William Shatner Still Not In Star Trek Movie – Final Cut Weeks Away | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

William Shatner Still Not In Star Trek Movie – Final Cut Weeks Away August 25, 2008

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Abrams,Shatner,ST09 Cast , trackback

For those who may not have picked up on this yet, William Shatner is not in the new Star Trek movie, yet rumors and conjecture persist that maybe he is. But a new pair of interviews with both Shatner and Star Trek director JJ Abrams denying Shat is in the movie should be the final word on this saga.

 

Shatner: I know nothing
In the brand new issue of Star Trek Magazine, the original Kirk again recalls that he had some meetings with Star Trek director JJ Abrams, but he still isn’t certain "what those meetings were about." However, he is certain about one thing:

I have no connection with the film whatsoever. It’s the strangest thing. Even my dear friend Leonard [Nimoy] won’t tell me what it’s about.  

In the interview Shatner also recounted recently working with Robert Pine, father of Chris Pine (the new Kirk) and that he and Chris exchanged notes of regard. He has nothing but good things to say about the Pines:

It’s a lovely family. I just wish him well, and hope that the movie becomes successful and that he himself is successful in it.

Abrams: Nimoy only — almost has final cut
And in case you are holding out hope that something has happened between the point in time Shatner did the mag interview and today, sorry but you are out of luck. In a press event for Fringe in New York today (reported by IGN), director JJ Abrams addressed the ‘is Shatner in it?’ question by saying:

No, the only cast member from the original films is Nimoy.

Abrams also said that despite others seeing a cut of the film, they were still ‘evolving’ the film, and noting:

I’m hoping the final cut is a few weeks away. But we’re definitely circling.

So there you have it. The final cut (without music, sound and visual effects) is almost done, and it is still sans-Shat. Maybe this will stop the speculation–maybe.

 

 

Comments

1. KJTrek - August 25, 2008

I suppose we’ll start seeing stuff on YouTube now… Man, the months are getting very long now.

First?

2. Deep_Space_913 - August 25, 2008

The speculation will end on Opening night. Until then, people will still want and need the Shat!

3. jeff - August 25, 2008

cool i was and how much would one have to pay to get a peak at this come on JJ u must have a price =)

4. Sean - August 25, 2008

I think it’s for the best not to have Shatner in it. It was really sounding like putting him in the movie would have looked forced. I’m not worried about the movie, either. Kevin Smith had good things to say about it, and so did Wil Wheaton. That’s good enough for me.

5. What is it with you? - August 25, 2008

Shatner’s Star Trek career isn’t over yet.

No need for despair. We haven’t seen the last of Shatner’s Kirk.

But in the meantime, I’ll take Pine’s.

Any Kirk in a storm!

(That one is for you Naval Dude).

6. What is it with you? - August 25, 2008

Or should I say…

Any Trek in a Storm!

That one is for you, Voyager!

7. 750 Mang - August 25, 2008

I still think Shatner will probably show up in it. But hey, I figured that Obama would pick Hillary as VP. Giving people what they want doesn’t seem to be in vogue right now.

I just hope it’s a great movie.

8. Jordan - August 25, 2008

If you honestly thought he would be in it you were setting yourself up for disappointment.

9. Trekkie16 - August 25, 2008

JJ likes to surprise people and he likes “twists”. Maybe Shatner will show up as a photo on the wall at Starfleet academy. I don’t think he will be in the movie but I wouldn’t put it past JJ to place Shatner somewhere in a photo or in the background in a commercial or something obscure.

10. Bob, the Evil Klingon Frontline Leader - August 25, 2008

I’ve learned that the secretly filmed Shat scenes will be hand delivered to each theater on opening night.

The again, monkeys may fly out of my butt, too.

11. Sir Martman - August 25, 2008

I’ll have to wait until the New Trek comes out,,,to see if William Shatner is or is not in the movie,,,

If not ,,,,,,,,,,I’ll start the ,,”Is William Shatner in the second Trek” rumour ..

I’ll be gutted if hes not in this,, I would give my front teeth to see Mr Shatner have a proper send off with the remaining TOS crew.

Im really worried now that this may be Nimoys last film as “Spock”,,theres a real sence of,,we may never see them together again,,,,sort of feeling

I hate that feeling,,,

:-Z

12. Sean - August 25, 2008

How is this still news?

I don’t understand how the Shatheads are still going nuts over this. Move on.

13. OneBuckFilms - August 25, 2008

Shatner is not in film. I repeat, Shatner is NOT in the film.

That is the end of this Public Service Announcement.

Thank You.

14. Denise de Arman - August 25, 2008

Bob#10- LMAO!! Would that be standard chimpanzee-size monkeys or their smaller flying-monkey cousins…

If there is a segment in the film where, say, Spock is viewing a holovid of Kirk made before Kirk’s death (possibly a cut from an original series ep), would that qualify as Shatner appearing in the movie?

15. Melonpool - August 25, 2008

I’m surprised they couldn’t reach some kind of compromise… like having Priceline do a little 23rd century product placement? ;)

16. 255 more to go - August 25, 2008

The more they say he isn’t in it, the more it seems that he is.

Time will tell for sure.

17. S. John Ross - August 25, 2008

I’d still bet a dollar he’s in a post-credits wait-for-it-while-the-cinema-empties cameo.

I wouldn’t bet a fiver or anything, but I’d venture a single :)

Either way, I hear he’s still locked in as the monster in Cloverfield 2.

18. VOODOO - August 25, 2008

That really sucks.

Kirk was given the worst ending of any major fictional character in history.

Let’s hope that Abrams can at least give the character a better ending. If he at least does that I will shut up forever.

19. 255 more to go - August 25, 2008

At the end of the movie, when old Spock returns to “the future” he arrives at a point in time when Kirk was still alive. I’m guessing we will actually not only see Kirk but also the rest of the surviving actors and the ones who have passed on through CG on the bridge of the starship Enterprise.

Torch passed.

20. Commodore Z - August 25, 2008

Bring back Shat!

21. Beam Me Up - August 25, 2008

I’m sure I’ll get over it.

22. DeadManWalkin - August 25, 2008

HONEST TO GOD “WHY ISN’T KIRK (SHATNER) IN THIS??? I don’t care how good it will be (I think it will be great), I would have been BETTER with Shatner… It was their chemistry (Nimoy/Shatner) that made it so special… What the hell JJ?

23. Dennis Bailey - August 25, 2008

Pressure is building for the DVD “Special Edition Extended Director’s Cut Approved By God” to feature William Shatner as Kirk performing “Sex In This Club.”

24. Tim G. - August 25, 2008

This is great. The FINAL CUT is just a few weeks away and then it can sit on the shelf for what, eight months?

25. Ali - August 25, 2008

It will be odd if the plot is to reset the timeline and yet – among a billion other things – Kirk is still dead. I still think a K/S coda would be cool.

26. Thelin - August 25, 2008

He’s not in this one, but will probably be in the next one, probably a cameo.

27. aries127 - August 25, 2008

The Abrams team is right not to bring him back. While Shat is an entertaining actor, he’s a ham. All tongue and cheeck, just what the new team is moving away from, and rightly so.

God love the Shat, but he’s just not a very giving (read: good) actor. He chews up (read: commandeers) every scene he’s in, which must be exasperating for a director. Nimoy’s stillness and gravitas are way more suited to a “good” film, which I hope this will be.

28. Pierce - August 25, 2008

I agree. J.J. is brilliant but as good as it will be, it could be “more” with Bill. For god sakes, he is Kirk! The actor you have playing a young Kirk is going to invoke “Shatner’s performance as Kirk” in some form, whether it be subtle or not. Why would you not have him? This is foolish. Don’t get me wrong, this movie will be solid, no question. I’m sure I’ll love it… but in the back of my mind, I’ll walk away wishing I could have seen BOTH KIRK & SPOCK on the same screen again. You guys could have took the time to make it happen… at the end of the day, it’s still just a movie.

29. Papa Jim - August 25, 2008

So, he is saying that Shatner is NOT in the movie? Right?

lol

30. SChaos1701 - August 25, 2008

Under no circumstance to we “need” the Shat.

31. Tom - August 25, 2008

stop saying the shat… are you stupid?

32. Tom - August 25, 2008

That’s like the “Hoff” which is also completely lame. God, so lame.

33. Katie G. - August 25, 2008

Anthony, YOU ARE TOO FUNNY!! This is absolutely hilarious!! I can’t believe this discussion is still going!!

Thanks for giving me a good laugh. Trekkies are, if nothing else, indefatigable.

And yes, I’ve been into the chocolate again…

:-D

kg

34. Beam Me Up - August 25, 2008

Maybe he’ll give a speech before the premiere of the movie?

35. Captain Scokirk - August 25, 2008

it’s been now like 17 years since the whole crew was together, the likelyhood of that happening again are unlikely, especially given they were unable or unwilling to do it 14 years ago, and if the new flik is a hit sans original crew I doubt that will make a case for bringing them in after the fact, what might be cool is some sort of gimmick where they bring in the survivors on to an episode of Boston Legal, something clever could be worked out there, and lets all hope for a free enterprise 2, that would be a great venue for a lenny/shat mindmeld

36. John from Cincinnati - August 25, 2008

So let me get this straight. The producers tell us they can take artistic freedom and change the uniforms and change the Enterprise interior, and this won’t pose a problem with future Spock and why he doesn’t remember it differently, but somehow, bringing Shatner back as Kirk is this huge canon/story problem that can’t be solved. Let’s be honest folks. The writers, producers and director just didn’t want Shatner back. It’s that simple. I’m not saying it’s right. I’m not saying it’s wrong. Just be honest with the fans about the reasons.

37. DarthDogg - August 25, 2008

I give up on Shatner being in this. Hell, im still awaiting the return of the Sisko!

38. SChaos1701 - August 25, 2008

I’ve said it before and I’ll keep saying it.

1) It’s FICTION therefore canon discussions and picking apart a fictional universe is just sad. I used to do it…WHEN I WAS 12!!!!

2) Chris Pine is now the person playing Captain Kirk…end of story.

That is all.

39. John from Cincinnati - August 25, 2008

38. EXACTLY. Fiction allows for the suspension of disbelief, such as bringing a Vulcan back from the dead or a starship Captain back.

40. TL - August 25, 2008

No Shat No Trek!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I hope JJ comes to his senses and put Shatner in the film!

41. cellojammer - August 25, 2008

I love Shatner’s portrayal of Kirk. But…

Kirk died in “Generations”. Shatner looks too old to portray him at any point in time before his established onscreen death. Having him appear in the movie would just be a sentimental gimmick. To shoehorn him in somehow would seriously compromise the credibility of the story for me. Leave him out of it!

42. Thomas - August 25, 2008

It’s funny, people are saying that this movie would automatically be better if Shatner were to turn up, but no one is willing to suggest the possibility (however remotely) that Shatner’s exclusion might be his own doing. J.J. and company might very well have felt that Shatner’s presence in this film might not have worked to the movie’s benefit, but who’s to say Shatner’s totally inocent in this matter? We don’t know the whole story. If he’s in it, and it doesn’t feel forced in, great. If he isn’t, oh well. It wasn’t the possible last appearance of Shatner as Kirk that drew my interest in this movie, it was the chance to see Trek return in a big way, having been infused with some badly-needed new creative blood.

43. What is it with you? - August 25, 2008

#36 – hit the nail on the head. I’ve been saying this all along, like when they used the timing of the writer’s strike as an excuse.

Right or wrong about the decision, they haevn’t exactly been square about it.

They couldn’t even be that way with Shatner.

I think he played it the only way he could back in the fall – confused and a little hurt.

He’s human afterall.

44. M33 - August 25, 2008

definition: “shat” – past tense of sh*t.

Please address him by his full last name. The other is an insult. Or whatever.

45. TL - August 25, 2008

TOS, the best of all Treks makes its movie return without even an apearance by the original crew? How low is Paramount and JJ gone not to at least throw in a sequence with the orignal crew, especially in a story that revolves around time travel!

46. JimmyMac - August 25, 2008

I agree with you #16. This means that Shat is definately in the movie.

47. Martin Pollard - August 25, 2008

This breaking news just in: Generalissimo Francisco Franco is STILL dead!

48. Doug L. - August 25, 2008

I suddenly have a sneaking suspicion that maybe just maybe as a result of the time travel element… the movie may end with a post credits nod to the Shat…

Imagine if you will… ala Iron Man ending with Samuel Jackson showing up as Nick Fury… Spock returns to the 24th Century to share a glass of Romulan Ale with an aged but alive Admiral KirK!

C’mon… that would be totally cool, doable, not conflict with the movie, and give everyone a double happy ending…

I’m on board. Quote me Doug L. 8/25/08

49. Thomas - August 25, 2008

45.TL,
The answer is simple: they don’t have to.

Also, in response to your post #40, Shatner is not the be-all end-all of Trek. Trek is bigger than any one actor or series. I’m not denigrating Shatner’s role in Trek, which was pretty important, I’m just saying that for me, Trek does not begin or end with Shatner. If it did, Trek should have ended with Generations.

50. TL - August 25, 2008

Trek is bigger than any one actor, but I for one have more faith in Shatner than in JJ.

51. Beam Me Up - August 25, 2008

I cant wait till next year when Shat fans have heart attacks in the theaters.

52. Commodore Lurker - August 25, 2008

Shat-Kirk is dead! RIP – already for Sarek’s Sake.

53. Another Shatner Fan - August 25, 2008

I really have not thought Bill would be in the movie for a long time now. I chose to believe both Bill and Leonard when they said that was the case. While I realize that to some fans it is unimportant whether Bill is in the movie or not; I ask those same folks to realize that to many of us fans who loved Shatner’s portrayal of Kirk, this movie, and the way this issue has been handled, leaves us feeling somewhat left out, and very disappointed.

I feel Bill should have been in the movie and not just in a cameo or some lame photo, stuck in the background of some scene. He should have been given the same opportunity to pass the torch to the new Kirk as Leonard was given to pass the torch to new Spock. This movie may be great, and I will reserve judgement until it comes out, but without Shatner, …well I think there will be something very special missing in the hearts of Shatner fans everywhere. It is an opportunity that is lost forever and that is very sad.

54. krikzil - August 25, 2008

Final cut…ah, but then there will be the screenings for audiences and that might lead to reshoots and I’m betting leaks! JJ better pick is audiences very carefully.

As for Shatner, sigh, I’ve accepted it, gone through the stages of grief and just am sad that such an opportunity of seeing them together again is lost.

55. Pat Payne - August 25, 2008

Or is he just “pinin’ for the fjords?” :)

But seriously, guys, the voices of reason have something here. Just because JJ Abrams has played things (like Cloverfield) very close to the vest in the past, it does NOT, repeat, NOT follow that every single movie he does has to have some sort of pre-release mind#$%! with the fans.

Until I see otherwise with my own two baby greys, the last we’ll see of cinematic Kirk was in Generations, when they dropped a bridge on ‘im.

56. dalek - August 25, 2008

The fans long ago accepted that it wasn’t going to happen.

Only Robert Orci kept it going (and JJ himself) post comic-con for at least 5 or 6 months, with Orci resurrecting it as far back as March again saying it was possible.

This isn’t the fans holding out hope. It was one of the writers messing with our hopes.

A movie about time travel and they couldn’t figure a way to get Shatner in it. I agree with the guy who said they should have just been honest and said they didn’t want him in, because the whole production screams of it.

It’s the worst handled piece of misinformation in Trek history.

57. aries127 - August 25, 2008

42 – Totally agree. Also, who’s to say that the story these guys wrote simply didn’t have the older Kirk in it?

If that’s so (which is my bet), and that’s the story/script that got the greenlight, then they’re right to refuse to put him in it just because he’s still popular. If they’re doing this right, the integrity of the story trumps the popularity of a single actor, even if it is Shatner.

58. Beam Me Up - August 25, 2008

We need the SHAT CUT!!!

59. Mike T. - August 25, 2008

I agree with some of the posters above, Mr. Abrams will possibly have Mr. Shatner on a viewscreen like Admiral Janeway was in Nemisis.

A quick scene and he’ll be gone. The actors in the scene will not know who they are talking to and Mr. Shatner can come in anytime and film the scene, hell he could film it at home with a blue or green screen in the background.

Only time will tell.

60. aries127 - August 25, 2008

53 – Shatner had his torch-passing already. It was called ‘Generations.’ It was a generally inferior film, but Shatner signed on anyway. Tellingly, Nimoy read the script and turned it down. And now the better decision will yield the better result (assuming ST09 is as good as I think it will be).

61. aries127 - August 25, 2008

VOTE IN THE EW POLL!!!

Which fanboy flick are you most excited about?

Star Trek is currently 4th out of 6, behind Harry Potter, Watchmen and Transformers 2. It’s on the EW homepage here http://www.ew.com

62. starfall42 - August 25, 2008

I found a recorded statement from Shatner on being left out of the movie: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bZKEhgieoc

:-)

63. Stanky McFibberich - August 25, 2008

Is it really necessary to refer to Shatner as “the original Kirk” and Nimoy as “the original Spock” ?

64. krikzil - August 25, 2008

>>Kirk was given the worst ending of any major fictional character in history.

Yup. Generations was bad enough the first time; who knew it would come back to haunt us all these years later!

65. Beam Me Up - August 25, 2008

Just as Kevin Smith if he’s in the movie.

66. Robert April - August 25, 2008

[Robert April shakes his head in disbelief at this whole thread.]

67. Out There - August 25, 2008

This just in to our news desk:

The original Dr. McCoy, DeForrest Kelly, is STILL NOT in the next Star Trek movie.

More details to follow on this developing story.

68. Green-Blooded-Bastard - August 25, 2008

…Both young Spock and old Spock stared into each others eyes for what seemed an eternity, standing at the edge of the platform that held the weight of the small but powerful class-II Vulcan Temporal-Pod, barely a wind to be heard anywhere. With a nod and acknowledgment of the events that had just transpired, and how with a lot of work and a bit of luck, certain events may have been altered ever so slightly, and the universe might be a better and safer place for it, the senior Spock gingerly placed himself in the Pod, the seat conforming quickly around him to take his shape, and with a very slight hum and magnetic push against the surrounding air, the Temporal Pod slowly lifted itself off the cold, blue-steel deck that was once it’s temporary and secluded resting place, and with a nearly blinding light and seemingly impossible speed, it is space-future bound.

The younger Spock carefully navigates his way down the outcropping of rocks and dirt that are the path to his personal and well hidden shuttle platform and makes his way to his three-wheeled cruiser, and heads back to the academy with an hour to spare before graduation. When he arrives, he is greeted by his new friend James Kirk. Kirk notices the bit of orange clay and dirt at the bottom of his uniform and queries “Take a nature hike without me”. “Not exactly” Spock replies in a much wiser voice than he had only three weeks previously. He raises an eyebrow an continues “However, if ever I should find it necessary to take one, I will remember to invite you, if you so desire”. Kirk let out a chuckle “If I so desire, Spock? How about simply because were friends now?” to which Spock placed a hand on his shoulder, and said in a more somber and mature voice “And ever shall I be, Jim”.

A sharp pinging emanated from under the console of the Vulcan Pod to alert it’s passenger that the craft had come out of Temporal Warp and entered the system of it’s destination at the correct positioning and star-date. The craft shot through the upper atmosphere with little effort and found it’s mark on the ground with relative ease, gently positioning itself between two large boulders in some shade. With a slight hiss and snapping of release clamps, the hatch slowly pulled back and away from the rest of the Pod and the older Spock emerged from the cockpit. Standing beside the craft, he took note of his surroundings, a dry arid landscape of rocks and sand, the hot sun beating down upon his wrinkled face, and found his way to a slightly familiar outcropping of rocks. Making his way around the debris, he managed to find the metal girder that once held a small platform and climbed to the top where from that height, he could drop down upon a fallen steel bridge and crawl across to the other side of the platform. Once across, he found the narrow, flat cliff facing overlooking the rest of the ravine that once held a small but important pile of rocks that interred a man that on more than one occasion had the habit of saving millions of people, and the inhabitants of Veridian III here were no exception. However, on this particular day, and in this newly-formed particular time-line, that small, lonely pile of rocks no longer existed, nor was there a body there to hide. The elder Spock felt a great relief flood over him, mentally noting to himself that with a slight alteration to reality as it once was known, he just may have saved a very close and dear friend of his from a fate most undeserving for a man that has saved entire planets from decimation. He knelt down to a knee and gazed upwards towards the sky, barely a cloud above, and smiled. Something he no longer found beneath him, rather, a part of who he was and had some time ago learned to accept and even embrace. With a gentle sigh, he said in a soft whisper “I’ll see you soon, Jim”, released the rest of his breath, rose to his feet, and made his way back to his ship for a quick ride to be with an old friend.

69. Lord Garth, Formerly of Izar - August 25, 2008

Still don’t buy it…..

70. Green-Blooded-Bastard - August 25, 2008

Oh, ahh, the above is just me wishful-thinking stuff…

71. John from Cincinnati - August 25, 2008

Generations was just a bad dream of Jean-Luc Picard. It never happened.

72. tom - August 25, 2008

If I were directing this movie, i would be be very upset at this time. To still be answering questions about this topic would not sit well with me. I do not however feel any sympathy for jj abrams. i would be concerned. whatever damage control or explanations given have not been succesful in putting this to rest. Many of the interviewers are mainstream entertainment reporters. If they are asking this question then they are probably representing the mainstream audience this movie so desperately needs. I guess jj hopes the movie is so good that after seeing it the reviews will be so great that this will finally be forgotten.
Still asking this is not a good sign. I will try to not let this deter the movie for me. I do believe after seeing it there will be a scene or scenes that could have been wonderful had Shatner been there. I still believe in this film. However this whole thing has been a mess since comic con last year. Seems there is more interest in who is not in it than who is in it. As a director or producer you would have to think that maybe just maybe we made a mistake.

73. Jovan - August 25, 2008

#24: It will NOT be “sitting on the shelf” for 8 months. The sound effects, music, and visual effects still need to be done as well as any additional tweaks. Give it time. The last time a Star Trek film was this hyped, marketed, and rushed with barely any time to spare to do everything properly… well… we know what happened there.

74. Tim Handrahan - August 25, 2008

We are still about 9 months away. There are always……possibilities!

75. Beam Me Up - August 25, 2008

Captain PIKE IS in the movie!!!!

76. oztrek - August 25, 2008

I dreamt that my grandmother had a dream that she was an Orion slave-girl and she was kissing William Shatner who was only a hundred and twenty kilos so she said to him:
“Gee you’re fat!”
He said to her with a ;) “I know! But I won’t be when you see me in the movie.”

So that means he IS in the movie and you can quote me.

77. Lostrod - August 25, 2008

#63:

Is it really necessary to refer to Shatner as “the original Kirk” and Nimoy as “the original Spock” ?

Certainly better than “He who was Kirk” that pops up from time to time.

78. Alec - August 25, 2008

Given Kirk’s death in Generations, resurrecting him in this film would, to say the least, require much exposition. This exposition is not germane to the origin-story of this film; and it would, in fact, harm such a story. I am a huge William Shatner fan; but the story must take precedence.

Regarding the story, I am a little uncomfortable with the notion of time-travel. First, even granting the possibility of time-travel, does it make sense to say that Spock may interact WITH HIMSELF? I.e., how can one-and-the-same person be in two places at the same time? Second, does it even make sense to say that we could change the past? The present and future follow inexorably from the past. So, in elder-Spock’s present, before he attempts time-travel, he will face the consequences of what he has done in the past; i.e., what he is about to do. What Spock is about to do has already been done; for what he did, he did in the past. So how is it possible to change anything? And why would he try to change anything, given that he has already done what he wanted to do?

79. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - August 25, 2008

Shatner deserves not to be in it after that atrocious DirecTV abomination that was passed off as an advertisement.

Hyperbole, yes, but the disgust you sense is quite real.

80. DrNebuloso - August 25, 2008

“I have no connection with the film whatsoever. It’s the strangest thing. Even my dear friend Leonard [Nimoy] won’t tell me what it’s about.”

LOL, this confirms it for me. He is in it.

81. Buckaroohawk - August 25, 2008

There’s no need to refer to Shatner as “the original Kirk” or Nimoy as “the original Spock.”

Shatner is Kirk. Nimoy is Spock.

But now Chris Pine is Kirk, too. And Zachary Quinto is Spock, too.

So, mathematically: Shatner = Kirk and Pine = Kirk. Nimoy = Spock and Quinto = Spock. Does this mean, then, that Shatner = Pine and Nimoy = Quinto? No. This is a new form of math. Equations only flow in one direction, from actor to character, not from actor to actor. It’s called Hollywood Mathematics (copyright Buckaroohawk).

We’ll find out in about nine months if the equations hold up to scrutiny. If they don’t, the error will obviously lie within the “Hollywood” part and not the “Mathematics” part.

See. Math is fun!

82. Shatner_Fan_2000 - August 25, 2008

#53 … Wow, after reading your post, I don’t even have to say anything, I can just refer people to your post! You’ve summed up perfectly my feelings on the matter. I’ve been cloned!

I shall now retire to the Norpin Colony.

83. CanuckLou - August 25, 2008

JJ may disseminate but I’ve never heard of him outright lying. This makes it definite, no Shatner.

…the adventure continues…

84. Spock's Brain - August 25, 2008

Bill will be in the next one.

85. steve623 - August 25, 2008

I think JJ Abrams could win first prize in a Lindsey Buckingham lookalike contest.

86. Zinc - August 25, 2008

The Kirk is dead. Long live the Kirk!

87. steve623 - August 25, 2008

“Shatner had his torch-passing already. It was called ‘Generations.’ It was a generally inferior film, but Shatner signed on anyway. Tellingly, Nimoy read the script and turned it down. And now the better decision will yield the better result (assuming ST09 is as good as I think it will be).”

Wow that totally doesn’t reek of misplaced arrogance.

88. Xai - August 25, 2008

I thought this was done months ago.

He’s not in it.
He and others that KNOW say he’s not in it and I’d think that the fans of Shatner would finally accept that fact. Are you thinking he’d lie to you? I mean really… there are a few “I know he’s in it because…’ statements that are just too funny.
And to the “shame on JJ” group, until facts are known, it’s shame on no one. They didn’t hire him or he wanted too much (Screen-time/money). There were meetings, but he doesn’t know what they were about? Huh?
And it’s not a grand conspiracy to keep him out…. that the best little gem of all.

My point? Trek fans are among the best known in the world and it’s time to show at least a “Wait and see” attitude about this movie rather than argue who’s in and out for the 186,262nd time. This is really old news.

89. garen - August 25, 2008

this is not a disaster.

90. Bill Peters - August 25, 2008

Wow, I was over the hole Shat thing about a year ago!!! Looking foward to the movie. only about half a year to go….!!!

91. Krik Semaj - August 25, 2008

Isn’t Shatner dead?

92. trekker77 - August 25, 2008

Anthony P: (respectfully) why ya gotta go stirring things up again? I thought this was ka-put. Now the Shat-heads in are reminded and angry again and anti-Shats are gloating. Have you been drinking again?

What happened to Peace in the Middle East (ern part of the Federation)?

93. Beam Me Up - August 25, 2008

Kirk will be in his own spin off movie, “Kirk’s Guide To Space Women”

94. Darth Doorchime - August 25, 2008

Well..

They always can let him sing the end credits song..

:-)

95. JR - August 25, 2008

ok ok ok ok… so, will Shatner be in the DVD version?????

96. British Naval Dude - August 25, 2008

After 23 years of intensive research, I have concluded that tha’ Hindenburg fire wuz caused by an airborne static spark which ignited the paint on tha’ skin… tha’ paint bein’ composed o’ aluminum acetate and iron oxide (componants found in rocket fuel)… and NOT by a single phazer blast from behind a grassy knoll… a phazer blast thought ta’ have been caused by William Shatner…

However, deductive reasoning suggests that since he wuz but six years old at tha’ time o’ tha’ blimp tragedy, tha’ shadowy man thought ta’ be William Shatner was not in fact him, and Shatner wuz not at tha’ Jersey airfield at tha’ time…

Oh, tha’ humanity… me life’s work tryin’ ta’prove he wuz thar’…. But I got a new lead… Bigfeets like fires ya’ see…

Arrrrrrrr…

97. British Naval Dude - August 25, 2008

‘course hope (even hopeless hope) is not at it’s end a bad thing so regarding Shatner (wit’ apologies please, due ta’ weight or Khan thinkin’ he be a Moby Dick)… Opening day fur tha’ film: “In what’s sure to be a media circus, the whale gets shipped in!”

Arrrrrrr…

98. The Last Maquis - August 25, 2008

Oh boy, Here come all the Little kids with their “Kirk’s Dead,get over it”
speeches. Listen here Brats, so is Data get Over That!! If he truly isn’t in the Movie, Then I’m sure “The Brams” or JJ Realizes How HUGE of a mistake that was. I know he’s regretting it. All it could have taken was a pick up scene or two, a quick Flash to, or a cameo. That’s it. No matter how Good the Movie is, There’s no Fu%#ing reason it couldn’t have been that Much better. Yes there is Leonard Nimoy and I can’t wait to see him again on the big Screen. When it comes To Bill it all just seems like one Big Missed opportunity, especially with all the time JJ had to do something about it. As for the Kids,
Hey maybe you want to see the original Star Trek get the same Dukes of Hazard, or Starsky & Hutch Big screen Makeover but I don’t.

99. Andy Patterson - August 25, 2008

I knew he wouldn’t be but I love him still.

100. The Last Maquis - August 25, 2008

Yeah, BND!! I was wonderrrin’ Where Ye Be.

101. Brett Campbell - August 25, 2008

Hmmm… How many tickets will be sold by the first weekend just to satisfy our curiosity over whether he is in the movie or not???

Either way, it’s all a CCONNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN!!!

102. number6 - August 25, 2008

This means Shatner is TOTALLY coing to be in this film!!

I knew it.

103. Magic_Al - August 25, 2008

Even after final cut, they could have reshoots after the entire test audience writes “where’s Shatner” on their response forms! I kid.

The best and missed chance for Shatner to return was on Enterprise as Mirror Kirk (who is not, of course, the dying-to-save-innocent-planets type).

104. Mike 1701 - August 25, 2008

#9.
Yeah, but that won’t happen ’cause Shatner would ask for a boat load of money for his photo to appear in the film. lol!

#50.
Not me. I have 20 times more faith in Abrams than Shatner. Abrams’ worst directed TV episode is better than the FINAL FRONTIER. God what a dreadful movie. Shatner should have been banned from coming close to any TREK film after directing that crap-fest of a movie.

#61
This EW poll doesn’t surprise me one bit. What I find amusing is the fan boys are arguing if Shatner is in or not in the film, and the real point to consider is if anybody cares if there is a TREK film to begin with.

105. John Whorfin - August 25, 2008

As Admiral Ackbar would say…

IT’S A TRAP!!!

106. Einstein Jones - August 25, 2008

I can’t believe that Anthony believed this might stop the speculation. Unfortunately, that tiresome little game will go on until the movie premieres.

107. Beam Me Up - August 25, 2008

The last scene is Spock and Spock visiting Kirk’s grave site. Young Spock looks at Spock and says, “Well, at least this will be changed.” Old Spock raises an eyebrow. He leaves Young Spock, and walks into a forest where we see Old Kirk waiting for him. They both walk off and the movie ends.

108. Einstein Jones - August 25, 2008

Told ya.

109. Illogical (Bink) - August 25, 2008

I heard from this guys cousin that was the doorman for this club that overheard a dude that knows a girl that works at this tanning salon in LA say that a guy was getting a tan was really a suit from Paramount and was talking on his cell whist tanning in the bed, unbeknownst to him she heard everything and heard him spill the beans that at the end of the movie there’s a really big set up for Shats return in 12!!!!!! That’s right, the Shat-man will be donning the gold tunic one more time in 2012:^)

110. Mark Lynch - August 26, 2008

#27

I must agree that Shatner has a predilection for hamming it up, as some third season episodes demonstrated. But I think that a good director can control that aspect. For what its worth, I think the best Shatner performance as Kirk was in ST:TMP and if I remember correctly that was because Robert Wise often made him do take after take until ‘the ham’ was on hold and you just got a believable scene.

But once again no real news here. Move along, move along. Nothing to see here. As Frank might say!

111. Mark Lynch - August 26, 2008

#73

Yep! It took 20 years until we got the finally finished motion picture on The Directors Edition DVD. But let’s be honest, was it not worth the wait? Well maybe not, it would have been nice to have it like that originally, but you know what I mean.

Ever since I first saw ST:TMP TDE I think that this is now the best Star Trek film ever made… Wish it could get a limited cinema release in the UK. Sighs….

A side note
For everyone who is using IE to post and gets annoyed at the stupid spelling mistakes they make after reading their (submitted and unalterable) post, may I recommend you download and install ‘ieSpell’, it is free and works really well.

112. Mark Lynch - August 26, 2008

The first cut is just one step with many left to go.

There will be music, sound effects, visual effects, more editing, test screenings. I will be surprised if it is actually sitting on a shelf gathering dust by Christmas. But if we get a great film out of it, who cares? It is not like we can bully Paramount into releasing it when we want.

Lets show how gracious and enlightened we (as Star Trek fans) are supposed to be and let the filmmakers get on with their job. And be thankful they even bother coming here to post from time to time. In my 40 odd years on the planet, I have never known filmmakers to make time like this for us rabid fans(!), we really should be honoured.

I’m sure that they will release some stunning photographs when the time is right to do so.

Patience is a virtue, some say.

113. fakesteve - August 26, 2008

As far as we know, Spock travels back in time to meet with the crew in the stages before they were formed, or even contacts his then troubled younger self to jumpstart that formation… this works for me. If ST is a runaway success there is always time for Mr. Shatner to be in the next one. For me it was a nice touch that sold me to TNG to have McCoy send her off in the pilot. And that was at a time when I said “Trek without Kirk and Spock? Never!”

eleventy-first

114. fakesteve - August 26, 2008

All right, I typed too slow and missed 111… but talking about Bilbo, here ist Leonard Nimoys fascinating Ballad of Bilbo Baggins…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XC73PHdQX04

115. William Shatner Still Not In Star Trek Movie - Final Cut Weeks Away | Sarkle - August 26, 2008

[...] Full article addthis_url = ‘http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sarkle.net%2Fscifi%2F2008%2F08%2F26%2Fwilliam-shatner-still-not-in-star-trek-movie-final-cut-weeks-away%2F'; addthis_title = ‘William+Shatner+Still+Not+In+Star+Trek+Movie+-+Final+Cut+Weeks+Away'; addthis_pub = ”; [...]

116. Ahmed - August 26, 2008

I really hope that he will be in the movie, after all this is the guy who made Captain Kirk a legend

117. Iowagirl - August 26, 2008

I’m really fed up with this cat-and-mouse game now. Don’t wanna be a part of Abrams’ amusement park any longer.

Keep discussing! Bye t’ya all.

118. Sarah - August 26, 2008

Hey. I’m really all right with that. Bill Shatner was quite an ego in his day, still is as a matter of fact. That’s fine but now it’s time for team work. I’m glad they let Mr. Nimoy take the lead. He’s a good leader. He doesn’t feel the need to belittle others to look greater himself. Nimoy is great already and others shine in his light. This movie will be a great un-Shatnered production of Star Trek. I’m looking forward to seeing it.

Get a life Bill! Isn’t there anything else you know but Star Trek?

119. John - August 26, 2008

I can’t belive people are still talking about this. Shatner has had his time now move on people. I mean seriously – move on. Make way for some new talent.

120. Notbob - August 26, 2008

You do, of course, realize this does not prove anything.

I heard that Shatener was in it in a small cameo to be a surprise to the audience. In fact, I heard that he’s not the only one. The cameos are said to be pretty small–i.e. mainly for the old fans.

J.J. Abrams is known for wanting the audience to be surprised while watching the film. He has folks sign agreements not to say anything. Having him say there is no Shatner doesn’t prove anything. Nor does having Shatner saying he doesn’t know anything about the film and that he isn’t in it. If he or Abrams were to say anything else, like “I can’t say,” or “no comment,” then everyone could deduce that he was in the film.

I’m not saying that he will be in it or not. I’m just saying don’t be too idiotically shocked if you see Riker, Shatner as Kirk, Picard, or hell, even Harrison Ford. If they aren’t in the film, that’s fine. But if they are, it wouldn’t be the first time film makers/ TV people told a little white lie.

Remember the whole, “Starbuck is dead,” last year. It was one of the worst kept secrets.

Both Abrams and Shatener say he’s not in it. Yet the rumors are all over the place that suggest that he is and Abrams wants it to be a surprise.

I can wait. If he’s in it, it won’t upset me or shock me in any way. If he’s not, it won’t either. But I don’t count on the word of folks who honestly want the people to see things and be surprised while watching the film for the first time.

121. The Lensman - August 26, 2008

#120
“Yet the rumors are all over the place that suggest that he is and Abrams wants it to be a surprise.”

The only “rumours” that are “all over the place” are fanboys who keep thinking “not in the movie” is some kind of code for “in the movie”. This isn’t Bizzaro World where “Hello” means “Good-bye” and words mean the opposite.
“not in the movie” means exactly that……

122. Will H - August 26, 2008

I just want to know how Kevin Smith got to see a cut of the new movie and Shatner didnt. Seems to me like JJ’s being kind of a dick to Shatner over this whole issue and it seems like at this point if Roddenberry was still alive JJ might even cut him out of the movie completly. I can accept not bringing kirk’s caracter back to life but he should of given Shatner some noticable roll, even if in a flashback or something, and for the love of god even if he didnt have him in the movie not letting him in on the movie is beyond rude.

123. CAPT. GERICO - August 26, 2008

BRING BACK THE SISKO!!!!! (OLD) KIRK R.I.P.!!!!! YOU’LL BE MISSED BUT NOT FORGOTTEN!!!!! BRING BACK THE SISKO!!!!!!!

124. Victor Hugo - August 26, 2008

Still there´s no reason why he can´t appear as a Holodeck recording. Just like Tasha Yar in her testament.

Gah, it could even be the video from the game “StarFleet Academy” when he says that risk is our business. This could even be the motto of the new movie. “Risk is our business” and drop that silly overdone “Begins” thing.

125. Of Bajor - August 26, 2008

#37 – Now that is one return I would pay good money to see!

126. Anthony Thompson - August 26, 2008

Thank God he’s not in the movie.

1. He’s too old.

2. He’s too fat.

3. He hasn’t played Kirk since TOS (or perhaps TMP).

4. The story of a film should not be changed to accomodate an actor.

127. Justin Webb - August 26, 2008

Could somebody explain to me how Shatner could come back? Didn’t Captain Kirk die in Generations or am I missing something?

128. Tom - August 26, 2008

126 Anthony Thompson

I thought they announced he was in at comic con…

129. Tom - August 26, 2008

Anthony Pascale

Perhaps you should take the “still” out of still not in the movie for this headline.

130. Joe Schmoe - August 26, 2008

In the alternate universe, Bill Shatner with a goatee is in the next movie.

Also in the alternate universe, Zachary Quinto plays a character on a TV show where a bunch of superfreaks chase him around and try to eat his brain.

And director JJ Abrams eats his kids’ pet bunnies for breakfast.

131. CmdrR - August 26, 2008

Bill will still be in the commercials, selling us the DVD.

132. Mark Lynch - August 26, 2008

#126
Come on, give Shatner a bit of a break here. He can’t help getting older or fatter. After all the alternative is fairly final, no?
Most people accumulate some girth as they age. Usually in places we don’t want. If I am as active as he when I am in my latter seventies I will have no complaints.

Personally, I would love to see him in the movie with a small but meaningful role. But only if it serves the story.

If he is in and JJ and Shatner are feeding us misinformation, so what? It makes the surprise at seeing him all the better. If they are telling the truth, then what have we lost apart from our time reading others telling us it is all a conspiracy…

133. Sam Belil - August 26, 2008

#126 — you too will be old someday (we all will). From day one I always felt that Shatner should be in this film. Was it a mistake not to inlude him — yes I believe so. As much as it pains to me to say this, no Shatner does not mean this will be a bad film. I believe it will be a good film — how good? none of us will know until we see it. I do know when I watch it, and if somehow this becomes the best Trek movie ever — I will still miss Shatner’s presence.

134. Andy Patterson - August 26, 2008

I believe Anthony and some others have said this – The next movie could really be THE movie to see. And that is the one that may have Shatner in it. But I don’t believe they will. I kind of feel a window has been lost.

135. star trackie - August 26, 2008

C’mon people, if it’s supposed to be a secret, what do you think they are going to say?

“Well, it’s a secret cameo, but yeah, Shatner does show up. It should be a big surprise!. ”

IF Shatner is in it, we WONT hear about it ahead of time. IF he is truly NOT in the movie, we won’t know until May, simple as that.

136. Adam Cohen - August 26, 2008

The movie will be the final word.

¡Viva Shatner!

137. Tom - August 26, 2008

#68 Green blooded bastard

Maybe Bob Orci and Alex Kurtzman would like that!!

138. Cervantes - August 26, 2008

….the Movie will be the final word….for that Movie, if he’s not in it….but the speculation and expectations will continue for the sequel if he’s not!….

AAAAAAARGH!!

Personally, I think it would have been UBERCOOL to see a re-teaming of the ‘elderly’ Kirk with ‘elderly’ Spock somewhere, however brief, in this TOS-influenced Movie….EVEN if it’s storyline is a rebooted supposedly ‘alternative timeline’. And if it doesn’t, and it transpires that William Shatner wasn’t overdamanding in his requests, then it’s an opportunity sadly lost.

Iowagirl, I’m with you, and I won’t be getting worked up about this anymore in any future threads like this one….

139. AdamTrek - August 26, 2008

test

140. AdamTrek - August 26, 2008

We can’t really believe everything that would come out of JJ’s mouth because of his secret-fetish.

Does anyone have a quote from a previous project where he deliberately lied or misled to cover up a surprise? Because as of now, that is the territory we are in based on what he his quoted as saying above of William Shatner is in fact in the new film.

I don’t know what to believe.

141. Joe Schmoe - August 26, 2008

We interrupt this webpage to bring you breaking news from our 24 hour news desk . . . .

James Doohan is also STILL not in the next Star Trek movie.

More details to follow as they come available . . . .

142. ensign joe - August 26, 2008

today I’m feeling rather shatner-rific so I say SHATNER WILL BE IN THIS MOVINooooooooooooooooooo *voooiiiiiipppp* … …

143. Trek Nerd Central - August 26, 2008

Yada yada yada. They doth protest too much.

Shatner’s in it. Wait for the easter egg, babies.

I, for one, won’t stop speculating.

144. Danpaine - August 26, 2008

Throughout the past, present and future of television and film, William Shatner has been, is and will be inexorably remembered as the actor who brought the character of James T. Kirk to life.

Chris Pine will not. Pretty simple.

That said, here’s to looking forward to a great new movie worthy of the name, with depth and continuity – not just another in a line of re-tread pieces of junk which are soooo prevalent today.

145. Jay - "The Real Jim Kirk" - August 26, 2008

I’m on the fence with this one.

The Fanboy inside me really wants Generations to be rectified and for Kirk to have a proper send off, but the rational side of me realises that Mr Shatner, no matter how classy and brilliant he may be, may not make this particular movie work. I agree with the comments above that the Shat being included in this movie would seem forced and that its not all about him. However I cant ignore the fact that Spock was saved by Kirk when he died, so surely Spock would do the same for his ‘dear friend’ (surely the Nexus has a loophole??)

The thing is though, we don’t fully know what Spock’s role in this film really is, and we do know that there will be another movie, so surely if the Shat is not involved in this one, he may be in the 2nd one??

146. Jim Smith - August 26, 2008

The thing that always blows my mind about this, every single time it comes up, is the people who pop up insisting that it’s better if Shatner isn’t in the movie.

I mean – how come? Seriously? How can you be someone who is looking forward to a movie about the TOS characters and simultaneously not be keen on seeing Shatner play Kirk one final time? How is that even possible?

I would like Shatner to be in the movie. I accept that he isn’t – and almost certainly never will be. I’d like him to be in a sequel. I accept that this is unlikely. To actively not want him to be in it seems ragingly illogical, to me. How can you like TOS and not like Shatner-as-Kirk?

I also do not – with the greatest respect to Kurtzman, Orci and Abrams – the film-flam about it being hard to find a way to put him in. K & O were kings of the multiple death and resurrection back on ‘Xena’ and ‘Hercules’. If anyone can do it, they can – and lets face it, even without seeing the script it’s obviously not a horrendously difficult ask.

Obviously there were negotiation difficulties and everyone is now being polite, and quite right too, but the idea that there is some inherent storytelling ‘problem’ here that simply cannot be solved is pretty risible, to be honest.

147. Andy Patterson - August 26, 2008

137

“Personally, I think it would have been UBERCOOL to see a re-teaming of the ‘elderly’ Kirk with ‘elderly’ Spock somewhere”

Personally I think it’d by “ubercool” to have to entire original cast in the movie some way. (On a side note I don’t know why Takei doesn’t pull Walter Keonig on the Stern show with him for some entertaining banter. Keonig is enormously entertaining. Missed opportunity Howard.)

But I’d love to see them in a second movie. Talk about tying all age groups together.

148. Lyle - August 26, 2008

“But a new pair of interviews with both Shatner and Star Trek director JJ Abrams denying Shat is in the movie should be the final word on this saga.”

Anthony, I admire your optimism. However, I suspect that even after the movie is out, and people are in the theater, and we are in the final 5 minutes of the movie with the Enterprise warping off into the distance, there will still be those going “there’s still time! Shatner can still have his surprise Cameo!”

What I would do if it were me is take a page from Ferris Bueller – after the movie is over and the credits have rolled, have Shatner appear on the screen in a hallway and say “You’re still here? It’s over – go home… go!”

149. Shatner_Fan_2000 - August 26, 2008

#137 “Personally, I think it would have been UBERCOOL to see a re-teaming of the ‘elderly’ Kirk with ‘elderly’ Spock somewhere, however brief, in this TOS-influenced Movie….EVEN if it’s storyline is a rebooted supposedly ‘alternative timeline’. And if it doesn’t, and it transpires that William Shatner wasn’t overdemanding in his requests, then it’s an opportunity sadly lost.”

Right on, brother! It pleases me to see so many posts demonstrating Shat Love. Like #145 …

“How can you like TOS and not like Shatner-as-Kirk?”

Exactly. No reason ever given for why he shouldn’t be in it ever holds up. Coulda been done. And shoulda. Period!

p.s. Does anyone else think the rumored plot of Spock jumping around in time righting wrongs and saving lives sounds similar to the plot of HAMLET 2? ;-)

150. Closettrekker - August 26, 2008

#36—“The writers, producers and director just didn’t want Shatner back. It’s that simple. I’m not saying it’s right. I’m not saying it’s wrong. Just be honest with the fans about the reasons.”

Based upon what?

According to Abrams and Orci, they did want to include Shatner. Orci told us that “Shatner required a larger role than (they) felt the movie could sustain”, and went on to explain that the source of that was Mr. Shatner’s “I don’t do cameos” comment.

There is no reason to believe that is anything but honest.

“…but somehow, bringing Shatner back as Kirk is this huge canon/story problem that can’t be solved.”

Of course it can be. That is not the question. The question is, can it be solved within the confines of the story they wish to tell, and without coming off as too gimmicky or contrite (not to mention justifying a role large enough to satisfy Bill Shatner).

151. Closettrekker - August 26, 2008

#56—“Only Robert Orci kept it going (and JJ himself) post comic-con for at least 5 or 6 months, with Orci resurrecting it as far back as March again saying it was possible.”

Wrong. The article was in March. The actual quote you are referring to was from October (“Who knows?”). If you wish to blame someone for Shatner’s absence in STXI, you should look to that article and the reason that discussions ended regarding finding him a place in the film.

“Shatner required a role larger than we felt the movie could sustain.”—Bob Orci, October 2007

Why, you ask?

“I don’t do cameos.”—William Shatner, August 2007

Please try to be more accurate with the timeline, lest you unfairly misrepresent the facts.

152. Cervantes - August 26, 2008

Okay, pulled in for one LAST troubling thought and comment on all this….

….as #147 Lyle points out, I and some of my fellow ‘optimists’ / possibly ‘over-optimistics’ could quite possibly be left sat sitting through every bit of the ‘end credits’ with fingers and toes crossed, till the bitter end, lol. I hope the score turns out to be terrific in this case! :)

153. star trackie - August 26, 2008

#145 “How can you be someone who is looking forward to a movie about the TOS characters and simultaneously not be keen on seeing Shatner play Kirk one final time? How is that even possible? ”

It’s no mystery. They are more fond of non-TOS version of Trek, so the character of Kirk means little to them. That and, of course, the fact that there will always be a few Trek fans who simply don’t like Shatner (who knows why) never have, and it really un-nerves and mystifies them that the man is incredibly popular. Hence the cries “PLEASE, NO MORE FAT SHAT!!”

Of course, for the rest of us, Shatner will always be the essence of the character and any chance for him to return to the role, however briefly, via a carefully guarded cameo surprise, would be delightful and welcomed with open arms. :)

154. British Naval Dude - August 26, 2008

followin’ up on post 96…

Dis is really important… while I conclusively dissproved me own theory that William Shatner wuz not at tha’ Jersey airfield in ’37 and did not take a pot-shot at tha’ Hindenburg, I still have evidence that I’m not crazy or a kook… I mean, thar’ is some history which could link ‘im ta’ blimp-bashin’…

http://deltrame.googlepages.com/blimpconspiracy

Arrrrrrr…

155. Closettrekker - August 26, 2008

#146—-” How can you be someone who is looking forward to a movie about the TOS characters and simultaneously not be keen on seeing Shatner play Kirk one final time? How is that even possible?”

I am a TOS fan and a fan of the original movies. My feelings about other incarnations of Trek range from disinterested to lukewarm. However, I can tell you that I feel much more comfortable without Shatner in this movie, and here is why:

Shatner as Kirk (TOS-TVH)=wonderful

Kirk as Shatner ( TFF-GEN)=not so good

I have been waiting 22 years for the iconic TOS characters to be recast and once again portrayed in their relative youth. I believe that the appearance of Nimoy as Spock is enough to satisfy my desire for nostalgia, and apparently justified by the plot of the film.

Believe me, it is very possible. For many of us, these characters are much larger than the actors who originally portrayed them.

Shatner said goodbye twice (STVI and GEN). That was enough for me.

156. OM - August 26, 2008

“Shatner: I know nothing”

…Ah, that’s it! He can’t be in the new film because he’s practicing to play Schultz on the Hogan’s Heroes remake :-) :-) :-)

157. Windsor Bear - August 26, 2008

Just wake me up next year when this whole thing has blown over, and I’ll run down to Dollar General to get it on DVD. Sheesh!

158. EnsignJulka - August 26, 2008

Whether the Shat is or isn’t in the film, it doesn’t matter, I just want to see this film now!!

159. Xai - August 26, 2008

98. The Last Maquis – August 25, 2008

No need to blow a vein….or insult people. Leave the name-calling at home.

160. Nightmare - August 26, 2008

Prediction:
Just like Superman Returns, This movie will fall FLAT !
Sorry.

161. cellojammer - August 26, 2008

TOS already killed off and resurrected a major character. They got away with it but to me more than once would feel like a real cheat. We’ve had enough “reset buttons” in the various incarnations.

Let the dead rest.

162. star trackie - August 26, 2008

#161 “Let the dead rest.”

The beauty of this movie is the dead CAN rest, yet live at the same time…in the alternate timeline. You can have your cake and eat it too. Nothing wrong with that.

163. Sam Belil - August 26, 2008

Wow — such passion. For those of you who have seen my posts over the past 2+ years, you will know that there is no one more “Old-School” than I am. I always argued that you cannot compare Shatner/Kirk to the plethora of actors who have played James Bond, Sherlock Holmes, Batman,etc. The logic being that for some 40+ years we all have known Shatner TO BE JAMES T. KIRK. Shatner IS KIRK/WILL ALWAYS BE KIRK!!!
Think about it– after just one movie, many people are calling Daniel Craig the best 007 ever! What I’m saying here is that we really need to get over Shatner not being in this movie, if I can accept that, then the rest of you should be able to accept it. Lets also accept the fact that even without William Shatner, we just might be (Please G-d) seeing a great movie — dare I say maybe the best Star Trek movie ever.

164. Captain Presley - August 26, 2008

So JJ “Mr. Secrecy” Abrahms says Shatner’s not in it, and we are to take his word for it? If Shatner were in it, they are all of a sudden now going to stop denying it? Can you see JJ saying: “Okay you got us – He is in it”?
Someone said JJ wouldn’t lie about it. He wouldn’t? This is the biggest project JJ has worked on to date with a lot weighing on it’s success.

I’m going on the record again and saying it for the 1,701 time: HE’S IN IT!

165. Closettrekker - August 26, 2008

#162—That’s assuming such a thing would be beneficial to the story in STXI. The indications are that it wasn’t, hence the quote from Roberto Orci (in October)…”Shatner required a larger role than we felt the movie could sustain”, and the clarification (in March) that the statement was in reference to Shatner’s assertion that he does not do cameos (from August).

That suggests that the story could only sustain what amounted to a cameo (perhaps a flashback on the part of Nimoy’s Spock to a time prior to the incident aboard the Enterprise-B).

166. dalek - August 26, 2008

#151 “Please try to be more accurate with the timeline, lest you unfairly misrepresent the facts.”

Actually I was referring to the facts stated on this website itself.

You will find that Mr Orci’s comments were said to Star Trek magazine March 08:
http://trekmovie.com/2008/06/16/orci-kurtzman-talk-why-chose-tos-prequel-shatner/

And you will find Trekmovie’s Anthony Pascale on comment 8 of the same article, and I quote: “Well Shat said ‘I dont do cameos’ back in October of 07…shortly before filming started. But in May 08 after filming ended he suddenly seemed OK with cameos, even suggesting a voice over. Perhaps he was bluffing”

Both months I quoted in my original message. My facts are from this website. Where are yours from?

167. British Naval Dude - August 26, 2008

SHATNER: Welcome to Raw Nerve where today we’ll talk with internet sensation British Naval Dude. British Naval Dude? What the hell type of name is that?

BND: It’s East Anglian. Hey, what aboot this new film that I talked ta’ Simon Pegg aboot- “Debbie Does Liverpool”?

SHATNER: I have no connection with the film whatsoever.

BND: Fair enough, but surely we can have some fun discussin’ it…

SHATNER: Even my dear friend Leonard [Nimoy] won’t tell me what it’s about.

BND: I see… Well enough o’ this crap then. Please welcome me next guest from tha’ new Debbie film- TJ tha’ hooker…

SHATNER: I’m not going to be on your show anymore.

BND: Wait… isn’t this yer show, mate?

SHATNER: Then why are you calling up a guest? It’s the strangest thing.

BND: We could wrestle o’er whose show it be…

SHATNER: OK, you be shrts, I’ll be skins…

BND: This is not gunna be pretty… Can we go ta’ commercial?

SHATNER: You better stop telling people I hate blimps.

Arrrrrrr…

168. TK - August 26, 2008

>BND: It’s East Anglian.

Oooh! I am honoured to be a fellow East Anglian!!!

169. Closettrekker - August 26, 2008

#166—You are absolutely correct. The interview was conducted in March but not posted here until June. Forgive me for being confused earlier. I stand corrected. My usually solid memory seems to have failed me today, and I apologize.

However, the point remains…if Shatner said “I don’t do cameos” in October of ’07, and Orci’s comment was from March ’08, that is still two months prior to Shatner publicly changing his stance on “cameos” with his comments on The View.

I never found Orci’s comments to leave much of a door open for the possibility, and certainly never felt he was “messing with anyone’s hopes”. What I took from those statements was an explanation for why discussions ended among the “Supreme Court” members, and confirmation that a “Shatner cameo” was at one point being considered as something they felt the story might support.

170. British Naval Dude - August 26, 2008

Norfolk or Suffolk?
Arrrr… it be ye’, me, Eddie Izzard, Wessex, Ivar tha’ Boneless, and Lovejoy…

Shatner’d like tha’ countryside thar’…. no dirigibles at all…

Arrrrrrr…

171. star trackie - August 26, 2008

#165 “#162—That’s assuming such a thing would be beneficial to the story in STXI.”

That’s where we disagree. I don’t think a fun cameo needs to be intregal to the story at all. I loved the monkees showing up in The Brady Bunch Movie. And yes, I know. Shatner doesn’t do cameos…depending on when you ask him. There is nothing wrong with a clever cameo, and if that cameo has some interesting bearing on the story, well that’s just more icing on the cake.

One thing you can bet the rent on is this. IF JJ and ORci and Shatner and everyone else wanted to surprise the fans with a a Shatner-played Kirk in this movie, you’re not going to read about it here or anywhere else. (Until May)

172. cellojammer - August 26, 2008

162.

“The beauty of this movie is the dead CAN rest, yet live at the same time…in the alternate timeline. You can have your cake and eat it too. Nothing wrong with that.”

That’s not beauty. It’s a gimmick and a cop-out. Because he chose to portray Kirk’s demise in “Generations”, Shatner cannot reprise the role without a lot of convoluted plot gymnastics. It would strain credibility to the breaking point. I would not be willing to suspend my disbelief that far. It would just be absurd.

I celebrate Shatner’s masterful portrayal of Captain Kirk over the years and toast his continued success in other pursuits.

173. Closettrekker - August 26, 2008

#171—I am of the opinion that a “cameo” could have been beneficial to the story. A flashback scene (from the perpective of Nimoy’s Spock) depicting a conversation between Nimoy’s Spock and Shatner’s Kirk (prior to the events aboard the Enterprise-A of course) which had some relevance to the task at hand could always have fit into whatever story they were trying to tell. The extent of their creative duties then would only be the subject and dialogue of the conversation and making it relevant to the resolution of some conflict in the story.

Orci’s comment in the March interview suggests that STXI could have supported a cameo, and the fact that there were meetings (with and without Shatner) indicates that it was considered.

“I don’t do cameos” obviously makes such a suggestion a moot point, given Orci’s recounting of how that comment affected their creative interest in finding him a role. It is interesting to me that 7 months later, Shatner seemingly pretended as though he never said that. What I was referring to in #165 was a role in STXI large enough to appease Bill Shatner in August-October.

174. Disappointed. - August 26, 2008

The only problem is that Shatner was never offered a cameo and that interview was after Shatner was told BY NIMOY (since Abrams didn’t have the guts to talk to him) that he wasn’t in the movie.

If you people don’t understand why Shatner fans are mad, I don’t know what to tell you. The bottom line is that not only is this such a touchy issue due to the crappy ending of Generations, but it was made worse by writers and producers coming on this site and acting as if they were trying to get him in the movie, when clearly, that was not the case.

If they had wanted him in the movie, they would have discussed plot with him, which never happened. Abrams said he was desperately trying to get him in the movie, but no contact at all means that’s simply not the case. They had a meeting early on, and that was it, and that was well before Abrams bragged about his desperation.

Not to mention how Orci acted on this site, constantly telling people how possible it was, while knowing full well Shatner wasn’t in the script, and there were no attempts to contact him.

The only person who told the truth the entire time was Shatner himself.

All this, and then one of the actresses actually has the nerve to say this is a movie for the fans. Like hell it is.

The excuses for not putting him in were weak. The whole movie, from what we know, involves Spock trying to keep Kirk alive in the past. You don’t think it would be easy enough to deal with Generations at that point?

Kirk’s death in Generations is a cloud over this movie. It doesn’t matter what happens to Kirk because we know he’s going to be splattered over a mountain because Picard couldn’t figure out that all you had to do was leave the nexus 10 minutes earlier and slap the cuffs on him.

They had a chance to fix Trek’s greatest mistake, and they had Trek’s most famous alumni ready to reprise the role. They fell out of a boat and didn’t hit water.

They may make a good movie, but the way they handled the Shatner situation was an absolute disgrace. I don’t know how much business it will cost them, but it will cost them business, whether it be people who are so mad they won’t see the movie, or people who would have gone to the movie just to see Shatner return to his iconic role.

Had Abrams just said from the get go that he couldn’t work it out for Shatner, it would have been weak, but it would have been far more honest, and there would be far less bitterness.

So don’t be surprised that people are upset. They have a right to be.

175. Disappointed. - August 26, 2008

The cameo comment was in October 2007.

http://www.livevideo.com/video/ShatnerVision/9498198D549B4433B3AEAA80FC9033CA/is-william-shatner-in-the-new-.aspx

That’s the interview. In the SAME interview, he mentions how a cameo was never offered, never discussed, and well after the original news that Shatner wasn’t in the movie came out.

So please let’s get over the “I don’t do cameos” line, since that was one line of a much longer interview well AFTER the producers decided he wasn’t in the movie.

176. tom - August 26, 2008

Is he willing to do a cameo? would they consider it at this point? What would mr. orci say to that? I’m sure Leonard Nimoy would oblige to shoot a gem of a scene with his old buddy.

177. star trackie - August 26, 2008

#172 “That’s not beauty. It’s a gimmick and a cop-out. Because he chose to portray Kirk’s demise in “Generations”, Shatner cannot reprise the role without a lot of convoluted plot gymnastics. It would strain credibility to the breaking point. I would not be willing to suspend my disbelief that far. It would just be absurd.”

Well, granted it would be absurd to you. To the legions of new viewers that the producers hope to attract, paying customers that don’t know Data from shine-ola, it might possibly..and I mean POSSIBLY dust off some bit of trivia buried in the back of their young brains that reminds them that Shatner did play Kirk once upon a time. Or perhaps it would be a revelation. Denny Crane was Kirk? Maybe a “that’s cool” will be uttered here and there, along with the inevitable “so what” shrug of the shoulders. And to fans like myself, who dismiss Generations as rubbish, his death never happened. Therefore a subsequent appearance as Kirk would be just that. The return of Shatner as Kirk. A beautiful thing to be sure.

178. Danpaine - August 26, 2008

Damn….this turned out to be a good thread.

And this (174):

“Kirk’s death in Generations is a cloud over this movie. It doesn’t matter what happens to Kirk because we know he’s going to be splattered over a mountain because Picard couldn’t figure out that all you had to do was leave the nexus 10 minutes earlier and slap the cuffs on him.”

…is absolutely correct.

Anyhow – thanks for an entertaining day!

179. Closettrekker - August 26, 2008

#175—“So please let’s get over the “I don’t do cameos” line, since that was one line of a much longer interview well AFTER the producers decided he wasn’t in the movie.”

You cannot discount that statement, especially since the film’s writer pointed to it specifically as the cause for the “Supreme Court’s” determination that it (putting Shatner in STXI) was not going to work within the story (at least in the type of role Shatner indicated he would require). Obviously, it was still in the air in October of 2007. Go back and read the article linked in post #166. Unless you are going to call Mr. Orci a liar, I don’t see how your contention that it (“I don’t do cameos”) was “well after the producers decided he wasn’t in the movie” can be accurate. Unless you can prove that Orci lied or misspoke in March, it will remain intregally relevant to the discussion…as long as it continues. He has no reason to have his credibility questioned. The only person involved who has demonstrated any inconsistency is Shatner.

180. dalek - August 26, 2008

#169 no probs, i just wanted to clarify that i wasnt making stuff up lol

I found the comments to be open to interpretation, but always offering hope when most of us had closed the door. They came across as the foot being left in the door. Many took them as gospel that something was happening or about to happen back scene and that it wasn’t over. So much so it prompted numerous responses from Shatner’s people who asked at one point, i recall, that they stopped because it was misleading.

181. Closettrekker - August 26, 2008

#174—-“Kirk’s death in Generations is a cloud over this movie. It doesn’t matter what happens to Kirk because we know he’s going to be splattered over a mountain because Picard couldn’t figure out that all you had to do was leave the nexus 10 minutes earlier and slap the cuffs on him.”

I beg to differ… Did the knowledge that Brando’s Vito Corleone would die in his tomato garden in GFI make De Niro’s much younger Vito Corleone less entertaining in GFII? I certainly did not feel as if I did not care simply because I knew how he eventually died or that it was a less than “good” death. That argument is absurd to me.

Generations is a “cloud” because it was a bad movie…that’s all. Those scenes should not have been written, and Shatner should not have agreed to do them. He should have followed the lead of his friend, Leonard Nimoy and politely said, “No thank you”.

182. jr - August 26, 2008

THIS JUST IN….. Shatner will be in the movie, but it will likely be in just one frame, like in a mind-meld sequence, so we will have to watch VERY carefully to catch it…. Ok, maybe not.

183. Rod Of Rassilon - August 26, 2008

you poor poor sick deluded people, oh how I love you all..

I can tell you now, because I didn’tsign a non disclosure agreement, that Shatner WILL appear in the film. He will be doing a sort of George Peppard role.

shatner will be wearing the Gorn suit… more than that would give way too much of the plot.

now please settle down ;)

184. Paul - August 26, 2008

Whats the betting that Shatner will be playing George Kirk Snr.?

In fact, I’d bet lots and lots of money on Shatner appearing as his James Kirk’s father.

185. Closettrekker - August 26, 2008

#183—If you find any takers, bring lots and lots of cash to the premeire…

186. Beam Me Up - August 26, 2008

I bet Shatner will be in the theater watching.

187. What is it with you? - August 26, 2008

It was my impression back in October that Shatner’s comments increased in frequency and desperation the closer it got to the writer’s strike.

To me, that implies that the door was open in his mind as well, and he was hoping to provoke some closure on the matter.

I believe Shatner when he says he knew nothing – he knew exactly what we did. That JJ. and Orci were leaving the door open, if only slightly ajar.

He was like the rest of us. He was hoping to see Shatner as Kirk one more time.

It was a great opportunity, now seemingly lost.

That said, this is new movie, with so much talent behind it, is the best we could have hoped for Star Trek.

I’m happy regardless over their missteps over my favourite Star Trek actor.

188. Lyle - August 26, 2008

I have to take issue with all those who deride Generations as rubbish. If you don’t like the fact that Generations featured the death of James T. Kirk (lest we forget, in a noble and heroic sacrifice to save the population of Veridian IV), then fine. If (like me) you were and still are upset over the destriction of the proud and beautiful Enterprise-D by a 20-year old Bird of Prey, fine.

But Generations had lots of good stuff in it. Picard’s grief over the death of his brother and nephew, his introspection to Troi, making reference to All Good Things, Data’s emotion chip, Dr. Crusher taking a dip in the holo-ocean, the Enterprise-B, Demora Sulu, Malcolm McDowell’s excellent performance as Dr. Soran, the excellent music and special effects, not to mention Kirk’s impassioned speech to Picard about staying on the bridge of the Enterprise and making a difference – these were all great things about a very good movie. No, it wasn’t Wrath of Khan, but it wasn’t Final Frontier either.

I was sorry to see Kirk die, just like everyone else. But Shatner’s time is over. I’ve been watching Shatner as Kirk since I was a little boy in the early 1970s, and nothing can take those memories away. When the Enterprise-A warped off into the sunset at the end of ST VI, I grieved that there would be no more adventures of the original crew. I didn’t miss Shatner, Nimoy, Kelley, Doohan, Takei, Nichols, or Koenig, as much as I respect them and their work – I missed Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Scotty, Sulu, Uhura, and Chekov. Nothing could make me more excited in the realm of Trek than the thought of seeing my old childhood friends on screen again. So they don’t look or sound exactly like they did when I was young – I can live with that. Pine et al. have some very large shoes to fill, but I for one am willing and eager to give them that chance.

189. Anthony Thompson - August 26, 2008

128. Tom

Actually, my prediction was a slightly snarky joke aimed at the Shatner fanatics. I really did NOT believe that it would happen; I was playing. But if it had, I would have gladly taken credit for it. : )

190. Lyle - August 26, 2008

Oh and one other thing about Generations – let’s say Picard had left the Nexus 10 minutes earlier and “slapped the cuffs” on Soran, or left the Nexus several days or weeks earlier and stopped him on the Amagosa Observatory – what then? Now you have 2 Picards – one on the bridge of the Enterprise-D, and another taking care of Soran – how do you resolve this situation? Having 2 Picards at once would not be a good thing – we already have Thomas Riker out there.

I realize this isn’t a thread about Generations, but I wonder if people have thought about that.

191. Trek Fan - August 26, 2008

Seriously folks, let’s have William Shatner back to reprise the role just one more time, that death he suffered in “Generations” was not a good way to end the character.

For shame, Paramount.

192. Matthew_Briggsuk - August 26, 2008

I don’t think Mr Shatner will be in the movie. As for his “i don’t do cameo’s” statment, I think that Generations was for him. He signed up to take the cheque killed Kirk and now Star Trek is on the verge of a huge (fingers crossed) comback, he wants a pieace of it.

Maybe he is in it. I would love to see how they brought him in. Who wouldn ‘t to see ur child hood hero in action again.

193. Anthony Thompson - August 26, 2008

132 and 133. Mark and Sam

Actually, I AM old. I was not critisizing Shatner for his age or girth; rather, I was pointing out that he is no longer well-suited to play a starship captain. I remember Richard Arnold equating the Starship Enterprise with the Enterprise aircraft carrier. Would you expect a 78 year old to be in command of that ship? Of course not!

Shatner is now at the top of his game in Boston Legal, playing a role that is tailor-made for his talents. I want something fresh and new for Star Trek, with just a bit of nostalgia mixed in. Nimoy will provide that. Anything more would be overkill and a huge stretch that the audience wouldn’t accept.

194. Another Shatner Fan - August 26, 2008

Firstly according to Shatner, in numerous interviews, there was never ANY offers made; so every time this cameo thing comes up I am left shaking my head, wondering why it is people criticize Bill Shatner for not taking such a role (when we don’t even know if it was, or even was GOING to be offered) or ….gasp… criticizing him for saying something that may have “scared” the producers off. In my opinion it would be almost insulting to ask him to do a cameo in a film staring the character that he created and embodied for all these years, especially since the list of people given cameos, and uncredited, or walk on appearances, by the powers that be on this movie, has seemed enormous. Why should Bill Shatner settle for that same kind of role?

As #174 Disappointed said
‘If you people don’t understand why Shatner fans are mad, I don’t know what to tell you. The bottom line is that not only is this such a touchy issue due to the crappy ending of Generations, but it was made worse by writers and producers coming on this site and acting as if they were trying to get him in the movie, when clearly, that was not the case”

I couldn’t agree more.

195. Sam Belil - August 26, 2008

#193 — If I offended you I’m sorry. I have just read one line too many saying how “long-in-the-tooth” Shatner is. Do I think there could be a role for him in this movie — YES!!! But like I said prior I am way over the fact that he is not in the movie. Shatner is still having an amazing career — and G-d Bless Him for That!

196. Bob - August 26, 2008

Script leak should pop up soon.

197. Boborci - August 26, 2008

Read every post so far. Not really going to touch this one again except to say how much we truly understand and feel the passion expressed here on all sides of the issue.

A true Kobayashi Maru.

198. Robert April - August 26, 2008

#197

Understood.

So, on to the NEXT movie then?

199. Boborci - August 26, 2008

Still have to finish this one…

200. Robert April - August 26, 2008

;-)

201. Robert April - August 26, 2008

You are alright Boborci!

202. What is it with you? - August 26, 2008

#201 Agreed.

Hope they get a chance for number 2.

203. Alec - August 26, 2008

I think that we ought to remember that this movie is not just aimed at Trek aficionados, but at casual viewers and people who are new to the franchise. The causal viewer and the first-time viewer will, no doubt, have heard of Captain Kirk. However—and this is the important point—they are highly unlikely to know that Kirk died over 70 years after Spock, McCoy, Scotty, etc., as a result of being trapped in the timeless energy ribbon, the Nexus, in the 1994 film Star Trek: Generations! If Kirk were resurrected, for it to make any sense, let alone have any impact, you would need to know this long, complicated back-story. And if only the hardcore fans know this back-story, only they will understand and care about the plot. The problem, of course, is that a film that only appeals to the hardcore fans is not going to revitalise the franchise, which is a fundamental purpose of this film.

I am a huge fan of Shatner; however, the story is all-important. Putting Shatner in this film is just too complicated. It would take too much exposition, and would do nothing for the film except to please a vocal section of hardcore fans who are disappointed with the way the character was killed-off in an earlier film. In fact, it would ruin the origin-story of Trek XI. If Alex and Bob give us a fun character-driven story with great drama and action sequences (look no farther than The Wrath of Khan), then everyone will be delighted. The action is key to attracting new fans: this was the success of Star Wars.

My pressing concern, though, is that the writers respect Trek, especially the Kirk-Spock-McCoy dynamic. This is where the story should be. Uhura, for example, should not save the day or start kicking Gorn-butt! This is totally out of character and above her rank. If we want strong female characters, as I do, then we should look elsewhere. Incidentally, Bob, Janeway was not the first female captain: in The Voyage Home, the Captain of the Saratoga is female. We could have more female captains; we could have prominent female instructors at the academy. What we cannot have is a Communications Officer who thinks she is Captain of the Enterprise or the star attraction; i.e., a case of the George Takei syndrome. Why should Uhura be any more prominent than Sulu or checkov? That she is a woman is no valid reason. Also, let’s remember that Star Trek is not just about sexual equality, it is, among other things, about religious and racial equality, too.

So ends my rant. Thanks for reading, especially Bob and the team. It’s great that you care enough about the fans to find out what they really think.

Alec.

204. TL - August 26, 2008

With over 200 post I hope JJ and company are keeping notes. Fans are still interested it Shatner making an appearance.

205. Boborci - August 26, 2008

“Incidentally, Bob, Janeway was not the first female captain: in The Voyage Home, the Captain of the Saratoga is female. We could have more female captains; we could have prominent female instructors at the academy.”

203. Alec – August 26, 2008

Yes, indeed. I meant no LEAD of one of the major properties had before been a female captain. I misspoke… thanks for letting me clarify.

206. VOODOO - August 26, 2008

Star Trek with Nimoy and not Shatner just won’t feel right.

It’s like a Beatles reunion with McCartney but not inviting Lennon to sing even though he is begging to do a duet. Why just have Nimoy in a Star Trek film when Shatner wants to be involved? Two icons is better than one.

Sorry Bob, but you guys dropped the ball on this one. There had to have been a way to get Shatner involved on some level.

I completely understand the need to get new fans involved with a franchise that has been faltering, but what about throwing a bone to the people who grew up with Shatner as Kirk? A 30 second cameo to show that his character survived that ridiculous death he was given would be more than enough. That shouldn’t be that hard in a film that uses alternate time lines and time travel.

I’m sure the movie will be great + I wish everyone involved nothing but the best, but it’s feels like a huge missed opportunity.

207. Alec - August 26, 2008

#202:

If Shatner is not in this film, then the reason for this is the same reason why he cannot be in the next, or any other, Trek film. The resurrection would require too much exposition, which would be totally lost on so many people. Besides, what would be the point in resurrecting Shatner’s Kirk? How would it impact upon this new crew? Shatner’s Kirk would have to time-travel back to his earlier self (this continues to confound me). I.e., substituting Nimoy for Shatner, a carbon-copy of Trek XI! This would be bad business. Trek XI will establish this NEW crew. In the subsequent films, they will drive the story: neither Nimoy nor Shatner will then be required to pass the torch.

I’m sad to say that I suspect that we have seen the last of the great William Shatner as James T. Kirk. However, as another person observed, we have already have two send-offs for him: The Undiscovered Country; Generations. Great though he was, I think that is enough.

208. OM - August 26, 2008

“Actually, I AM old…”

…So am I. Just put the ‘phones on tigher, crank up Quadrophenia, The Wall or Who’s Next and let the little punks go play with themselves *by* themselves.

:-)

209. Doug L. - August 26, 2008

Some people can’t accept that Shatner isn’t in the movie, Some people think it’s better that he’s not in the movie.

I think it’s better that he’s not, HOWEVER, as i indicated in post 48, it would be a cool nod to undo his ignoble death from generations as a simple time travel abberation after the credits role. it doesn’t require exposition, it doesn’t impact the story telling of the movie.

Any fan worth his salt should appreciate the idea. It’s simple and fun and undoes one of the most poorly conceived film scenes of all time. It’s a simple, fun thing to do, and if the parties involved are all legally and financially agreeable to it, I can’t imagine they wouldn’t.

All the denial of his participation, leads me to believe that maybe he has a cameo. The rest of the movie doesn’t need Shat or the “old Kirk” character, it’s unncessary and complicates the story they want to tell.

Not sure why so many people can’t get past it. It’s cool either way.

Doug L.

210. OM - August 26, 2008

“The resurrection would require too much exposition”

…Are you kidding? There’s a really simple way to bring back James T. Kirk:

Spock: “It appears that in order to save the universe, I must go back in time and stop Nero before he changes the timeline.”

Q: “By golly, you Vulcans may be humorless, but sometimes your logic astounds even *me*! But you’re going to need help, O Eared One.”

Spock: “Agreed. But what sort of help do you propose?”

[Q snaps fingers]

Kirk: “What th…dammit, Spock! I was busy falling off a bridge! What am I doing here?”

Spock: “Admiral?….JIM!”

Q: “There. That should suffice. And I’ll tell you what, Spock. You and Kirk pull off this errand for me and stop Nero, and he gets to stay alive.”

…There. Simple as that. Granted, there’ll be some wankers out there who’ll whine, but who cares? Kirk would be back, alive and ready to die heroically alone all over again.

211. Robert April - August 26, 2008

#207 “Great though he was, I think that is enough.”

And now that we have reached consensus, this thread will undoubtedly end after this final post.

212. The Last Maquis - August 26, 2008

159. Xai

How P.C. of you, indicative of your generation. Isn’t it past your Bed time Son?

213. Doug L. - August 26, 2008

nope 211 not ending yet… I’m waiting for comments on my post.

Shat could have a cameo without even touching on his resurrection or impacting the story over all.

The audience isn’t so stupid that they couldn’t figure out the ramifications of time travel, and the audience newbies he probably never even saw Generations wouldn’t even need to be clued in in the first place.

Just a quirky little end scene that the insiders would get, and the newbies would appreciate simply cuz it was the original captn kirk.

it’s not that hard to swallow. you wouldn’t even need dialogue for a this scene. it’s all impact.

anybody out there feel me on this???!

Doug L.

214. Doug L. - August 26, 2008

sorry couple typos, i’m watching the DNC while i type. Doug L

215. Alec - August 26, 2008

#210

PLEASE do not mention Q. I enjoyed his exploration of humanity; but I hope the script for Trek XI is sound enough not to need a get-out-of-jail-free card in the form of an omnipotent being who can tie up all the loose ends with a click of his fingers whenever the plot needs him to.

Generations is not my favourite film; but it is underrated. The Nexus was a clever, genuinely Sci-Fi concept that united the two iconic captains of Star Trek. The film is part of Trek canon. Kirk’s death is, therefore, part of Trek canon. Perhaps people should accept this and move on with their lives? Kirk died as he had lived: he made a difference. He risked all to prevent a desperate scientist from launching a missile that would have killed MILLIONS of innocent people. That is a heroic death. That is a significant and meaningful death. I think that, because of Kirk’s legendary career and iconic status, fans would have been disappointed with pretty much any death scene.

216. Xai - August 26, 2008

212. The Last Maquis – August 26, 2008
159. Xai

“How P.C. of you, indicative of your generation. Isn’t it past your Bed time Son?”

My generation?
I’m 47, and I was taught that you stand up for your opinion without insults and derogatory remarks about others.
Apparently that was not taught everywhere.

217. The Last Maquis - August 26, 2008

Doug L

Well, the thing I liked More Than any other Idea was “The Guardian of Forever”
It’s a Classical reference, and would be awesome to see again. The Nexsus is kinda stupid to me, but it could work also. Even if Spock saves the day. and all ends well and we see the New cast Fly off towards new Adventures, some kinda post credits Scene where Spock turns and we see Kirk (the Shatner)
for like a half a sec. I’d be satisfied.

218. tom - August 26, 2008

#197 Boborci

I do not agree with your choice or the result of this issue. However I respect you for listening and making a hard choice

219. Xai - August 26, 2008

215. Alec – August 26, 2008

agreed

220. The Last Maquis - August 26, 2008

216. Xai

Then leave me to mine. (opinions)

221. Robert April - August 26, 2008

#213 “nope 211 not ending yet…”

Hmmmm, perhaps this will go on for the typical 500+ posts then. Not that anyone really wants Shatner in this (or any follow-up) movie; we just PRETEND to want him in it to set a new world record for most posts on trekmovie.com.

;-)

222. Alec - August 26, 2008

There is indeed a lot of love for Shatner!

223. krikzil - August 26, 2008

“I don’t do cameos.”—William Shatner, August 2007

He stated he wasn’t in the movie (as did Nimoy) at the Vegas con in August 2007 so I doubt this comment was responsible for the outcome. I do tend to think it’s probably the literal truth of what happened at the outset however. He took that original meeting with JJ but given the direction the movie was taking, Kirk was long dead thanks to Generations. Shatner indicated in that meeting that he was interested in a bigger part….fair enough. (Nimoy and Kelley felt the same way about Generations.) But it just couldn’t work for them in the story they decided to tell.

When Shatner mentioned he’d never heard back from JJ at that con, well the writing was on the wall because it was AUGUST with filming coming up in NOVEMBER. (Nimoy was telling us when he was reporting for filming.)

I would have loved to have seen Shatner & Nimoy together once more, no doubt about but apparently it wasn’t in the cards.

224. Xai - August 26, 2008

220. The Last Maquis – August 26, 2008
216. Xai

“Then leave me to mine. (opinions)”

Then have your opinions.
But insulting other posters in the process (“Little kids” and “brats”) and then me. That doesn’t set well.

225. Anthony Pascale - August 26, 2008

224
I agree and a warning to Last Maquis

lets be respectful of each other. I know this is a tough issue, or as bob says (hi bob!), it is a Kobayashi Maru. But do you have to hit self destruct while talking about it.

226. Alec - August 26, 2008

Clearly, Shatner is not, and will not, be in this film. I know that Anthony started this topic partly as a joke and partly as way of providing a specific place for our ‘Shatner in the movie’ debate, as opposed to ‘derailing’ other threads; however, I think that this thread has been one of the most interesting I have seen on this site: a clean and healthy exchange of opinion among fans. And this is no trivial matter that we are discussing. This is William Shatner.

227. The Last Maquis - August 26, 2008

Aww got teacher to send me to timeout? Very well Anthony, this feels like a no win scenario to me.

228. Xai - August 26, 2008

227. The Last Maquis – August 26, 2008
“Aww got teacher to send me to timeout? Very well Anthony, this feels like a no win scenario to me”

“teacher” caught you on his own. My opinions and my battles are mine.

If it feels better to mock someone, that’s your choice.

229. Xai - August 26, 2008

What I find a little funny is that he doesn’t seem to know he’s supposed to be IN this movie. (according to some fan opinions.)
Bill Shatner and my father are about the same age and for what I can see, both tend to speak their mind. I couldn’t see Mr. Shatner keeping a secret this long without making broad hints.

230. David P - August 26, 2008

Oh the dreaded confirmation of the abominable fact: NO SHAT IN STAR TREK! OH LORD LIFE IS THAT MUCH LESS WORTH LIVING!!
ABRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMS! BLOODSUCKER!!!

231. Anthony Pascale - August 26, 2008

Maquis
clearly you do not know when to quit so you are done with this thread

232. dalek - August 26, 2008

#206 I agree with your sentiments wholeheartedly.

I just want to add that I also wish the movie, and the movie makers well. I hope Star Trek is a success.

If Shatner’s inclusion in Trek is definitely at an end from hereforth, I would finish by hoping that in some way down the line soon, they deal with the death of Kirk. It was the least optimistic exit and goodbye of any major character in the Trek universe, and Kirk is not only one of the all time greatest players, but now the central protoganist again.

You don’t need Shatner to change Kirk’s future, or create a future after his “death”.

But to keep Kirk dead whilst we watch his past, feels a bit creepy, and unsettling. Like watching home movies of a dead relative. It feels like that watching some of the old episodes back since Generations.

We hear a lot “whats best for the story” but the Star Trek universe is far more important than any one story (and this story just sounds like a rehash of Gods and Men).

Forget Shatner. If his Trek is tryly over I’d still like to see Captain Kirk given his fair dues. Star Trek is about optimism. There’s nothing optimistic knowing that character (now played by Pine) is gonna end up the way he does in Generations. It’s still the one thing in the way of me enjoying this movie.

Good luck with it all!

233. Shatner_Fan_2000 - August 26, 2008

# 206 & 232 … AGREED. I’m in the camp that is rooting for the franchise, and will be there to see the movie for that first midnight showing, hoping I’ll love it …… but, just think how many MORE fans would be happy and excited right now if we knew we were getting Shatner along with Nimoy. For God’s sake, these ICONS won’t be with us much longer, but are still vibrant and capable today. What a missed opportunity!!

234. Thomas - August 26, 2008

210. OM
You think that’s simple? Yes, if you’re a Trek fan. For the non-fans, it’s going to be a huge “WTF?” moment.
The “wankers who’ll whine” will be the new audience trying to figure out what the hell is going on. The thing about Q is that if he shows up, he could have done this whole movie himself and not have to involve NimoySpock at all. He could have just fixed everything himself and the movie would end in five minutes. I hope you’re just joking.

235. Mark Lynch - August 27, 2008

No offense meant to anyone but how the hell can a piece of non-news get to over 230 posts……?

I dread to think of what will happen when something noteworthy happens.

236. The Prophet - August 27, 2008

In the 24th Century Spock is called by the people of Talos ones again, to meet Captain Pike, who had not died yet.
During the Rendevous of that both characters, the were telling the history of Star Trek from their own point of view. Only those Parts that they have taken part in the beginning.

Nothing about a timetravel or something, that’s the story of the movie.

237. TheLovelyBonesMcCoy - August 27, 2008

Boborci is right — this situation is a bit of a Kobayashi Maru. And if I’m right, Boborci “doesn’t like to lose.” He’ll find away to change death into a fighting chance to live. Have faith.

238. Another Shatner Fan - August 27, 2008

Mr. Orci

I also commend you for being interested enough to read, and kind enough to respond to what the fans have to say but as #203 said:

“Sorry Bob, but you guys dropped the ball on this one. There had to have been a way to get Shatner involved on some level. ”

The one thing I would ask is that there be no more “cat and mouse” games on this issue. Shatner fans have been up and down with every piece, or imagined piece, of info that has come out on this subject, and frankly we, well at least I, am exhausted by the roller coaster ride and I believe this approach is reaching the point of diminishing returns.

To many Shatner fans it feels as though our opinions have not mattered at all and that has left many of us feeling very left out and a yes angry and IMO that is why this issue is still such a hot topic.
Thanks for listening.

239. Dom - August 27, 2008

I get the impression that, if we count TNG continuity in the film, Kirk is obviously dead at the start of the film and the timeline will be revised by the end of the film to the extent that we don’t know what the future of any of these characters will be: effectively a ‘Universe 2.’ It could well be that many events of TOS and so on won’t happen or will happen differently in this timeline.

In effect, this will make the new film series ‘current,’ rather than a historical period. The biggest issue for any Trek ‘prequel’ to deal with is knowing what happens to the characters in the future. Enterprise proved this by having to ride roughshod over a lot of people’s opinions of Star Trek history.

Indeed the Berman Treks played out the future to at least the 30th century, so by effectively sidelining that issue, the neo-Trek films can be open to do whatever they want!

Sadly, Shatner can’t realistically appear in the film: he’s dead at the start and Chris Pine’s Kirk’s future should be unknown. The last thing the writers would then want to do is handcuff the series again by setting up a revised future where Shatner is playing an older Kirk.

By the end of the new Star Trek film, we need to see Pine as the ‘main’ Kirk and Quinto as the ‘main’ Spock!

240. star trackie - August 27, 2008

“I am a huge fan of Shatner; however, the story is all-important. Putting Shatner in this film is just too complicated. It would take too much exposition”

Question: How much exposition does it take to make a dead character live in an alternate timeline dealing with time travel?

Answer: None.

241. Upset - August 27, 2008

179–again the “I don’t do cameos” statement came well after it was announced that Shatner would not be in the movie. It had absolutely NOTHING to do with the decision making process.

Mr. Orci–this was not a kobayshi maru. It was no brainer and you guys just dropped the ball. I agree with 232.

At this point–the character of James T. Kirk must have his destiny changed. This movie doesn’t matter because no matter what happens, Kirk still gets splattered over a mountain side because an idiot from his future couldn’t figure out that he could just as easily leave the nexus a few minutes earlier and slap the cuffs on Soran.

242. star trackie - August 27, 2008

#241 “Mr. Orci–this was not a kobayshi maru. It was no brainer and you guys just dropped the ball”

I think we should save any commentary about “dropping” the ball until after we’ve seen the game. Shatner can be omitted from the film, and it could still be a great Trek movie. Conversely, Shatner can be in the film, and it still be a stinker. All I can really do it hope for a good movie, and if Shatner pops up, as Jim Kirk, in a photo, a flashback, a voiceover, a ghost or on the side of a coin, it will only be gravy.

It can be done. And in the context of a changed timeline, time-travel story, it can be done quite simply and I hope they do surprise us all. But if they don’t, it’s no reflection on the capabilites of those involved. I’ll just chalk it up to another failed Hollywood negotiation.

243. Sneak Preview Before Wide Release & IMAX? - August 27, 2008

Let’s have some sneaks please so that the film is as good as it can be upon its wide release.

Every other Trek movie has been branded as exciting and the best ever only to be met with mixed or disastrous results.

With all the lead time between now and next summer, can we have IMAX prints and maybe a 3D version simultaneously release? Perhaps these two formats can be ‘extended’ cuts or special editions to get people to see the film in those special venues.

244. Closettrekker - August 27, 2008

#241—-According to Mr. Orci, the determination was made that “Shatner required a larger role than the movie could sustain.” He went on to clarify that this determination was made according to Shatner’s “I don’t do cameos” remark.

“the “I don’t do cameos” statement came well after it was announced that Shatner would not be in the movie. It had absolutely NOTHING to do with the decision making process.”

I’d like to see you back that up. The statement in August that Shatner would not be in the movie came from Shatner, who admittedly had no contact with Abrams after their initial meeting. He says Nimoy told him. Well, neither one of them are/were members of the self-prolaimed “Supreme Court”, who would ultimately make the decision as to whether he was in or out. Mr. Orci, however, was privy to those discussions.

Unless you are willing to call Mr. Orci a liar (and you have no reason to), there is no reason to question that.

“This movie doesn’t matter because no matter what happens, Kirk still gets splattered over a mountain side because an idiot from his future couldn’t figure out that he could just as easily leave the nexus a few minutes earlier and slap the cuffs on Soran.”

Once again—does knowing that Brando’s Vito Corleone dies in his tomato garden ruin the Oscar-winning performance of De Niro as the young Vito Corleone in the Godfather, Part II?

Is Coppola’s Patton not a good movie because we know he will eventually die in a jeep accident instead of on the battlefield?

Does Generations ruin our experience watching the young Kirk defeat the Gorn on Cestus III, confront Kor on Organia, battle Khan in the engineering section aboard the Enterprise or in the Mutara Nebula, or outmaneuver the Romulan Commander in “BOT” near the Neutral Zone?

Of course not. That argument is absurd.

Why should Abrams, Orci and company bear the burden of correcting someone else’s movie? It is not their responsibility to throw fellow filmmakers under the bus by undoing what was written in that awful movie.

Let it go.

245. Alec - August 27, 2008

#240: ‘Question: How much exposition does it take to make a dead character live in an alternate timeline dealing with time travel?’

My answer: Assuming you want the audience as a whole, not just Trekkies, to understand the plot, then you will need much exposition. You are assuming that the audience is very familiar with the character such that they do not need to be told why Kirk even needs to be resurrected in the first place. I suppose your argument is that, once the time-line is changed, what happens in Generations is irrelevant: Kirk does not need to be resurrected; he never died. I am warming to this idea.

The first problem I see is that, if Kirk’s death is revoked in the alternate time-line, what else changes? No doubt there would be myriad changes, few of which could be explained in this film. I wave this objection, because this would create a nice mystery at the end of the film: we would be left to wonder how the landscape of the 24th century has been reshaped.

The second problem I see is that, because of the long life-spans of Vulcans, Spock knows that Kirk died on Veridian III. Spock outlives Kirk. So, if Spock successfully changes the time-line to prevent the destruction of the federation, he is going to be surprised to see his old friend alive, isn’t he? But the causal viewer and first-time fan are not going to understand WHY he would be surprised: they did not see Generations. Perhaps one could object that, with the changes in the time-line, Spock would have no memory of the earlier events. I’m not comfortable with that explanation. However, if this scene is cleverly written, this confusion could be avoided. Spock need not mention the alternate time-line, of which Kirk would have no knowledge. He could meet Kirk with a ‘knowing look’ in his eyes. The new fans would have no knowledge of Kirk’s death in Generations and would not wonder how elder Kirk got here; and so they would not be perplexed or troubled by this scene, assuming Spock keeps quiet about the alternative time-line. In fact, I now see no problem in Spock mentioning the alternate time-line. Spock could quickly explain why he is surprised to see Jim; after all, he died in his timeline X number of years ago. I would love the film to end with elder Spock and elder Kirk each enjoying a glass of Romulan Ale beneath the stars. We have clever writers. What will we think of their solution?

246. Closettrekker - August 27, 2008

#241—Rick Berman, Ron Moore, William Shatner…Those are some of the names responsible for what happened to the character of JTK in Generations.

Nowhere in that list will you find the names JJ Abrams, Damon Lindelof, Bryan Burk, Roberto Orci, or Alex Kurtzman.

You have a great deal of misplaced anger. Point it at Berman and Moore for developing that story. Aim it at William Shatner for agreeing to do it.

How is it that you justify giving them a pass and finding the one party not at all liable for creating the problem to be responsible for rectifying it?

That makes absolutely no sense.

247. Alec - August 27, 2008

I’m now convinced that Shatner can be in this film and that it can not only make sense, but be beneficial to the film. If anyone is in any doubt as to the popularity of William Shatner, they need only look at this thread. The film will do better business with both Nimoy and Shatner in it. All that needs to happen is for Shatner and Nimoy to film a five-minuite scene at the end of the film where, having altered the time-line, Spock returns to find his old friend alive and well. This would not be difficult or expensive to shoot and it would please a great many fans. Perhaps Kirk could be concealed at first: he could be in a dimly-lit room in a chair facing away from the camera as Spock walks towards him and the audience gets a surprise…

248. British Naval Dude - August 27, 2008

No gnus is good gnus…

My, my… after 3 days, heated debate, that Orci bloke droppin’ in, and me damnable evidence that Shatner has some sort o’ psychological phobia concernin’ blimps… seems this thread wants ta’ believe… or some other nonsensical phrase like that…

Why it’s just like yer’ presidential convention goin’ on in Colorado…

Oh, by tha’ by, I accept monetary donations ta’ help me research Shatner’s dirigible disorder… ‘course I just use tha’ money ta’ buy meself rides in blimps…

Arrrrrrr…

249. VOODOO - August 27, 2008

Closettrekker #246

There is no doubt that Bob Orci, J.J. Abrams and the rest of the team had nothing to do with the character being killed off in such a meaningless way. I also believe them when they say Shatner would have been involved if his character wasn’t killed off in Generations.

I also admit that they are in a very unenviable position where Shatner is concerned. They are damned if they do and damned if they don’t. I for one have zero “misplaced anger” towards the creative team.

On the other hand they are in a very unique position to give the character the dignified ending that Rick Berman took away.

If I were involved in this film I would somehow slip Shatner in. Even if it were in the end credits kind of like Iron Man or the X-Files. A ten second cameo would do the trick.

James Kirk deserves a better ending.

250. Closettrekker - August 27, 2008

#247—-” If anyone is in any doubt as to the popularity of William Shatner, they need only look at this thread.”

While he played a cultural icon and I have no illusions about his popularity with older fans like me, I’m not sure this thread is a good indicator.

Younger moviegoers (which is a more than substantial portion of this film’s target audience) could likely not care less about William Shatner. Many of them were not even alive the last time he portrayed JTK in canon Trek.

251. krikzil - August 27, 2008

>> I couldn’t see Mr. Shatner keeping a secret this long without making broad hints.

Ain’t that the truth. Probably why Nimoy won’t tell him anything either. ;)

Closettrekker– no disrespect to Mr. Orci (I personally love his writing) but his statements I think were just kindness to fans and ultimately in movieland it’s what the Director says and does — or in this case doesn’t do — like get back in touch with Shatner that pointed to what the reality of the situation was from the start. (I mentioned in another thread that I was pretty surprised when Shatner told us that at the Vegas 2007 con. And it pretty much ruined my day.) JJ came out pretty early about the problems inherent with bringing the Kirk character back with the Generations death.

And even if Shatner rethought the idea of a cameo, the writers strike was going on throughout filming. sigh.

>>On the other hand they are in a very unique position to give the character the dignified ending that Rick Berman took away

Yes, that would have be wonderful!

252. Closettrekker - August 27, 2008

#251—“…no disrespect to Mr. Orci (I personally love his writing) but his statements I think were just kindness to fans and ultimately in movieland it’s what the Director says and does — or in this case doesn’t do —…”

For me, there is absolutely no reason to question Orci’s statements. I recall JJ talking about the inherent problems with including Shatner, but it was always coupled with an expression of desire to find a way to make it work anyway. He never said to us, prior to Shatner’s infamous “I don’t do cameos”, that Shatner would definitively not be in the film. Shatner himself says he never had any further contact beyond the initial meeting, and that he heard from Nimoy that he wasn’t in it. Of course, Nimoy was not one of those decision-makers. The only one (privy to those meetings) who has spoken about it at all publicly is Orci. That is all we have to go on. Orci says that Shatner’s comment indicated to them that he required a role larger than the movie could sustain.

I understand that you, and many others, will turn a blind eye to Bill Shatner being at all to blame for not having so much as a cameo in this film. Bill even acts as though he didn’t say it (by making comments as he did on The View), and many of you would gladly accomodate him by ignoring the fact that he did. The truth is, Orci’s comment suggests that even if it was eventually to be worked out within the story, Shatner’s mouth made it a moot point.

I don’t get it… Shatner agreed to do Generations, but he gets a pass for that, while Orci and company get a bad wrap for not fixing it…

Shatner is the only one who has been inconsistent throughout the entire ordeal, and yet Orci’s sincerity is what gets questioned….

I hope some of you never get jury duty…at least if I am ever accused and put on trial for something I didn’t do.

253. Alec - August 27, 2008

#250:

I think we should, here, emphasise ‘target’ in ‘target audience’. I have no doubt that this film will be aimed at the casual fan and the first-time viewer, along with Trekkies; however, I am sceptical as to how popular this film, or any Star Trek film, will be with non-Trekkies. Star Trek does not (yet?) have the mass appeal of something like Star Wars or Lord of The Rings, which also have strong fanatical fan bases. I think, somewhat unscientifically, that a very significant proportion of the people who see this film will be Trekkies. Many people, sadly, will not give it a chance when it has ‘Star Trek’ in the title: too cerebral; too nerdy, etc.

I disagree with respect to William Shatner. He is, as you say, a cult icon. As such, he is instantly familiar. Many young fans, whilst they may not have seen (m)any Trek films, will know that William Shatner is Captain Kirk. As a cult icon, he is referenced throughout the media: in films, such as Fight Club; in TV shows, such as The Simpsons and Family Guy. Shatner is also well-known, now, for his work on Boston Legal.

254. British Naval Dude - August 27, 2008

No worries, Closettrekker-
in England yer’ guilty until proven innocent so we’d likely just skip tha’ jury trial… (I did think that wuz funny, though)

But seriously folks, no sportin’ event is safe wit’ Shatner on tha’ loose… mercilessly huntin’ down them zeppelins…

Arrrrrr…

255. Closettrekker - August 27, 2008

#253—-“Shatner is also well-known, now, for his work on Boston Legal.”

Which is watched by what demographic? 40-65 year olds?

” I think, somewhat unscientifically, that a very significant proportion of the people who see this film will be Trekkies. Many people, sadly, will not give it a chance when it has ‘Star Trek’ in the title: too cerebral; too nerdy, etc.”

That’s speculation, and especially unsubstantiated since the hype hasn’t even begun yet, and will likely not begin until Christmas (when STXI can reasonably be expected to sustain mainstream hype through opening weekend). This film will have much to offer mainstream moviegoers, and particularly younger ones, as it promises fantastic special effects and action-sequences, the likes of which have never been seen in a feature film. There will likely be an aggressive campaign to surpress those preconceived notions about Trek. Shatner’s absence in the film will be one more reason to believe that “this is not your father’s Trek”. While the character he portrayed is admittedly an “icon”, Shatner also brings with him a stigma of silliness and ham-it-up acting.

“Many young fans, whilst they may not have seen (m)any Trek films, will know that William Shatner is Captain Kirk.”

Of course, but they will not have the same apprehension about him being portrayed by someone else as many of those who grew up with it, and certainly not to the same degree as established fans of the franchise (who will see the film regardless of Shatner’s presence/.non-presence in it.

My kids are a prime example. They are excited about STXI, and the notion that young actors will be portraying Kirk, Spock, and McCoy. They have watched Trek movies with their old man for years (although they cannot take TOS seriously), and could not care less about William Shatner. They and their peers will determine if this film is successful or not, especially with that budget. I cannot imagine many 10-21 year olds really giving a damn if Shatner is in it or not, and they may even be more willing to give it a chance if he isn’t.

256. Tom - August 27, 2008

The right intent was there from the start. They did meet with him. Perhaps they didn”t realize he would require a larger role. They thought he would just be happy to be asked. Knowing Shatner and his history in Trek, they probably should have realized that he wanted a large role. Even Berman knew he would not do a cameo in Generations, so they made it bigger. Berman blew it with Nimoy and Kelley. They still definiteky had to approach Shatner and they did. They reasons that they did not get him in to the movie is on them. How hard they tried is not really for us to know.

257. GaryS - August 27, 2008

I will see the film either way.
So, it makes no difference to me one way or the other.
We do know if he is in it ,
It wont be a large role.

258. THX-1138 The Fandom Menace - August 27, 2008

So much emotion. So much passion. So much ugliness. So much vitriol.

It’s sorta like watching two water buffalo mate.

It doesn’t matter how much of a cult icon Shatner is. It doesn’t matter how many pop culture references to him there are. It doesn’t matter what the die-hard Trek fans think is best.

What matters is if the writers of this film thought that they could make any sense out of their story by writing William Shatner as Kirk into it. It didn’t seem to work for them. If other people think they can write a Trek movie and include William Shatner, go ahead and do it. But for this movie, there will be no William Shatner.

I think a lot of people are afraid that this movie might be a success without Shatner. And that seems to make them want to lash out at the writers and director for his exclusion. I just have a hard time believing that Abrams, Orci, and Kurtzman et al took on this movie with the ulterior motive of keeping Shatner out of it. That’s ludicrous. It just boils down to the fact that Kirk died in Generations and every idea I have read (EVERY IDEA) sounds half-baked and contrived. Too slap-dash, let’s just forget this ever happened, fan-boyish. In my opinion, Spock’s death was a bad idea, as was his subsequent resurrection. By bad idea, I mean poorly executed.

All in all, It’s a poor idea to kill off characters in long running stories only to bring them back.

259. Closettrekker - August 27, 2008

#257—“I think a lot of people are afraid that this movie might be a success without Shatner”.

Or worse, a “bigger” success than any previous Star Trek film…

I think that the older some people get, the more afraid they are of change.

This film is not as much for me as it is for my kids. Whether it is a success or not depends primarily upon how many of their friends go see it. That will have next to nothing to do with Shatner’s absence or presence in the movie. I guarantee it.

260. Sam Belil - August 27, 2008

Shatner’s popularity speaks volumes in this thread! No one wanted to see him in this movie more than me. I got over the anger — we all need to get over it. Shatner will always be known as the one the original James T Kirk, significantly far more than Denny Crane or TJ Hooker. When people think William Shatner — the first thing that comes to mind is James T. Kirk — just ask my 15 year old son. #257 — I totally agree with you — as painful as it might be to many people out there, the possibility does exist that this might turn out to best ST movie ever without Shatner, and you know what that will NOT take one thing away from his legacy!!!! Look at the wild success of Daniel Craig, he a FANTASTIC James Bond, perhaps the best — but that does not take away from the “Gold-Standard” that was so very well established by Sean Connery’s James Bond. We can be “Shatner-Loyalists” and still EMBRACE this film — if not successful it will NOT be because that Shatner is not in it. If this movie fails, it will because of lousy story telling. I have only reason to believe that we will be seeing a good story!

261. THX-1138 The Fandom Menace - August 27, 2008

Sam, (and Closet) you are absolutely, 100% correct.

Trust me; I revel in watching Shatner in Kirk on my DVD’s of the series and movies. His performance is captivating and as a child he was my first hero.

Sam Belil-

“We can be “Shatner-Loyalists” and still EMBRACE this film — if not successful it will NOT be because that Shatner is not in it. If this movie fails, it will because of lousy story telling. I have only reason to believe that we will be seeing a good story!”

That is the most articulate statement on the issue I have heard. It should be put at the beginning of every article on Shatner that appears here in Big Bold Type.

262. THX-1138 The Fandom Menace - August 27, 2008

“as” Kirk. Typonians.

263. star trackie - August 27, 2008

Success in the terms of $$ doesn’t mean a whole lot. Before Casino Royal, Pierce Brosnan’s last movie, the one with Hale Berry, was the highest grossing Bond movie of all time and it was shit. Casino Royale continued the upwards spiral and became the new Bond box ofice champ..and it was good. And neither will ever take the iconic place of Connery’s Goldfinger, which has cemented it’s place firmly in film and pop culture history.

JJ’s Trek may do great and spawn 2 sequels(I hope!), or it may just do so-so and turn into a one-off that will be an interesting footnote to the legacy called Star Trek. With or without Shatner, let’s hope it doesn’t turn into another Lost in Space or Speed Racer.

You’ve heard the old saying, “The bigger they are, the harder they fall.”? Well, that’s especially true with big budget, by-design Hollywood blockbusters. We need to all cross our fingers and hope for the best.
And a wish or two for Shatner to show up in the movie certainly can’t hurt.

264. Alec - August 27, 2008

#255:

Of course I was speculating; and I made it clear in my post that that was what I was doing. In disagreeing with my comment that a very significant proportion of people who see this move will be Trekkies, you are speculating, also. Neither of us has conducted detailed polls, surveys, and general data predictions, I trust? There’s no harm in speculating!

The Trek team are going to have to work very hard to change the perception of the show as cerebral and nerdy. Incidentally, I hope that doesn’t mean they change the show. You suggest that Shatner’s absence will help people to think that ‘this is not your father’s Trek’. However, I think that the general perception of Star Trek (including The Next Generation, Deep Space Nine, Voyager, etc) is that it is a cerebral and nerdy show. Again, we’re only speculating; so don’t lay that charge against me! But I think you’d have a hard time denying that the general public thinks that Star Trek is a bit nerdy.

265. Closettrekker - August 27, 2008

#262—“Success in the terms of $$ doesn’t mean a whole lot. ”

I’m afraid it’s quite significant toward determining the direction of the franchise in the near future.

“And a wish or two for Shatner to show up in the movie certainly can’t hurt.”

I suppose that depends upon how much you will be disappointed when he doesn’t show up.

266. The Original Mark T. - August 27, 2008

Sam #259, you said it!

That has to be the best, most even-handed take on the subject thus far. None of us, aside from the few members of the inner circle who have posted here, know what has transpired over the last several months regarding Shatner and STXI. For the rest of us to be hurling insults about an actor’s weight, claiming the director/writers “dropped the ball”, or employing the WAY over used term “missed opportunity”, without seeing the final product, is ridiculous.

As for me, I look forward to debating the benefits/drawbacks of Shatner’s inclusion/exclusion from the film the day after it hits the multiplex.

267. Closettrekker - August 27, 2008

#263—“In disagreeing with my comment that a very significant proportion of people who see this move will be Trekkies, you are speculating, also.”

Actually, I was referring to the film’s stated target audience, and the implication was that the film will only be successful if they turn out to see it. I would hardly consider any of that that speculation.
And I do not necessarily disagree with the notion that the number of “trekkies” who see this film will be significant. I suppose you would have to specifically explain what the term “significant” means to you in relation to this film’s audience.
What I disagreed with is the contention on your part that the attempts to market the film to that target audience will fail, which is what you implied. It is impossible to judge that probablity before we even see a 3-4 month aggressive campaign to market this film leading up to opening weekend (now the assumption that such a campaign will begin over the holidays is speculative).

268. Alec - August 27, 2008

#266:

I said that (at this moment in time) I am ‘skeptical’ about whether Trek XI will be popular with non-Trekkies; I certainly didn’t mean to imply that I thought that the film would ‘fail’ to be popular with non-Trekkies. My point is that, in general, I don’t think that past Trek films or shows have been terribly popular outside the strict fan base; consequently, J.J. and co have their work cut-out for them if they want to change this. In this, they may well succeed. Only time will tell.

Confining our discussion to this thread: in general, it seems that most people want Shatner to be in Trek XI, so long as his inclusion makes sense in respect of the plot.

269. THX-1138 The Fandom Menace - August 27, 2008

#265 The Original Mark T.

“As for me, I look forward to debating the benefits/drawbacks of Shatner’s inclusion/exclusion from the film the day after it hits the multiplex.”

I personally think that it will be a non-issue. I personally think that it is currently a non-issue. Except that everyone keeps making an issue out of it.

270. Closettrekker - August 27, 2008

#267—Perhaps I should have been more clear. This is the line I was referring to from your post (although I quoted it earlier):

“Many people, sadly, will not give it a chance when it has ‘Star Trek’ in the title: too cerebral; too nerdy, etc.”

That is what I called speculative, and found to be implying that the marketing campaign will fail. Once again, though, “many” is a relative term.

271. British Naval Dude - August 27, 2008

I am just glad that I got ta’ mention “Ivar tha’ Boneless” in this thread. Thanke’…

Arrrrrrr…

272. krikzil - August 27, 2008

“For me, there is absolutely no reason to question Orci’s statements. I recall JJ talking about the inherent problems with including Shatner, but it was always coupled with an expression of desire to find a way to make it work anyway. He never said to us, prior to Shatner’s infamous “I don’t do cameos”, that Shatner would definitively not be in the film. ”

Uh, he never he WOULD be in the film either. I’m not questioning Orci at all but in the world of movies, it’s the director, not the writer who calls the shots. (Unless of course you are a writer/director like Cameron.)

“Shatner himself says he never had any further contact beyond the initial meeting, and that he heard from Nimoy that he wasn’t in it. Of course, Nimoy was not one of those decision-makers. The only one (privy to those meetings) who has spoken about it at all publicly is Orci. That is all we have to go on. Orci says that Shatner’s comment indicated to them that he required a role larger than the movie could sustain. ”

Not ever hearing from JJ says it all. Nimoy wasn’t a decisio-maker too but obviously JJ included him to a greater degree than normal out of respect for his place in Trekdom (as he should). They didn’t see a way to incorporate Shatner into the storyline. Shatner could have been saying anything to everyone in August and that wouldnt have changed a thing. It was over before it began in that first meeting I believe. They already had the idea of where the storyline was going. Shatner wanted a larger role; it didn’t fit with their storyline. They knew he didn’t want a cameo. (The only criticism I have for anyone is that perhaps JJ should have called Shatner back.)

“I understand that you, and many others, will turn a blind eye to Bill Shatner being at all to blame for not having so much as a cameo in this film. Bill even acts as though he didn’t say it (by making comments as he did on The View), and many of you would gladly accomodate him by ignoring the fact that he did. :”

Rather harsh. And untrue. I’m not turning a blind eye at anything. I however DO believe you are more than willing to criticize and blame Shatner for more than his fair share at every turn. We’ve had this debate before.

“I don’t get it… Shatner agreed to do Generations, but he gets a pass for that, while Orci and company get a bad wrap for not fixing it…”

I’ve never given him a pass. I’ve heard people complain about it a lot and wish he’d listened to Nimoy. Have you read his new autobiography? He discusses why he did the film. But as awful as his death in Generations was, I get why it happened. Braga and Berman were simply eager to pass the torch and didn’t care about Kirk or TOS. At the time of that movie, TNG was riding very high. Interestingly enough, Braga did say that in retrospect (at this last Vegas con) that he realized how wrong Kirk’s death was.

“Shatner is the only one who has been inconsistent throughout the entire ordeal, and yet Orci’s sincerity is what gets questioned….”

Not inconsistent at all. Puzzled, hurt and ego bruised. Emotions which given his stature in Trek and his current career make a lot of sense to me.
And of course, he’s asked why he’s not in the movie every single interview
even though he’s promoting his book , his tv show or whatever other thing he’s got going. Other than commenting on not understanding why he’s not in it, he’s never said a bad word about the new film.

“I hope some of you never get jury duty…at least if I am ever accused and put on trial for something I didn’t do.”

Ah, but you’d vote Shatner guilty in a hearbeat. ;)

273. Alec - August 27, 2008

#269:

‘Many’ is indeed a relative term and, of course, does not imply a majority. We, perhaps, should also be clear about what we mean, here, by the word ‘fail’! However, I think we should now put these considerations to one side. We both want the film to succeed. The difference is that I would like Shatner to be in it, just in a small cameo scene at the end, if possible.

274. star trackie - August 27, 2008

#264 “#262—”Success in the terms of $$ doesn’t mean a whole lot. ”

I’m afraid it’s quite significant toward determining the direction of the franchise in the near future.”

Sadly, you’re right. When a movie does well, be it good or bad, it usually insures a sequel. Bond, by all rights, should have died on the vine 3 movies ago. BUT, depsite the crap they put out, people flocked to see it, insuring more crap would follow. Thankfully for all, the franchise seems to be back on track after losing Brosnan forced them to re-think their direction.. And we won’t even talk about the gawdawful “satire” movies like “Another Teen Movie”, “The Superhero Movie”, “Scary Movie” and the upcoming “Disaster Movie”. As long as people flock to see them they will keep coming. And a lot of people think they are funny as hell. But I consider them rushed, un-funny successful failures. Big box office only guarantees more of the same. For better or worse.

275. krikzil - August 27, 2008

“We can be “Shatner-Loyalists” and still EMBRACE this film — if not successful it will NOT be because that Shatner is not in it. If this movie fails, it will because of lousy story telling. ”

Well said. And I agree with Closettreker– I do think this movie is the make or break it for Trek. The movie has to do well or we’re cooked. Or at least for many years from now when someone might resurrect it again. I don’t want to wait until I’m in the retirement home!

276. Alec - August 27, 2008

#274:

If this film flops—I’m confident that it won’t, by the way—the franchise will likely not expand in the near future. However, remember that we already have 10 feature films and 726 episodes over 6 TV shows. Have you seen every single episode? Can you remember every single episode? I doubt that you’ll be bored in your retirement home.

277. Closettrekker - August 27, 2008

#271—“Not inconsistent at all. Puzzled, hurt and ego bruised. Emotions which given his stature in Trek and his current career make a lot of sense to me.”

Not inconsistent?

He says in October, “I don’t do cameos”.

Months later, he goes on The View and publicly questions why he doesn’t have what amounts to one (i.e., Kirk’s father, etc.). That doesn’t seem inconsistent to you?

“Ah, but you’d vote Shatner guilty in a hearbeat”

Based upon the fact that Abrams, Orci, etc. all stated that they wanted him in the film, along with Orci’s statement that Shatner’s “I don’t do cameos” comment caused them to realize that he required a larger role than the movie could sustain (and thus ended any more talk about it amongst the “Supreme Court”), I would say he blew any chance of having such a cameo. If that means “guilty”, then yes.

There is nothing but conjecture to suggest that the decision was already final.

“Not ever hearing from JJ says it all. ”

Why? If it was still “up in the air” at the time, as Orci suggested, how would not hearing from him say anything at all?

” I’m not questioning Orci at all but in the world of movies, it’s the director, not the writer who calls the shots”

Orci is a member of the “Supreme Court” of STXI, and took part in those creative meetings. Nimoy was not a member. As much as I like Leonard Nimoy, he is much less credible than Orci on that subject. It is irrelevant whether Orci had the final say or not. He was there in the meetings discussing the subject and trying to determine if it could work. Nimoy was (to our knowledge) not.

“It was over before it began in that first meeting I believe. They already had the idea of where the storyline was going. Shatner wanted a larger role; it didn’t fit with their storyline. They knew he didn’t want a cameo.”

It is obvious that Orci believed that anything more than a cameo would not work within their story. Otherwise, I don’t know where you get your inside information about how they already knew he did not want a cameo. That is particularly puzzling, since he later indicated he would have liked such a role (contardicting his October comments).

“I however DO believe you are more than willing to criticize and blame Shatner for more than his fair share at every turn. We’ve had this debate before.”

Look, we have had this conversation before. I liked William Shatner as JTK for many years, but I simply do not put Bill upon the same pedestal that I would afford Jim Kirk.
I’m not letting him slide on the fact that he publicly declared an aversion to the very type of role he later said he didn’t understand why he didn’t have. I also will not sit idly by while others (not you) put the onus on Orci and Abrams, etc. to “right the wrongs” of someone else’s movie (that Bill himself decided to make).

“Rather harsh. And untrue. I’m not turning a blind eye at anything.”

No? You said the other day that you wished people would stop bringing up “I don’t do cameos”, as if you wish to “handicap” the discussion by discounting relevant facts. That’s not “turning a blind eye”? Maybe there is a better term for it—like perhaps, supressing information?

You (nor anyone else) have ever given any information which refutes Orci’s claim, only conjecture and information from sources like Nimoy (who unfortunately wasn’t there in those meetings) given at a convention. The only credible information on the subject of whether it played any role in the decision to give it up is from Roberto Orci, and that’s all there is to it.

278. Closettrekker - August 27, 2008

#274—“The movie has to do well or we’re cooked. Or at least for many years from now when someone might resurrect it again. I don’t want to wait until I’m in the retirement home!”

There! We are in complete agreement about that!

:)

279. Sam Belil - August 27, 2008

Actually a few folks over at Paramount will be cooked (“Sauce for the goose”) — will be cooked if this movie bombs. I also agree that this is a make or break movie for the franchise. Having said that, there is no doubt in my mind that Abrams, Orci and Company (and we can assume that they’re NOT stupid) — have taken and will take every possible step to make ensure the success of this project. I define success for this movie as “critcally acclaimed’ success. If this movie does not score the “Dead Presidents” that Dark Knight, Casino Royale, Iron Man etc. did, but fares well against the competition in May 2009– you’re going to tell me that it is a failure?????

280. Closettrekker - August 27, 2008

#278—” If this movie does not score the “Dead Presidents” that Dark Knight, Casino Royale, Iron Man etc. did, but fares well against the competition in May 2009– you’re going to tell me that it is a failure?????”

Not at all. It just needs to stand out a bit amongst the competition in front of it, IMO.

281. Sam Belil - August 27, 2008

#279-I can agree with your sentiments.

282. NTH - August 27, 2008

Kirks solution for the Kobayashi Maru dilemma was motivated by by his desire not to lose and to impress his examiners with an unorthodox solution to a seemingly impossible problem.A post final credits scene involving Shatner and Nimoy,as I have previously suggested,could be for those fans who want Shatner to appear one last time the holy grail that they are seeking.For those who do not want him back or one way or another have no opinion on the matter they could simply leave when the final credits roll.Perhaps as part of the “evolving” process that Mr.Abrams refers to this matter may be revisited.Perhaps the old adage that it is darkest before the dawn might apply here.

283. K.M.Kirby - August 27, 2008

Of course, Shatner has a role in the new picture. Before the older Spock gets in the time shuttle, he is reminded of the memorial statue of Kirk at the new academy. The audience may not actually see this statue, but it is certainly there. And it is played by Shatner.

284. ByGeorge - August 27, 2008

Must be something unique to Shatner lovers. I don’t hear fans of any other character complaining like these guys do.

As a Spock fan I’m delighted that they have recast my favorite character, and if Nimoy wasn’t in it I wouldn’t care as long as there is a Spock in the movie based upon the character portrayed by Nimoy and they do a good job casting him. It seems to me these Shatner fans want Shatner more than they do Kirk. IMO it shows Nimoy did a better job of endearing his character, Spock to us than Shatner did with Kirk. Pine looks quite handsome, energetic, and confident. Looks like he will do a good job portraying Jim Kirk.

After missing these characters for many years, since STVI, I’m so happy they decided to go back to the original beloved characters again. Looking forward to the movie, the new Kirk, the new Spock, and the new McCoy along with the rest of the new cast.

285. asc1138 - August 27, 2008

testt

286. asc1138 - August 27, 2008

From my “ressurect William Shatners Kirk in ST:11″ petition

At the end of the film, just before Original Spock is about to return to his time period, he turns to young Spock and mindmelds with him. In that mindmeld, Original Spock tells young Spock that he will meet Picard in Unification, and then tells him to inform Picard of Doctor Soren’s whereabouts and how he plans to destroy the star at Veridian III. After arresting Soren, Picard would then take the Enterprise-D into the Nexus, rescue Kirk and return to Star Fleet.

This of course, alters The Next Generation movie time line, as there will no longer be an Enterprise-E. As TNG fans as well, we ask you to consider imagining that maybe it was the Enterprise-D Lily shouted at Picard to “Blow up the damn ship” in First Contact. We think that scene becomes even more emotional now. The D’s continuing existence also then negates the ridiculous “manual override” scene in Insurrection, as the D never had a darn joystick for Riker to use to fly around with!

Think about what that does for Nemisis–now it’s the Enterrpise–D– that has gone through the hellish battle with the Scimitar, requiring a refit. We think it adds much more weight to the battle between Shinzon and Picard, as he would have nearly destroyed the D as well as killing Data. One of the reasons We love the refit original Enterprise, is the history it had. We never got a chance for that feeling to develop for the D, because she was killed off in Generations.

Finally, after the mind mild, Original Spock returns to his timeline and finds that Original Kirk is alive and well and wondering where Spock has been. They’re running late to the christening of the completion of the REFIT Enterprise D!!! She will be refitted as a Soverign class ship, but she will keep her original Galaxy Class design as a testament to one of the few surving Galaxy class ships. Kirk and Spock ride off into a shuttle pod with Picard and Data(???), and the picture ends with the refit Soverign class D warping away.

If the idea itself does appear a bit fan-boyish, we understand, but consider this: Kirk’s motivation to go to Genesis in Star Trek III is purely to save his friends. This could be argued to be “fan-boysish” as well, but it works out to be one of the most heart-felt and memorable films of the series.

You could add a few flash back scenes in the first scene you have with Leonard Nimoy. He could be sitting in meditation, remembering when he was on Vulcan in ST:III telling Kirk, “My Father says that you have been my friend, you came back for me.” To which Kirk replies, “You would have done the same for me.” Then he remembers hearing the news of Kirk’s death on the Enterprise B, and how he felt that, logically, Kirk died honorably, alone, and saved the Enterprise. Afterall, he himself made that same decision so many years ago.

Fast forwading, he hears Picard’s report about his encounter with Kirk in the Nexus. Spock at this point realizes that he should have thought about the possibility that Kirk may not have been killed by the Nexus Ribbon bolt, but he could have been ABSORBED by it, causing him to be transfered to it. At that moment he realizes that if he would have persued the ribbon himself, he could have found Kirk and brought him back to normal space. Now he’s lost his friend, for the second time.

Afterwards, we see Spock remembering that he stormed into Picard’s quarters, almost yelling at him, demanding an explanation as to why he left Kirk on Veridian III without a proper StarFleet burial (Sarek barging into Kirk’s quarters in ST:III). At this point, you could have Old Spock’s meditation interrupted by the main plot of the story and continue the rest of the film from there.

287. asc1138 - August 27, 2008

Sorry for the multiple posts, but I was having issues seeing my posts display. Sorry :-0

288. james - August 27, 2008

Well the shat is getting old so they better hurry up. if he is not back in this film maybe the next. im 29 years old been watching trek since i was 4 i still remember the day they killed kirk off people were pissed watching it then they tease us hes back only to die by a damn steel bridge falling on him not the way i wanted the greatest captain of starfleet go go. an got a crappy send off if anything they should have took his dead body back to earth for a starfleet goodbye. when they killed spock off in st2 nimoy was pissed off the fans were pissed off. spock was to stay dead but due to the out cry they brought him back. nimoy had his chance to come back as spock its time for the shat. nimoy has said in interviews its been to long since he;s been dead to bring him back i have thought of 3 ways myself where he could be alive back in the swing of things nothing cheesy either. most kirk fans just want to see our captain back one last time. we all think kirk got a raw deal when he was killed off , spock dies saving the day repairing the warp drive dies due to radiation, data dies by taking a hand phaser to blowing up thing up b4 count down. kirk saves the day to only have a bridge fall on him an put in a hole to be cover up by rocks an have worms eat the man who saved the universe more times then any other captain. gene r said it best in star trek your never dead theres always a way to be brought back. as far as the new movie ill go see it cuz i love trek but the wrold of st needs to go foward not into the past did we not learn anything with enterprise fans want the story to move on not backwards. meny members of the next gen want to do one more movie they did not get a real fair well send off in the last movie “” by LeVar Burton
so i hope to see another movie moving the story to the future not to the past. but all things will happen for a reason. last few movie people say did not do to well well look at it like this shat said in a interview the last few movie had a budget of like 18 million no more now whats the budget of this one like 80 90 million if the tng had a budget like that i dont think the movie would have bombed its not the fans that are ignoring trek its the people at the office that make bad moves that in the end might kill trek. thank got for star trek online that will help bringe life to trek an maybe a new tv show . trek needs a new show on tv

thats my 2cents
LONG LIVE CAPTAIN KIRK

289. james - August 27, 2008

Whats next after the movie they will prob wanna talk all the new cast members an make a new tos an step all over the tos we know to love an rewrite the adventures for todays group of people to latch on to. after kirk takes command of the enterprise we are in tos time line just prior to the cage episode so one movie prior to this i can see but jj said there could be a 12 with the same new cast an bring in some prior old cast members if thats the case they would be walking all over the shats tos. from rumors we will see kirk take command newar the end of the movie so if this is to be true then a number 12 with the same cast would really piss me off messing with the tos

290. Closettrekker - August 27, 2008

#285—And none of that seems to you like an unethical act on Spock’s part?

As Spock is my favorite character, I would be offended if Spock were written to intentionally disrupt the timeline for the sake of a personal friendship, not matter how important to him that friendship was.

Without being forced or given no choice but to do so, I could never see him intervening with the course of the timeline he knows to be correct. Even if he were forced to change the course of the timeline (presumably because only Kirk could do something which was necessary to resolve a problem even greater than the one he would be creating), how could he (Spock, of all people) not feel ethically bound to return Kirk to the proper point in time where he becomes caught in the Nexus (I cringe at the prospect of the word “Nexus” ever again appearing in a ST movie)?

He would be fully aware of the potential ramifications of altering the outcome of the incident aboard the Enterprise-B or on Veridian III. There would be far too many births, deaths, outcomes of wars, etc., etc. He could inadvertently jeopardize the entire safety and well-being of hundreds of billions of people in the Alpha Quadrant.

That is not the Spock I grew up with, or the one that we as fans have come to know. I could see Spock putting his own life in jeopardy for his friend, but not the lives and futures of billions upon billions of people who had no choice in the matter.

The difference between Kirk going to the Genesis Planet in TSFS and this scenario is obvious. Spock’s rescue and return to Vulcan did not require such drastic measures as intentionally altering the timeline (for the sake of one life, btw), nor did it put any innocent lives in jeopardy (much less hundreds of billions)—only the careers of those who volunteered to participate in stealing the Enterprise, etc.

The difference between this scenario and TVH (when we see Spock advocate and execute a plan to alter the timeline by importing Whales from the past) is that in TVH, he and his shipmates were given no choice—risk altering the timeline, or allow Earth and its people to be destroyed.

I do not think that it is “fanboyish” (since a fanboy would be unlikely to have Spock turn into a totally different person). I think you have Spock behaving far outside of the well-established integrity of his character. It actually reads like material concocted by someone who is unfamiliar with the character.

I bet you know him better than that, and if you rethought it—you wuld come to a similar conclusion.

Your intentions may have been good, but you just murdered the Spock we have always known and replaced him with someone we’ve never met.

Try adding the element of a threat so large that it actually justifies Spock taking such a drastic measure, and consider adequately explaining why it would be necessary for Kirk to be rescued to combat that threat. Then you have to find a way to justify not returning Kirk to his death.

291. krikzil - August 27, 2008

Heh Closettrekker — ready to go round and round some more? :)

I’m not going to go point by point cause, well, it’s late and I’m pooped. Just a couple of thoughts….

I don’t know why Nimoy would be any less “credible” — he (like Shatner) was pitched ideas before any script was written so he was involved from the beginning. Orci: –“We went through the same process that we went through with Nimoy: We pitched him what we were thinking early on before we wrote it… ” I’ve listened to Nimoy now for 30+ years and he doesn’t strike me as the type who comments on things he doesn’t know about.

As for suppressing information….heh heh, we’re sitting here discussing a movie, not the Bush administration. All I’m saying is I don’t think Shatner’s comment(s) mattered one wit; JJ apparenlty felt an appearance by Shatner as Kirk wasn’t an option. From the man JJ himself:

“The only reason why Mr. Shatner is not in the movie and Mr. Nimoy is, is because his character died on screen. It was very difficult, and now impossible with the writers strike, it is very difficult to find a way to put him in that didn’t feel like we were putting him in just because we were huge fans of his. You and I could come up with dozens of ways, but every way that we came up with felt like it was transparently fan boys trying to get Shatner in the movie.”

[The Writer's Strike began early Nov '07 and ended almost mid-Feb '08 (almost throughout the entire filming time).]

So that’s it for me. ;)

292. Wes - August 27, 2008

Why keep denying this over and over? We have already delt with Shatner, but, why keep going over it, unless………

293. JB Gestl - August 28, 2008

If Denny Crane is in this movie, I’m going to ask for my money back.

294. Dom - August 28, 2008

If, as everyone suspects, we end up with a new timeline, Nimoy’s Spock won’t be able to return to his original version of the future, so Shatner can’t appear. Nimoy’s Spock is most likely to die or to stick around in the shadows trying to affect the timeline as little as possible!

At the same time, given a new timeline throws everything up in the air for what happens in the future, Kirk might well not die on Veridian III (God help us! The production team all know how we feel about that!) while any of the characters could die at a different point in the new film series’ history.

So the very existence of the new film effectively ‘corrects’ Kirk’s death without having to go into Shatner cameos, and massive discussions about TNG and the Nexus!

295. Danpaine - August 28, 2008

Almost 300 postings on this. Three days. What other issue on this site elicits this kind of passion?

Way to go, Bill Shatner. 77, and still making waves.

I’m looking forward to the movie either way, but he’ll always be Kirk to me…there’s no replacing him – only suceeding him.

296. krikzil - August 28, 2008

So true Danpaine. Of all the actors, Shatner has always illicited the greatest reaction from fans, both good and bad. It’s always fascinated me.

And just wait until the movie actually is almost here and then out. The whole He’s Not in the Movie/Why Not? will live on.

297. Closettrekker - August 28, 2008

#291—“Heh Closettrekker — ready to go round and round some more?”

Why not?

“I don’t know why Nimoy would be any less “credible” — he (like Shatner) was pitched ideas before any script was written so he was involved from the beginning”

He is only less credible in speaking about what may or may not have transpired in meetings which discussed if or how a role for Bill Shatner should be added to the story. That has nothing to do with being pitched script ideas well ahead of that point.
My idea of better credibility concerning the “Shatner meetings” is simply one guy (Orci) being present in those discussions, and one guy (Nimoy) not being present. That is of particular interest when Nimoy declared essentially that “its over”, when Orci clearly considered it still “up in the air”. Since Nimoy was not there and Orci was, Orci has more credibility on that subject.

“All I’m saying is I don’t think Shatner’s comment(s) mattered one wit; JJ apparenlty felt an appearance by Shatner as Kirk wasn’t an option.”

I realize you believe that. But here’s the problem with that belief. It requires what Roberto Orci said in March to be a complete falsehood, and you can provide no evidence that he was not being truthful in clarifying that Shatner’s “I don’t do cameos” statement caused them to ultimately decide that he (Shatner) “required a larger role than the movie could sustain”.

Furthermore, your quote from Abrams was DURING the writers’ strike. That means it was after Shatner’s comment and after Orci, Abrams, and the rest of the “Supreme Court” had finally ended creative discussions about whether they could work something out.

Prior to Shatner’s comment, all you heard from them was things like:

“We really want to find a role for him, but it’s difficult because his character was killed.”

The word “impossible” was not substituted for “difficult” until after the writers’ strike had begun, so there is no evidence in Abrams’ quote that the book was already closed prior to October, and thus nothing which refutes Orci’s claim that it was Shatner’s “I don’t do cameos” which ultimately closed that book.

298. Alec - August 28, 2008

asc1138 (#286), your proposal for resurrecting Shatner’s Kirk requires not only knowledge of Genesis, but also of a TNG episode-double, at the very least. I’m not sure whether you’re serious or jesting with us. The causal fan and first-time fan have NO WAY of following this. In fact, I’m struggling. As I and others have shown above, there are simple and affordable ways of resurrecting Shatner for a 5-min. cameo with Nimoy at the end of the film. This would not detract, in any significant way, from the new crew or their story. It would be a nice touch for the fans (who like shatner; of whom there are many).

As someone else said above, I have a hunch, also, and it’s nothing more than a hunch, that Nimoy’s Spock dies in this film. I could easily be wrong; and I’m sure that I’ll change my mind again; but I think that Nimoy might finally want closure on his character via a fitting, and worthy, last mission. Of course, if this is true, it makes a Shatner cameo all the more difficult.

299. British Naval Dude - August 28, 2008

A statement from William Shatner’s attorney says that:

“…he (Bill) categorically, wholeheartedly and vehemently denies the allegation that he detests blimps.”

(sorry- just thought I’d bring a little closure ta’ me rantings of his alleged dirigible-phobia I spoke of herein…)

Arrrrrr….

300. Alec - August 28, 2008

I should have written ‘Generations’, not ‘Genesis’. Sorry. Too much exposure to the Wrath of Khan, I think!

301. Closettrekker - August 28, 2008

“No, the only cast member from the original films is Nimoy”

Abrams is well known for keeping secrets about his projects, but not for outright lying….

William Shatner is not in this film. Period.

302. star trackie - August 28, 2008

301 “William Shatner is not in this film. Period.”

Such inside information!! And here I thought Bob Orci was the only Star Trek producer that visited this site!

303. Closettrekker - August 28, 2008

#302—Actually, it is public information, not inside information. Some people just want to ignore it. We have no reason to believe that Abrams is a liar. He doesn’t have that kind of track record. There is a difference between keeping something a secret and outright lying. If you believe that Shatner might be in the film, then you have to believe that Abrams might be a liar, and there is no reason or evidence to support that.

304. Alec - August 28, 2008

#303:

There is still time to put Shatner in the film…

305. Xai - August 28, 2008

295. Danpaine – August 28, 2008

Waves? It’s the same dozen or so people going round and round.

—-

302. star trackie – August 28, 2008

What more is needed to prove the point?

The writers, producers and the actor all said it’s not happening. Now they are all lying?

306. Sam Belil - August 28, 2008

I cannot believe that this debate is still going on. Once and for all –

#1-Shatner NOT being in this film does NOT translate into DISASTER.
#2-Shatner BEING in this film does NOT GUARANTEE SUCCESS.
#3-This flim (hopefully) being a GREAT STORY will Translate into $$$$$$!!
#4-Again — we can all LOVE Shatner and EMBRACE this film at the same time.
#5-Just as an FY, everyone HATED George Lazenby in HMSS, however that was one of the MOST critically acclaimed Bond films of all time.
Hey guys, lets find something new to argue about…

307. Trek Nerd Central - August 28, 2008

#306. I agree 100 percent on all points.

But one thing: Didn’t Shatner’s son-in-law work on this film? How could he know NOTHING? *That* I don’t believe. . .and it makes me more suspicious than ever.

Ain’t worth debating, though.

308. star trackie - August 28, 2008

#302 “What more is needed to prove the point?

The writers, producers and the actor all said it’s not happening. Now they are all lying?”

I don’t know one way or the other….yet. And the point is, neither do you.

309. Closettrekker - August 28, 2008

sigh…

310. Closettrekker - August 28, 2008

#304—That’s assuming someone felt it would be beneficial…Otherwise, why would you go and shoot more scenes and then edit them in so that they make sense within the story (assuming they even could), when the film is already at the point where they are just adding special effects and score?

311. james - August 28, 2008

all we can hope for is hes around in st 12 from a interview from Lt. Cmdr. Geordi Laforge

Could ‘Star Trek XI’ Open Door To ‘Next Generation’?

24 June 2008 12:12 AM, PDT

Many Trekkies are hoping that J.J. Abrams’ upcoming “Star Trek XI” film will help reinvigorate the franchise. Instead, some actors who have spent a couple of decades with the Star Trek phenomenon hope that it might help boost their careers — and a return to Starfleet. LeVar Burton, who played Lt. Cmdr. Geordi Laforge in “Star Trek: The Next Generation” and four movies, says that if the newest Star Trek movie is a success, it could mean a reunion of “Next Generation” proportions. “At the end of the day, I’m pretty certain that a lot of the fan base would like to see the ‘Next Generation’ cast do one more turn around the galaxy,” Burton recently told Star Trek Magazine in excerpts made available by TrekMovie. “I guess the performance of this next movie will have alot to do with whether that comes to pass. It will make people see whether there’s an appetite for Star Trek again.”

so maybe if we see a tng again on film we can have the shat once more

312. Alec - August 28, 2008

#310:

No: there is clearly TIME to put Shatner in this film, regardless of whether anyone felt doing so would be beneficial to the film. Of course, whether it is beneficial is the key issue here; the one which we have been debating. For me, and many others, just a 5 min. cameo at the end of the film would be great (as well as cheap and easy).

#311:

After spending so much time, money, and energy creating a film about this new crew, I don’t see why Abrams and co would revisit The Next Generation, especially just for one film to please a few cast members! What would the Trek team do next? Return to the new crew? That would not make much business sense.

313. smoothie - August 28, 2008

Fix the time line J.J.

Generations was a dream and Kirk ends up in the shower a.k.a. Dallas.

314. VOODOO - August 28, 2008

Yet another Shatner post with over 300 responses.

315. Xai - August 28, 2008

by 6 people

316. Xai - August 28, 2008

308. star trackie – August 28, 2008

The writers, producers and the actor all said it’s not happening. Now they are all lying?”

“I don’t know one way or the other….yet. And the point is, neither do you.”

Sorry, I forgot about the conspiracy between JJ, Shat and the writers that has them secretly filming the Shatner scenes in an undisclosed location somewhere near Riverside, Iowa. They are doing the brave thing, lying through their teeth and putting their good names on the line so Shatner can get one more Trek paycheck and save their sorry backsides.

Please.
Conjecture and arguing “what could have been” may be sport in here, but it’s time for a few to face what is the inevitable truth. William Shatner might be in the seats come May, but won’t be on the screen.

317. Robert "Horton Hears a Who" April - August 28, 2008

#315

Wow, up to 6 people now?

YOP!!

Surely NOW our voices will be heard!

Bring back Shatner as Kirk!

:-)

318. Shatner_Fan_2000 - August 29, 2008

#315 … “by 6 people”

That statement has never held water with me. I’ve been relatively quiet in this thread, because I mostly believe that the time is passed and, yes, the ball hath been dropped. Still supporting the movie, though, because I am a fan of the franchise.

But denying Shatner has a large fanbase? Just silly, considering the guy’s status within the Trek world, AND his huge present day career resurgence outside of those confines. Shatner is popular. He has MANY fans. No denying it.

319. Doug L. - August 29, 2008

I’m amazed at how many people try to create the “back story” to explain how Kirk can be made to live again… If the powers that be are agreeable to it and can work it out, we may get a happy, time travel snafu ending resulting in Kirk never having died. Expect it after the credits roll, if at all.

Time Travel opens the door to this. No more explanation is required.

I think the sensibilities of the writers and director lend themselves to understanding the relevance of the character, and that he had a piss poor death which could be easily undone in a two minute post credits scene without impacting the story or direction they want to take the franchise.

Subsequently they leave a smile on a lot of movie goers faces and everyone is happy. If they worked it out from the business end, I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see something like this.

Doug L.

320. Ivory - August 29, 2008

XAI #315

Even you must admit that William Shatner’s involvement/non involvement has by far been the biggest/most talked about subject by Star Trek fans since this project was announced.

Anthony puts a story up about Shatner and boom you have between 300 and 500 posts. Shatner is clearly a major flashpoint for Star Trek fans.

Most of the mainstream publicity this film has gotten revolves around Shatner not being in the film.

321. Losira - August 29, 2008

I’m so upset because Shatner is not in the film!
He is Kirk, and I don’t care if he is dead: that’s sci-fi after all and he could be alive again!
If he will not be in the final cut, I don’t know if I will go to the cinema.
JJ wants this film not only for trekker, but even to catch new audience from people who yet doesn’t know Star Trek: I don’t think it will be.
Anyway, I still hope that William Shatner will be in the movie!

322. VOODOO - August 29, 2008

No Shatner = The film is not as good as it could have been.

323. krikzil - August 29, 2008

“The word “impossible” was not substituted for “difficult” until after the writers’ strike had begun, so there is no evidence in Abrams’ quote that the book was already closed prior to October, and thus nothing which refutes Orci’s claim that it was Shatner’s “I don’t do cameos” which ultimately closed that book.”

His word choice is simply a reflection of the calendar. “Difficult” became “impossible” because of the late date — the USA Today article was in January. You can’t still be saying you’d love to find a way to make it work when filming is almost complete, you can’t change the script anyway and Shatner is having hip replacement surgery in late January.

” I realize you believe that. But here’s the problem with that belief. It requires what Roberto Orci said in March to be a complete falsehood,”

Not at all. I took Orci’s comment — about the storyline being unable to accomodate the size of role Bill wanted — to be a summary of the problem from the beginning and not an immediate reaction to Bill giving interviews in October. Afterall, Orci himself was still making with the wistful at the start of filming and subsequent to the OCTOBER Shatner comments:

“There are two things,” Orci said in an interview in November. “One, from our point of view, we are still hoping to find a way. Secondly, one of the difficulties that was brought up and discussed with Shatner when we all met him and pitched him ideas is that Trek fans are sticklers for their canon. [And,] unfortunately, Shatner’s Capt. Kirk was killed in Star Trek VII [1994's Generations]…..The difficulty there is not just ignoring that or explaining it in an unsatisfactory way merely to get him back in,” Orci said. “So that is the struggle: the rigors of canon and not phoning it in just to have a cameo.” Still, it could happen, he said. “From my point of view, it’s a very long shoot, and things change. It’s just whether we can figure it out.” Another possible problem: The ongoing writers’ strike prohibits members of the Writers Guild of America from making any changes to the script until the strike is settled. ”

Given that JJ hadn’t talked to Shatner beyond those first meetings in 2006, it doesn’t seem that it was ever really a viable option, just wishful expressions based on their feelings as fans of Shatner and his character. I love the respect they’ve shown him in their comments and it’s very nice that they were trying to be gentle in deference to the fans like me who were crushed by his lack of inclusion (kobayashi maru is right!!!). It just apears to me that it was over long before anything Shatner said in October. Kirk had died so he couldn’t fit into the timeline with Nimoy’s old Spock….and JJ deemed just a cameo “too fanboyish”. [Course I might argue that I find many of the choices they HAVE made to be on the fanboyish side which calls this into question...but that's another debate!]

324. Closettrekker - August 29, 2008

#323—I take Orci’s comment in march to mean that the only chance of Shatner’s inclusion (for the very reasons listed in his November comments) was going to be in the form of a cameo. Nothing else was ever going to fit within the story.

Let’s bear in mind that, just because Orci’s comments appeared in an article in November, does not mean that those comments were not actually made to the interviewer prior to that. Shatner’s “I don’t do cameos” statement was only made public in October. Bob’s seemingly still mildly optimistic stance could easily have been expressed a couple of weeks (or more) before the article (as is often the case).

Don’t get me wrong. I do not actually believe that if Shatner hadn’t made that statement that he would have gotten a cameo. I just believe that the statement put the final nail in the coffin. After that, the creative team had no further reason to explore the possibility.

I made no secret early on that I had no wish to see Shatner in STXI. I love his portrayals from TOS-TVH, but I think he started phoning JTK in after that. I think that for the first two decades, it was Shatner as Kirk, and that was fantastic. Beyond then, I think it became Kirk as Shatner. That, to me, was not so good. I think he began pandering to the Parodic SNL/Mad TV crowd a bit too much. I cannot imagine a STXI performance that would have come off any different to me.

I honestly recall walking out of the theater after STV: The Great Trek Turd Of ’89 and thinking (among MANY things) that it would be best if someone else took over the chair (not just the director’s chair). Patrick Stewart did not turn out to be what I had in mind (and I’m not denegrating the actor, rather the character which was written for him). Twenty years later, I’m getting my wish. It sure took long enough. The last thing I wanted was for Shatner to show up and ruin any chance of a new generation taking Star Trek (or Captain Kirk in particular) seriously.

Slowly, I began to warm up to the possibility of cameo appearance–a GFII-like flashback scene from the prespective of Nimoy’s Spock, depicting a conversation between the two of them prior to the incident aboard the Enterprise-B which had some bearing upon what Spock was facing at a particular time in the story.

I felt like that could have worked. But it didn’t happen. Oh well. How many goodbyes does Shatner’s Kirk need?

325. Dennis - August 30, 2008

I still say just have Shatner do the “Space — The Final Frontier…” voiceover. It would be a huge nod, and part blessing. I think it would be all the real hard-core Shat fans would need.

326. Mr. Bob Dobalina - August 30, 2008

Orci Said they like to surprise us. Abrahms also is all about surprises. Would they lie to mislead us and surprise us? Sure they would, it’s Hollywood people.
I, for one, hope they are lying through their teeth and deliver one big surprise called William Shatner come May. And they just might. And no one, short of a time travfeler that has borrowed SPock’s Time MAchine, can say otherwise. You can speucalate both ways, but no one can say for sure. All we can dois hope. (unless you are in the minority and don’t like Shatner, and boy are there a lot of those folks around here!)

327. Xai - August 30, 2008

#318 Shatner fan

read 314 and 315 in sequence and look at all the posts on this thread. I was referring to the thread…. not the “millions” worldwide.

#320 Ivory

same thing…. repeating posters… even 6 or so… (I didn’t count) can add up to 300… not out of adoration… out of debate.

328. Alec - August 30, 2008

#325:

It would be annoying, and perhaps a little insulting, if Shatner were involved only to the extent of doing the voice-over. Give him a proper part (i.e., at the very least, a cameo scene) or no part at all. Besides, Shatner’s doing the voice-over would make no sense if he were not given a proper part in the film: there would be no elder-Kirk in the film, after all. As it stands, let Nimoy do it. This makes sense and is a ‘nod’ to the Trekkies, anyway.

#327:

Regardless of whether there are a few ‘repeat posters’, that this thread has generated FAR MORE posts than any other recent thread shows, quite clearly, that this issue is the most talked-about; and that, in general, people care more about this issue than any other recently brought to our attention. Most regulars have spoken on this issue; and some have spoken more than others; but the total number of posts has dwarfed that of any other recent thread.

One further point: of course this film will be judged, principally, by how much money it makes. And perhaps the addition or omission of Shatner will not significantly affect the amount of money that the film makes. However, fan satisfaction is also important; and, including Shatner, perhaps, would make people enjoy the film more. This, at least, seems to be true of a great many Trekkies—perhaps a clear majority? Movie makers want to make money; but they also want to please the (core) fans. George Lucas is a possible exception…

329. Xai - August 30, 2008

#328 Alec

The last few Shatner polls on Trekmovie showed no clear cut mandate for Shatner. And “talked about”? Try “debated” and the debates on here take a lot of posts. Suggest that the new Enterprise will have a third nacelle and you’ll get 329 posts on that too.

330. Nabi - September 1, 2008

DEATH TO ALL TREKOIDS
Star Trek survived largely because of the acting rapport of the original team and because the original, episodic plots, though often cheesy, were presented with style and true sci-fi conviction.That original momentum plus the fanatical commitment of the Trekoids kept it going beyond reason, especially after it quickly devolved into a poorly written soap. Hack writers seem to be doing their best to obliterate the franchise established by the fine work of Shatner and al. but, because of the fanatic,blind commitment of the Trekoids have so far failed. They have assaulted the franchise with every bad weapon in their arsenal ; still the Trekoids keep coming like zombies on amphetamines.
It’s become a game. First the writers bumped off Kirk. Now they see each new project as a fresh opportunity to try to bump off some zombies (oops, sorry, I mean Trekoids).
The team at Boston Legal should sue.

331. krikzil - September 4, 2008

Closettrekker — sorry, I haven’t been able to spend to get back here so I’m only just reading this thread…

“Slowly, I began to warm up to the possibility of cameo appearance–a GFII-like flashback scene from the prespective of Nimoy’s Spock, depicting a conversation between the two of them prior to the incident aboard the Enterprise-B which had some bearing upon what Spock was facing at a particular time in the story.”

I’m still rather schizo about a cameo but I like your idea. A final conversation between these 2 characters would have been nice.

“I felt like that could have worked. But it didn’t happen. Oh well. How many goodbyes does Shatner’s Kirk need?”

Well, he’s only had the one and it sucked. Which is why I and so many others wish he could have been a part of this movie. A better send off for his many years of being Kirk and the fun of seeing Nimoy and Shatner together one last time. We haven’t had that since STVI.

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