startrek.com/startrek/view/news/article/2310513.html

502. VOODOO - October 21, 2007

#498

Shatner should be in the film without question, but to think that Shatner will not be asking for a ton of money is naive. He basically said this on his site.

He has always been tough as far as negotiations go.

My bet (this is simply a best guess) is they floated (nothing formal) the idea of a cameo (a hint to this is Shatner specifically said he doesn’t do cameo’s) to Shatner months ago when they met with him. I’d also guess that Shatner suggested more money + a bigger role.

It seems that the writers created a script that is centered around the older Spock. Their hands may be tied as far as writing a big part for him.

I don’t think anyone can really ask that they change the entire script around to give Shatner equal screen time to Nimoy.

Not even die hard BBK people think Shatner needs a huge role in this film. I would be happy with a 60 second scene at the end of the film that shows Kirk is alive + well.

It is at least possible (again I have nothing to back this up) that Shatner’s ego + desire to collect one more big check from Star Trek (as he hinted at in his video) is keeping him from a cameo (that could be quite important for the story) in the film.

As I have said. I believe Mr. Shatner when he claims he has not been contacted of late. BUT, there may be reason for that and other things going on behind the scenes.

503. Harry Ballz - October 21, 2007

Hey, wake up everybody!! Mr. Orci responded (# 484) to my query of # 459 regarding the BBK debate, and NOBODY wants to analyze his answer??
Aw, C’MON!!!!

When you hear the bell, move on to geography…..DING!!

504. VOODOO - October 21, 2007

#499

Under other circumstances I would agree with you, but if this film is in fact about time travel + alternate time lines. It could be fairly easy for Spock to alter the time line just enough to save Kirk.

The nexus is so vague (a time line in and of itself) that I don’t think it would be that tough to do.

505. EdDR - October 21, 2007

Stop the toying around. Either he is in or not. I prefer that Shatner would be in the movie. Have to pull him out of the Nexxus to do that . Not impossible for the Federation and the Star Trek Universe to do.

506. VOODOO - October 21, 2007

Harry Balz# 503

I didn’t see that. W/over 500 posts it’s easy to miss things.

It looks like Mr. Orci gave us the answer we were looking for.

It seems they have not decided what to do yet.

Roberto, all I can ask is that you give my boyhood hero (father like figure. I know it sounds corny) the dignity he deserves.

The character deserves better than falling off a bridge to his uneventful death. It truly is the worst ending of any major character ever.

A 60 second scene in the film (no need to change the entire script) would be great.

Shatner + Nimoy one more time to end the TOS era. While introducing a new cast is the way to go.

507. roberto Orci - October 21, 2007

497

No. Fanfic or something.

508. Iowagirl - October 21, 2007

# 503, 506

You’re right, Harry Ballz. In the heat of the debate people sometimes fail to see the really important things…

I agree to Voodoo’s interpretation – nothing’s decided yet. At least, that still gives us our 50 % share of hope. And we can still “rage against the dying of the light”…

Mr Abrams, Mr Orci – please, don’t miss your once in a blue moon chance!

509. Thomas Freeman - October 21, 2007

Well I for one think that William Shatner is an integral part of the original Star Trek and well… if they are bringing Leonard Nimoy into the film, why can’t them bring Shatner as well? They were the two main stars of the series. It could be a fun sort of “reminiscing” between the two elderly Kirk and Spock and bringing the viewers back to their early years in Star Fleet and how they met each other.

510. jonboc - October 21, 2007

Honestly I don’t think it’s Ronberto or JJ that we need to plea to. As bad as the Shanter bashers hate the idea, the fact is this, JJ and the writers WANT Shatner. Now…let the Shat-haters have some time to let that sink in. One more time…they met with him…they WANT to work him into the movie. OK. Now that has been decided, we look at Shatner. The man WANTS to be in the film…under certain conditions. SHatner is willing to play Kirk again. Ok. That is now established. So no more speculation there, please. The producers want him, and he wants to be involved.

The log-jam seems to be with the accountants at the studio. THAT is who needs to hear the pleas and arguments for his involvement. The bean counters who sign the checks will decide this, not the director ror writers, we know where they stand. Unfirtunately, accountants and studio execs aren’t the artsy types….all business. And that may not bode well for Shatner’s pending involvement.

511. Harry Ballz - October 21, 2007

To be blunt I think what may have happened is the following:

Months ago the Shat was offered a cameo part with a paycheque equal to Nimoy’s (favored nations clause). The Shat, being the megalomaniac that he is, insisted on a much bigger role in the film and A LOT more money. Because the script was probably “tighter” without his involvement, Paramount wasn’t happy with these demands. If anything, they were hesitant to involve Shatner in the first place since he can be a “pain in the ass” on a GOOD day, and why open THAT can of worms again?

This is where we sit today. Shatner acting like a spoiled petulant child and TPTB being firm with the “rules of the house”. This is why I stick to a suggestion I made before; Tell Shatner there is an IRON CLAD contract waiting for his signature, stipulating that it is ONLY A CAMEO, it will take only two days to film, AND he doesn’t get one penny more than Nimoy as that wouldn’t be fair or right. Oh, and spell it out in the contract that if the Shat “phones in” the performance they film, then it won’t be used and no money is to be paid.Then tell the Shat that the offer is TIME SENSITIVE and if he doesn’t respond by a specific date, they are GOING AHEAD WITHOUT HIM!!!

IT’S DECISION TIME, FOLKS!!!

512. Randy Yeoman - October 21, 2007

it is weird how peope keep reading things into all these statements, or jumping to conclusions. Hey how about we assume that they are not lying and what they say is what is up. Shatner wants in and is dissapointed. The team haven’t made up their mind and are divided as the trekkie community itself. Why is that all so hard to believe?

513. Lord Garth Formerly of Izar - October 21, 2007

Thanks Brother, script seemed rather busy to me

514. Lord Garth Formerly of Izar - October 21, 2007

thanks Brother, script seemed kind of busy to be real and I hate the Luxor

515. Sean4000 - October 21, 2007

Anthony,

Is this officially the most posted thread this site has ever had?

516. Pragmaticus - October 21, 2007

Since this seems to be the thread everyone is frequenting, a heads up – John Cho will be appearing on the October 29th episode of How I Met Your Mother, at 8:00 PM on CBS. He plays Jeff Coatsworth, a slick lawyer trying to convince Marshall (one of the supporting characters, played by Jason Segel) to sell out on his dream of being an environmental lawyer and go work at a big law firm.

517. dalek - October 21, 2007

Just looking at the poll (not that these are ever things to go by) but after 454 votes for Shatner In Star Trek 2008?

Must Have (35%)
Would Prefer (34%)
Don’t Care (21%)
Don’t Want (10%)
Total Votes: 464

Looks like the majority of visitors to the website want him in the film. Only a minority don’t. The people who post on the comments probably aprise a very small percentage of people in that poll, so I’m suspecting the majority of votes are from lurkers or news readers.

518. Viking - October 21, 2007

#511 Harry – agreed with the last part of that statement. Shooting is supposed to start in a couple of weeks, and for that you need a working script. Unless there’s a Plan B ending, it’s just about crap-or-get-off-the- pot time for the principals involved……..

519. Ty Webb - October 21, 2007

I think I’ll have to bow out of these Shatner threads in future. All this begging by fans is making me puke a little.

520. Dennis Bailey - October 21, 2007

#478: “but I’d be interested in hearing you cite three or four CLASSICS produced in the last few years. I, personally, haven’t been impressed by much out Hollywood in a LONG time,”

Harry, after wracking my brain for a bit I’ve got to agree with you – there may have been some great Hollywood films in the last few years that I haven’t seen, but I can’t think of any.

The last really great movies I remember seeing are “American Beauty” and “Elizabeth.” Both quite a while ago.

Narrowing it down to sf or fantasy films, there are few since the 1970s that seem to me to be great films. None of them are Trek films.

But “great films” is a much more limited category than “films I really like.” As far as sf/fantasy movies are concerned I tend to favor a few eccentric ones – I really enjoyed “The Impossibles,” “Serenity” and “Sky Captain” but find the “blockbusters” pretty boring.

521. Harry Ballz - October 21, 2007

Dennis, thanks for taking the time to consider your answer, it’s much appreciated!

Wouldn’t it be nice, and not unreasonable, if Hollywood cranked out maybe two or three GREAT CLASSIC movies per year? I don’t think that’s asking for too much………..

522. Bubba Hotep - October 21, 2007

As much as I would love to see a Shatner Kirk in the film, would everyone please take a chill pill and reality check?

If the writers of this next film are going to keep with canon, it would be impossible for them to include an older Kirk played by Shatner and still keep with canon. Lest we forget, an old but still relatively young Kirk disappeared in the late 23rd Century while aboard the Enterprise B only to mysteriously re-appear in the 24th Century and die shortly thereafter. At no time in Trek canon has an old Kirk ever existed.

In order to have an old Kirk in the movie, they would most likely have to do some lame ass thing where Spock hears of Kirk’s return to the 24th Century and subsequent death. Spock then heads out for Veridian III or wherever the hell Kirk’s body is buried and along the way remembers the first time he met Kirk or the first mission with Kirk and crew on the Enterprise (where the bulk of the movie takes place). When he finally finds Kirk’s body, some magical effect of the Nexus has restored Kirk to life. Of course, Spock could have ripped off some magical healing orb from the Romulans and uses that to restore Kirk to life.

LAME!

So as much as it sucks, keeping everything in line with canon basically precludes an old Shatner Kirk from being in the film.

523. jonboc - October 21, 2007

totally of topic, but at 521 posts, this thread is about dead anyway…

I was really put off by Urban’s casting as McCoy. Admittedly it was from first impressions and foggy memory so I rented Doom, where he co-starred with the Rock, to referesh my memory about this guy.

Movie wasn’t anything that I haven’t seen done better before, but it’s worth a look to watch our future Dr. McCoy. I’m pretty much sold on him now. Even amidst all the jarhead hot-dogging, there were moments that I could imagine him doing the same type scene in Trek. And I could imagine it being very very good.

Now I need to see some work by Pine. But as far as our new Bones is concerned…

sign me-

persuaded

524. JCool - October 21, 2007

#523

If you want to check out Karl Urban’s range
I suggest u watch

“Out of the Blue”

and “The Price of Milk”

both r not action type films

525. girl6 - October 21, 2007

Hey Mr. Orci–

One request: Please, please, please don’t throw some 98lb, bleached blonde blow-up doll in the story. Too many movies get ruined by some chick with fake boobs who doesn’t need to be there.

*cough* MI:III *cough*

That’s not to say, no sex.

And if there’s a strong, intelligent woman who moves the story forward, that’s cool, too.

I mean, all those beautiful people, out in space, on a *5-year* mission…somebody’s doing somebody. The mission had to be 90% boredom and 10% oh-my-god-we’re-all-gonna-die-horrible-deaths.

Blink.

Could tend to make one want some thank-god-we-made-it-through that-alive boot knockin’.

That also doean’t mean that you got people on the job in the turbo lifts, now. But Kirk and Spock worked 8-12 hours a day 5 feet from the most beautiful woman in the universe. One of them had to have a thing for Uhura. It doesn’t have to be totally obvious, but can a sista get some sexual tension in her Trek movie?

Or McCoy could have an Uhura jones. McCoy might be less distracting but my vote is for Spock.

While I’m on my knees, it would be hella cool to open with Spock on Romulous thinking about his first encounter with the Romulans. You guys could do a reboot of “The Balance of Terror.” It’s one of my favorite eps and totally relevant today. Eric Bana would look cool as the Romulan Commander.

Or something.

Just please, no brow ridges.

Or wig caps.

Hey. Just asking.

Thank you.

p.s.

I can’t believe you guys are still here. I’m here *now* but I’m actually *back*. I had a party, went to a party, now I’m here, amazed that the debate still rages. Dorks rule.

“We happy few!”

http://www.spockjones.blogspot.com

526. Jon - October 21, 2007

I’d like to see a Trek movie where people aren’t running around with zap guns trying to save some other guy or bring back an old Star Trek character from the dead.Seems to me that that’s a bit of a formula movie that goes back to springing Princes Leiah.Trek needs to do some high concept stuff

527. Lord Garth Formerly of Izar - October 21, 2007

#525… Now there is an interesting post .

BUT,,,, I must disagree with the no extraneous hot chick thing.
Original Trek revelled in as you say 98 LB bleached blond blow up dolls.
It was part of it’s charm, part of it’s fun and as prudish as Trek has become over the last 25 years I think Trek desperately needs that TA it used to have to make it relevant to a mainstream audience and to truely be Star Trek. (SEE TRANSFORMERS) TOS was a very sexual show, far more so than any of the bland spinoffs that were very puritanical in their approach to sexuality.
Was Uhura any less strong or intellegent because her red panties showed every time she moved around the bridge???

528. Xai - October 21, 2007

Is all the anger and pleading done now?

Dear Mr. Orci,
All I want for Christmas is….

LOL

529. Harry Ballz - October 21, 2007

#527 Lord Garth “I think Trek desperately needs that TA it used to have”

Ooh, ooh….I know, I know…..TA stands for Titillating Adventures, right?

530. girl6 - October 21, 2007

#527

Right about Uhura. And most of Kirk’s moved the story forward but didn’t get in the way. Too many movies today throw in some extraneous boobs that can’t act.

That’s all I’m saying.

531. girl6 - October 21, 2007

meant to say “Kirk’s women”. ;)

532. Jimtibkirk - October 21, 2007

Over 500 comments? This is unbelievable.

I kinda feel for JJ and his guys being put in this situation with Shatner hotter than ever but Kirk dead (so was Spock, I know). If this was just the new cast and no Nimoy, there’s no problem with Shatner.

I just hope whatever gets worked out helps rather than hurts this film, whether it’s budget, story, marketing, whatever. I just want a great movie.

Either way, I’ll be there. It’s got Star Trek in the title. Oh, that IS the title. Even better.

533. Lord Garth Formerly of Izar - October 21, 2007

Herr Ballz – Nize

534. Xai - October 21, 2007

500 comments and about 15 people responsible for most of them.

535. Harry Ballz - October 21, 2007

“bleached blonde blow-up doll”

Hey…..I don’t pick on YOUR hobbies!!

536. VOODOO - October 21, 2007

According to that poll

70% want Shatner back.

While only 10% don’t want him back.

That is a poll of hardcore fans. I’d bet it would be higher in the general public.

537. JCool - October 21, 2007

#534

LoL!!

538. Scott G. - October 21, 2007

I also don’t usually post but here I will regarding Bill Shatner and the decisions being made right now by those making them. I’ve been an avid Trekker since the 60’s when I was watching it practically in diapers. That sorry tale spoken, I also thought that Rick Berman made the Cardinal mistake of killing off Superman when he made the decision to bump Kirk. Since 1994 I have to say this, I’ve personally been praying that someone with the intellect would come along and resurrect Kirk if for no other reason, but to give him a proper ride into the sunset, instead of a topple down a rock face. If for no other reason, please give the fans that still adore “Shatner’s” Kirk the opportunity to give an adequate wave goodbye as we welcome in the new Kirk. By the way, decision makers, EXCELLENT choice! I think he’ll do fantastic! Enough said, thanks for listening to little ole me. Just a ticket buyer. :)

539. Shatner_Fan_2000 - October 21, 2007

#525 “The mission had to be 90% boredom and 10% oh-my-god-we’re-all-gonna-die-horrible-deaths.”

LOL. I like you, girl. You’re a breath of fresh air in an otherwise arid, Vulcan climate! :) As my Captain once said, “We’re stronger with you than without you!”

“I can’t believe you guys are still here. I’m here *now* but I’m actually *back*. I had a party, went to a party, now I’m here, amazed that the debate still rages. Dorks rule.”

Hey, I went bar-hopping on Saturday night, hosted a radio show today and cooked up a fabulous Italian dinner all while doing this! Not claiming I have a life, though. That’d be too much of a stretch. ;)

540. Iowagirl - October 22, 2007

“We shall not cease from exploration and the end of all our exploring will be to arrive where we started and know the place for the first time.”
(T.S. Eliot)

541. Jeffrey S. Nelson - October 22, 2007

It sounds like old Spock will interact with young Spock. But, it is logical to assume that the role offered Shatner is a cameo where old Kirk interacts with old Spock at the end of the movie after Spock restores the timeline tampered with by the Romulans. That’s enough for me. Why isn’t it enough for Shatner? Is a cameo beneath him? No. Does he deserve as much money as NImoy is getting for a larger role? That’s debatable. I just want to see Shatner back in action as Kirk once again…especially if Nimoy is on board after saying he’s retired from acting. Must be a good part. Again, I wouldn’t be surprised if Denny Crane dresses up as Captain Kirk for the Halloween episode of Boston Legal.
C’mon, Bill… beam on board for the movie. After all, you dressed up as Captain Kirk for two weeks of Hollywood Squares in 1976 for a special edition of the show called Storybook Squares. I’m sure they paid you a bundle for that.

542. StillKirok - October 22, 2007

I don’t see how at this late stage, they can “not be decided.” I still say what Paul implied in #54 is probably the likely situation. It looks really bad to do that.

At least Shatner left open the possibility that if wanted, he will be willing. So if the producers are truly trying to get him in the movie, it’s probably time to give them man a call and show him the script.

543. Ivory - October 22, 2007

#542

There is still time for him to do a cameo type role that shows Kirk is alive after the nexus.

544. StillKirok - October 22, 2007

#543–Yes there is, but again, that requires the producers to do more than repeat a comment made in July. I still don’t see how you can say you’re trying to get him in the movie, when you don’t write him in the script and don’t bother contacting him.

It’s terrible.

545. New Horizon - October 22, 2007

The thing is though, Kirk had his ‘into the sunset’ moment with Trek 6. It wasn’t simply up to Berman and Company to kill off Kirk, Shatner could have refused…but he agreed to it, and cashed the check in the end. Nimoy wisely opted out of Generations, because he could rightly see that it was a waste of film.

Here now, we have a chance to enjoy a new Trek film, without the Berman Era baggage, and yet people want to weigh it down with strenuous efforts to resurrect a dead character.

It would be nice if Star Trek could simply go back to being Star Trek, and not some over wrought Sci Fi opera like it became under the helm of Bennett. The dumbifying of trek began before Generations, it really started with Trek 5. Even Trek 6 felt like it was being spelled out for the general public.

So please, can we omit the weepy nostalgia and get on with the adventure and exploration please?

546. Bono Luthor - October 22, 2007

Sorry, I respect your opinion but disagree. I don’t care who was responsible for the mistake of killing Kirk, I just want it corrected. You could argue that Spock already had his into the sunset moment at the same time, so why bring him back.

Kirk in Generations was just wrong, as, I have to say, was Spock in TNG. They need to be together for it to work. Not on-screen together all the time, but in the same movie and interecting in some way.

For those interested, Herc at Aint It Cool said this when asked to comment on the Shatner denial video:

“FACT! J.J. Abrams loves William Shatner.
FACT! J.J. Abrams has the ability to bring Kirk from the dead.
FACT! Shatner is 76. How many movies does Abrams need to bring Shatner back?”

I agree with his logic, but one thing that was new to me was JJ loving Shatner. If that’s true, and I don’t see why Herc would say it if it wasn’t, then that’s a good sign for those of us who want Shatner in as Kirk.

Keep the faith!

547. Dennis Bailey - October 22, 2007

What’s interesting about Herc’s comment there is that he offers not a scintilla of evidence to back up his claim the other week that Shatner’s non-participation is “a lie.”

Like many other folks, he simply posts several of what he considers good reasons that Shatner *should* or *is likely* to come back. That’s fine and good, but a far cry from his assertion that he “knows a whole lot more about this movie” last week.

It would appear that Shatner’s video has taken Herc as much by surprise and disappointed his expectations to about the same degree as it has everyone else.

All of that said, I’ll repeat what I’ve posted in just about every Shatner thread ever on trekmovie.com: that it seems real likely to me that Shatner will eventually be in this movie, somewhere, and that whether he is or not makes no difference to the quality of the finished film.

548. Shatner_Fan_2000 - October 22, 2007

#536 “That is a poll of hardcore fans. I’d bet it would be higher in the general public.”

100% AGREE.

#540 Love that quote, buddy. :)

#484 Roberto … Risk is part of the game if you wanna sit in that chair. Make history, my friend. Be known as the man who brought back Kirk.

549. Bono Luthor - October 22, 2007

# 547 I’m sure this film will be of a high quality, based on the work of JJ to date, however the level of enjoyment that many people take from it, and the ease with which they can accept a new cast in the iconic roles will be impacted on greatly by his involvment of lack of.

550. StillKirok - October 22, 2007

#545–had Trek 6 been the end, then you wouldn’t have the issue. The Trek 6 ending was ruined by Generations. The Berman era baggage IS still there because of Generations. Even a small cameo that shows Kirk is alive will alleviate that baggage.

I didn’t realize Herc responded to Shatner’s video. But I have to agree with Bailey here. There is not a single piece of evidence that Shatner’s video isn’t true. If JJ loves Shatner so much, he would actually CONTACT him rather than just use the Shatner name to get some buzz.

The way this is being handled is awful, and all it takes to fix it is a phonecall to Shatner.

551. Bono Luthor - October 22, 2007

#550 If that’s what is going on, that they are using Shatner’s name, then I think a lot of people will feel put out.

I’m not 100% sure that’s what the situation is, but if it is, it will become crystal clear at some point and a lot of goodwill will evaporate.

Herc didn’t put out a responce to Shatner’s video, but I asked him for his thoughts on it in a talkback (non Trek) earlier today.

I was hoping he might give new info, but alas.

However, like I said earlier, the idea of JJ having a lot of love for the Shat gives me reason to keep hoping.

Maybe I’m a fool, but I’m not giving up hope. The alternative is just not worth contemplating.

To all those who want Shat in the movie:

Keep the faith!

552. Ivory - October 22, 2007

Dennis

Did Herc respond to Shatner’s video or is that just your opinion of what he is thinking?

553. Bono Luthor - October 22, 2007

552 I asked him to comment on it in a talkback and the “Fact” qoutes are his responce.

Don’t get me wrong, I doubt I’m the only one who has been pushing him to say more.

554. Dennis Bailey - October 22, 2007

Bear in mind that Leonard Nimoy wasn’t signed for ST:TMP until a few hours before the press conference Paramount held featuring the actors, producer, director and studio heads to kick off the movie.

Granted, that was several months before shooting began, whereas at this moment we’re apparently two weeks before they turn over.

555. RaveOnEd - October 22, 2007

For those posting above, Kirk will be in this film. You seem to be confused about that. Its Shatner that you want in the movie.

And, you can flame away all you want, but I think its wrong for Shatner to use the fans as his negotiation tool or sounding board. I think he’s now resorting to being manipulative of the fans, and that’s plain wrong and childish for a 76 year-old, professional and well-known actor to be doing.

If they can find a spot in the movie for him, they’ll do it. I doubt they’re going to take lightly a $150 Million movie, scrap a story just to get Shatner a few seconds of screen time.

When I first read about the “favored nations” clause in the 80’s with Shatner and Nimoy, I think it was not only salary paid, but also screen time/lines apportioned to each. If they can’t give both, Shatner has the right to refuse.

As for the “I don’t do cameos”, well, he ain’t gonna get much more than that in this movie. It isn’t his movie, and like it or not, James T. Kirk will be seen in the form of Chris Pine for the bulk of the movie.

556. Dennis Bailey - October 22, 2007

#555: All of that is true.

Kirk will be in the movie no matter what, played by Chris Pine.

At this late date, if Old Kirk is written into the movie it’s not going to be a part on par with Old Spock’s – the Old Spock part is apparently a central premise of the script and has been since the beginning.

557. Shatner_Fan_2000 - October 22, 2007

#555 “I think its wrong for Shatner to use the fans as his negotiation tool or sounding board. I think he’s now resorting to being manipulative of the fans”

In #49, Paul explained that he and Lisabeth bring the topics to Shatner with little preparation beforehand. You act like Bill is holding press conferences condemning the new film. He was just giving his honest reaction to the question put to him. He wants in, and it’s understandable. I’m sure his hopes were really raised when Abrams and the writers met with him. And even if he said nothing, many fans would still want him in. He’s not manipulating anyone.

558. StillKirok - October 22, 2007

One thing that few people think of is that they can bring the older character back even without Shatner, by simply aging Chris Pine. It wouldn’t be the best situation, but it would take care of Generations the same.

And Shatner is not using the fans as a negotiating tool at all. Last week, it was reported that Shatner was going to be in the movie. Mr. Orci did not deny it here and kill the rumor. No one did.

Something like that is going to have to be addressed, and Shatner was the only one to do so.

The fans are reacting on their own, and it’s good for the producers to see the disgust. It’s not JUST the lack of Shatner, it’s the way the producers are currently playing–saying that they are trying to get him in, yet not even contacting Shatner or even showing him the script.

That’s a reason to refuse to see the movie.

559. Ivory - October 22, 2007

# 555

The Kirk in this movie (played by Chris Pine) is an alternate timeline Kirk.

While it is true that “a version of Kirk” will be in the film. As of now it is now the real Kirk that we have invested 40 years of time + money into.

We need Shatner one more time to give the character a better ending

560. Dennis Bailey - October 22, 2007

# 559: “The Kirk in this movie (played by Chris Pine) is an alternate timeline Kirk.”

So, instead of the imaginary character “Captain Kirk” who commands the Enterprise in “Star Trek,” it will be another imaginary character called “Captain Kirk” who commands the Enterprise in “Star Trek.”

This is like the story of the scholar who devoted his life to proving that Shakespeare’s plays were not written by William Shakespeare, but by *another* writer with the same name.

561. Iowagirl - October 22, 2007

#555

At this point, none of us can say what is actually going on. Whether it’s Abrams & Co. manipulating the fans as Paul was suggesting in his recent posts, or Shatner who is making a move in his very own and special way. At least, Shatner IS addressing the fans – whether you like what he’s doing or not. And addressing the fans on a subject that is obviously of interest to them is the most consequential move you can make.

So, you should stop accusing Shatner of manipulating anybody as neither you nor any of us know for certain the actual state of affairs. By not having any distinctive information and accusing Shatner of manipulation, nevertheless, you will only allow your self-righteousness to outclass Shatner’s assumed egocentric way.

– As for the “I don’t do cameos”, well, he ain’t gonna get much more than that in this movie. It isn’t his movie, and like it or not, James T. Kirk will be seen in the form of Chris Pine for the bulk of the movie. –

Congratulations – now we know whose script it is they’ll eventually use!

562. Dennis Bailey - October 22, 2007

#561: “At this point, none of us can say what is actually going on. ”

This much is true. At this point, most anyone’s guesses about who if anyone is misleading who are pretty much equal.

563. Robert April - October 22, 2007

Shatner. Period.

564. Danpaine - October 22, 2007

563 comments on this alone, to this point.

I think that speaks for itself.

565. Iowagirl - October 22, 2007

#559, 560

Chris Pine = Young Kirk
William Shatner = Old Kirk

So far to be shown: Young Kirk (timeline?)

Required to be shown for the sake of historical and cultural importance/coherence and continuity of character/emotionality/legendary friendship with other old main character/universe’s balance/insert own preference: Old Kirk (timeline: post Generations)

No versions, just the same character at two different stadiums of his life, portrayed by two different actors for obvious reasons.

Is it really that difficult?

566. RaveOnEd - October 22, 2007

Not that difficult at all, but it may be that Shatner is not to be part of it. Shatner is not “required” to be shown at all.

Bottom line, to me, is how frustrating it all is. We really have no idea what’s really happening behind the scenes here. Shatner may be saying “I have not seen the script at all”, which may actually translate into, “I have not seen a script with a part that I am happy with”.

Just supposition here, of course, but its just frustrating with all of this. If there were only a final word from the folks in the production about it.

And, #561: of course, I will allow my own self-righteousness to outclass Shatner’s: what I’ve done so far in life are things I’m proud of, so I therefore put those above Shatner’s accomplishments, since I’m not responsible for those. And, if you think Shatner does not have a big ego, then you’re probably in for a big disappointment.

567. Bono Luthor - October 22, 2007

# 565 No it isn’t. It should be very simple indeed.

Keep the faith.

568. Iowagirl - October 22, 2007

#560

– This is like the story of the scholar who devoted his life to proving that Shakespeare’s plays were not written by William Shakespeare, but by *another* writer with the same name. –

Obviously, his story survived.

569. Dennis Bailey - October 22, 2007

#568: “Obviously, his story survived.”

Only as an obscure joke. :)

570. New Horizon - October 22, 2007

“565. Iowagirl – October 22, 2007
No versions, just the same character at two different stadiums of his life, portrayed by two different actors for obvious reasons.

Is it really that difficult?”

Yes. One is dead.

571. Iowagirl - October 22, 2007

#569
Obscuring what?

#570
Your answer is not only uninspired but also technically wrong as I stated that it is the SAME character, but only TWO different actors. As far as I know, both actors are still alive.

572. Harry Ballz - October 22, 2007

Sheer speculation, but picture this:

Months ago the producers come up with a killer script having an elderly Spock playing a pivotal role. Nimoy likes the script, terms are hammered out and everything’s in place. Now, at the last moment, Shatner, feeling left out, starts to push being added to the mix. The producers, being reasonable, say they can have him do a cameo. The Shat balks at this suggestion, wanting a much “beefier” role and screen time. Of course, he thinks a HUGE paycheque should go with that. When the producers point out that his idea flies in the face of what they had planned, the Shat pleads his case to his considerable fan base.

Reminds of when a spoiled child doesn’t get the answer they want from one parent, what do they do? Why, they appeal their case to the other parent, of course!

If this is anywhere NEAR what has transpired to this point, I don’t know if I want to see the TPTB reward such selfish behaviour!

573. New Horizon - October 22, 2007

No, my answer is technically right…unless you were trying to say something entirely different. You said…

“Required to be shown for the sake of historical and cultural importance/coherence and continuity of character/emotionality/legendary friendship with other old main character/universe’s balance/insert own preference: Old Kirk (timeline: post Generations)”

There IS no old Kirk ‘post’ Generations. Old Kirk is dead. My answer wasn’t meant to be inspired, I was simply stating the truth.

So, in order to have an ‘older’ Kirk…there will have to be some miraculous resurrection. If they do bring him back through some magical efforts, I sure hope I can figure out a way to use it to get back some of MY friends who have passed away in the last ten years. That would be nice.

Sorry, I just find this whole ‘bring Kirk back to life’ stuff so lame. I can actually hear how people would be applauding in the theatre right now.

As stupid as it was for them to have killed Kirk in Generations, it’s even more stupid for the fans to be trying to stretch the limits of reality to bring him back. Life isn’t fair, and I guess I just find it even more distasteful to try and bring back a Character that we all admired, regardless of whether or not he should have died in the first place. It doesn’t matter now. Kirks death in Generations is an open wound for me too, but I sure as hell won’t go so far as to geek out with nostalgia and see…oh come on, bring the old corpse back from the dead for one more lap around the universe. It’s just contrived, and not cool.

574. RaveOnEd - October 22, 2007

Harry – I think that sounds to be the most realistic possibility I’ve seen.

575. RaveOnEd - October 22, 2007

Make that “looks to be the most realistic possibility I’ve seen.”

576. Bono Luthor - October 22, 2007

#572 I think the studio would be more on the defensive if that was the case.

Why say they are trying to work him in there if they know it’s not to be?

The longer they let it run the bigger the anticipation on the part of those who want him in the film and the greater the sense of dissapointment and possible negativity towards the film in the long run if he is not in it.

If that were/is the case, the sooner they can say NO he is not in this film the quicker they can draw a line and try to undo any negativity caused as a result. They would want to put that moment of dissapointing the fans behind them as soon as possible.

I guess they COULD be waiting until they have some stills and maybe a teaser to wow us with in the hope that at that point we won’t care.

If so that kind of sucks, and as far as this pro-Shat fan is concerned, wouldn’t work.

Keep the faith.

577. Andrew Salmon - October 22, 2007

I can sum up my thoughts on the new Trek film very simply:

NO SHATNER, NO TICKET

Very simple. If he’s not in the movie, I’m not going. I’ll wait until it’s on TV. Won’t even rent the DVD. No action figures, memorabilia… nothing will I buy.

So if you want my $$, make the call and give us Shatner.

See, simple.

578. Shatner_Fan_2000 - October 22, 2007

#575 … thanks for posting again. We were having a really hard time figuring out what you meant.

Ok, not really.

Speculation on what negotiations – if any – may be going on is pointless. There’s no way on Earth any of us can know.

579. Iowagirl - October 22, 2007

#573
Comparing this fictional scenario to “real life” is even more uninspired and uninspiring – and “truth” is not only what is but also what will be. But this has been said very often before and you surely don’t want to hear it now if you didn’t want to hear it then so I will stop this debate here and now. Thank you for your time.

580. Dennis Bailey - October 22, 2007

#576:”Why say they are trying to work him in there if they know it’s not to be?

The longer they let it run the bigger the anticipation on the part of those who want him in the film and the greater the sense of dissapointment and possible negativity towards the film in the long run if he is not in it.

If that were/is the case, the sooner they can say NO he is not in this film the quicker they can draw a line and try to undo any negativity caused as a result. They would want to put that moment of dissapointing the fans behind them as soon as possible.

I guess they COULD be waiting until they have some stills and maybe a teaser to wow us with in the hope that at that point we won’t care.”

Bear in mind the proportionality of the responses:

1) Shatner records personal videos which are distributed via Internet and gets up on stage repeatedly at conventions, haranguing and expressing his confusion and disappointment at not being in the movie.

2) The producers, when pressed, make polite, vague statements about hoping to work something out.

One of these is a strategy to get attention, the other an attempt to minimize or avoid attention. The suggestion that the producers are “using the controversy to get publicity” won’t wash – the only one who’s courting publicity based on his participation/non-participation in this film is Shatner.

The folks actually working on it appear to be far too busy making a movie to feed this speculation at anything more than the bare unavoidable minimum.

581. Dennis Bailey - October 22, 2007

We’ll make 600 posts just coasting, but for this to be trekmovie’s first 1000-post talkback Shatner’s just gonna have to release another video. :lol:

582. RaveOnEd - October 22, 2007

578 – “Speculation on what negotiations – if any – may be going on is pointless. There’s no way on Earth any of us can know.”

My thoughts exactly. As for your other comment, you can get stuffed.

And, 579 – just because a post had something you don’t want to see gives you no right to stop a debate. I say further that most of what you have said makes no sense, and if something in real life is not inspiring, than you are seriously in need of help.

583. Pragmaticus - October 22, 2007

I think it’s possible that older Spock might stay in the alternate past. After all, isn’t he supposed to be the “guardian” of the timeline? If that’s the case, you can’t squeeze old Kirk into the film. Roberto, if that’s the case, you don’t have to shove Shatner into the movie.

584. Shatner_Fan_2000 - October 22, 2007

#582 “As for your other comment, you can get stuffed.”

Oh very well. May I siphon some of your hot air?

“And, 579 – just because a post had something you don’t want to see gives you no right to stop a debate.”

Whoa, big fella! That may work with most chicks … ;)

585. girl6 - October 22, 2007

Day-um. Almost 600 posts. So much furious writing! It’d be cool to put this much fervor toward ending the war in Iraq.

On the other hand, there’s a new Star Trek movie and Shatner’s not in it!

I’m off to write a letter to my congresswoman. ;)

586. StillKirok - October 22, 2007

I’m sure on an Iraq page there aren’t too many requests to have Shatner in this movie.

But there is still no reason to assume anything other than what Shatner has said.

Maybe if the producers would actually make a comment that isn’t parroting something Abrams said in July, we might be able to get somewhere.

I guess it suits the movie better this way. Upsetting the fanbase and getting negative publicity is at least buzz. But I’m with #577. No Shatner, no ticket. Not at this point.

They would have had a better shot at my money had they just said they weren’t including him from day one. But again, trying to get him in the movie requires actually talking to him.

587. Dennis Bailey - October 22, 2007

In fact, outside of one or two Trekkie boards the producers have gotten all of their publicity – say, in the trade press or CNN or wherever – by making casting announcements regarding who *is* in the film.

There’s next-to-no “mainstream” (if you count New York tabloids) coverage of Shatner’s non-participation going on since sometime back in August – despite what sometimes seems a furious attempt out of the Shatner camp to keep the pot boiling.

588. StillKirok - October 22, 2007

So basically, outside of where it has got the coverage, it hasn’t received any coverage. Can’t really argue with that.

589. Robert April - October 22, 2007

Whether a press release mentions Shatner by name is irrelevant.

People have very stark reactions reactions when they read something about the cultural phenomenon that is “Star Trek” and certainly people can’t help but think of Shatner whenever they hear the name Nimoy.

Here are the reactions most people have to the press releases so far.

“Who is playing the NEW Kirk?”

“Chris WHO???”

“Nimoy is in, huh? That’s cool.”

“What about Shatner?”

“So, there is a new Spock too?”

BTW, most of the mainstream press I have seen has CERTAINLY mentioned both WHO will be in (the new movie) and that Shatner (so far) is NOT. This is at the core of what makes this whole story interesting.

Publicity generated by a press release is MOST valuable when the reader not only remembers the article but is is also motivated by that information to take some kind of action in response (buy a theater ticket, reflect in a blog, start a “Bring Back Shatner” letter campaign (or whatever.)

Remember folks, controversy breeds interest.

590. Etha Williams - October 22, 2007

#588 — You’re twisting words. Dennis didn’t just say that outside of where it got coverage, it hasn’t received coverage; he said that it has not received coverage in very many sources.

The truth of this statement may be a matter for debate, but there’s no need to ignore the basic content of his post.

591. Dennis Bailey - October 22, 2007

#590: ” You’re twisting words.”

Well, they pretty much have to in order to dismiss facts in favor of wishful thinking.

592. dalek - October 22, 2007

# 546
Re: Herc at AICN
““FACT! J.J. Abrams loves William Shatner.
FACT! J.J. Abrams has the ability to bring Kirk from the dead.
FACT! Shatner is 76. How many movies does Abrams need to bring Shatner back?”

Basically, the guy who started this all off, the engineer of the whole Shatner in the film; has no evidence. All he has is hope based on theories.

No wonder he didn’t announce it on a main thread as news. All Herc has is, just as we do: speculation!

Many of us had accepted before Comic Con that he wasn’t going to be in it. JJ’s comments brought new hope. I hope he can deliver on that now because that hope is gradually decaying.

593. Anthony Pascale - October 22, 2007

i would have agree with dalek there

The announcement that Nimoy was going to be in the movie at Comic-Con, along with Shatner’s statements the week before, would have been seen as confirmation that this film would be without Shatner. JJ re-opened the door by saying they were trying. I feel therefore that he should close the door and make the announcement or statement regarding the final decision…either yay or nay.

and yes it is a lot of comments, but not neccessarily the record for most commenters…scan above and there are a handful that have posted many many times

594. VOODOO - October 22, 2007

#559

I agree 100% it may be a version of Kirk, but it won’t be our Kirk. Mirror Kirk is a version of Kirk, but not the one know and love.

#581

I predict a 1,000 post thread if Shatner is announced

595. VOODOO - October 22, 2007

Dalek # 592

Herc, hinted that he knew more than just a simple theory in his original post.

He said outright that he “knows more about this film than you do”

If tptb don’t want Shatner why not just say it?

596. VOODOO - October 22, 2007

I went over to AICN and asked Herc the Shatner question point blank in the Kristen Bell/Hero’s thread.

Let’s see if he responds.

597. Roberto Magana - October 22, 2007

I posted this on a more recent topic, but I want to get this out… Shatner being eyed to play Kirk’s father in a Michael Caine/Alfred/Batman Begins way. So grow some facial hair Shatner and audition… Wink! Wink! Nudge! Nudge!

598. Dennis Bailey - October 22, 2007

#593:”The announcement that Nimoy was going to be in the movie at Comic-Con, along with Shatner’s statements the week before, would have been seen as confirmation that this film would be without Shatner. JJ re-opened the door by saying they were trying. I feel therefore that he should close the door and make the announcement or statement regarding the final decision…either yay or nay.”

Well, that’s a good point. You don’t suppose they’d actually start shooting on the 5th without making a decision or making it public?

Come on, let’s at least get 600 posts here!

599. roberto Orci - October 22, 2007

598 —

yes, we might start shooting without closure to this issue — our deadlines for various actions are not subject tp intuiive rules.

600. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - October 22, 2007

Somebody close this thing down before it gets to 600… oh, damn.

601. Nelson - October 22, 2007

Wow, 600 posts.

As a diversion here, there is a report on ET that Shatner has a home in Malibu. He thinks it’s safe for now. But those wild fires look pretty unpredictable, no one’s safe. I hope everyone gets out safely.

602. Pragmaticus - October 22, 2007

599 – Exactly. Roberto, you shoot from November to March, correct? So you have plenty of time to see what you can do in terms of the script, and whether the film is tighter if you find room for Shatner’s Kirk. Roberto, my advice is to see whether the film still remains as tight after you write Shatner into the film. If it doesn’t, I’d leave it alone. This film is supposed to provide a starting point for a new series of films, rather than to provide an ending for another. If you can accomplish both, then that’s wonderful. However, I would rather see a great “first” movie rather than a clunky “last” movie. I have faith in you – Transformers was awesome beyond my wildest dreams.

603. Harry Ballz - October 22, 2007

#599 Roberto Orci “we might start shooting without closure to this issue”

Now that’s interesting……If old Kirk was a, pardon the expression, “dead issue”, I don’t think Mr. Orci would have worded his comment that way. It almost implies that even at this late date they’re deliberating AND working on it! The known facts are behind closed doors, but the Shat may just come back from the dead yet!! His new nickname will be PHOENIX, having risen from the ashes! And, no, please….not as a young Jim Kirk’s grandpappy! That would be a lousy compromise!

604. Shatner_Fan_2000 - October 22, 2007

#599 Thanks for weighing in again, Mr. Orci! It’s great to know there’s still hope. I have confidence that something will yet be worked out. Give everyone’s childhood hero the happy ending he deserves, then we’ll all be at peace and ready to fully embrace Chris Pine.

605. Iowagirl - October 23, 2007

Just came back from my “real” life – we made over 600, whatever that means.

Thank you, Mr. Orci, for stating that at this point you are not “beating a dead horse”. However, the term “intuitive rules” intrigues my heavily developed imagination…

606. dalek - October 23, 2007

#599

Hmmm interesting. Does “closure” mean you are yet to decide, yet to script; or you are yet to hammer out a deal with the Shat?

Remind me never to play you at poker :)

607. Olympus1979 - October 23, 2007

Just wanted to throw in my two cents. First, I like the idea of bringing back kirk, but i dont think you even need shatner to do it.

That being said, I want to say ONE thing to those who say Kirk cant return because he is dead: ALMOST ALL THE TOS CHARACTORS HAVE COME BACK FROM THE DEAD!!!!!

1. Spock- we all know this one

2. Scotty- In the changeling, he was pronounced dead after the veger jr. shot him. He was taken away and *gasp* BROUGHT BACK TO LIFE!!!

3. McCoy- This is the one that SCREAMS hello, its sci fi!!! McCoy was KILLED on the planet in shore leave, checked out and pronounced DEAD. He was stabbed and KILLED. But guess what, at the end of the ep. he comes right back to life, better then ever, AND NO REASONABLE EXPLANATION IS EVER GIVEN!!!!

So dont give me this Kirk is dead stuff. They all died.

And I think its so amazing that a writer actually visits and participates on this site. Who does that!?!?! Shatner or not, Orci has showed us all how much these writers care for Star Trek, and its obvious we are in good hands :)

608. Dennis Bailey - October 23, 2007

#599:”yes, we might start shooting without closure to this issue — our deadlines for various actions are not subject to intuitive rules.”

That’s interesting. Thanks.

609. StillKirok - October 23, 2007

#599–That is very interesting, but as a writer, especially one about to go on strike, how can a script be changed with that much of a rewrite DURING filming?

Can a movie have a fairly major change during filming? I know Generations needed a rewritten ending. It still stunk, but they did a reshoot, and a refilmed ending.

Yet, it wasn’t THAT major of a change. Even had they done the smart thing and spared Kirk, it wouldn’t have been that major of a change.

Would it be a major rewrite to include older Kirk? Or if you don’t want to answer that, how difficult would it be to change the script to include Shatner? “Very difficult” or “not that difficult” would suffice without spoilers.

And keep in mind that you could always dress up Chris Pine in aged makeup if Shatner didn’t want to come back as Older Kirk and you wanted to fix Generations anyway.

610. Ivory - October 23, 2007

It seems to me that they have Shatner’s part written. Or at the very least they have an outline of how they would work him in.

It may come down to

1/ Shatner’s contract demands
2/ Shatner not wanting to simply do a cameo.

Much like his Enterprise salary demands. Shatner may be placing too much value in an appearance.

If he is asking for the world (multi millions) for a simple cameo, I doub’t they will give it to him.

If both sides are reasonable I have little doubt Shatner will be there as a James T. Kirk alive and well with the older Spock.

611. Iowagirl - October 23, 2007

“In the middle of every difficulty lies opportunity.”
(Albert Einstein)

612. StillKirok - October 23, 2007

The problem is, there is no evidence Shatner has been written into the script. Shatner hasn’t even seen the script. There also is no evidence Shatner is making ridiculous demands. In fact, the only evidence is that they haven’t contacted Shatner.

With ENTERPRISE, there were salary issues. No question. But with the movie, there’s no evidence of that. And with the budget like that, Shatner’s salary should not be an issue at all, unless he’s asking for $20 million or something silly like that.

They should give him what Nimoy gets, regardless of the role. Bottom line is, no matter how big or small the role is, Shatner is a draw.

But they aren’t even at that stage, since they clearly haven’t shown him the script or contacted him. He’s getting his news the same way we are.

613. Scott - October 23, 2007

Shatner will return!
The same 60 people posting 10 times each, proves its!
I will post everyday until confirmation!
Geeks never stop!!!!!!

614. Dennis Bailey - October 23, 2007

#612:”In fact, the only evidence is that they haven’t contacted Shatner.”

The “evidence,” in that respect, is very weak.

615. Ivory - October 23, 2007

I agree with Dennis.

They are all on the record as saying they have been in contact with each other.

He may have asked for too much money or too big of a role, but the fact remains at some point they were in contact + will be (I believe) again in the near future.

Perhaps Mr. Nimoy could bring the two sides together if they are infact not talking.

616. dalek - October 23, 2007

They met with Shatner and Nimoy before the script was written. Shatner said JJ wanted him in the movie shortly after that meeting.

Since that meeting from what we’ve been told Shatner heard from Nimoy he wasnt in the script. Called JJ and said he wasnt angry, just disappointed.

Since that call JJ has said they are trying to get a worthy way to put him in the script. And Mr Orci confirmed that.

I can’t see where in between any of this Shatner went to negotiating table and demanded salary. He hasn’t been approached as far as anyone is aware re: wage or script or storyline.

617. Harry Ballz - October 23, 2007

When Mr. Orci says, “our deadlines for various actions are not subject to intuitive rules”, some have questioned what that means…….usually the phrase “intuitive rules” refers to words without meaning or maybe “talking about something doesn’t necessarily make it so”.

I don’t know if that casts any more light on the subject…….oh, and by the way, no cheap puns or cracks about my using the phrase, “make it so” while describing the definition!

618. Dennis Bailey - October 23, 2007

I just took “intuitive rules” to mean “it might make intuitive sense to an outsider that all such decisions would be made and settled prior to the start of production, but in practice it doesn’t necessarily work that way.”

619. Nelson - October 23, 2007

re: #610-

I keep seeing posts that say Shatner had salary or negotiating demands that lead to Paramount opting out his participation on Enterprise. Why does this keep coming up, and to see so many posts that say his salary demands are what could be keeping him out of this new film. I’ve never seen this story pop up anywhere other then as hearsay evidence on this site. Is this really true, was it written up? Is it simply Treklore? Thanks.

620. Ivory - October 23, 2007

620

I don’t have any link to send you, but Shatner was playing hardball about his salary for Enterprise.

621. Harry Ballz - October 23, 2007

Dennis,

I agree that is a fair interpretation…..the phrase “intuitive rules” seems to be prevalent in science as well, so it would seem to signify a specific theory or line of reasoning…I don’t know if Orci meant it that way!

I guess we’ll soon find out!

622. Pragmaticus - October 23, 2007

What cannot be ignored with regards to Shatner is that he has an admitted inferiority complex when it comes to Nimoy. He said so himself on the special features for one of the movies – either II, III, or IV. He also claims that he taught Nimoy everything he knows about directing, that Leonard “learned at his knee”, that Nimoy would walk into a room and everybody would bow their heads, etc. It might not be on paper, but it’s clearly in the Shat’s head that he feels that TPTB have always liked Nimoy more or something, while Shatner feels that Nimoy essentially owes his whole career to him. It’s some psychological thing with Shatner. I’m betting that Shatner has it in his head that this is one more example of Leonard getting more glory than him.

The fact is, Generations screwed everything up for the Kirk character. It presents a huge problem. How do you bring him back from the dead in such a way that it doesn’t detract from the main story of this film – namely, a story that has nothing to do with Shatner’s Kirk and everything to do with Pine’s Kirk.

There are only two possible ways I can see Shatner’s Kirk coming back. The first is in the very beginning of the film, before Nimoy’s Spock goes back in time. Somehow, Shatner’s Kirk is pulled out of the Nexus, where a part of him has remained. But I think this would adversely impact the story unless right afterwards he vanishes. This would be part of what precipitates Nimoy’s Spock to go back in time and save Pine’s Kirk from whatever the Romulans have cooked up.

The second way would be for Nimoy’s Spock to tell Pine’s Kirk what happens on the Enterprise-B, so that that event does not happen as it did in Generations. Then, Shatner’s Kirk could possibly be alive if Nimoy’s Spock returns to the future, although from what I have read, it seems unlikely that he does return to the future, since Nimoy’s Spock is supposed to be the “guardian of the timeline” or whatever. However, it could set up a great final scene if he did return to the future. If Kirk was that old, he might be close to death by then. Spock could come to Kirk’s bedside and say, “Jim, do you remember our first five-year mission?” Kirk smiles and struggles in saying, “Yes…” as he looks lost in thought, closing his eyes, fading to a shot of Pine’s Kirk in a similar position aboard the Enterprise, laying on his bed, collecting his thoughts. His eyes open, he makes his way to the bridge as the music swells, he sits in the captain’s chair and gives the first orders of the five-year mission. We cut to an exterior shot of the Enterprise, and Pine’s Kirk gives the voiceover of “Space… the final frontier…”, etc. after which the Enterprise goes to warp speed. Fade to black, roll credits.

623. Greg2600 - October 23, 2007

Ah, so Orci says they are still not decided on Shatner, but Shatner swears he hasn’t been formerly asked. You have to wonder if Paramount execs. are standing in the way?

I still think it would hillarious if Shatner did an Optimus Prime, and they found him “dead” on an old ship, but he wasn’t. Oh, wait, didn’t that happen to Scotty?

624. DRE - October 23, 2007

I think I have a suggestion that would work for Kirk’s return AND its non interference in the bigger story of the film. It would help Shatner’s need to be in a bigger capacity and justify paying him the money he demands, and most importantly it would work for those who want him in the film and those who do not.

Shatner films a cameo for the very end of the film, with no explanation of how he got back or anything, and thus saving a lot of confusion for the new audience by going into the whole Generations thing.

For the DVD, on the second disc with the extras, a one hour “Kirk Returns” short film that ties into “Star Trek 08″ and explains his return for the Trekkies, made by JJ himself or second unit or whoever (Written by Mr. Orci and Mr. Kurztman, of course.) Q could even be in it.

Would that not satisfy all involved?

625. Harry Ballz - October 23, 2007

#624 S

Shatner’s ego would never be satisfied with a “Kirk Returns” short film on DVD! Every movie he’s cast in, he expects to play the lead and every other supporting part as well! A DVD movie would be too small in his books!

The difference between God and William Shatner?

Answer: God doesn’t think he’s William Shatner!

626. Harry Ballz - October 23, 2007

Nah, Shatner’s ego is far too big to act in a mere DVD movie!!

627. Harry Ballz - October 23, 2007

Sorry for the second post, I didn’t think the first one did and then…BAM!

628. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - October 24, 2007

Why leave it at just Shatner, folks? I mean, since we fans are all entitled to demand anything we want of Star Trek, let’s do the laundry list all nice and tidy for the Paramount execs, shall we?

1. Bring back Kirk from the Nexus… who cares who saves the universe from Soran?

2. Bring back the Borg Queen… she’s so sexy!

3. Bring back Will Decker and Ilia… let V’ger find god some other way.

4. Bring back Jadzia Dax… getting offed by the Pah Wraith was such an undignified death.

5. Bring back Khan — he was such a good villain, and a superman at that.

So, let’s just scrap the whole ST11 script as it stands now and let all those kids go reboot some other SciFi show (like Space 1999, that one still needs to be reimagind!), and we’ll all just draft a new script revolving around time travel to bring back all of these lost characters in one big plot. After all, it’s Science Fiction, and you can do anything as long as the music is grand and it makes folks’ hearts swell.

Oh, and while we’re at it, let’s bring back Darth Maul too. Now *that* was an undignified death!

629. Iowagirl - October 24, 2007

#628

Thanks for your efforts, but no – Shatner will do.

630. Cervantes - October 24, 2007

#136 StillKirok

‘Kirk’s death lingers over this movie’

So true…and although many of any new audience won’t care or have a clue about him, it will remain a DISATISFYING experience for a lot of ‘TOS’ fans around the world that will miss the still alive, but older William Shatner since the still alive, but older Leonard Nimoy has been cast in this project.

And I dare say that a lot of critics and reviewers with fond memories will be highlighting this obvious omission ( if it proves to be the case ) which can only put the movie in a certain negative light at the time unfortunately.

631. StillKirok - October 24, 2007

Shatner as Kirk is far more important to Trek than the Borg Queen, Jadzia, Decker, Ilia, Khan, or any other character you could think of, combined. To compare any other character to Kirk is just silly.

There has been no evidence of contact in over a year. As for Shatner and Enterprise with salary, Shatner flat out said that the price wasn’t right.

We’re not at that stage with the movie since the producers haven’t bothered to write him in or contact him.

632. Iowagirl - October 24, 2007

#136, 630

AGREED – it is “lingering” and disturbing, but only for those who have a soul that allows being disturbed.

633. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - October 24, 2007

Shatner as Kirk is far more important to Trek than the Borg Queen, Jadzia, Decker, Ilia, Khan, or any other character you could think of, combined. To compare any other character to Kirk is just silly.

*Whoosh* Did you hear that? That was The Point zipping right over your head.

634. StillKirok - October 24, 2007

Not at all. The point was taken. My point clearly was missed. There are no demands for any minor characters. But people want Shatner back as Kirk. Kirk is the main character. Shatner was the star. This hasn’t changed despite 13 years of trying to blow it off. And now they have the chance to make it right.

But they haven’t even bothered to contact him, despite saying they were trying to get him in the movie. Doesn’t seem like much of an effort.

635. ZoomZoom - October 24, 2007

#630+ posts! Like him or not (and if not then I just don’t get it!) he certainly packs the crowds in. ;)

636. GaryS - October 24, 2007

lets say the last scene alters the timeline and kirk is alive
whats next ? shatner leading a new cast? what happens next?

637. Harry Ballz - October 24, 2007

Why it’s obvious, isn’t it? Shatner starring in a new sitcom about an elderly Kirk living in a Federation Nursing Home (actually, that’s not bad…I should pitch this idea to Hollywood!) where he chases nurses all day and watches the liver spots form on his hands!

638. Iowagirl - October 25, 2007

#636

Who cares what happens AFTER him being alive again? There’s a new cast, there will be sequels with that new cast, anything can happen, it’s the future. Kirk is alive, that’s all we need to know. We will RELAX and ENJOY.

639. Shatner_Fan_2000 - October 25, 2007

#638, I agree 100%. After Shatner as Kirk gets his happy ending, the quest is over. Bring on the new Star Trek II starring Chris Pine!

640. GaryS - October 25, 2007

so if he just appears for a minute and shatner never appears in trek again after a brief cameo tht is acceptable?

641. Shatner_Fan_2000 - October 25, 2007

#640 … For me, yes. Of course I would prefer more than a brief cameo, but the bottom line is – I think myself and many others just want to walk out of the theater feeling better about the fate of our favorite character than we did after the depressing experience of seeing him die a lonely death in Generations.

642. Iowagirl - October 25, 2007

#640,641

Exactly what ShatnerFan said. This is our last request. No sweat afterwards – we’ll have 40 years to re-watch and to re-consider. We’ll be the lucky ones.

643. StillKirok - October 25, 2007

I’m in that camp too. I just want the character alive and well, with a happy ending, riding off into the sunset, post-Generations. It’s all I’ve ever wanted. In fact, had Star Trek 6 been the last appearance of Shatner, I doubt there would be anything close to the demand or the uproar.

Generations created a mess that really needs to be cleaned up to finally restore the good will of the franchise.

This film should be about the originals passing the torch properly. Generations failed miserably in that regard. You don’t pass the torch by killing the torch bearer. Generations created nothing but anger on long time fans, and the demand for Kirk’s return has been one of the few constants in Trek ever since. Unfortunately, so has been Paramount ignoring that demand.

Anything involving Kirk post-Generations has succeeded. The Shatner books were among the best selling of all time. No episode of Trek got a higher rating than Trials & Tribbleations since it aired.

People like happy endings.

Put Shatner in this film, show him alive and close the movie with Nimoy and Shatner, and they wouldn’t need either actor anymore. The Pine/Quinto era can continue with great feelings all around.

Don’t bring in Shatner, and you will continue to have a disappointed group of Trek fans who likely will not see the film and will continue the bad momentum that has plagued the franchise since it started to decline right after Generations.

It shouldn’t be a tough decision. Yet the producers, despite claiming to be “trying to get him in the film,” have yet to actually contact him with the script.

644. Ivory - October 25, 2007

Please bring Shatner back as Kirk.

645. GaryS - October 25, 2007

i hope Mr. Shatner is in the film. but the purpose of the film should be to tell a good story .PERIOD! its not about righting the wrongs of Generations or any other Trek film.
plese tell a good story first mr. Orci.
Its OK to Include Mr.Shatner , but only if it serves the story.

646. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - October 26, 2007

#645 — Bump.

647. GaryS - October 26, 2007

#646 nah this thread still has some lfe in it

648. Cervantes - October 27, 2007

#645

Couldn’t they have just originally come up with a good story that included an appearance of an ‘older’ Kirk, and much-alive William Shatner, seeing as they were including Leonard Nimoy in this reboot project?…

649. Cervantes - October 27, 2007

The answer to that is…quite probably, by the way.

650. SeataPref - January 18, 2008

http://www.google.com
http://www.yahoo.com
http://www.msn.com

TrekMovie.com is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.