http://www.entertainmentearth.com/cjdoorway.asp?url=aff-home.asp

Kirk Family Spoilers For New Star Trek

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).

 

Sort by:   newest | oldest
Harry Ballz
August 10, 2008 11:49 am

Evil stepfather?

Oh, what fresh hell is this??!!

mark
August 10, 2008 11:54 am

get ready for round two from disgruntled fans

TrekMadeMeWonder
August 10, 2008 12:08 pm

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!

SPB
August 10, 2008 12:10 pm

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.

Irishtrekkie
August 10, 2008 12:15 pm

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

August 10, 2008 12:20 pm

> 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.

fred
August 10, 2008 12:27 pm

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

August 10, 2008 12:36 pm

‘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

CanuckLou
August 10, 2008 12:38 pm

Remember to think alternate timeline here folks!

…the adventure continues….

August 10, 2008 12:40 pm

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… ;)

mark
August 10, 2008 12:51 pm

@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

August 10, 2008 12:55 pm

#12

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

Smitty
August 10, 2008 1:04 pm

Or Dom Keating is taking the mickey…

Just sayin’.

-cs™

BrF
August 10, 2008 1:09 pm

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.

Orion Man
August 10, 2008 1:11 pm

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.

HisDivineAssassin
August 10, 2008 1:18 pm

Star Trek stardate-90210

Lord Garth, Formerly of Izar
August 10, 2008 1:19 pm

#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

Michael Hall
August 10, 2008 1:20 pm

*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.

CaptainLordBat
August 10, 2008 1:27 pm

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

August 10, 2008 1:43 pm

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

I agree wholeheartedly. :)

VOODOO
August 10, 2008 1:52 pm

#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.

sean
August 10, 2008 1:56 pm

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.

Krik Semaj
August 10, 2008 2:34 pm

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.

CmdrR
August 10, 2008 2:35 pm

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.

Beam Me Up
August 10, 2008 2:45 pm

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

Beam Me Up
August 10, 2008 2:51 pm

The Xindi story was kinda cool, though.

sean
August 10, 2008 3:19 pm

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.

Dr. Image
August 10, 2008 3:29 pm

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

Beam Me Up
August 10, 2008 3:35 pm

DS9 had the best Trek battles anywhere.

Redjac
August 10, 2008 3:37 pm

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

Voyager was a squandered opportunity.

Enterprise was lame.

SeePea
August 10, 2008 3:40 pm

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?

SeePea
August 10, 2008 3:47 pm

#18: Hooray Michael Hall! Natering Nabobs abound.

Kev-1
August 10, 2008 3:55 pm

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.

Jay - "The Real Jim Kirk"
August 10, 2008 4:09 pm
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… Read more »
SeePea
August 10, 2008 4:10 pm

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.

Jay - "The Real Jim Kirk"
August 10, 2008 4:10 pm

#33 Sybok?

cellojammer
August 10, 2008 4:20 pm

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?)

Beam Me Up
August 10, 2008 4:24 pm

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

August 10, 2008 4:30 pm

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.

Harry Ballz
August 10, 2008 4:30 pm

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!

August 10, 2008 4:40 pm

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

Jamie
August 10, 2008 4:44 pm

“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.

Viking
August 10, 2008 4:54 pm

LMFAO @ Harry Ballz……….

August 10, 2008 4:58 pm

#43… AMEN!

SeePea
August 10, 2008 4:58 pm

#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.

Harry Ballz
August 10, 2008 5:03 pm

#45

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

Viking
August 10, 2008 5:11 pm

FOOD FIGHT!

Viking
August 10, 2008 5:13 pm

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

AJ
August 10, 2008 5:17 pm

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.

SeePea
August 10, 2008 5:23 pm

#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.

wpDiscuz