Orci, Burk and Quinto Talk ‘Star Trek’ | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Orci, Burk and Quinto Talk ‘Star Trek’ December 13, 2007

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

The latest issue of SciFi magazine has a very good in depth article on the new Star Trek film. In addition to covering the background and casting, the article also has many quotes from co-writer Roberto Orci, executive producer Bryan Burk and the new Mr. Spock, Zachary Quinto. Some select quotes below on their approach to the franchise, Shatner’s possible role, Nimoy’ involvement and more.

Bryan Burk on why the Abrams team got involved with Trek

…we all felt like it was an incredible world that has existed for 40 years, and like some other great franchises, be it Batman or James Bond, it needed a boost by finding a new approach to the story and the world. It was too great to let it go away or continue on its current path. Because at its core there were these great characters and the belief of a hopeful future in this incredible universe that Gene [Roddenberry] created, it felt like this was a perfect place for us to jump in for our next big undertaking.

Orci discussed, as he has done before, that the film was a ‘reintroduction’ to the franchise and that it was ‘two films in one,’ meaning that it will be geared for the hardcore fans as well as the general public. Bob even noted that the film could be called ‘Star Trek Zero.’ But he assured fans that even though they are going back to TOS, there are plenty of gaps to cover:

If you are a fan of Star Trek, there is a lot of unexplored history . With The Original Series, there was so much that could have come before it. [On TV] it felt like it had been the The Next Generation and then The Next Next Generation, so it seemed like a fresh thing to go back to the source and go back to what happened before.

Quinto talked about how he looks to Nimoy and the script and not DVDs to guide him:

…we not only have the support of Leonard Nimoy, but we also have his involvement. When I have a questions about where this character is coming from or how this character would react, I can go directly to the source.

I haven’t watched any episodes up until now. I’ve been sparingly immersing myself in what was created before, in terms of the style and aesthetic. For me, the key to this whole experience is this character. All the ansers I need to find in order to define this character are in the text of the script.

Regarding the Shat, Orci went into a bit more detail on why that is not an easy issue:

Unfortunately, Shatner’s Captain Kirk was killed in Star Trek 7, so the difficulty there is not just ignoring that or explaining it away in an unsatisfactory way merely to get him back in. That is the struggle–the rigors of canon and not phoning it in just to have a cameo. From my point of view, it’s a very long shoot, and things can change. It’s just whether we can figure it out.

For much more, pick up the latest issue of SciFi Magazine.

Comments

1. FredCFO - December 13, 2007

It will be quite a gymnastic feat to get Kirk back in after he died. Although, didn’t the say in Star Trek VII that a mirror or essence remained in the Nexus?

2. VOODOO - December 13, 2007

Translated = They never wanted Shatner

3. Harry Ballz - December 13, 2007

Quinto’s not watching TOS episodes? Mistake number one!

4. Pragmaticus - December 13, 2007

Sounds like a good interview. But come on Zach, at least watch a FEW episodes!

5. Bryan - December 13, 2007

(Orci) “it’s a very long shoot, and things can change. It’s just whether we can figure it out.”

So does this mean “We wrote a part for Shatner, but negotiations stalled”?

“If contracts and availability and the WGA strike all align properly, we might be able to work Shatner in”?

Or, possibly, “ZOMG weer so tired uv shatner qwestions we be under gag order stop askin us it plsthx”?

6. trektacular - December 13, 2007

Even though it was stupid for Shatner to die in VII, I’m glad they aren’t ignoring coninuity.

7. I AM THX-1138 - December 13, 2007

That Nexus nonsense. It was referred to as an echo. The echo can’t leave the Nexus because it is not the real person and it has no will of it’s own. Like your reflection in the mirror isn’t really you.

Of course none of this matters as it’s all pretend, so they should do what they like.

As long as they get rid of the hats.

8. The Vulcanista - December 13, 2007

“Unfortunately, Shatner’s Captain Kirk was killed in Star Trek 7, so the difficulty there is not just ignoring that or explaining it away in an unsatisfactory way merely to get him back in. That is the struggle–the rigors of canon and not phoning it in just to have a cameo. From my point of view, it’s a very long shoot, and things can change. It’s just whether we can figure it out.” — Robert Orci
***************************************************************************

Interesting. Very interesting indeed.

Peace. Live long and prosper.
The Vulcanista }:-|

9. Dennis Bailey - December 13, 2007

Some Quinto-centric blog has posted the whole article:

http://community.livejournal.com/zqfans/48327.html#cutid1

10. The Vulcanista - December 13, 2007

#2 Voodoo

Huh?!?

I got just the opposite from Orci’s comments. Sounds to me like they want Shatner in, but the canon of STVII kind of blows that out of the water for now.

Peace. Live long and prosper.
The Vulcanista }:-|

11. Dennis Bailey - December 13, 2007

I like what they have to say about Christoper Pine and what he brings to the part. Clearly they understand the Kirk character very well – particularly his extraordinary intelligence and the need to communicate that, which is often taken for granted.

12. Harry Ballz - December 13, 2007

Yeah, well…..to be blunt…..if they wanted to co-ordinate an off-site forum of , say, the top ten “experts” who frequent this board then, maybe……just maybe TPTB could share the storyline of the film with that group and RECOMMENDATIONS could be made to help “massage” the outcome of this epic…………..remember, kiddies, you don’t have to WORK in Hollywood in order to have fresh, insightful ideas………….we’ll even work for scale.

Hey, I’ll be glad to sign an ironclad non-disclosure contract if I can be of some help! Anthony has my address…….. :)

13. Dennis Bailey - December 13, 2007

Well, I’ve been hanging around here since the beginning and haven’t seen a plot idea yet that would be worth incorporating into the film…including mine. :lol:

14. Bobby - December 13, 2007

Kicking back and not stressing about Dec. 2008. Looking forward to a great story, NO SPECULATION, and a great movie. But…still intrigued to see the Enterprise and the look of other ships.

15. Lostrod - December 13, 2007

Wow.

I was surprised that Quinto had not watched a single episode of TOS? You would think that someone would compile a list of key episodes that he could work into his schedule.

16. Sean4000 - December 13, 2007

“”"Unfortunately, Shatner’s Captain Kirk was killed in Star Trek 7, so the difficulty there is not just ignoring that or explaining it away in an unsatisfactory way merely to get him back in. That is the struggle–the rigors of canon and not phoning it in just to have a cameo. From my point of view, it’s a very long shoot, and things can change. It’s just whether we can figure it out.”"”

Kirks’s death was so poorly portrayed and forgettable by most non-shatner fans that a hokey bring back would go mostly unoticed by most general moviegoers. I only say this because I’ve burried that part from Generations so deep in my mind it’s hard to recall it anymore. Kirk’s resurrection is something that needs to be addressed on film and TV before Shatner’s Death. It’s coming and we all know it.

17. The Vulcanista - December 13, 2007

#9 Dennis Bailey

Thank you so much for posting the full article.

All I’ve got to say is wow. Just… WOW! I think these guys really, really get it, especially Orci. It’s my Xmas ’08 wish that their vision and love for this franchise translates on the big screen.

And on a side note, entirely too much *squeeing* on that site. Ick!

Peace. Live long and prosper.
The Vulcanista }:-|

18. Dennis Bailey - December 13, 2007

I think he’s indicated in the past that he’s seen some of “Star Trek.” But there’s no reason for him to delve into it as research – as he says, he’s drawing the character from the script and from his consultations with Nimoy.

Nothing that happens to the Spock character in TOS matters much here – because Quinto is playing the character before that series begins. “The Cage” might be of passing interest – if Quinto was playing against Jeffrey Hunter instead of Bruce Greenwood as Pike. :lol:

19. Harry Ballz - December 13, 2007

The key is what ever the “punchline” is to this movie and where they want to take the franchise…..give me the climax (pardon the expression) to the flick and I can tell you WHERE the Shat could be worked in, if at all……….

Dennis, you’re too modest…….if you were PRIVY to the entire script, you could come up with four different (insert Shatner) options before breakfast!

20. Jupiter1701 - December 13, 2007

I think people would enjoy life a lot better if they don’t fret about this movie, and they go watch it when it comes out and just try to have a good time.

This is entertainment, who really cares if cannon is strictly followed at this point. Batman Begins didn’t jive with the earlier movies, and truthfully so what. Just enjoy the movie for the story it tells, and throw the preconcieved notions out the window.

Short of cloning, you’ll never get actors who look and sound like the original characters, so don’t get hung up on those details. To expect the sets to look like cardboard cutouts made from the 1960s to be in a $100 million movie in 2008 is also not logical reasoning.

If it’s not your Star Trek, that’s fine. The world is beginning to pass us older folks behind. Just go into a store and look around. There are a lot of people walking around younger than us. This movie isn’t being made or us, it’s being made for the next generation of fans.

You’re welcome to either enjoy the new movie or not. But to sit there and expect the producers to make the movie exactly to our own expectations is just not reasonable. Let them make their movie. If it fails, well then we’ll go back to not having any more Star Trek movies. Which we don’t have any now, so we’d be no worse off.

This is a chance to get the franchise back off the ground. Let’s be positive and help it be reborn. Or you can sit there and mope and let it fail. It’s your choice, but I for one want to see more Star Trek. So I will overlook canon issues in favor of them telling A GOOD STORY. That’s all that really matters.

21. The Vulcanista - December 13, 2007

#18: “Nothing that happens to the Spock character in TOS matters much here – because Quinto is playing the character before that series begins.”
********************************
Agreed. It makes perfect sense that Quinto would avoid seeing TOS eppies to prevent Nimoy’s performances and the Spock character experiences from coloring his performance in a prequel, key word being “prequel.” Besides, he’s got the original well, so to speak, to drink from. Lucky him!

Peace. Live long and prosper.
The Vulcanista }:-|

22. ShawnP - December 13, 2007

I’m convinced that some of the most creative minds in Hollywood are working on this project, and I have confidence that they will pull through and make a movie that doesn’t suck, like so many naysayers are worried (and sometimes “hoping”, it seems) they will make. And I agree with Jupiter1701 in that a good story is one of the primary goals, not matching nose contours or set design to the tee, although I clearly advocate something that is unmistakable as the things we’ve come to know (i.e., an Enterprise sans wings). Canon is important too, of course, and I think they will stay in line with it–but that doesn’t guarantee a good movie. Nemesis was in line with canon, and look what that got us…

Anyway, excellent article. Hear, hear!

23. Picard for President - December 13, 2007

Dennis, great link to that article. Thanks. It looks like Shatner is not in the movie because of fear of upsetting the fans who enforce canon law.

While I think Picard is the more realistic captain, it is a shame that ad hoc decisions take a life of their own. It would be cool to see Shatner play one last time.

So come on guys, lighten up on the canon thingie. You’re making me think I’m stuck in the middle of a fight about Vatican II!

24. Greg2600 - December 13, 2007

I understand Quinto not wanting to watch the episodes, because he’s probably concerned he will start thinking in terms of what would Nimoy look or talk like at this juncture? Then again, Nimoy is a good person to ask because he is likely one of the few Trek actors who did watch the show and knows all the tidbits. Actors say they don’t watch their work, though. It’s more important for the writers to have watched the show.

As for Orci’s comments, I know he’s trying to be diplomatic. But like I said many moons ago, right at the start, when the possibility of having Shatner or Nimoy……..The we couldn’t figure out a way of writing Shatner back in because of Generations argument is not going to cut it! I said it then, I’ll say it now. That’s not a valid argument in my book. This is fiction, it’s “pretend” as someone said. The audience is not going to bash you if your story doesn’t fit every canon point in the past. And Yes Bob, for God’s sake Phone the flipping explaination of Kirk’s return in if it means getting Shatner back!!! We’re not going to hold that against you.

What he should have said, and frankly, so should Abrams, was that we wrote a script which centered on Spock, not Kirk. Writing an entire other subplot about the return of Kirk would have detracted from the main story about Spock. I wouldn’t be happy, but at least that is forthcoming. To say, yeah we wrote this script about Spock, and not Kirk, and then everybody started talking about Shatner, and now we’re trying to write Shatner in, but there’s probably no room for him, and blah blah blah blah. Keep everyone hanging for months and months. What would they have done if Nimoy turned them down? Didn’t they see Unification and Generations? Having one TOS actor alone is boring.

25. The Vulcanista - December 13, 2007

#23: “So come on guys, lighten up on the canon thingie. You’re making me think I’m stuck in the middle of a fight about Vatican II!”
*************************************************
But, Picard for President, it’s what Trekkies *do*! It’s been going on for 40 years; why stop now? }:-)

Peace. Live long and prosper.
The Vulcanista }:-|

26. star trackie - December 13, 2007

Man, that article does a body good. The reverence they show for the original series tells me that really understand TOS, it’s characters and how it worked. They “get it”. More importantly, if they get that, they have to know and understand where the spin-offs went wrong.

And more music to my ears…the door is STILL open for Shatner. Don’t argue with me, argue with the writer’s and producers.

I feel good about this movie. Here’s hoping the looong winter of Trek’s discontent is almost over.

27. The Vulcanista - December 13, 2007

#26 Star Trackie: “I feel good about this movie. Here’s hoping the looong winter of Trek’s discontent is almost over.”
***************************************************
And that it’s perpetually 80 degrees and sunny for the next five years that Abrams and Co. have control of Trek!

Peace. Live long and prosper.
The Vulcanista }:-|

28. Picard for President - December 13, 2007

^25 The Vulcanista

Lol! My pop was Roman Catholic, mom Protestant Episcopalian. I know waaay more about canon than I should!!!

Hmmm… come to think about it, Vatican II, Trek and Your Correspondent are all ~40 years. Coincidence? I think not!

(Somewhere in there is a joke, you know, like, “If you stacked a million economists end to end they still wouldn’t reach a conclusion” but for Trekkers.)

29. Thorny - December 13, 2007

26. Greg2600…

“What he should have said, and frankly, so should Abrams, was that we wrote a script which centered on Spock, not Kirk.”

Unless, of course, that’s not the case. This movie could well have a lot of Kirk in it, but its the pre-Enterprise and early-Enterprise Kirk, not a 70-ish Kirk (who is dead, remember.) They didn’t set out to write a movie about undoing Kirk’s death in “Generations”. If that’s the movie you want, fine. But that’s not this movie. Move on.

30. Oregon Trek Geek - December 13, 2007

Star Trek XII: The Search For Kirk

31. Daren Doc - December 13, 2007

Hmmm… hasn’t watched a single episode of TOS? Funny… that’s just what the production designer said to me when I interviewed with him… Might be a clue what we’re in for next year.

32. dalek - December 13, 2007

Roberto still saying “maybe” to Shatner even now after all this time after the fans have long given up? If this is a tease ending in disappointment it was really in bad taste team Abrams! If it aint, well played on your part. Either way, maybe has become the most tiresome answer ever since we know the strike is in place.

Anyway wake me up on the next Quinto has tingles trying on a Vulcan robe, another hot actress seen on the Trek lot, Shatner says he’s not heard anything, and Roberto Orci says “maybe” again and again.

Speaking of “canon”. Braga said the events of First Contact created a brand new timeline.

33. cd - December 13, 2007

#31 – Great. >:>{

34. K. M. Kirby - December 13, 2007

If this new Trek concept generates any interest in Kirk, it might lead to some sort of reunion for some of the original cast members (outside of convention appearances) in a blockbuster film. It’s still possible for the Mirror Universe Kirk to appear in a transporter malfunction, leading to all manner of adreniline-soaked, “high octane” antics as a result. The movie poster could show Spock giving Mirror Kirk a mind meld, thus bringing back the possibility of a sequel, after it proves impossible to return the Mirror guy to his own anti-universe…

35. Gary Seven - December 13, 2007

I am not as sanguine as others regarding how Quinto has not watched ANY episodes of Star Trek. I understand not wanting to be creatively stifled by watching it too much, but not at all? That is very disconcerting to me. Listening to Leonard Nimoy at age 76 in 2007 talk about how to play Spock is great, but it is NOT the same as watching the Spock character demonstsrated on screen over many episodes. I can only imagine Quinto’s ignorance in not seeing ANY episodes. I agree with Daren Doc- what are we in for? I don’t need a clone of Nimoy’s Spock circa 1966, but this seems more like flying blind. Too many remakes are soooo inferior to the original. Anybody see the new “Planet of the Apes?” I’m usually not so worried or controlling about the new movie- “Young minds, fresh ideas” are ok with me. I’m no Stanky F….but still….

Not watching any episodes?!!!!!!!!This could be BAD.

36. Gary Seven - December 13, 2007

Sorry, I think it’s Stanky McF…

37. jonboc - December 13, 2007

#31- “Hmmm… hasn’t watched a single episode of TOS? Funny… that’s just what the production designer said to me when I interviewed with him… Might be a clue what we’re in for next year. ”

Gotta admit, this scares me a little. I just hope the producers and their possitive attitude came into play when the sets and designs were approved. I’d hate to see them rubber stamp a TNG looking set because it’s convenient and “modern”, Star Trek has a singature look for the 23rd century, I hope they don’t lose sight of that.

38. Daoud - December 13, 2007

Folks, Quinto’s merely pointing out he hasn’t been actively watching episodes of TOS since he was cast as younger Spock.

He’s said elsewhere he grew up watching TOS… so it’s not like he’s not already familiar with it.

So on his part, it’s wise to stick with that “general sensibility” and fine tune it for this pre-TOS epic we’ll be seeing.

Agree furiously though that seeing Cage (NOT Menagerie) would be wise. I’d even suggest him watching Yesteryear, but only the parts with younger young Spock. :D

39. Mike D - December 13, 2007

Honestly, I think it’s a good thing that Quinto isn’t pouring over old episodes. This isn’t TOS with better effects – it’s a new thing, and the actors have to figure it out for themselves. Otherwise, we wind up with a bunch of wooden performances.

All we should worry about is if the writers have poured over TOS – which they have. A lot. If the writers know TOS, it’ll come through in the script, and if Quinto is as good a character actor as we all think he is, he’ll get that from the script itself.

Remember, actors work off a script – not tapes of the last guy who had the role.

40. steve adams - December 13, 2007

I have to say I’m not happy about this reboot concept, however I am really happy for L Nimoy. He’s having the time of his life right now and rightfully so!!
Zac Quintos calling him on the phone prob everyday going over scenes, Nimoys basically telling him how to act out the scenes. I’m confident out of all the roles in this film Zac’s “Spock” will be the Best. Now if Pine can pull off a good Kirk we might have a winner. I think Pine has a harder time with this role. Bruce Greenwood I really think is going to
kick ass as Pike! Man this is looking good and I can’t believe I just typed that!
^
Mr Ballz I’m with you 100% I would love to co-produce this next Star Trek film with you and 10 of the best posters on this site but that’s not how it works in Hellywood. By now all the sets, wardrobes, plotline have all been worked out and finalised…. We’ll have to hope Mr Mission Impossible gets it right… They should just call this film. Star Trek.Mission Impossible… :)
^
Trektackular, I thought you didn’t like Kirk?
^
All you posters that beg and wine for shatner to get a cameo, “get a life”…….

41. ShawnP - December 13, 2007

Ah, I see people have found the half-empty glass… I was wondering when the generally positive tone of the thread would change.

And in terms of the 23rd century “signature look”–that’s not signature. That’s the 1960s. I will not be too impressed if it feels like “Gidget in Space.” (But given the confidence that the production team has earned in me, I’m sure they’d even do that well.)

As a related aside to the look of the future, I’ve noticed that when I watch TNG episodes, the production design was generally divorced from the contemporary trends of the time the episodes were filmed. I watch the reruns on TV, and I forget that TNG was filmed in the late 80s-early 90s because the clothes and what not weren’t a reflection of that time period. I watch TOS, and I think Gidget. Anyway, I’m optimistic about and welcome any updating they do (within reason, of course).

42. Gerry Alanguilan - December 13, 2007

How to bring Shat as KIRK back for those who think it’s impossible. It’s SCI FI. Anything can happen.

They bring in the Mirror Universe Kirk.
Have the transporter rematerialize him from organic matter based on a saved transporter signature.
The Q saved a copy.
Trelane saved a copy.
He didn’t die after “It was fun. Oh my.” It could be a lot of things:
-Future men/Aliens/Section 31 comes back to save Kirk, asks Picard to stay quiet. He’s whisked off somewhere. There’s nothing under those rocks.
-Based on Shat’s book, the Borg could revitalize him and use him.
-The Organians save him and makes him one of their own. A LOT of advanced aliens owe Kirk big time. It could be anyone.

He is taken from the Enterprise B by beings unknown before it explodes and a clone is sent to replace him.

His brain is saved and is transplanted into another body. Hate “Spock’s Brain” all you like, but it’s canon. A good writer can make that credible. “Spock is revived and is a baby growing fast in a planet created by a bomb that creates life.” as a plot is ridiculous until someone talented like Nick Mayer got a hold of it.

The Kirk that comes out of the Nexus to help Picard isn’t Kirk, but a solidified echo of himself. Kirk is STILL in the Nexus.

The Kirk that Picard encounters chopping wood is 10 years older than the Kirk who was whisked away by the Nexus on the Enterprise B. He has no memory of what happened during his last 10 years. Could be he was off with Spock on some other adventure yet to be told.

I got a chest full of these ideas. Trek writers let me know if there’s anything in there you can use. I’ve got more if you like.

43. Kigs - December 13, 2007

I agree, he doesnt need to watch the episodes. The guy has Leonard Nimoy, the man who created the character standing right next to him, guiding him.
Its like reading a textbook about surgery instead of working hands on with the leading surgeon in the field.

Come on people- think about it.

Kigs
(happy that Quinot and Nimoy are working together! :) )

44. Stanky McFibberich - December 13, 2007

re: 3. Harry Ballz – December 13, 2007
Quinto’s not watching TOS episodes? Mistake number one!

One of many.

Sounds worse all the time.

45. KirksBrother - December 13, 2007

All they have to do to bring Kirk (Shatner) back into the story is by bringing him back from another alternate universe. In that alternate universe things aren’t going so good. Spock gows back to the Guarding of Forever and brings back Kirk. This is just a thought I’ve had floating around in my head for the past few weeks.

46. Pumpkin - December 13, 2007

I doubt Nimoy would have been keen on Quinto if he didn’t think he would do Spock justice. I think Nimoy is rather protective of Spock as he truly gave birth to the character and had *much* input on how the character evolved (and continued to do so through the movies and TNG).

However, if this movie screws up the Spock character through the actors’ performances, I’ll end up thinking much less of Nimoy. =/ Unless there’s a news release that he’s beginning to suffer from some sort of disease that diminishes cognitive abilities.

Nimoy has sort of put himself in a precarious position die-hard-fandom-wise by his endorsement of Quinto. (Personally, I’ll be much more interested in the stories that come out *after* filming is wrapped up and the movie is released.)

Characters can still shine even with a shoddy script/plot – look at Star Trek V! :D

(And it just irritates me that “Spock’s Brain” was fine for canon, but great episodes like “Yesteryear” and “Beyond the Farthest Star” aren’t for whatever reasons Roddenberry had.)

47. TrekMadeMeWonder - December 13, 2007

. . .

48. Duane - December 13, 2007

Correct me if I am wrong, but didn’t Nimoy say he finally “got” the Spock character when filming “The Corbomite Manuever.”

Can’t the new Spock watch at least this episode?!?

49. The Vulcanista - December 13, 2007

#46

Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe the Great Bird himself did indeed canonize “Yesteryear.”

Peace. Live long and prosper.
The Vulcanista }:-|

50. steve adams - December 13, 2007

#42 ,, possible yes do we need to see this No!
^
#24, Have you seen
shatner lately. Holly Starfleet he’s huge and bloated. Your gonna want that in this high tech upgrade of a film. Hate to break it too ya Hellywood is too concerned with image and looks to give shat a cameo… For once I thankfully agree with the vanity overdose in this town.
^
=x

51. steve adams - December 13, 2007

(Correction)
#42 ,, possible yes do we need to see this No!
^
#42, Have you seen
shatner lately. Holly Starfleet he’s huge and bloated. Your gonna want that in this high tech upgrade of a film. Hate to break it too ya Hellywood is too concerned with image and looks to give shat a cameo… For once I thankfully agree with the vanity overdose in this town.
^
=x

52. hitch1969© - December 13, 2007

MEMORANDUS

from : hitch1969©

to: Trekmovie.com ThinkTank©,

re: The Shat was in this movie???

http://trekmovie.com/2007/12/06/nimoy-log-looking-forward-to-next-week/#330673

BEST!!

=h=

53. steve623 - December 13, 2007

“Hmmm… hasn’t watched a single episode of TOS? Funny… that’s just what the production designer said to me when I interviewed with him… Might be a clue what we’re in for next year. ”

May God have mercy on us all.

54. hitch1969© - December 14, 2007

reMEMORANdumb:

from : hitch1969©

to: Trekmovie.com ThinkTank©,

re: The Shat was in this movie???

- the link didnt link so here is the original cuneiform -

95. hitch1969© – December 6, 2007

Sir Nimoy™,

Please be honest with us. Was Shatner really ever “seriously” considered for this movie? Was his name tied to early press simply for the sake of?

I think you somewhat in the know. For any number of reasons, I feel that having you in this movie is much more conducive to the franchise; although I must admit that I would like to see you onscreen with Shatner. However, given an “either / or” scenario… well, let’s just say that I liked the fact that you passed on Generations. I do not believe you to be as concerned with canon and most of the elements that most folks here would debate about. You are an actor, a storyteller, and in that sense… much more responsible in terms of what you will attach your name to as opposed to Shatner. You had wherewithall to smell a bad apple with Generations. Still… I gather that you could care less if the new Enterprise has wings. It’s the stories, the characters that you have emphasized, in particular, yours.

More about my take on Generations. It’s my favorite of TNG movies, although I should absolutely hate it. They killed James T. Kirk, in such a senseless way, I am in 100% agreement with the BRINGBACKKIRK campaign in that one. But Shatner DID agree to act that out… as long as he could put his horses in a scene or something to that degree. There was some give and take obviously with the regime at that time – Berman, who despised what Roddenberry had established, trying to distance himself from TOS yet remain faithful to the franchise; and Shatner – who in my opinion should have told them exactly what YOU told them at the time. I must admit, when I read that you rejected your role in that film as perfunctory, I was disappointed that you were not on board. Do you sense the ambiguity that I have towards this movie?

Why do I love Generations, then? I’ve thought about it a million times. Maybe because it came out at about Thanksgiving that year, and I was happy in my life at the time. Maybe because despite hating what seeing what Shatner had done…. it was time to accept that the TOS movies were over. It could have just been one more time with Shatner. Who knows.

This new movie is quite different from the others just in terms of the immediacy of the internet. The globality of it. The rules in that regard have been leveled and repositioned. I like to think at times, what if everything being equal to today… would Star Trek II have been as monster a movie as it was? As important?

A slight tangent that I want to go off on here is this entire idea that this new movie is supposed to appeal to the masses, yet endear itself to the diehards. JJ and the OrcSter© have imparted this to us over and over. If that is the true intent, I think the movie will fail. ST The Motion Picture was THAT kind of movie. Nemesis was THAT kind of movie. Effing Star Trek II The Wrath of Khan was tailor made to the die hards and nothing but, with a few “who is this Khan?” new characters planted in the mix for exposition. What made that completely intelligent was that they were characters like Carol and David Marcus who ADDED to the canon, the diehard experience. I SO SO SO hope that this movie picks up on that and does it correctly. I don’t think that there was any one of us back in 1982 upon seeing the first trailers for this movie and seeing Ricardo Montalban (although this should make no sense to the uninititated at the time) that we KNEW that this was Khan from effing Space Seed, episode so and so from season so and so, and HOW COOL was that that they’ve stayed so loyal to the show and picked this up how many years later????

That was my reaction at the time anyway. I tried to explain my enthusiasm to my mother (who called it “the Star TRACK) and even though she was familiar with the show thought I was entirely too hopeful about things being centered about an episode that she didnt remember.

I’ve rambled but my question is this: Shatner? I remember months and months ago, that Shatner himself said something along the lines (out of nowhere at the time, but search this site, and it is here) about JJ being full of “hot air”, this sort of thing. So Shatner knew at that time… however that he knew.. for whatever reason… maybe it was money. Maybe it was creative control. Maybe it was the effing horses, who knows… .but still… all in hindsight, it seems to me that Shatner was never ever really in the running to get a job on this movie.

And Sir Nimoy™, I suppose that I am fine with that. However, as recently as ComicCon, you on the same stage with JJ… “we’ll try to fit him in if we can in a way that makes sense or it will be a waste” – something to that effect. Please be honest with us. Please tell JJ and those folks to SHAT, or get off the pot. Put him in the movie to boost ticket sales, or let us know that he’s definitively not there and stop using his name for exposure.

25 years ago, your final scenes in Star Trek II totally blew me away. It’s something that I cannot describe. There had been “rumors” that Spock would die in that movie – ahhh, here comes that immediacy of the interweb thing again – rumors. You guys caught that and wrote Spock’s “death” into the first 5 minutes of the movie in the Kobayashi Maru, so the ending…. dude. I don’t know if it was YOU. I don’t know if it was Shatner, or maybe like Forrest Gump says… both happening at the same time.

Maybe thats why we all want you BOTH back? I certainly trust your judgement for the franchise over Shat’s. Please just be honest with us. I am so looking forward to whatever you will be filming over the next few weeks. I know that your piece of this movie will be loyal and faithful and artful and all the effing words which make your legacy in this franchise what it is and was. Thanks for giving us a few sentiments here at trekmovie dot com. Very, very cool.

BEST!!

=h=

55. Prologic9 - December 14, 2007

For those hoping for an idea to come along allowing Shatner to enter the movie, remember there is still a writers strike going on and absolutely NO changes will be made to the script until the strike is over and the studios and WGA come to an agreement. Even William Shatner can’t change that.

The strike doesn’t look to be over anytime soon either so keep breathing.

56. dannyboy1 - December 14, 2007

No wonder Bill’s been annoyed, with them constantly stringing him along like this. Just admit he’s not in the damn movie and leave it at that. There will be no changes to the script because of the writer’s strike. He’s not in the movie….period. Stop this crap about “Well we might be able to work something out.”

Besides we all know Kirk is still alive inside the nexus. It only created illusions for you. It wasn’t a time-travel device.

57. trektacular - December 14, 2007

steve adams, I like him and hate him how ’bout that. Personally more hate right now because of these shatnerlovers, I just would like to say he’s not that great folks, get a fu*kin life!

58. KevinA Melbourne Australia - December 14, 2007

If they wanted Shatner back he’d be in it.

There is a milllion things that could see him return with “The Search for Kirk” by Spock at some point, return from the Nexus somehow. What about Scotty saying in RELICS (TNG) that he “bet Jim Kirk himself got the Enterprise out of moth balls to rescue him” Scotty said this in the future after the Kirks disappearance from the Enterprise B.

There is room to believe that Kirk (Shatners Kirk) can come back somehow.

I think he will be in it. Probably at the end with an appearance like NCC-1701A at the end of the Voyage Home.

‘There are always possibilities’ – Spock pre Death – Wrath of Kahn

59. trektacular - December 14, 2007

William Shatner is so B movie, long live bad actors and their admirers!

60. NTH - December 14, 2007

Just a thought ,if the Kirk situation is not resolved in this film then we will be seeing the new kirk in the context of a new reincarnation of this character who is destined to die an empty death.Science fiction is surely all about possibilities and in this context canon has to work around this.The possibility of changing Kirks destiny exists within this film and of it is within Mr.Abrams remit to act upon it however Mr.Shatner is not always going to be here.

61. Will Johnson - December 14, 2007

I’m not a fan of any of this re-boot/re-imagined/re-introduced crap, nor of the secrecy of this project(I don’t care so much about the story’s secrecy, that’s fine, just tell me flat out. “Yes it’s canon and isn’t changing anything” or “No, it’s only kind of canon, character wise, but we’re retconning the look of everything else.”). Nimoy’s involvement is the only thing keeping me around for this simply because that implies it’s still the same universe that I’ve already invested a good part of my life being entertained by.

It also seems Quinto is really into actually doing the character of Spock justice. I’m still not happy about the shape of his nose, but he’s the best casting choice, as far as look, that they’ve made.

I’m not happy about the (as of yet) unseen design changes. Why? If it’s so effing respectful, why are you afraid of showing it off? I keep hoping all the secrecy and rumors are just a big dis-information campaign and that the first time anyone sees the Enterprise on screen, she’s the way she’s supposed to be instead of some excessively re-designed bastard child attempt at something that could maybe, if you squint and stare at the floor, be re-fitted to be the way it appears in TOS.

The last thing I want is another Mandalorian Armor -> Clone Trooper -> Stormtrooper evolution type fiasco, especially with the Enterprise. Change the uniforms, fine, they do that every few movies/series anyway, but good lord, please leave the Enterprise alone.

As for the Shatner stuff, if he were to be in this movie, before they roll film on him, I would hope they’d force him to get in shape some since, as others have stated, he’s a bit less than “Kirk-ish” in appearance. I think on screen, as Kirk, he’d call to mind the jokes that Letterman made at the time of the last TOS movies. As is, I really doubt he’ll be in it because I don’t think they truly want him in it(1) and (2) I don’t think the WGA strike will be over soon enough for any major story additions to be done with any grace.

62. Iowagirl - December 14, 2007

- I haven’t watched any episodes up until now. –

That’s all I need to know.

# 2, 10

Orci is as cryptic as ever. It’s safe to say that.

Generations has been canon for 13 years. If the events in that film would make Shatner’s involvement in STXI impossible a priori, it would be knowingly misleading to still suggest that “things may change”.

Having said that, I think it’s somewhat ironic to say “whether we can figure it out”. Of course, they’re the ones to figure it out, so Orci’s either pulling our leg or keeping us in suspense (same alternative for quite a long time now).

Again, we’ll have to wait and see.

63. Leonel - December 14, 2007

Well.. I surely haven’t made the time yet to read through the magazine article nor the replies to this post. I will say this though: I’m content with Mr. Quinto not having seen any TOS episodes or original crew movies.

Why?

The movie is primarily taking place prior to the time period in which we got to know Spock as a character. And dare I say, Leonard Nimoy seems to have made quite the effort to work with Quinto based on how much time this site has reported them to have spent together. If the movie were to be taking place some time between TOS and TMP, then perhaps I would be concerned.

No matter, I’m cautiously optimistic and I just can’t wait for the movie.. :)

64. Uncle Twitchy - December 14, 2007

Considering everything that happened in the Star Trek universe following Picard entering the Nexus has all been his Nexus fantasy anyway, it should, theoretically, be perfectly easy to come up with a way to pull Kirk out of it.

But that’s neither here nor there.

65. Jim Smith - December 14, 2007

#23: “So come on guys, lighten up on the canon thingie. You’re making me think I’m stuck in the middle of a fight about Vatican II!”

Vactican II or Veridian III? :)

FWIW, I can see value is talking to Nimoy about Spock rather than just watching Spock onscreen. IIt’s going to the well rather than watching someone pour the water.. If I can just beat a metaphor to death there.

I also think that Older Kirk being dead is no real reason not to include him. Characters in Star Trek and SF and comics die and come back all the time, the trick is – as Mr Orci says – to pull if off right. The participation of Sir William Shatner allowing it, of course.

‘Hercules: The Legendary Journeys’ – on which Mr Orci was one of the premier writers (and for which I used to write most of the UK newstand magazine, incidentally) made a speciality of death and resurections, so if anyone can do it, I think he can.

To me even a slightly fluffed explanation would be worth the Shatner/Nimoy screen-time. But then we all have our own priorities in these things.

66. Jim Smith - December 14, 2007

# 59 Without that two-time Emmy award winning, classically trained ‘bad actor’, the shows you prefer to the one he starred in wouldn’t exist. You are, of course, entitled to your opinions on the man and his work but it is worth bearing in mind that without his work, none of us could be here..

67. CanuckLou - December 14, 2007

Best line of the article is near the end from Quinto – ‘The character(Spock) has a lot of heart’

Need one say more. Quinto gets the character. He needs not to see any episodes.

Feeling really good about this.

Still waiting for an early Xmas present from JJ, Orci et al in the form of a cast picture or Enterprise shot……

68. Bryan - December 14, 2007

Shat is now a Golden Globe Nominee to add to his list of credits….so there!
Look, I liked him more in the first season of the classic series. As his popularity grew over the final two seasons, his acting became more hammy in my opinion…but Nimoys locked upon the center of Spock. The two really juxaposed each other and with the third leg of McCoy…well became the heart of Trek. Someone in an earlier post said one TOS character in the subsequent series was BORING. I cannot say it was so, but it always seemed it was missing something.
Laurel without Hardy or Curly without Moe & Larry just isn’t the same.
I fully intend to see and support Paramount as I have over the last 40+ years, but for me Star Trek died after Star Trek 6: The Undiscovered Country.
It will do well at the box-office no doubt. New cast may continue the adventure after Nimoy does in fact pass the phaser.
But alas for many of the original 12 year olds first watching Star Trek in 1966, our time is past and we can only revel in the following generation to carry the phaser.
This movie will do what Generations tried to do.

69. non-fanatic - December 14, 2007

If they really want William Shatner in the new film, all they have to do is to have him turn up in a scene to help his old mate Spock in the nick of time (depending what the story is of course), Spock could say: “Captain [surprised look, raised eyebrow], you’re supposed to be dead” and Kirk could say: “I didn’t like it much” and give Spock one of his grins and then get on with saving the universe or whatever they’re doing.

Do it when there is no time for him to explain it and have him go missing before the story has finished leaving Spock wondering if he imagined the whole thing (maybe he does imagine it).

70. Jim Smith - December 14, 2007

#69

“Captain, I thought you were dead?”
“So did I. I got better.”

or just have Kirk quote Baron Munchausen “And that was just one of the many occasions on which I died..”

71. Major Tom - December 14, 2007

Do u really think we need the Shat in this movie? No! Let´s do Nimoy in this one and the Shat in the next movie:-)
By the way: greats from good old germany!

72. Major Tom - December 14, 2007

Greats???
What the hell…? Never write too fast;-)

73. TB - December 14, 2007

Thanks #9. After reading the full article, I can only say, Wow!” This film sounds like it’s going to be fantastic. After all they said about Chris Pine it seems like they really found the right actor to play Kirk & that’s very reassuring.

74. Batts - December 14, 2007

I cant believe this guy is serious, not watching an episode?! So what are you going by, besides the script?? Is’nt a picture worth a thousands words?? Now I am real nervous…..

75. Dennis Bailey - December 14, 2007

#31:”Hmmm… hasn’t watched a single episode of TOS? Funny… that’s just what the production designer said to me…:”

Sounds good. Maybe we’ll get something fresh and novel. Given the kinds of location shooting they’ve been doing, seems like a good chance of that. :)

76. New Horizon - December 14, 2007

As for the production designer not watching a single episode. I simply can’t believe they would never have seen an episode or a few minutes here and there over the years. The show was everywhere.

–It will be quite a gymnastic feat to get Kirk back in after he died. Although, didn’t the say in Star Trek VII that a mirror or essence remained in the Nexus?–

If you watch Generations, you’ll notice that they take some time to have guinan say she was ‘ripped’ out of the nexus against her will. I don’t think this reflection stuff was meant to be the norm.

77. Benjamin - December 14, 2007

Shatner does not *need* to be in this movie.

But he *should* be in it.

Star Trek is about friendship and the human adventure.

I didn’t care if The Shat was in it…. until I re-watched all the TOS movies over this past month.

Shatner and Nemoy need to be in it. Both. For thirty seconds. Don’t explain anything….

Spock raises an eyebrow, Kirk smiles, cut to credits.

78. Dennis Bailey - December 14, 2007

#76: “As for the production designer not watching a single episode. I simply can’t believe they would never have seen an episode or a few minutes here and there over the years. The show was everywhere.”

Of course the production designer and everyone else involved knows what the show looked like. It’s not necessary to do a lot of research to get the gist of that.

They’re designing a 100 million-dollar-plus movie. It’s not going to look exactly like the old TV series, and in some cases it won’t be nearly close enough to make long-time fans immediately comfortable with it. Look at the “spy photos” so far – only one thing we’ve seen duplicates anything from the original series, and that is the makeup on Mr. Spock.

79. Diabolik - December 14, 2007

When Quinto says he’s not watching the DVDs for his character reference, he doesn’t mean he has never seen any. He stated before he knew TOS quite well. Of course he’s seen it many times, he’s just not going back to study the programs now.

80. Rob Z - December 14, 2007

I think we can speculate so much about canon. But remember, if the plot truly is about Spock going back in time, then anything can change, anything can happen, and any part of the future can be changed. So the writers really can’t be trapped by previous canon such as Kirk’s death. If you change the future, then maybe someboy wasn’t killed in Star Trek 7. It’s just my amateur speculation that with time travel, anything can happen in a script.

81. SirBroiler - December 14, 2007

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again – if Shatner was so concerned about the franchise, he would have NEVER let Berman kill of Kirk – especially in such pathetic fashion. But he wasn’t concerned about the franchise, he was concerned about his wallet.

Now Shatner bitching and moaning, along with many of you, that he should be brought back into the story now??? Please!!!

Nimoy was smart enough to realize that Generations was not worthy of his involvement, no matter the size of the paycheck. He truly respects the characters and the history of Trek, and his commitment is paying off now.

I don’t think the creative minds behind this movie should be forced into some pathetic science fiction plot point to explain away Kirk’s death – just to have Shatner in the movie. If Spock goes anywhere near the Nexus – or if we find out Kirk secretly placed his Katra in Chekov before saving the Enterprise-B – then I’ll be skipping this movie.

Time to move on folks. Kirk is dead. Long Live SPOCK!!!!

82. Captain Amazing!! - December 14, 2007

Yep. In Generations, Guinan told Picard she couldn’t leave because she was already there which indicates to me that the Kirk (or part of Kirk , essence or whatever) that’s still in the Nexus CAN come out.

83. Bart - December 14, 2007

I’m sorry that Shatner can’t be involved; I can imagine it must be difficult for him. HOWEVER, I’m even sorrier that he was stupid enough to allow himself to be killed in GENERATIONS. He never should have agreed to it. It was a stupid script and a stupid meaningless death, that left the majority of TOS fans totally let down. I grew up with Star Trek from age 2…Kirk, Spock and McCoy were my childhood heroes. Frankly, I NEVER wanted to know how Kirk died….should have been left a mystery.

I totally respect Ron Moore and Brannon Braga, but they showed a complete lack of respect for TOS and it’s fans for writing that death. They admitted it was like a dare, “CAN WE REALLY KILL KIRK?”

And Shatner is even more to blame; he should have cared more about his character and the TOS fans.

Sorry Bill, you’re going to have to sit this one out, I guess.

ps. In my opinion though, they could ignore canon on this point. It was too stupid to be respected

84. cd - December 14, 2007

#78 – Of course, the Spock makeup is not exactly the same. >;>} or should I type );>}

85. Bart - December 14, 2007

See, that’s what happens when you don’t proofread your writing. I said “STUPID” way too many times in that last post. Sorry.

86. Dennis Bailey - December 14, 2007

#84:” Of course, the Spock makeup is not exactly the same. >;>} or should I type );>}”

You know, in the interests of “positive nitpicking” ;) I should observe that in at least one of the spy photos of Quinto wandering around outdoors dressed as Spock it looks like we can see a positive improvement in the makeup – the ear-tips look somewhat translucent in strong backlighting.

If that’s something other than an optical illusion in the photo, it’s probably a benefit of using silicone rubber ears rather than the old-fashioned foam rubber – some light *does* pass through the pinnae of human ears.

87. Shatner_Fan_2000 - December 14, 2007

Did anyone notice the article referred to Carol as “Kirk’s wife”?

88. Diabolik - December 14, 2007

#87… probably a mistake, but of the kind that does indicate it’s Carol Marcus, since we know they had a kid together….

89. Dennis Bailey - December 14, 2007

Yep.

We don’t really have any prior information about whether they were married or not – only that Carol regarded their relationship as being in the past by the time that talking to David about his father was concerned.

David knows Kirk as “that overgrown Boy Scout you used to hang around with.” But then, there’s a lot else he doesn’t know either.

OR…

…could just be an error on the reporter’s part. :lol:

90. subatoi - December 14, 2007

So what if Kirk’s dead? I never understood this reason.

They can make the events in the movie happen whenever THEY want. Can’t they just decide the future-part of movie takes place between movies 6 & 7, and have Kirk alive?

I don’t get it…

91. cd - December 14, 2007

I think they can come up with an explanation for Kirk being alive, but then they would have to put Shatner in it. He did a good Kirk in TOS, but as the years went by, getting him to play Kirk and not Shatner becomes more and more difficult to the point of impossible. Listen to Nicholas Meyer’s comments in ST2 or 6 (I can’t remember which). He would have Shatner do take after take until Shatner would get bored and then his performance would be toned down enough to be appropriate.
I am not trying to talk bad about him; he is great as Shatner and the over the top Denny Crane and in the PriceLine commercials, but I just don’t think he would do that good as Kirk now. I am afraid it would be distracting and end up being a stunt more than anything helpful to the movie.

92. Shatner_Fan_2000 - December 14, 2007

I think that’d be cool. It would add another layer of depth to Kirk if he was married prior to the 5 year mission.

93. cd - December 14, 2007

#86 – if they are translucent and slightly green…. that would be cool. It would be cool if they could hide Quinto’s subcutaneous beard too. );>#}#

94. cd - December 14, 2007

#87, #92 – Kirk in WNMHGB said “I almost married her!”

95. Jan - December 14, 2007

#9 Thank you for the link

96. CaptainRickover - December 14, 2007

Bryan Burke not understand the Star Trek universe at all. Batman or James Bond never have an advancing universe. In Star Trek we had TOS, TNG, DSN, VOY and at last ENT (three different centuries). Star Trek has a timeline, Batman or James Bond not have. Bond exists over 40 years too, but this guy never aged. It’s no problem to reboot it over and over again. And Batman have seen many reboots by the time. But Star Trek has not. And that’s the problem. Go away too far from the existing canon, and you will fail completly.

And that’s what will happen, when guys like Bryan Burke have too much influence on that project. I fear the worst…

Orcis comments are a mystery at all. He makes sure, Star Trek (XI) fits in the existing canon, but then he says a new audience will adore it too. I’ve never seen a problem with that with the older series and movies (my little brother is becoming a Star Trek fan because he seen TUC on DVD). Bob Orci is a damn good diplomat. Whatever he’s saying, it depends on you, WHAT he was saying.

Quintos comments sound like the usual “I’ve never seen Star Trek before”. How many people have sayed that too? Nevertheless, it seems a bit arrogant to me, when he’s actually playing Spock!!

And Shatner’s Kirk: He may rest on Veridian III in peace.

97. Jim Smith - December 14, 2007

#94 – that assumes he was talking about Carol Marcus in the pilot, which ain’t neccesarily so.

I don’t blame Shatner for playing Kirk in GENERATIONS. It’s not so much a killing of Kirk as giving him one last chance to live. Gene R himself said he thought Kirk was ‘dead’ by the time of GENERATIONS and while I don’t like the movie much, or its ending, it is a bit more Real Kirk on screen, which I’m always in favour of. Hence my desire for Shatner to be in this movie.

But, that other guy was right, Shatner doesn’t *have* to be in this movie, but it would be nice if he was.

I am a bit incredulous at the idea that his character being dead is somehow a bar to all this, I mean.. c’mon, WRATH OF KHAN, VISIONARY, THOLIAN WEB, CAUSE & EFFECT, TIME SQUARED, NEW GROUND, TAPESTRY and that’s just picking things people tend to agree are good or great. Elsewhere Trip dies about once a year on ENTERPRISE, the VOYAGER cast cark it reguarly. This is drama, actions are symbolic, not literal, it needs to be done with conviction, f’sure, but it’s not like there’s no kind of precedent.

98. Dr. Image - December 14, 2007

I work for politicians and I know rhetoric when I hear it. We’re gonna have to wait and see. There’s been so much bad writing in Trek for so long, courtesy of B&b, that all I hope for is a well-thought-out story & script, with dialog that doesn’t make me cringe.
My GUT feeling is that we’re going to see a reboot that will stylistically disappoint many, myself included.
Note: Slight off topic- Yesterday I finally got my TOS-R set. Threw disc one into my trusty Toshiba A3 and, after getting by the cheesy menue graphics, proceeded to be utterly blown away by the image quality of this effort. Not to mention, I now TAKE BACK any skeptical comments I ever made about the CG Enterprise (the newer one, that is.) In HD, the damn thing looks like Doug Trumbull himself shot a 10 ft. miniature of it on 65mm. Mag-fkg-nificent! The disc set is WELL worth it, even if you have the older DVDs, which PALE by comparison.
I see the phaser remote is now painted the proper colors, so I guess I’ll be sending away for it.

99. YUBinit - December 14, 2007

If memory serves, hadn’t Quinto very early on say he would be immersing himself and becoming a fan (which is the wrong attitude, your either a fan or your not). So in doing this wouldn’t it be at least partly about watching the show? You just don’t declare to be a fan to pacify the intelligence of the fans who should know better… that’s insulting. So either he’s an idiot, or he’s a two-faced PR jerk whose full of crap?

100. Dennis Bailey - December 14, 2007

No reason to think that the “lab technician” Mitchell was referring to was Carol Marcus, and no evidence to support it.

101. Diabolik - December 14, 2007

And there’s no reason not to… more reason to than not, really.

102. Dennis Bailey - December 14, 2007

However, that’s a matter of opinion – not evidence that establishes a piece of continuity that the writers and producers should take into account.

Whether Kirk and Marcus were married is unestablished.

103. Jan - December 14, 2007

I don’t know exactly if the following thoughts have already been discussed here (I unfortunately have no possibility to read every post here because I’m on the job) – but one thing about Shatner and a possible part in the movie:

Apart from the fact he died in STVII, I think there is no point of time in the script, where Shatner can play Kirk at his current age. We have Spock after the last TNG-Movie (But that’s a point where Kirk would have been died anyware, didn’t he?), Spock in Zachary’s age and Spock at his birth… So I think there is no place for Kirk in his later years or am I totally wrong??? And to involve the poor Nexus-thing in the movie somehow isn’t a satisfactory solution in my opinion.

104. Snake - December 14, 2007

ways of getting Shatner in the movie without the whole Generations/TNG era problem..

Flashback (to kirk in the movie era? – (cue CgI to make him look like he did in the 80s)

Voice over ?

God i dunno

105. Nelson - December 14, 2007

re post #48- I believe Nimoy has stated he didn’t get the Spock character until The Naked Time. This is the 6th episode produced, not counting The Cage.

106. Jan - December 14, 2007

#104
but either you have a small cameo part or you have to write a new script. and both is not possible or good for the movie, I think.

107. star trackie - December 14, 2007

Getting Shatner in this movie is easy..and I’d wager already on paper. The time line is changed. It REMAINS changed, as is evident by new designs of ships, uniforms, etc. Spock undo’s the dangerous events, whatever put everything in jeopardy..but still, changes remain. One of the fringe benefits of this new timeline being a 75 year old Kirk, alive and well in one of the sequences that Spock is hopping around in. I’ll say it again. The timeline is CHANGED. TNG..as we know it… never happened…therefore Kirk was never killed.

Not saying that’s how it’s gonna be., but, since everything is changing…sorry Shatner-phobes…his involvement is not at all beyond the realm of possibility.

108. Bart - December 14, 2007

Star Trackie….good idea, change the damned timeline and eliminate that horrible meaningless Kirk death.

Better he should die of a heart attack while trying to shag a Tellarite prostitute at 70 then that meaningless death he had.

I agree with the other poster though….After Star Trek IV, Kirk became William Shatner, rather than the other way around. After all these years, I wonder if he could pull it off again.

109. Myrth - December 14, 2007

Yes the timeline was changed somewhat by First Contact but that fact is not widly well known and franly not easy to write in as a one off. Honestly, it took a whole movie to bring back Spock and now people are pushing to bring back Kirk in what 5, 10 minutes? Look I hate Generations for killing off Kirk, the original and best captain, and i would be all for a “search for Kirk” type of movie, but that is not what Trek XI is, for better or worse, and to force the issue for a cameo sake is bad for the creative process on many levels. There have been many suggestions given on how to do bring Kirk back and a couple of them even reach beyond to realm of fan ideas that sound good to fans and terrible to everyone else, but the fact is all of them require more time than they have in this new film. Yes i know there is the theory that Spock can some how change the events of Generations, but how do you show that without refiming atleast some of Generations? So now theyt have to get back other actors and work on other sets and models etc. People will say they can do it in dialogue, but while we sit and analyze every sylabol that every cahracter utters, most people miss a very surprising amount of dialogue in movies. Something that important and potentialy confusing needs to be accompanied by some visuals. And remember studios never want to confuse an audiance, bucause a confused audiance will not give you next film the time of day. I’d love to see Kirk alive and well and galavanting through space at the end of this film, but to do that justice it would have to be a different film.

110. Snake - December 14, 2007

i think the whole Shatner being in/not being in the movie has blown up far more than Abrams etc would have thought..

111. Bart - December 14, 2007

Great idea….change the damned timeline. Eliminate that horrible, meaningless death.

Better Kirk should die trying to shag a Tellarite prostitute at age 70.

I agree with the other poster though too; After Star Trek IV, Kirk was playing William Shatner rather than the other way around.

112. J C - December 14, 2007

Oh Please give it up already.Nimoy wasn’t in Generations and Shatner was.You’re getting a big new Star Trek movie with Nimoy now.Get over it.

113. J. Parker - December 14, 2007

Will I spoil the ending by stating the last scene is Nimoy as Spock at the memorial statue for Captain Kirk, the one that should have been shown in GENERATIONS?

Or is it that nothing of the kind will happen?

# 31, Daren Doc — *sigh*, point taken; that may not bode well, unless the producers are going for Star Wars design spectacle.

And I know the film is Star Trek, not ON THE WATERFRONT or CITIZEN KANE or LAWRENCE OF ARABIA or AFRICAN QUEEN, but I think the 21st century writers haven’t had the skill and artistry or talent of the 20th.

Maybe more competition, and less of a medieval “guild”.

114. Dennis Bailey - December 14, 2007

#113: “Maybe more competition, and less of a medieval “guild”.”

And maybe you should acquaint yourself with the relevant facts, economics and history of the profession instead of tossing off a vague and inaccurate remark.

115. steve adams - December 14, 2007

#77 sounds like you want a “return of the jedi” ending with all the dead heroes waving at Luke. (My god not me!!!)
Ques? Should we CGI in the young Kirk or have the current version in the picture?
^
This shatner lovefest ending would be the most
incredibly lame, unoriginal tackky finale of all time.
^
Yet it would follow treks ongoing effort to copy Star Wars.
^
I agree with Trektacular again on shats B-movie standing. :)

116. Litenbug - December 14, 2007

42. Gerry Alanguilan – December 13, 2007
How to bring Shat as KIRK back for those who think it’s impossible. It’s SCI FI. Anything can happen.

How about this scenario..

The producers cannot find enough room in the storyline or their budget to satisfy an ego-driven actor?

I doubt this is a problem brought about by a lack of creative writing

117. Shawn - December 14, 2007

I happen to know that Quinto was seen leaving the Paramount lot with a box full of TOS DVDs. For what it’s worth, he’s got to be watching.

118. simonkey - December 14, 2007

come on you all know deep into your hearts that this movie will be much more different,it will be something else.you all try to bring back memories of the golden era of 80s star trek,dont you see it?quinto said that he wont see any episode at all ,the producers talk all the time about different approaches and new audiences etc,that doesnt look star trek to me it looks like an new science fiction franchise, think about it the only common thing to the old trek we know will be the names of the crew,they even discuss about a different uss enterprise?let them go to hell………
of course ill go to see the final product but dont be to optimistic…………!
thank god i watched the original crew and the stories+ next generetion!!!!!!!!

119. Shatner_Fan_2000 - December 14, 2007

#115 “I agree with Trektacular again on shats B-movie standing.”

Nearly the entire series of films, even the good ones, qualify as B movies. Only TMP and this new one are considered “tentpoles” by the studio. At least Shatner qualifies as the most popular, entertaining performer in this series of B’s.

120. Nathan - December 14, 2007

Blah blah blah, the article’s good, blah, blah, blah…

121. Closettrekker - December 14, 2007

I love Abrams’ approach. There IS alot of unexplored Star Trek history. This is what I have been saying for years. I DID like what was done in Enterprise. It wasn’t perfect, but it WAS the right idea. I have been saying for some time now that the future of the franchise is in its unexplored past.
Give me new movies and series centered on Pike’s NCC-1701, the voyages in between TOS and TMP, and in between TMP and TWOK. Then there is 78 years of unexplored history between STVI and TNG. Give me the voyages of USS Excelsior under Captain Sulu, Cmdr. Rand, etc., and the Enterprise-B voyages under Capt. Harriman/Demorra Sulu, etc. We could be watching new Star Trek for another 40 years!!! But hurry, because it would be a shame to miss the opprotunity to cast George Takei while he can still play Sulu.
Enough with the Shat-chat… He, along with everyone else, just needs to let it go.

122. Dennis Bailey - December 14, 2007

#117: “I happen to know that Quinto was seen leaving the Paramount lot with a box full of TOS DVDs. For what it’s worth, he’s got to be watching.”

It’s the Christmas season – gifts for the whole extended Quinto clan! Paramount employees get a steep discount. :lol:

123. Dr. Image - December 14, 2007

#109 Myrth- Re: timeline- (Everyone read this. Good sense. VERY.)

I can do without Shat, but here’s what I REALLY want:
I want Pike wearing a ribbed-collar uniform with charcoal-colored pants and brandishing a hard-assed attitude.
I want landing parties with gray duty jackets and hand LASERS.
I want an Enterprise with cherry-red, spiked nacelle caps, a huge sensor dish, and bulbous bridge assembly, etc.
I want a utilitarian bridge without red accents and with 60′s desk-lamp style viewers.
I want Dr. Phil Boyce and his travelling barcase.
I know.
Ain’t gonna happen…

124. ShawnP - December 14, 2007

#121

Well said. And you really should come out. It’s good for the psyche.

125. Classic trek - December 14, 2007

”its a long shoot and things can change”

im reading that as a positive!! thats saying that the door is still open and that it could still happen. its a long shot but my goodness i do hope that shatner can be brought in.

are we going to see the construction of the enterprise on this film? that could be a very exciting and spectular visual for this movie and something we havnt seen before.

greg
UK

126. I AM THX-1138 - December 14, 2007

This has nothing to do with this thread, but since we kind of have a JJ connection going on, I noticed on AICN (I can’t help myself sometimes) that they have posted 5 minutes from Cloverfield.

127. Rover ILP - December 14, 2007

You have to admire an actor that respects the process. Quinto seems to be doing that by not going to TOS episodes for his character work. By watching the episodes, what you get is John Bolushi or the other actors/comedian “pretending” to be the character. Trust me, we want Pine and Quinto finding these characters from within.

Try this experiment sometime. Go to a production of “A Few Good Men” at your local theatre. You can tell the difference between an actor that has developed the character of Jessup versus an actor that has watched Nicholson play the part.

128. K. M. Kirby - December 14, 2007

Line from Star Trek XIII, after the Mirror Kirk is accidentally beamed out of the Nexus: “I…am JIM.”

129. TheGreatBird - December 14, 2007

#44: “Sounds worse all the time.”

Agreed.

130. danbramum - December 14, 2007

The important thing won’t be the canon but the optimistic, liberal and progressive basis of the story. I could live with changes in the canon, especially when it comes to the visual canon. If the new Kirk has a thicker nose… I don’t care. As long as the story (as regards content) is on a high artistic level.

A nice way to get Shat in might be: Opening scene: Spock discusses an issue regarding the romulans with Kirk (and maybe others – conference table?) onboard the Enterprise A. It’s just the holodeck and Spock leaves for the 24th century. Ok, maybe it reminds of the Enterprise finale to much. But would be a nice homage. Bringing in already “dead” characters has never been the big problem on Star Trek. Orci (or someone other) once announced that they took ideas from “Yesterday’s Enterprise”. Why don’t the romulans change the course of time, everything changes in the 24th century, Kirk is still living, but is a totally different person. Spock (like Guinan): “You are supposed to be dead. Something is wrong here… have to go back to fix it” etc. etc. ;-)

131. Sam Belil - December 14, 2007

Hey #123-”I want Pike wearing a ribbed-collar uniform with charcoal-colored pants and brandishing a hard-assed attitude.
I want landing parties with gray duty jackets and hand LASERS.
I want an Enterprise with cherry-red, spiked nacelle caps, a huge sensor dish, and bulbous bridge assembly, etc.
I want a utilitarian bridge without red accents and with 60’s desk-lamp style viewers.
I want Dr. Phil Boyce and his travelling barcase…”.

You could not have stated it more perfectly — DON’T DAZZLE ME WITH NEW STYLE UNIFORMS, GADGETS, NEW LOOK ENTERPRISE ETC.
DO DAZZLE ME WITH CONTINUITY AND GREAT STORY TELLING!!!!!

132. Dennis Bailey - December 14, 2007

How can one be “dazzled by continuity?” That’s like being dazzled by a brown 1977 Mustang II coupe.

133. ShawnP - December 14, 2007

I will gag if it’s a complete replica of that 60s set.

134. Cranston - December 14, 2007

#131 — re: “DO DAZZLE ME WITH CONTINUITY”…

I enjoy nods to continuity as much as the next fan, but I confess that the notion that continuity can (much less should) be “dazzling” strikes me as a bit…well, bizarre.

Kind of like asking that a major novel “dazzle” you with the paper stock. I

135. Cranston - December 14, 2007

…but of course Dennis beat me to it.

136. Thomas - December 14, 2007

I would like a design concept that expands on the design elements that TOS established; I don’t want to see an exact replica of the original designs. The movie camera is a far more scrutinizing eye than the TV camera, so what looks good on the small screen does not always translate so well to the cinema screen.

137. J. Parker - December 14, 2007

# 114. – Dennis Bailey; thankfully, there are different opinions allowed. If you are a member, fine. I think Mr. Fischer has valid points:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/fischer/fischer30.html

The Writers Cartel of America

Apparently showbiz writers are afraid of competition, or perhaps are dimly aware that almost anyone can compose much of the drivel for which they are so handsomely paid. To prove it, watch any soap opera, and write down a few pages of dialog. Notice how pathetic it looks on paper. See if you can edit and improve it. I\’ll wager that if you received at least a \”B\” in high school English (any year) you can do better. Now you know why there is a Writers Guild – your spinster aunt could write this offal, and she\’d be happy to do so for a fraction of the WGA minimum.

In a free marketplace, of course, none of this would exist. Folks would register their scripts (more cheaply than the $20 the WGA charges, since there would be competition) and send them to producers, who would simply make monetary offers to their creators. Naturally there would be some thievery, but there has always been plenty of that going on. (A novel that I was lucky enough to see published thirty years ago had seventeen plot and character elements \”borrowed\” by a brainiac who used them in his own novel. I later found a newspaper story stating that the author liked to read novels during his train ride to work, and he \”combined\” some of them into his own. Oh, this person happened to be a lawyer, and the one I consulted informed me: \”He knew what he was doing – the similarities are just a wee bit tenuous to file a lawsuit.\”)

In the open market, a great screenplay by an unknown talent might command a lot more money than it does now, while all the inane junk would command far less than current scale. As in any free market, equilibrium would automatically settle in, and the goods in question – in this case written words – would fetch what the market deems they are worth, and not the arbitrary minimums that are demanded by the WGA cartel. Whenever a market is freed, these always emerge: more, better and cheaper.

138. Sam Belil - December 14, 2007

#132 — Not unless it’s a Cobra II (for record my dad had a very cool 1972 Mustang rag-top, after 30 years I still have not forgiven him for selling it).

#134-The point I was making is that new style costumes are not necessary . When Sisko and crew went back in time (“Trials and Tribulations”), were TOS costumes made to look different (one has to assume budgets were higher in the 90s) — no!!! They looked the way the were supposed to for that era. Even look at the Charlie X episode, the crewmen from the Antares were still wearing CAGE/WNHGB style episodes. You can even see female crewmen wearing CAGE/WNHGB style pants. Change for the sake of change will not work, unless Abrams and crew are making an “alternate universe story”, then they can do whatever the heck they want.

#136-Yes — if this is a “Cage” era story I want to see the bridge with “Goose-necks” and all, and of course a design concept that expands on those elements — but not radical change.

139. Cranston - December 14, 2007

#138 — Yes, the original costumes were faithfully reproduced for “Trials and Trbbleations.” But the intended audience for that is in no way representative of the intended audience for a major motion picture. “T&T” was aimed squarely at us — viewers of DS9 who were rabid Trek fans (usually for many years,) in whom the episode was designed to evoke nostalgia. Yes, it looked good. But it was essentially a TV flashback episode.

In general, as much as I like the TOS designs, they would be laughed at on the big screen by most of the intended audience — i.e. millions upon millions of people who do *not* have those kinds of nostalgic strings to be pulled.

140. frodis - December 14, 2007

The 23rd century, especially those years prior to TOS, has it’s own identity, and no, it doesn’t look like the 24th century. It can look updated, it can look polished, it can “closely resemble” the original designs and I’ll be cool with it. But if Abrahm’s and his crew Next- Gen-ifies the look of TOS, at all, I will hurl.

The two shows are nothing alike…period. No reason to blur those lines. Let apples be apples.

141. VOODOO - December 14, 2007

#77- Benjamin

“Shatner does not “need” to be in this move, but he “SHOULD” be in this movie”

You are correct sir.

142. Closettrekker - December 14, 2007

#138- Considering the canon fact that Jim Kirk is 34 years old at the time he takes command of the Enterprise, it is all but a given that some of the story will be in the era of “The Cage”. I, too, would like the uniforms to reflect that, but even Superman’s cape has changed. Did he get a new one, or is that a reinvention of what the artist thinks it should look like? My point is, no variations in uniforms, starship bridges, phase pistols/lasers/phasers,etc. will ruin the story. In fact, if they go out of their way to make everything look like what it did in the 60′s (my kids laugh at the TOS phaser fire, etc), I’d be willing to bet that this movie won’t have the necessary resonance with young and fresh audiences to breathe new life into the franchise. Would you sacrifice that for nostalgic continuity?

What it comes down to is, will the ends justify the means? If so, our beloved franchise will live on. Otherwise, it may end here…

Kaplah(spelling?), Mr. Abrams.

143. trektacular - December 14, 2007

If Shatner does show up I hope it is in a frilly blouse like the one that Melin Belli wore in ‘and the children shall lead’.

144. Shatner_Fan_2000 - December 14, 2007

#143 … Loan him one then. :)

145. jonboc - December 14, 2007

#142 “What it comes down to is, will the ends justify the means? If so, our beloved franchise will live on. Otherwise, it may end here…”

If the end result resembles nothing of the show that was so beloved, and it ends..does it really matter?

146. Sam Belil - December 14, 2007

#142-No argument, again what I’m trying to say is some variation on the Pike era uniforms are fine, but a completely drastic change is not necessay.

#139-Completely disagree with, “But the intended audience for that is in no way representative of the intended audience for”. Just go back to 1996 when STFC came out, they had new look uniforms which that very same year were ibeing ntegrated into STDS9 (a TV audience), even Berman and crew recognized the importance of continuity in the ST universe.

147. Closettrekker - December 14, 2007

#145-You are correct. However, is the essence of the show in its costumes, or in its characters and storytelling? I would sacrifice the nostalgic costumes and colorful plastic bridge props any day of the week and twice on Sunday to capture a new generation of Kirk/Spock/McCoy fans!
I have no doubt that Mr. Abrams will give us longtime TOS fans our nostalgic moments, but at the same time, his primary task is to make a movie that will reach millions of potential fans who are more tech-driven and whose parents may not have even been born when TOS debuted, as well as those, like us, who will go see it anyway. It will take both for this to work.

148. trektacular - December 14, 2007

144. why? youre momma already beat me to it! oooooooooh!

149. Myrth - December 14, 2007

#145 Yes it does really matter. i have heard this argument several time now and quite frankly its not a very good statement. Nothing stays the same, especialy franchise or legacy material which star trek is turning into. Comic characters now are not comic characters of the 40′s nor should they be. Legacy material like comics, and James Bond, and now Star Trek reflect the current world while keeping some basic elements of what makes them iconic. So it shall be with Trek and rightlys so. So yes it does matter if it does not resemble the original series as long as the spirit of Trek and these now legacy characters, remains, then it still is Trek, just reinterpreted.

150. Sam Belil - December 14, 2007

#149 – You are 100% correct!!!! We really need to get off this “myth” that this movie is also supposed to get “new fans/audiences”. From day one through present is that ST is unique in that you either LOVED IT OR HATED IT!!!! There is no such thing as a “Casual” ST Fan. This movie should be about the core fans who have supported this franchise over the past 40 years. The of the biggest reasons there was an STMP was because of the core fans!!! Ask Harve Bennett, Nicholas Meyers or any of the producers of the prior films do you think for a second there were saying “we want these movies to draw in new fans”. There is nothing that can make a Star Trek hater (then AND now) like Star Trek.

151. OneBuckFilms - December 14, 2007

I noticed in the article that there is a potentially unintentional spoiler.

There is mention of “Kirk’s wife Carol” being cast.

So we’re going to have Carol Marcus, and establish that Kirk married her !!!

I hope that was a slight mistake, and that Kirk gets CLOSE to marrying her, since I always imagined Carol Marcus as the “Little Blonde Lab Technician” he mentions almost marrying in “Where no man has gone before”.

I though that an interesting minor tidbit …

152. Shatner_Fan_2000 - December 14, 2007

#151 … See #87 and subsequent posts.

#148 … As witty as always (that is to say, completely devoid of).

153. Jim Smith - December 14, 2007

> You are 100% correct!!!! We really need to get off this “myth” that this
> movie is also supposed to get “new fans/audiences”. From day one
> through present is that ST is unique in that you either LOVED IT OR

154. Myrth - December 14, 2007

#150 I think you missed my point. I was arguing against the notion of “If it does not look like my TOS then it can die and i don’t care”. I feel very much that the look and feel needs to be updated to appeal to the current time and hopefully a whole new generation and demographic. I feel that Trek should take the direction of updating itself just like comic books and other legacy material that update the look and feel and stories but keep the same spirit. Its the intent and spirit that make a story like trek what it is, not the color of its clothing. So yes i do feel that we can appeal to more than our base demographic and more importantly we should. I also disagree that there is no way to make a lover of something out of a hater of something. I have seem haters of Fantasy fall in love with the genra because of the LOTR films, i have seen abject haters of Transformers fall in love with Giant Robots because of the new movie. I have seen people who hated noir films because of hearsay fall in love with Noir films because of the Maltese Falcon. In short, quality of product is waht will win over new fans, and the dated look of the 60′s is not quality by any standards. Thats why when he got the money Roddenbury himself changed the look and feel, he knew it looked bad. if JJ and company make a quality movie that keeps the sririt of Trek but reflects our modern sensibilities, trust me there will be people in that theater that would never have considered themselves a trek fan cheering our beloved crew onward.

155. Sam Belil - December 14, 2007

#154, sorry if I misunderstood you. I have no problem (as I have stated many times before) with some slight changes. I can almost assure that drastic changes will most certainly hurt the franchise. I happen to be a media research professional (been so for nearly 20 years), and have worked for some major publishing and entertainment companies. I have been involved and overseen many focus groups, subscriber studies and online surveys. I can tell you that the core fan, subscriber/reader of those franchises had one key element in their responses — do NOT change what you’re doing they told us (in some cases plead). In one case, several changes to the editorial franchise was made (and we’re talking a major one) and as a result lost nearly 3 million readers in the past 3 years. I am speaking both as a hard-core fan (I have been watching ST since I was a child since 1966) and a senior level media research professional.

156. Myrth - December 14, 2007

#155, i am not going to dispute your credential, but I am sure you will agree that quality will out over nostalgia in the long run. And as nostalgic as we all are about the original series, its does not have quality set or costume design. Just like I may be nostagic about reading my dads old superman books where superman sneezes because of super sneezing powder and blows apart a solarsystme, but heck if I would buy that book now. Thats not quality. A perfect example of a series update that changed major design and even gender elements but kept the spirt is Battlestar. You can’t tell me as a person in the buisiness that that is not a success. Would Batman Begins have been a critical and financial success if it kept the design elements of the 1960′s show?

157. Dr. Image - December 14, 2007

DS9 made the classic aesthetic work with T&T.
How? Good writing.
That’s what I really want.
For once- and as an antidote to Nemesis- simply good writing.
And some respect for what has come before would be REALLY nice.
We deserve it, I think.

158. Steven Choate - December 14, 2007

#150: “This movie should be about the core fans who have supported this franchise over the past 40 years.”

Then you’d better cut off about 80% of the expected budget for this movie. There simply ARE NOT enough ‘hard core’ Trek fans to support the movie (price) we’re getting.

#150: “There is no such thing as a “Casual” ST Fan.”

This is pure nonsense. There are FAR more casual fans than hard-core ones (especially the hard-core variety that’s been around since the 60′s and 70′s). How would you categorize the 7-9 million people who tuned into the premier for Enterprise but were not there by the end? Were they hard-core fans who simply quit being hard-core, or were they simply casual fans who are amenable to watching Trek if they find it interesting, or entertaining, but who won’t watch Trek simply because it is Trek (like a hard-corer would)? BTW, my wife would entirely be defined as a casual Trek fan, whereas I’m entirely hard-core.

159. danbramum - December 14, 2007

#155, but as a media researcher you will know that a big movie needs more than the core fans, especially a movie with a budget as huge as the one of JJs Star Trek XI. Even the less expensive ST movies needed the casual moviegoer – he is the one who makes a movie succeed or fail. It is a totally different market than the comic/mag or book market, you cannot compare them. A big film relies on the main market. Your comparison would would be appropriate for a direct-to-dvd production at best.

160. Dennis Bailey - December 14, 2007

#137:”- Dennis Bailey; thankfully, there are different opinions allowed.”

Yes – you have the absolute right to be completely wrong, as you are in this case.

And no, Mr. Fischer makes no point other than the usual cant and resort to ideology and hypothesizing typical of political flakes. He knows nothing real about the situation – nor, obviously, do you.

161. Sam Belil - December 14, 2007

#159 STWOK had far from the biggest budget, look how well that movie did. Historically, big budgets do not guarantee success. The point I was making (again) is that drastic changes are not needed to make this movie a success and again I stand by my feeling (only my opinion) to bring in an entire new look and ignore the established continuity will hurt more than help.

#158 I say this will all due respect, who do you think goes to the conventions, trade shows, “Save Enterprise” campaigns. Those are core fans. I think it is safe to assume (I’ve been visiting this website from almost day one) — that most if not all of us who write in are very passionate and long time fans. Regardless of whether we agree/disagree the one thing we share is that we want this movie to be great! Yes it is only my opinion but I want this movie to have a look that represents the era that it is supposed to be taking place in — again I don’t need to be dazzled with “new looks”. Some of the best story telling inTOS wasn’t about speciale effects, etc. (“City on the Edge of Forever”, “Court Martial”). TOS at its peak was about fantastic story telling — and that is what this movie should be about – it should have the “essence” of TOS.

162. Harry Ballz - December 14, 2007

If there can be an American Idol system to allow for any talented singer to step forward and be considered, then why doesn’t Hollywood have a method or program in place to afford unknown screenwriters the same opportunity?

Doesn’t the entertainment capital of the world WANT to look at fresh, new ideas? After all, a screenplay is either good or it isn’t….what would be wrong with an organized open forum of equal competition for all the scribes out there??

Are the current crop of writers simply protecting their turf and not wanting anyone else to have a chance to elbow their way in??

163. Steven Choate - December 15, 2007

#161: “I say this will all due respect, who do you think goes to the conventions, trade shows, “Save Enterprise” campaigns. Those are core fans.”

That’s self-evident, and I don’t think anyone would claim otherwise. Problem is, there are enough core fans to run conventions and so forth, but not nearly enough to make a profitable big-budget movie. Therefore, if a studio is out to make a profit on a big budget movie they can NOT make that movie by targeting only the hard core. As a hard-corer myself I’d be content with the new movie looking as close as possible to TOS, but I don’t expect it to, anymore than I thought TMP would.

Question for you, what did you think about all of the major changes that Roddenberry created for TMP? There’s really no way the look of the trek universe could have changed so much in the short in-universe elapsed amount of time that occured between TOS and TMP. Those changes occured for the EXACT same reasons there will be changes in the upcoming movie.

164. Steven Choate - December 15, 2007

Dennis #160: “And no, Mr. Fischer makes no point other than the usual cant and resort to ideology and hypothesizing typical of political flakes. He knows nothing real about the situation – nor, obviously, do you.”

You do realize that instead of addressing any of the actual arguments made you simply dismiss the argument in it’s entirety because it’s not made by someone on the ‘inside’, don’t you? Your argument is a logical fallacy (irregardless of whether you are correct or not) and makes it pretty hard to have debates of substance.

Harry #162: “Are the current crop of writers simply protecting their turf and not wanting anyone else to have a chance to elbow their way in??”

One of the guiding principles of any union, really. (and I’m not saying that I think the writers are right or wrong in this particular strike)

165. Sam Belil - December 15, 2007

#163 — I was not crazy at all about the pajama look uniforms of TMP, of course major changes occured because this was “new” Enterprise — a “post”-TOS Enterprise. If we are to assume that this a Pike Era Enterprise — should it not look (at least on the outside) like the one and only Original Enterprise? Of course I expect some modifications to the interior — but why not bring back “goosenecks”, “lasers”, “flak-jackets” etc. –since that is what Pike and Crew used in the Cage and Menagerie.

FYI — as I stated before TWOK was shot on a much cheaper budget, and at least the uniforms (while more military in look) came much closer to the look of the TOS look — and that was by the BEST of all ST movies. Additionally, TMP also took a place a fairly significant amount of time after the 5 year mission ended.

Let me ask you this question. If United Artists decides that the next James Bond movie will be “period piece”, taking place say in 1963. Just which Aston Martin do you think would featured in that movie — the one from Casino Royale 2006 or the one featured in Goldfinger? Again this is all about some semblence of continuity.

To the person who brought up Batman from the 1960′s — that show was pure camp — a comedy at best. Comparing that to TOS would be like comparing Gone With the Wind to the Muppets Take Manhattan.

166. Voice of Reason - December 15, 2007

165- To take your James Bond analagy one step further. Lets add Sean Connery to the mix. SHould they make a Bond movie today..starring Sean COnnery as Bond…and he is transporterd back to the time of Goldfinger….should 1963 be revamped to look new or modern like 2008 because it would look cool? Of course not. If you want to get real serious about the established Trek timeline, and have Nimoy as Spock, travel back to an established time in HIS history…it should look very much like THAT time in his history. Period.

If you want to play games, and treat the history laid down by TOS lightly, then you can jack with it. If you want to make a new timeline, you can jack around with it. If you want to reboot it completely , you can revamp it, get crazy.

But if you have Leonard Nimoy, recreating THE Spock from 1966, you need to keep it real within Nimoy’s Trek universe if you want to be taken seriously, in the context of Trek’s fictional timeline.

If you don’t want to go within the constraints of established TOS/Nimoy Trek history, pull a Lost in Space and do whateve ryou want to do. Whether or not its the right decision will be measured by the box office.

167. Steven Choate - December 15, 2007

Sam #165: “I was not crazy at all about the pajama look uniforms of TMP, of course major changes occured because this was “new” Enterprise — a “post”-TOS Enterprise.”

That’s your in-universe reason for the changes, but it had nothing to do in reality for why the changes occured, anymore than why there will be changes in the new movie.

Remember, when Roddenberry was working on Phase II, which was also going to consist of a ‘new’ Enterprise, the look of that show was going to be much closer in appearance to TOS. No, the reason there were so many changes in TMP has nothing to do with a ‘new’ Enterprise, and everything to do with what would look good on a theatrical movie screen.

“but why not bring back “goosenecks”, “lasers”…”

Actually, I always liked the goosenecks, although I think you and I may be in the minority there! As for the ‘lasers’, that would be a bad idea, for the same reason Roddenberry got rid of them for TOS: because viewers know that lasers don’t work that way, and aren’t ‘futuristic’ enough for a weapon.

“Let me ask you this question. If United Artists decides that the next James Bond movie will be “period piece”…”

Not really a valid analogy, because ‘period piece’ vis-a-vis your Bond analogy is used to describe a look for something in our real world past. Since none of the technology in Trek is real, or has ‘occured’ yet, it’s not the same thing as having a 2006 vehicle in a movie set in 1963.

The MAIN reason there are going to be changes is that if they made this new movie look like TOS the viewing audience WOULD think this a ‘period piece’: 1960′s! The makers of this movie want you to think it’s a ‘period piece’: 23rd century, not 1960! (those goodnecks screem 1960, not 23rd century).

VoR #166: “But if you have Leonard Nimoy, recreating THE Spock from 1966, you need to keep it real within Nimoy’s Trek universe if you want to be taken seriously, in the context of Trek’s fictional timeline.”

Did you think the Enterprise in TMP was ‘real’ within the trek universe? Because of the differences in relative dimensions there was NO WAY the TOS Enterprise was re-fitted into the TMP Enterprise.

Although fun to discuss, all of this is moot anyway, since it’s pretty obvious that any changes in aesthetics in the movie can and will be explained away by the Romulans changing the timeline! :)

168. Sam Belil - December 15, 2007

..”Not really a valid analogy, because ‘period piece’ vis-a-vis your Bond analogy”, #167 — Is this not fun or what? This will be my last posting as my wife and son are now giving me major grief.

Please refer to “Trials and Tribulation” and “In a Mirror Darkly”. These episodes were produced with big budgets and for the most part in the new millenium, were the looks of the Defiant and Enterprise changed? Were the looks of the uniforms changed? Which unfiroms were Sisko and Crew wearing when they went back into the past? Lets say there was a time travel story on TNG that had Picard and Crew interacting with Pike and crew, what uniforms do you think Pike and crew would be wearing? The looks for that “time in TOS history”, therefore if we are to assume a Pike Era story, logic dictates the look must match as closely as possible. Cawley and crew did a great time travel story and they totally got it right in terms of “look for the specific period in ST history”.

Again like you said, if this does indeed become an alternate timeline universe series then anything is possible — new look, new characters, even possibly the Captain Pike’s fatal mission on the class J starship will never happen in this possibly “new” timline.

169. Captain Robert April - December 15, 2007

Just canonize Shatner’s Star Trek novels and the heavy lifting is done. A two second line referring to something in the books, and on with the story. Also make for a nice tie-in to those novels, boost sales, and all that.

170. Greg2600 - December 15, 2007

I think I recall reading that Orci laughed at the alternate timeline rumors. Not going to happen. Also, the James Bond comparisons will never match up. Like with comic book comparisons. While I am an enormous Bond nut, the character has little to no background, and canon is just not relevant. Never has been, since the beginning. I mean, the villain Blofeld was played by a different actor every time during the first Bond decade. Same thing with the comic book movies. You’re going from paper to film. Star Trek is different, canon matters because it’s more of an ongoing saga (like Star Wars). Would you want George Lucas to recast Han Solo? No, it would never work. Do I think they should have recast TOS? Personally, no, I don’t agree with it, but only out of my preference. As long as these Abrams adventures do not impede on TOS, I am okay with it.

171. DEMODE - December 15, 2007

Crazy thought… but what if the Romulans and/or Spock use the Nexxus to travel back in time? That would be one good way to rescue Shatner’s Kirk!

172. YUBinit - December 15, 2007

#162

AMEN Harry. This is the same circle where high concept ideas are writing live screen versions of 30 year old saturday morning cartoons.

173. tom - December 16, 2007

just watched godfather part 2. the scene where thet worked in james caan in a flashback was done perfectly. they can easily do the same for shatner. it may not bring him back to life, but we get to see bill and leonard together one last time. there should be meaningful dialog and perhaps spock can throw a hint at how to save his friend without seeing it.

174. Sean - December 16, 2007

What kills me about all this ‘No one remembers Generations/It’s a minor canon obstacle’ talk, is that Kirk’s death is being treated like a throwaway reference. This isn’t as simple as ‘Oh, the Enterprise suddenly has 29 decks instead or 26′ or ‘Spock has a half-brother no one every mentioned’.

I mean, good lord, the character DIED. It was a huge media event at the time! Patrick Stewart and Wiliam Shatner were on the cover of f&*king Time magazine for god’s sake! They both were appearing on every nightime talk show from Leno to Letterman to talk about the fact that he was killing the character. TV Guide released a special Trek issue. Dozens of other mainstream publications were dedicating prime space to the movie/Trek in general. Trek was probably at the peak of it’s popularity with the general public at the time. Believe me, people DO remember he died.

I think it’s with that in mind that Orci says they have to take special care in how they bring the character in, if they do at all.

175. Admiral_Bumblebee - December 17, 2007

Somehow now I think again that the Shatner-not-being-in-the-movie-issue is a ruse. If he isn’t in the movie now, how can he be included later? Either tey really don’t want to have him in and don’t want to tell or he is in the movie and they try to find excuses for not telling so.
If it is a ruse, then it is one of the biggest marketing stunts ever.

TrekMovie.com is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.