Kirk Family Spoilers For New Star Trek | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Kirk Family Spoilers For New Star Trek August 10, 2008

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

This week the ‘boys of Star Trek Enterprise’ appeared at the Creation Official Star Trek convention in Las Vegas, including Dominic Keating (Malcolm Reed). TrekMovie had a chance to follow up on a comment Keating made in a previous interview regarding his audition for JJ Abrams Star Trek and what he said was a bit surprising. 
[SPOILERS BELOW]


Uncle or evil stepfather?

In April we reported on a quote from a Star Trek Magazine interview in which Keating said:

It was to play Jim Kirk’s uncle in the Midwest, where Jim grows up, before deciding to be a spaceman. I only got to read one scene, so maybe it was just that scene. I know I have it a good read. I didn’t say anything at the time, but I’m sure, even if they’d liked me, they’d go, ‘Well, who is this guy?’ They’d say, ‘Oh, he played a part in Star Trek…’ And that it’d be, ‘No.” So that’s not going to happen. Would have been fun.

TrekMovie asked Keating for a bit more on the role he was auditioning for and here is what he said:

I was goanna play, had I gotten it, what was it? I was going to play the evil stepfather to James Kirk, yeah it was his stepfather. They were very very very cagey about the script so I literally got three speeches to go in with.

Where is Kirk’s daddy?
The first thing comes out of Keating’s statements on his audition is that there seems to be a confusion between ‘uncle’ and ‘step-father.’ IMDB is currently listing a Brad William Henke playing a character named ‘Uncle Frank.’ TrekMovie has confirmed that Henke is in the film but not nailed down the character for sure. However, TrekMovie has confirmed that Chris Hemsworth, who plays George Kirk (the father of James T. Kirk) was not part of the Iowa scenes shot in Bakersfield California (which included Spencer Daniels playing a young Sam Kirk and Jimmy Bennet playing a young James T. Kirk).

No auditions for Trinneer and Montgomery
Keating again repeated that he thought they made a mistake in even letting him audition, because he had already played a major character in the Star Trek universe. TrekMovie also asked Conner Trinneer (Trip Tucker) and Anthony Montgomery (Travis Mayweather) if they went in to audition for any of the roles and both agreed that unless the character was one of their descendants, there would be no point. 


Keating greets the crowd in Las Vegas

More Enterprise Convention coverage
So far Jolene Blalock, Dominick Keating, Conner Trinneer, and Anthony Montgomery have appeared at the Vegas Con. Today Scott Bakula will appear. Coming soon TrekMovie will have a full summary report on all the ENT stars (and another report for TOS and another for DS9 and yet another for VOY).

 

Comments

1. Harry Ballz - August 10, 2008

Evil stepfather?

Oh, what fresh hell is this??!!

2. mark - August 10, 2008

get ready for round two from disgruntled fans

3. TrekMadeMeWonder - August 10, 2008

I am all for the director / producers having a little artitic license.
You have to buld a little drama in the backstory of Kirk.

How about instead of ” Not on MY ship…” to “Not in my house…”

More Spoilers Please!

4. SPB - August 10, 2008

Considering Kirk never seemed to even acknowledge his heritage during the TOS episodes and movies (outside of his brother), I see no reason to get all up in arms about an “Uncle Frank” antagonist. Depending on how the scenes are written and performed, they could very well end up enriching the character and backstory of James T. Kirk.

Doesn’t bother me in the least. Sorry.

5. Irishtrekkie - August 10, 2008

: O ………………………………Great Bird of the Galaxy !!!!

6. Cheve - August 10, 2008

> 1. rag451 – August 10, 2008
> Thank goodness “that” series will not be represented in this film!

I really hope it does, because it was a very good TV show (Much better than most of Voyager, and I say so liking Voyager a lot) and it added a lot of depth and magnificence into Star Trek’s canon, lore and history.

They had bad luck, they got moved to a bad day just as they where becoming really excellent and also became a inocent victim of the divorce of CBS and Paramount, but you’ll never hear me say anything bad about it, because it has many of my top 10 favorite Trek episodes ever.

Also, I enjoy many episodes from other Star Trek series much more because of Enterprise and what it added.

7. fred - August 10, 2008

i wound love a bit of enterprise in it, fair play it started off well crap but by season 3 it getting good and season we had not seen good trek like that since the end of ds9

8. JWW - August 10, 2008

‘enterprise’ was great, much better than ‘deep snore nine’ and ‘lost in space’

jj missed the boat by not having shatner play the part of george kirk, an obvious no-brainer… typical of this production, from what i can see so far

9. CanuckLou - August 10, 2008

Remember to think alternate timeline here folks!

…the adventure continues….

10. sebimeyer - August 10, 2008

I like it. Explains why Kirk is the way he is, which seems to be what this movie is about. Oh yeah and that Spock guy… ;)

11. mark - August 10, 2008

@JWW

the fact that shatner is 77 and the guy who plays george in this movie 25 might, just might suggest to me they script called for a younger actor and that in fact shatner was a bit too old, but thats just how my brain works

12. JWW - August 10, 2008

#12

…or ol’ grampa kirk, or whoever… he could have played a family member, and kept us shatfans happy

13. Smitty - August 10, 2008

Or Dom Keating is taking the mickey…

Just sayin’.

-cs™

14. BrF - August 10, 2008

Ah, there’s an idea. Shatner as the Kirk clan’s screwball great-uncle. That would have been a powerful kind of hilarious or awful. You wouldn’t have been able to take your eyes of it, in either case. Maybe it would be a good spin-off series.

15. Orion Man - August 10, 2008

You know while I agree that story elements are spoilers, I really am not interested in the “story” at this time. BTW, this news hardly ranks as a spoiler of any significance especially due to the fact it’s not confirmed.

I don’t think sets, uniform or starship images are really spoilers. So let’s bring those on. Let the cats out the bag so when the movie comes around we can focus on the story.

16. HisDivineAssassin - August 10, 2008

Star Trek stardate-90210

17. Lord Garth, Formerly of Izar - August 10, 2008

#1 is right but good have said it a bit more delicately

#11 are you really that angry over a dopey tv show ??? Lighten up son

18. Michael Hall - August 10, 2008

*Sigh* You know, I was pretty critical of Paramount’s decision not to have a presence at Comic-Con, but after reading what passes for commentary on these last two threads I’m really starting to appreciate what the producers of this film have to contend with. You’d think from all the second-guessing, hair-pulling, threats to stop breathing and/or boycott the film, etc., that people had actually seen something substantive–like, maybe, a trailer or several minutes’ worth of footage, instead of a heavily stylized movie poster and a couple of rumors–to form the basis of such judgements. Given how little information has been made public so far, evaluating Trek 2009 at this point is like each of the blind men giving their confident take on the topography of the elephant–only the blind men actually had much more information to go on, and were thus much better-informed (not to mention more dignified) than the average Trek fan who posts to this site.

19. CaptainLordBat - August 10, 2008

#15 wasn’t there a memer of the Kirk clan who was an attorney in Boston? I think he had mad cow disease!

20. Dennis Bailey - August 10, 2008

#8:”‘enterprise’ was great, much better than ‘deep snore nine’ and ‘lost in space’”

I agree wholeheartedly. :)

21. VOODOO - August 10, 2008

#8 + #21

The word great and the t.v. program “Enterprise” should NEVER be mentioned in the same sentence.

DS9 was somewhat better, but still very mediocre.

22. sean - August 10, 2008

Or, maybe they thought having William Shatner play someone other than James T Kirk might prove confusing for non-fans watching the movie. “Wait, what’s he doing there? I thought he was someone else?”. Never underestimate the ability of a casual viewer to be easily confused.

23. Krik Semaj - August 10, 2008

8 & 20
I really liked Enterprise. It’s always comforting to know that I’m not alone in that view. It get’s trashed by an awful lot of fans on this site, but I think it was much closer in spirit to Trek than “Lost in Space – the Voyager years, ” or Deep Snore Nine. I never warmed up to those two incarnations, and I really tried to – being a dyed in the wool Trek fan from the very beginning.
9 months and counting.

24. CmdrR - August 10, 2008

You’ve got it all wrong. Uncle Frank is the evil Romulan who chews off Nero’s ear while trying to teach him the ancient art of nambla.

25. Beam Me Up - August 10, 2008

Enterprise was average at best. It got too political and dreary in Seasons 3 and 4.

26. Beam Me Up - August 10, 2008

The Xindi story was kinda cool, though.

27. sean - August 10, 2008

Ok, enough with the Deep Snore Nine stuff. If you want people to respect your love of Enterprise and not take cheap shots then I’d think you would return the respect and not slam DS9.

28. Dr. Image - August 10, 2008

ENT…. better than DS9…. in exactly which alternate reality?? (Just so I don’t ever end up there.)

29. Beam Me Up - August 10, 2008

DS9 had the best Trek battles anywhere.

30. Redjac - August 10, 2008

DS9 was the best Trek series since TOS — in my opinion…

Voyager was a squandered opportunity.

Enterprise was lame.

31. SeePea - August 10, 2008

While some fans with tunnel vision are trolling and flaming against the minutiae a film like this opens itself up to, an epic about the formative era before “1966″ may be forming in front of our eyes. Why wouldn’t there be just as much intrigue in young Kirk’s life as in any other part of the exceptional life we’ve come to celebrate?

32. SeePea - August 10, 2008

#18: Hooray Michael Hall! Natering Nabobs abound.

33. Kev-1 - August 10, 2008

I wish they wouldn’t deconstruct the characters in order to add “texture” to individual backstories, but without Roddenberry or Shatner, Kirk is fair game. Will Spock also have “evil” relatives? Of course, the whole story could be baloney. It’s just a movie, anyhow.

34. Jay - "The Real Jim Kirk" - August 10, 2008

Deary deary me, today has not been a good day for the world of Star Trek, but its not because of the news, no, its because of its so called “Fans” you love it yet you hate other spin-offs, you whine and sulk at every piece of news thats presented, there always has to be a negative response from you guys, you are never possitive about anything except the attempted sarcasm and cheap “whit” you write on this website.

I think Anthony should just give up reporting news about this new movie and continue reporting about other trek stories, as this new movie has done nothing but annoy everyone. I realise that curiosity and second guessing go hand in hand, but curiosity killed the cat, and if we’re going to have people formulating their visionary ideas about this new picture, before we have any concrete evidence (let alone a trailer), and these “preachers” stating that this movie is doomed and that everyone should boycott it, then curiosity itself could ultimately kill the carefully growing positive hype of this movie.

Before long people are just going to get sick of this whining and bitching, every time we’re thrown a scrap, and move on elsewhere…. 9 months of scraps = alot of winging… SAVE IT FOR AFTER THE TRAILER…. pretty please??

Kindest Regards

Jay, UK

P.S – As for the integrity of the spin offs, TNG was always my favourite as i grew up with post TOS trek. DS9 added on to TNG and VOY added on to DS9, and although i have seen very little of ENT i am intrigued, although i must say that the theme tune is my one and ONLY winge!!

35. SeePea - August 10, 2008

Kev-1: Writers have been deconstructing characters’ backgrounds since at least Meyer’s Wrath of Khan(What? Kirk had a son? And by an old flame we’ve never heard of?) I sympathize with your concerns for poetic continuity, but just like in ’82, Trek needs poetic license right now. If Abrams does it right, it will be as much a milestone as Wrath of Khan.

36. Jay - "The Real Jim Kirk" - August 10, 2008

#33 Sybok?

37. cellojammer - August 10, 2008

I didn’t like ENT during its run but after renting the whole kit and kaboodle, I’ve become a big fan! I’ve heard the howls about continuity, but those have always been present, even within each single series. If you don’t get your panties all twisted up over minutiae you might actually get some entertainment value out of these shows.

And then get on with your real life.

“Deep Snore 9″? LOL! That’s an uncharitable thing to say about THE BEST TREK SINCE TOS!!

(I loved it, can you tell?)

38. Beam Me Up - August 10, 2008

I think TOS TNG and DS9 are the best Trek series. If it wasn’t for TNG having Cardassians, they never would have been on DS9

39. rag451 - August 10, 2008

I’m looking forward to the new movie, continuity be damned. I haven’t been this excited about “Star Trek” since 1991. I keep reading about folks who want to see the ship, see the uniforms, see a clip of dialogue or a space battle, whatever, but frankly I’m enjoying the forepl, er, gentle teasing by the studio, producers, writers, etc.

40. Harry Ballz - August 10, 2008

Funny how some of you are criticizing any of us who express concern over what may be coming in the new movie…..isn’t this supposed to be a forum for various opinions, both good and bad, not just the ones who praise TPTB?

Stop slamming those who anticipate problems with the new movie and want to discuss it! Every post can’t be sweetness and light! Sheesh!

41. Scott Xavier - August 10, 2008

It makes sense, when no daddy’s around, the boy usually turns to womanising and such… Happened to my pops.

42. Jamie - August 10, 2008

“Enterprise” was boring.

20 minutes into the pilot and I was utterly bored. And this was the PILOT! Something I’d been excited about watching for months. But less than half way through and I was fed up.

Because I really am a big Trek fan, I gave it a chance. I watched the first two seasons. But in all that time I found nothing to like about the show. Nothing to enjoy.

Bear in mind, I enjoyed Voyager. I’m not a person who demands amazing scripts or terrific acting. A Trek show doesn’t have to try too hard to please me. But Enterprise just sucked.

And anyone who says DS9 was boring (and has watched it beyond season 2) is just crazy. DS9 was fantastic, especially seasons 4–7.

43. Viking - August 10, 2008

LMFAO @ Harry Ballz……….

44. rag451 - August 10, 2008

#43… AMEN!

45. SeePea - August 10, 2008

#40: Nice Name. Do you have nuts hanging from your truck too? Just asking, I like my forums PG.

Once an opinion is expressed it enters the forum you “ache” for. In that forum, we get to express our opinions. That’s what a forum is, a place where opinions are debated.

Speaking for myself, I intend to slam any opinion I think anticipates a problem which I believe is unlikely or untrue, given the evidence.

46. Harry Ballz - August 10, 2008

#45

Debating is fine, being downright pissy quite another! We can respect other opinions while disagreeing with them!

47. Viking - August 10, 2008

FOOD FIGHT!

48. Viking - August 10, 2008

Yes, I gotta be the evil clown here…….hehehehehehe………(*rubs hands together*)

49. AJ - August 10, 2008

The problem with Enterprise was that the characters stopped being human, It was a day at the office every day. Archer was the regional sales manager who would give crappy motivational speeches, and you wondered if he’d ever been laid before. He is by far the weakest captain in the bunch

As for Kirk having evil “Uncle Frank” as a relative, why not? Good motivation to leave crapville, Iowa, and make something of himself.

50. SeePea - August 10, 2008

#46: I’d be the first to agree logical opinions diserve respect. But any opinion, once expressed, is open to scrutiny. Your preoccupation with all things below the belt aside, “pissiness” is in the eye of the beholder.

51. Harry Ballz - August 10, 2008

Pissing in my eye, eh? Urine trouble now!

52. The Underpants Monster - August 10, 2008

Ooh, drama in the Kirk family! I loves it! I think it’d take a somewhat tumultuous family background to produce a complicated man like Kirk.

I didn;t think Enterpise was a bad show in and of itself, but it set itself an unenviable task in bridging the gap between our time and Kirk’s. IMO that’s the sort of thing best left unseen, and anyone tackling it wouldn’t have succeeded.

53. S. John Ross - August 10, 2008

Evil uncle stepfather Frank is the first cool thing I’ve heard yet about this story, honestly. :)

I’ve heard hundreds of cool things about the production; the casting is 100% cool … what little we’ve seen of the design looks cool. But what we’ve heard so far of the story have been … time travel, meh … there’ s villain, meh … I’m sure the story is much grander than they’re letting on, but that’s the part they’ve given us nothing really juicy on apart from “real Spock’s in it, too.”

THIS, on the other hand, sounds juicy :) Bring it on, evil uncle stepfather Frank!

54. AJ - August 10, 2008

45:

Why don’t you stop insulting other posters on the thread?

There is quite a large group of skeptics here who value this franchise, and have done so for 35-40 years. This is not “Speed Racer,” and there is a massively profitable precedent, the Star Wars prequels, where fan hopes were smashed, and the studio still hoovered in boatloads of cash.

When you get down to “nuts hanging in your truck,” you sidestep the debate for a personal swipe at a fellow poster, and it’s childish and unnecessary.

55. SeePea - August 10, 2008

#49: Now, now. I’m from the Midwest. I think Kirk got many of his better personality trates from a life well grounded in 23rd century Iowa.;)

56. JB - August 10, 2008

“Uncle Frank”?? Wasn’t that a character in “Tommy”? Oh wait, that was Uncle Ernie.

Jimmy, can you hear me…

57. SeePea - August 10, 2008

#54: No intention of side-swiping or sidestepping the debate. I believe I’ve adequately explained my opinions in previous posts including your quote from me, taken quite out of context.

58. Beam Me Up - August 10, 2008

It was hilarious watching ENT’s fourth season where they felt the need to tie up every Trek question

59. SeePea - August 10, 2008

#54: I once heard that “Puns are the lowest form of humor.” But I’ve decided you’re funny. Well done.

60. SeePea - August 10, 2008

I meant # 51, Mr. Ballz.

61. Charles Trotter - August 10, 2008

I think we’re reading a bit ahead of Dominic’s comments. He probably used the term “evil” lightly and loosely.

Most likely, this “Frank” *was* Kirk’s uncle then became his stepfather. I guess we have to read into that as we will.

Or perhaps the term “uncle” is some sort of nickname. I have friends who call their parents’ friends “aunt” or “uncle” even though they are not related.

62. Gibnerd - August 10, 2008

think about what we know about young Kirk…he’s cocky, he steals a car, he cheats on a major academy test, he’s a young starfleet hotshot with something to prove. why? maybe he’s got something to prove from a bad family situation…
like said above it makes sense with kirk’s character if you think about it. i dig it.

63. Oregon Trek Geek - August 10, 2008

Well… I see we have a long way to go. …

64. AJ - August 10, 2008

61/62:

I wonder of we’ll get the “behind the scenes/dirty laundry” look at Spock’s early life as well. While “Yesteryear” did a terrific job, considering the format, and taking into account the sparks between Sarek and Spock as Spock becomes an adult, there’s just a lot more to build on than with Kirk.

65. Gibnerd - August 10, 2008

totally AJ-
one thing I’ve alway loved, as many Trekkers have, is how different Kirk & Spock are and yet they have a deep deep friendship. perhaps they had a similar childhood…. a feeling of alienation, not belonging, tough fathers….

66. montreal paul - August 10, 2008

I like all the Trek series. Each had elements I really loved. DS9 was great… Voyager had lots great about it too.. And I really enjoyed teh writing in Enterprise’s final season. To me.. Trek is Trek. I love it all. Even crappy movies like Insurrection and Nemesis had really good parts. Some are better than others.. but I consider myself a true fan..

67. Dennis Bailey - August 10, 2008

James Kirk is raised by a stepfather because his *real* father was actually –

Okay, I’ll get in trouble if I let that one slip. LOL

68. Harry Ballz - August 10, 2008

Hey, Dennis, did you finally get around to seeing The Illusionist and what did you think?

69. Kirk in Diapers - August 10, 2008

Hey, shatner wants in. Why haven;t they thought to make him kirk’s dad? Its so obvious its silly.

70. rag451 - August 10, 2008

Judith & Garfield Reeves-Stevens fleshed out Kirk’s origins in “Best Destiny,” a fine novel which will probably conflict with the coming film. For me at least, sometimes I confuse canon from television and film with what I’ve read or heard from the actors. As such, canon kind of loses integrity…

Ah well, I ramble.

I enjoy these comment threads. They’re a lot of fun to read.

71. Allyn - August 10, 2008

All the shows did have something good in them…
DS9 had actually real character development & issues, and was more realistic than squeaky clean STTNG (which I still really like). I liked the battles a lot in DS9 but they weren’t as good as the ones they tried to imitate in Babylon 5 & the DS9 strength was the great standalone episodes.

Voyager I think overall was the weakest of the post-TOS shows. I called it “Star Trek Lite” but even Voyager had its redeeming, standout episodes. I liked the one where the old man was sheltering Janeway and thought he was his daughter, for example, and also the one with the murderous hologram.

Enterprise I think could have dispensed with the whole Xindi plotline and the future guy timewar thing… the other shorter story archs such as in the 4th season with the Vulcans were outstanding and redeemed the series IMHO.

72. Daoud - August 10, 2008

#70 Boborci has mentioned they read a lot of the novels… I believe he has mentioned Federation, and Best Destiny… So there’s always hope!

73. SPB - August 10, 2008

#67 -

“James Kirk is raised by a stepfather because his *real* father was actually –”

…DARTH VADER?!?!??!

74. AJ - August 10, 2008

67:

Dennis. Nice…shall we start speculating?

Garth of Izar?
Kodos the Executioner (Kirk lived on the same darned planet, and was spared)
Crazy, toothless ol’ Uncle Frank. Yeeh-hah!
Old Spock (Please, God. No.)
Nero
Some people from Enterprise (*sigh*)

75. Anthony Pascale - August 10, 2008

lets leave the extremely boring and repetitive ‘i hate enterprise and want everyone to know it’ crap for our full update on the ENT cast, or better yet, skip that article since you dont like Enterprise

76. Kirk's Revenge - August 10, 2008

#71

I’ve enjoyed all of the series.

Voyager was okay but could’ve been better.
The episode that always sticks out in my mind is the one where Chakotay is brainwashed into fighting a war after crashing his shuttle on some forest planet (They went through quite a few shuttles on that show, didn’t they?).

Anyway, the last line sums it up pretty well. It goes something like, “I just wish it was as easy to stop hating as it was to start.”

I just wish there were more episodes like that one, having a good message but without being preachy. Instead, we were subjected to way too many Borg and holodeck episodes.

77. Mike Norris - August 10, 2008

Kodos would be a bit creepy. Since Kirk was hitting on his daughter

78. AJ - August 10, 2008

77:

Maybe Kodos IS Evil Uncle Frank!

I really hope not.

79. JB - August 10, 2008

Maybe it’s this Uncle Frank:

http://jeffwerner.ca/images/journal/blue-velvet-frank.jpg

Mommy!

80. Beam Me Up - August 10, 2008

Dr. McCoy is really Kirk’s dad.

81. 221b - August 10, 2008

I makes a lot of scene, IMO. Orci said he read all or most of the books and even mentioned favorites, didn’t he?

A couple of the books already implied that Kirk senior was lost in space or dead very early in James Kirk’s life.

So stepfather comes in, who doesn’t want to hear about all that space nonsense from his stepson, making little Jim want to go there even more, because he detests the man and wants to follow in his dead father’s footsteps.

I like it.

82. Harry Ballz - August 10, 2008

#81

I do believe you’ve got it, Sherlock!

83. Orion Man - August 10, 2008

This is hardly news I’ve been waiting for. My goodness. If this is all we’ve got my head will explode.

KAAAABLAAAAAAAMMMMMMMMM!

84. Alex Rosenzweig - August 10, 2008

#81 – There we go. I came in late to the thread, but wondered how long it would be ’til somebody would remember that the heretofore non-canonical backstory included Kirk’s father being lost. Well, maybe we’ll get to see what’s goin’ on with that in the sequences with the Kelvin. And a stepfather and/or an uncle who have a bit of a different view of things, well, that wouldn’t be contra-canonical either. Different, maybe even unexpected, but there’s room for it to work.

Let’s see where it goes. :)

85. SpikedCanon - August 10, 2008

4. SPB

you nailed it

86. Christopher Lee - August 10, 2008

Not that anyone cares about my two cents, but I think Abrams should have tied the Kirk era and Enterprise era together with T’Pol. She would still be alive during this time frame. She could have been an ambassador to Earth.

87. Insaint - August 10, 2008

Knowing what we know about the personality of Jim Kirk, the Evil Step-Father does make a lot sense to me.

88. Cheve - August 11, 2008

#86. Christopher Lee

In fact she could be an admiral and still look like it does today, since Vulcans seem to age randomly if one pays attention to Sarek, Spock and so forth (One comes to think that, once they leave the accademy, Vulcans age at the same ratio than humans, then pause for 200 years at a random moment of their lives, then continue aging agan)

89. Iowagirl - August 11, 2008

Don’t we all have an Uncle Frank? At family celebrations he’s usually sitting in a rocking chair which seems to be reserved for him for ages, humming some old songs from years gone by, the little ones make fun of him which he shrugs off as he’s a sweet-tempered soul, and because he loves the kiddies as much as they love him…

I think XI desperately needs an Uncle Frank character!

90. The Underpants Monster - August 11, 2008

#74 – Hey, maybe Kirk travels back in time and becomes his own father!

91. ChristopherPike - August 11, 2008

I look to reading more about the Enterprise cast members who attended and took to the stage. Any chance of hearing what Brannon Braga and Manny Coto had to say?

92. Dennis Bailey - August 11, 2008

Actually, “Uncle Frank” is TV’s Frank.

“Kelvin.” Ri-i-i-ght… ;-)

93. Doug in Afghanistan - August 11, 2008

#49: I so disagree.

IF you believe Archer was the weakest of the Captains, an opinion I happen NOT to share, it must be remembered Archer was the first Captain to be out there in an explorers’ capacity as a representative for Starfleet. He was writing the book. I might posit that he was the least experienced, but he certainly developed into a great leader (and Bakula was the perfect choice for the role.. IMHO).

Initially, I liked the fact that there was a gee-whiz attitude of the crew and from there how they matured as explorers. This can be best exemplified by the relationship Archer and crew had with T’Pol and the Vulcans.

I don’t think it’s any secret I’ve liked all incarnations of TREK, some more than others. I think ENTERPRISE was very credible addition to TREK canon–especially season 1 and 4 (personally, I thought the story arc on season three was cool, but lasted far too long, but it was a noble effort)!

I cannot wait to see what part ENTERPRISE will play in the historical timeline leading into the new movie.

94. Dom - August 11, 2008

We don’t know much official about Kirk’s family, so it’s perfectly possible Kirk had a difficult relationship with Winona Kirk’s subsequent beau. It’ll be nice to get a whistlestop tour through the early lives of our heroes.

And Harry Ballz. Why don’t you just SHUT THE HELL UP?!!!!! You’ve made your point. We all know you don’t like anything about the new film. There can’t be anyone left on the Trekmovie forums who hasn’t read one of your sourpuss remarks on a thread somewhere. At least Stanky McFibberich, stick in the mud as he can be, has genuine wit and even charm.

I’ve gotta ask: what purpose does your posting serve here? You’ve made your opinions amply clear. You clearly have nothing further to contribute to any of the discussions here, except to pee on people’s bonfires.

This isn’t about censoring opinions: you’ve made yours and now you’re repeating yourself on every thread. Shut up and stop repeating the same garbage ad nauseum. This is a site for people who like Star Trek and it’s for people who are enthusiastic about Star Trek in its various incarnations. Why not go to danielcraigisnotbond.com? They like your sort there!

Certain people’s behaviour on the last couple of days’s discussions have brought shame and embarrassment on any level-headed Trek fan.

95. Harry Ballz - August 11, 2008

Dom, you must be on glue…….I just reviewed all my posts in this thread and I don’t see any negative comments from me regarding the movie! As Shatner would say, “GET A LIFE!”

Don’t make me take out a restraining order!

96. Harry Ballz - August 11, 2008

p.s. my post at #1 is questioning a plot point, not slamming the entire movie. There is a difference, but I wouldn’t expect someone like you to recognize the distinction.

97. krikzil - August 11, 2008

Amen Harry #40 and AJ#54. I don’t see in the Trek Charter where we all have to agree with one another on everything. Would be boring. Personally I like debates but really don’t get why some of you have to make it so PERSONAL, calling other fans names or screaming at them to leave or stop posting. My favorite was the poster who diagnosed other fans as possibly having Asperger’s.

I’m not a doctor, I just play one online.

98. Marian Ciobanu - August 12, 2008

- The second part of DS-9 was the best trek show ever..DS9 had the best pilot episode(not episodes).. but D.K. is one of my favorites trek actors..in my opinion it was a very bad decision from the producers to not include him in the movie…

99. OM - August 12, 2008

“Evil stepfather? Oh, what fresh hell is this??!!”

…Oh, come on, now, it’s simple! The Evil stepfather and Kirk’s two older ugly stepbrothers pick on him all the time and make him do all the chores. Then, his fairy godfather shows up one day, turns a tribble into a hovercraft, and arranges it so that Kirk can go to the Midshipmen’s Ball, where not only does he meet Princess Ruth, sneaks off for some closet time with Carol Marcus thanks to Gary Mitchell, but winds up getting a commission when he accidentally drops his official Starfleet kinky boot trying to make it back to the Tribble-coach before 1023.0.

…How does Nero manage to alter time? Kirk doesn’t get out of the Tribble-coach before it returns to its normal state, and gets crushed.

Hey, what were you expecting? Janice Lester feeding him a poisoned apple, swapping bodies with him and letting him be the love slave of seven dwarves? :-P

100. Closettrekker - August 12, 2008

#94—With all due respect, I think you’ve mistaken our Harry Ballz for someone else’s…

101. Victor Hugo - August 12, 2008

56:
>“Uncle Frank”?? Wasn’t that a character in “Tommy”? Oh wait, that was >Uncle Ernie.

So true, i hope they don´t make Kirk want to fly just because of “spite” like George Constanza, like: I wanna be an astrounaut just ´cause is forbidden.

Besides, didn´t we see something similar with Captain Picard?

102. Dom - August 12, 2008

krikzil (97) You are no position to accuse other contributors here of being mentally ill. That’s probably worse than any remark anyone has made here. I will happily debate the new film with anyone who is a sceptic.

But what certain characters are doing here isn’t contributing to a debate: they’re deliberately acting like sulky teenagers. Harry’s post: ‘Evil stepfather? Oh, what fresh hell is this??!’ is a prime example. Better Harry explains his issue with the story concept (if, indeed, that’s what the storyline includes) than make a sour remark with no backup.

The reason many of us are getting irate here is a simple: there is a veil of secrecy over this film, which means that what few details that do leak are spurious and prone to a late-in-the-game Chinese whispers level of inaccuracy, so an open mind is important.

Those of us who are enthusiastic are keen to see what the studio feeds us and keep an open mind. We know who the writers and the director are and they’ve very decently taken time out to talk to the fans. We’ve all felt engaged in the process of making this film and the film makers simply want to avoid spoilers leaking all over the web.

On the other hand, there’s a bunch of sourpusses here who have been dead set against this film from the start: alleged ‘purists’ who aren’t purists at all, since they won’t even countenance a new Trek film that includes Leonard Nimoy . . . and fans of Berman Trek who wanted another movie with the aging TNG cast or a ‘composite’ movie featuring casts from all the spin-offs, even though the spin-offs failed to capture people’s imagination in the cinema.

There are also people who feel that Star Trek belongs only to them: they don’t want Star Trek to return to being aimed at the mainstream. They blanche at the idea that Star Trek will go back to being a franchise about a possible future for the human race, rather than than the self-contained, self-referential Star Wars-ey sub-universe it drifted towards in later days.

And more than anything, with a lack of solid information, these people are only coming here to the little that’s rumoured as an excuse to dish out sarcastic remarks for no other reason than to be sour.

I respect perfectly well that people have their doubts about a new film that recasts famous characters and updates an era that has recently been used by a separate group of TV shows as a historical period. The original Star Trek characters are going to be ‘current’ again and rumours of a variant timeline mean that its history might ‘rewrite’ subsequent events meaning that, in some ways the separate spin-off shows might not happen in that timeline.

I appreciate that that bothers some people, but revisionist continuity is nothing new in comic books and novels and indeed was used extensively in the creation of the TNG universe.

People are supposed to come here to debate, but a couple of the recent threads have been overrun by people essentially writing ‘This sucks!’ and little else!

I guess it’s because Anthony’s away and the trolls knwo that they can run riot for a while! :(

103. Dom - August 12, 2008

Closetrekker, in the VegasCon 08: New Star Trek Movie Posters With Four New Cast Images, Harry Ballz said:

‘Not impressed with the four new images AT ALL! Abrams could have EASILY taken shots where the actors would bear more than a hint of resemblance to the original cast members. The current photos don’t look like them in the slightest! Looks like he’s aiming for the 14-17 year old crowd and totally disregarding any care or concern for the original fan base. Where would be the harm in striking a tone that would satisfy both? Typical New Hollywood crap! Looks like Stanky may have been right about this movie all along!’

then

‘No, but he supposedly DIRECTED how the photos were taken! Hmph, so much for HIS directing style!’

then

‘The simple fact that they have invited Nimoy to be part of this film, as older Spock to his younger self, precludes that we have some right to expect a similar “look” to the rest of the cast and their respective characters! Anything else would be highly illogical!’

then

‘And if it ends up that Nimoy’s Spock goes back in time only to end up negating the universe of TOS, so they can launch a new version with this group in an alternate timeline, that will stink to high heaven! What, we’re supposed to accept the ERASING of the entire Trek history we’ve loved all these years for these NEW GUYS?? I don’t think so!’

Basically every post was a negative ***statement***, not anything for discussion. Having seen nothing but some stills of actors who don’t look like clones of the TOS cast, he’s slagged of the film as a product of ‘Hollywood crap,’ claimed they’re disrgarding the original fans when the team have clearly stated that they aren’t and are obviously from what little we’ve seen are meaking something that looks more like TOS than any of the movies of subsequent TV shows. Abrams’ direction of the film is attacked on the basis of someone else’s stills, followed by a rant about ‘negating continuity!’ YAWN! And Harry’s one of the more sane ones!

Maybe people should look at the film’s casting this way: they’ve hired an actor to play Old Spock who looks a bit like Zachary Quinto!! :p

104. krikzil - August 12, 2008

>>krikzil (97) You are no position to accuse other contributors here of being mentally ill. That’s probably worse than any remark anyone has made here.

See this is why I commented on your post and others. It helps if you actually read what’s written. I didn’t make the Asperger’s comment but was using it as an example of what I’ve read here. You say you don’t like the “sour-pusses’ and all. Heh, not everyone is going to like what you and I like or agree with us but they have the right to their opinions. Not every comment is going to be positive and I think it’s nice that people have a place to come and share whatever they are feeling as long as they don’t make it personal and attack each other. **I** have reservations about this movie myself and will mention them as warranted.

But heck, Trek fans are always a spunky lot and nit-pick the details. Heck, just wait until the movie actually does come out. The real fun will begin then!

105. Closettrekker - August 12, 2008

#103—-I only meant that Harry has been posting here since I can remember (I’ve been posting for about 15 months), and he’s basically been pretty positive about the movie. Not to mention he’s usually good for a laugh. I think he’s entitled to take issue with some things. Maybe he was just in a bad mood!

I generally agree with alot of your opinions that I see posted. In fact, I’ve yet to see any news which leads me to believe this movie can’t be fantastic.

I just have to take issue with your decision to tell Harry to “Shut the Hell up”. I realize that Harry is quite capable of defending himself, so I’m not going to make a huge issue of it. It just seemed a little out of character for someone like you, who normally contributes to the level of intelligent debate here in a positive manner.

With that said, Harry does seem to be a little negative in the posts you mentioned, but again, I wouldn’t go so far as to say, “We all know you don’t like anything about the new film.”

I don’t think that’s true. I think Harry is excited about the movie. He is just a bit apprehensive about some things. He’s still one of my favorite Canadians. LOL.

106. THX-1138 The Fandom Menace - August 12, 2008

OK, I’ll say it:

Dom, you’re being an idiot. You have valid points about the movie, but 100% of what you have said about the posters (commenters) is deluded, misguided, and incorrect. YOU are the one taking things out of context. Harry made NO personal attacks unless someone jumped his comments first. As a matter of fact, I’ve read both positive things about the movie and it’s direction as I have negative from Harry. Probably more on the positive side.

What I have seen here recently is some of the more (definitely not all) casual posters and commenters i.e. the ones who don’t come here every single day, or the newbies in some cases, attacking people and comments with absolutely no sense of manners. Harry never does that. We are glad to let you know if you are wrong (in our opinion, of course), but we never call people names. I mean, unless they like it. And I have reservations about the new flick as well, because I have seen every single one in the theater and have more than once come out feeling that they could have been better. Because that’s what Star Trek, and I as a fan, deserve. Just remember:

Be more respectful. This is a community.

107. Harry Ballz - August 12, 2008

Closettrekker

thanks for defending my position. You are correct that I am excited about the movie AND that I am a bit apprehensive regarding aspects to the new film. I am simply coming out with different observations and comments over these last many months to address these issues. Why this seems to irk certain people is beyond me. Thankfully I don’t give a hoot what other people think about moi!

We are all entitled to our opinion. PERIOD. END OF STORY!

108. Harry Ballz - August 12, 2008

THX, thanks buddy, appreciate the support!

109. THX-1138 The Fandom Menace - August 12, 2008

Anytime, mate. I’m getting tired of the snarky and uninformed attacks that have popped up recently.

i don’t really like the “evil uncle” angle. I could handle the stepfather thing because Kirk’s daddy’s absence and subsequent divorce from his mama have been the fodder and storyline of a lot of fun Trek novels I have read.

110. Closettrekker - August 12, 2008

#109—I think Dom is right on that one, though. I don’t see anything in previous Trek canon which would preclude Kirk from having an uncle with some sort of unsavory character about him.

However, I think it is just as likely that Keating simply mispoke or had somewhat of a cloudy recollection of his auditioning experience with STXI—meaning the character he is referring to is actually Kirk’s stepfather. He could also have been misleading in his use of the term “evil”. We heard previously, from Harry Knowles recounting of the few minutes of footage he saw, that JTK’s father was serving aboard the USS Kelvin (if I am not mistaken). Perhaps he is killed, and Winona remarries later. It could be that Jim simply does not get along with his new stepfather and Keating simply took a bit of dramatic license in calling him “evil”.

In any case, I can’t bring myself to judge any of that, since it is hardly substantiated at all. All we have to go on is an answer given by Dominic Keating that he did not even sound too sure about himself.

111. M-5 - August 12, 2008

Harry Ballz – August 10, 2008
Evil stepfather?

“Oh, what fresh hell is this??!!”

LOL! I’m still cracking up.

112. Moonchick61 - August 12, 2008

Wow Folks! Aren’t we making a mountain out of a mole hill. Dominic Keating could have misspoken or simply assumed things himself. Let’s just relax and enjoy the wait. We’ll know next May. Although I have to say, some of you have some ” fascinating” imaginations.
And what’s with the “I hate this Trek show” and “This Trek show is great but the other one sucks balls”. My fellow Trekkies, Variety is the spice of life. Although I love all things “Trek”, I have my favorites.

1) TOS- the spring from which all Trek flows.
2) DS9- the best stories and characters of the lot.
3) ENT- don’t know what everybody has against it. Loved it. It was different and isn’t that what we Trekkies claim to embrace, something new.
4) VOY- have waited for years as a women to see the first female captain and what a captain she was.
5) TNG- Have to confess my least loved. My problem was that the deepest and most human characters were a Klingon and an Android.

113. Closettrekker - August 12, 2008

#112—The only thing I would change in your list of favorites would be a flip-flop of ENT and DS9.

1.TOS
2.ENT
3.DS9
4.VOY
5.TNG

As for Dominic Keating’s comment, I agree, although I have already addressed that in depth (#110).

114. noirgwio - August 13, 2008

I love these guys! ENT forever baby! And y’know what, I bet if you didn’t like ENT, you probably won’t be content with STXI… Wake up and smell the tribble farts, this will be a reimagining, it is a restart… I had to swallow that fact, and it was hard, but things evolve… Trek will go on, we can be happy about that, but it is a new age, new Bond, new Joker, new Trek. Will all us trekkies like it? No – not when people are even to this day: “ENT SUX” or “TOS SUX” or “DS9 WAS BEST”… Oh, I know we all have our favorites, mine is from most to least: ENT, TOS, TNG/VGR/DS9. The last three being tied third… The ENT bashers won, they aided in the show’s shut down by not watching, not supporting it. That’s just MHO.

115. vorta23492392932939230 - August 13, 2008

TNG
TOS
VOY+DS9 tie
ENT (and I like ENT!)

116. krikzil - August 14, 2008

For me:

TOS
The Classic TOS movies
DS9
Voyager
TNG
The TNG movies
Enterprise

117. Marian Ciobanu - August 14, 2008

1. DS-9 (although i hated the use in exces of religion)

2. TNG.(although was a little too..naive..unreaIistic ..)

3.ENTERPRISE ( very careful made..but with a huge lack of imagination..i never understood the use of dr. Phlox )

4.VOYAGER(the best fx..the best costumes..but with weak characters..for example NEELIX is the most disgusting trek character i ever saw.. without no importance for the show’s story..and JANEWAY seems to be..asexuate..without no reason)

5 TOS(when i see TOS..i alwas remember about THE STONEAGE OF TELEVISION..)

118. Hairy Ballz - August 14, 2008

WOW

119. Harry Ballz - August 14, 2008

Hey, what the…!

Oh, a wise guy, huh?

That’s HARRY, not HAIRY!

120. Andrew - August 14, 2008

Have the movie’s producers given any hints about mentioning Tarsus IV, and how a young (maybe teen-aged) James Kirk came to be there during Governor Kodos’ massacre?

Seems to me that that chapter of Kirk’s life opens a pretty wide door for introducing some extended family members.

121. Mike - August 16, 2008

I wouldn’t get too hopped up yet. We know they’ve made up characters for the auditions before.

Still, if they are sticking to canon at all (and it sounds like they aren’t) this could be the guy who fills in for Kirk’s father after he is killed by Kodos, the way Riley’s was.

But we already know Kirk’s father (or step) was one of the auditions. Whether he’ll actually appear, who knows? He could also be a flashback character.

122. Quarkster - August 21, 2008

——> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qazF6B1Ir0U <——–

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