Shatner AGREED with the suits and writers at Paramount to kill Kirk. Why are people upset at the guy for doing that? I mean he knew that Kirk wasn’t going to come back in the next movie – he knew that Paramount was moving on with the TNG crew. Yet he allowed his character to die by falling off a rock or something.

He can’t play Kirk anymore, Kirk is dead.

Nimoy wasn’t in ST 7 and Kirk isn’t in ST 11.

Obviously, I didn’t get your sarcasm and you didn’t get mine. Tie.

Anyway, I still enjoyed our somewhat mixed up conversation on BBK, sarcasm and dead equines – main thing is that different views never will become dead horses.

“Xai, you obviously don’t know anything about the goal of the BBK group, nor want to know, nor care. That‘s perfectly alright, but your answer as to the BBK goal still is incorrect; and it has been given on this board so often (by many people, in many variations) that it even can’t claim to be clever and smart anymore; it just has become repetitive and lame. So, as *this* dead horse already died of exhaustion, and already was buried – how about a nice cross? I think you’re the right man for the inscription.”

Remind me to label my sentences on future posts and clarify one since it struck a nerve.

Xai said…- “The BBK group should be pleased. Kirk is in the film.” {sarcasm, intending to be humorous}.
I am fully aware of what BBK is, aims for and wants. I am sorry you didn’t appreciate the humor I intended.

It’s not up to me to put a marker on the grave of something that’s not dead, and obviously BBK supporters have the right to desire the outcome they seek. I do, however, feel the subject of this thread is beating a dead equine.

When I asked Bob Orci how viewing this film might change how we look at TOS, his answer was that he hopes it will enhance the experience. I will give them a chance to make that happen, but I admit to being somewhat perplexed. Perhaps in the end of a three film arc, the original timeline is restored. Who knows? Given Orci’s recent statements about their sequel-less approach to writing this script, I’m not so sure.

It’ll be interesting over the 3 films to see if Abrams can create real peril for these characters whose futures are already documented.

Perhaps you haven’t been paying attention to his inconsistent story and how it has evolved in the past few months.

Shatner explains his side in whichever way he deems fit to suit his agenda at the time.

Prior to filming, and when JJ was still looking for a role for Bill in STXI by the way, Shatner was publicly stating that he doesn’t “do cameos” and that leaving him out would be a bad business decision.

Since filming has wrapped, he is wondering publicly why he could not have been allowed to do the voiceover or to play a role such as Kirk’s father or something like that. He either wasn’t being completely honest in the beginning (and probably playing hardball to gain a more featured role or more money), or he isn’t being completely honest now. Which is it? It doesn’t really matter, because either way, he is or has been dishonest about this situation. It is Shatner who lacks credibility, not Abrams.

Just in case you are unconvinced, let’s review another situation in which Shatner is untruthful. Shatner used to say that he tanked Sulu’s promotion scene to best look after the interests of George Takei. Now he claims that is ridiculous and that he never did anything of the kind. Obviously, in one of those versions of the story, he was lying.

#94–With all of that in mind, how can you justify blaming Abrams for any of this. For all we know, he was serious about wanting to find Bill a role in the film. But given the story problems his character’s death provides, the most logical role would have been a minor one, like a flashback scene to the time when he was alive, or as one of Jim Kirk’s relatives. Either one of those options would amount to a “cameo”, so why would JJ offer him the type of role he had already publicly dismissed? Then, to make matters worse, Bill goes on to publicly criticize Abrams and what he called a “bad business decision”. If it were my movie, I wouldn’t go out of my way to create something for that jerk either.
In my guess, Shatner’s ego got in the way of any potential appearance in STXI. He publicly and foolishly insulted the director, publicly dismissed the idea of a cameo (”I don’t do cameos”), and now he’s “disappointed”? Good.

Xai, you obviously don’t know anything about the goal of the BBK group, nor want to know, nor care. That‘s perfectly alright, but your answer as to the BBK goal still is incorrect; and it has been given on this board so often (by many people, in many variations) that it even can’t claim to be clever and smart anymore; it just has become repetitive and lame. So, as *this* dead horse already died of exhaustion, and already was buried – how about a nice cross? I think you’re the right man for the inscription.

Since we like “points”…

1.JJ has said Shatner’s not in it and explained his reason’s why (on multiple interviews).

2. Shatner has said he’s not in it (Source, latest autobiography)

3. Nimoy has stated Shatner’s not in it (interviews)

4. JJ and Shatner met at least twice (according to Shatner), including JJ coming to the set of Boston Legal.
(IMO, regarding this point, you don’t meet the man twice or more, once at the BL set, just to tell him there will be no deal. At this point in time, JJ had to know the storyline and had something in mind for Shatner . Something happened there that we are not being told.)

————————-
107. Iowagirl – May 24, 2008
#104

“…and for the last 14 years I’ve been a proud member of their sister party, the BBK. ”

__The BBK group should be pleased. Kirk is in the film.