Shatner: Nobody Offered Me A Role | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Shatner: Nobody Offered Me A Role September 18, 2008

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

Recently JJ Abrams kicked off a lot of buzz when he revealed that there was a scene in the new Star Trek movie written for Shatner, but said it didn’t meet with Shatner’s ‘no cameo’ requirements. Today William Shatner launched his new ‘Shatner Project’ video blog and one of the first videos is a direct reply to the latest from Star Trek’s director.

 

Shatner’s new message for JJ

For the video-challenged Shatner made it clear that he was not offered a role, but still wont take a cameo. Speaking directly to Abrams Shatner stated:

JJ, nobody every came to me and said ‘we have a cameo.’ Maybe you wrote it, but it never presented itself to me. But the truth is I wouldn’t have wanted to do a cameo, because that you would have clipped that out. It doesn’t fit. You said in your statement you were having trouble fitting it in anyway. But nobody every asked me and I am just sorry that I am not in your wonderful movie and I would have loved to have been in it.

But he isn’t giving up…he is now talking about the sequel. Shatner  went on…

If you make another one maybe you can think of ways of bringing Captain Kirk back to life. I brought him back to life in one of my books, very easily. You know the machine where you suck in air with the molecules where Captain Kirk hovers and you reassemble from the molecular…and then you throw the switch on the right and then you throw the one on the left and out comes Captain Kirk reassembled. We’ve got DNA of 160 million years old and we’re trying to right now with our primitive — we’re are not talking about 2300 now, we are talking about 2008. We are trying to assemble the DNA of a 160 million year old being. And I think we can do it. You don’t think you can get Captain Kirk back to life?

Anyone still think this is all some kind of publicity stunt?

More Shatner Project Video
In addition to the comment to Abrams, The Shatner Project also put up a new Welcome video

There should be more Shatner video coming soon. Keep track of all of Shatner’s videos at the new Shatner Project channel at YouTube.

 

Comments

1. ElrondL - September 18, 2008

This has become exhausting. If it IS a PR stunt, it’s a darn effective one. :-)

2. Energize - September 18, 2008

Does Shatner own this site?

3. JeFF - September 18, 2008

It would be a riot if this all really was a hoax… and at the end… he walks out.

4. Mickey MET - September 18, 2008

I’ll admit. . . . I WANT Shatner’s Kirk, even in a cameo, in the new movie! There’s 1 vote for bringing him in. . . .

5. Tim - September 18, 2008

I believe Shatner. I think they wanted Spock becoause of the Heroes dud(e). Frankly I don,t like any of JJ’s work. Maybe if they bring a new series to TV/syndication he would appear in a role(Kirk?).

6. trekmaster - September 18, 2008

Hehe, yes, I love those videos. More coming soon…stay tuned! ;-)

7. Energize - September 18, 2008

I like his description of the Transporter.

8. Anthony Thompson - September 18, 2008

Yawn. I really wish there could be a moritorium put on all Shatner articles on this site! Or at least anything relating to his non-involvement in the movie! ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

9. Brian B. - September 18, 2008

He needs to give it up. He’s old, washed up. Don’t listen to him JJ! Bring on the new cast!

10. Earl - September 18, 2008

Bring back Shat in the ST XII

11. Brett Campbell - September 18, 2008

#4 – Make that TWO votes. It would make what will hopefully a great movie even better! So the debate rages on. And we who want him in won’t ever give up the ship!

12. ServantWarrior - September 18, 2008

And I, for one, don’t really care to see Shatner as Kirk again. The whole process has become so tiresome and overblown, not unlike…

… well, you get the idea.

Let’s focus on the present — what we HAVE, not what we don’t. Just sayin’.

13. I'm Captain Kirk... I'M CAPTAIN KIRK! - September 18, 2008

Shatner you’re my hero and all, and you always will be… But please, for give it rest. Stop bitching about the fact that you’re not in the new movie.

14. audioweaponsys - September 18, 2008

its totally gotta be some viral something or other. JJ and Shatner probably sat down and said “hey, lets pretend your not in this”

15. Earl - September 18, 2008

And bring back Manny Coto as new Star Trek producer.

16. Dansk - September 18, 2008

For god’s sake, give it up already. Shatner needs to get a life.

17. Lt. Broccoli - September 18, 2008

starting to sound like a broken record

18. Anthony Thompson - September 18, 2008

10 and 11.

Yeah, an 80 year old Capt. Kirk would be awesome!!!
NOT.

19. veritas1325 - September 18, 2008

He’s in it. It’s all a hoax. Don’t be fooled. DENNY CRANE.

20. Dr. Image - September 18, 2008

“… the machine where you suck air in…”
Wasn’t that in STV?

21. Sean - September 18, 2008

This really seems to be getting bitter and sad. Shatner needs to let this all go, and JJ needs to quit giving this story life by saying new things like “we had a scene written for him”.

Shatner won’t be in the next Trek. Move on, people.

22. trekmaster - September 18, 2008

It doesn’t matter how old he is, if he feels and looks like younger than he really is.

23. rehabilitated hitch1969© - September 18, 2008

Shatner’s got that never say die kind of arrogant swagger and that makes him the captain now innit?

Beautiful.

THE WOMEN!!

=h=

24. ensign joe - September 18, 2008

Shat is the shizz. yo.. JJ, Orci, Kurtz… you know what to do.. save Star Trek.. save Fandom.. save the Future.. BRING BACK KIRK!

Remember this well–there shall be no peace as long as Kirk’s dead.

25. Energize - September 18, 2008

Shanter needs his own series.

26. Alex - September 18, 2008

Oh my god. This man can’t be serious anymore. Maybe he should not ask himself the question “How can you bring back Kirk?” but instead “Why should they?”. We don’t know shit about the story of the movie, just that it centers around the two Spocks and Romulans. That’s it. If the story does not require him, then he’s not in it. Did you ever hear Koenig or Takei or Nichols complain that they are not in?

27. Blowback - September 18, 2008

Cripes… More red meat for the fans

28. Energize - September 18, 2008

Kirk should be the villain in the next one,

29. Shatner_Fan_2000 - September 18, 2008

I BELIEVE SHATNER.

‘Nuff said.

30. rehabilitated hitch1969© - September 18, 2008

I don’t know who said it but i am going to say it again. AS much as I would want to see Shatner in Star Trek again… and I really would… it’s really not worth pursuing. And what they said was that they compared it to bringing back your dead grandfather just so that he could live a few more years and then die again. Whats the value in that? Could you build an entire movie around it? If so, who would want to?

We can’t, and shouldn’t, ignore Generations. This is starting to get as lame as the Brett Farve “retirement”. It’s supposed to be a somewhat permanent thing, the death of a character. It’s been almost 15 years since Generations. It was fun. Oh, my.

THE WOMEN!!

=h=

31. Loken - September 18, 2008

Will Shatner just SHUT UP and go away! I am so sick of reading about this. Star Trek can survive WITHOUT him just fine.

I am so sick of reading about this.

Alec

32. Commodore Lurker - September 18, 2008

You’re dead Jim!

33. Energize - September 18, 2008

He’s in! He’s out! No, he’s in again! He’s out! IN! Out!!!

34. Ralph F - September 18, 2008

Um, is this reminding anyone of Adam West circa 1988/1989 while Tim Burton’s BATMAN was being filmed?

35. Earl - September 18, 2008

It’s so sad to see hwom many Abrams worshipers and Shat bashers we have on the TrekMovie. For me, thes people aren’t Star Trek fans, they only TOS nerd fans.

36. steve - September 18, 2008

It’s sad, to me. I’d say, without seeing the film that Spock fits better. If I saw Kirk (Shatner) it would feel contrived.

Maybe they can work him in in a viable way for the next one.

For now, I just think the entire thing is…sad.

37. Justin Olson - September 18, 2008

Once again, William Shatner confuses the novel and movie “Jurassic Park” with what scientists are doing in the real world.

38. Martin Pollard - September 18, 2008

Jesus Christ, Anthony, I really wish you could place a moratorium on these “Shatner in the new Star Trek movie” things. I know why you can’t, but you do realize that every single time you post an article about this shit, you end up with a 600-post blog entry filled with fans screaming at each other. It’s reached the point where it’s so far beyond ridiculous that you need the Hubble to find it.

39. danpaine - September 18, 2008

Disagree, #38 – free speech and all, and this is Star Trek news.

40. Earl - September 18, 2008

#38
What about disableing comments ond this pseudo message board, and make a real message board, like every other decent site.

41. Earl - September 18, 2008

#39
I know that Anthony will delete my post, but I anway going to say: There is no free speech on this site, beacuse he deleting posts which don’t fit in the divine vision of mr. Abrams.

42. montreal paul - September 18, 2008

38 – Martin

It’s not just the Shatner stuff that puts everyone at odds. It’s everything! You have two camps.. people thatt like stuff and people that don’t. I find it frustrating too. It’s getting to the point where I may just stop reading what people are saying and just leave it at reading the articles. But.. then I miss things that Bob Orci or Chris Doohan might say in a post.

43. danpaine - September 18, 2008

The issue of whether or not Mr. Shatner has a place in this new movie or not aside, I have a real problem with the disrespect so many ‘fans’ here show him. The man has made immeasurable contributions to this 40 year old franchise – give him the respect he deserves. You ‘bashers’ sound like a bunch a whiners.

44. Will Doe - September 18, 2008

While I don’t see how they can really make it possible for him to return as Kirk. Bill’s always been endlessly entertaining. I hope he continues for years to come. He doesn’t need Star trek anymore.
And hasn’t for some time now,
So keep on chugging Bill keep on Chugging.
And yes I can not wait for the movie.

45. rehabilitated hitch1969© - September 18, 2008

you guys shouldnt bash AP like that. He runs a good site. YES, some things get deleted. You know what though, its his site. And he will invite valid criticism, just not mean spirited slander. You guys should be thanking AP, not bashing him.

did i just write that?

THE WOMEN!!

=h=

46. Earl - September 18, 2008

#43 These aren’t truly fans, these Lost&Alias fanboys, which accidently get int the Star Trek world.

I now expect “delete work”. ;)

47. Earl - September 18, 2008

#45
And what about deleting Shat bashers posts?

48. New Horizon - September 18, 2008

#43

He played a character in a 40 year old sci fi franchise, he didn’t find a cure for cancer. Can we keep things in perspective? I made my living as a professional actor for 10 years myself…they’re just people…flawed human beings. If only everyone fought for the well being of the less fortunate and the rights of the oppressed as valiantly as they will fight for a rich man who has had a fulfilling life already.

Life is change.

49. PW - September 18, 2008

That video response is 100% the end of this subject and Shatner’s Kirk. He refuses the cameo regardless.

I’m someone who wanted him in the movie badly but even I can admit that Shatner was being very rude & patronising to JJ so I could not imagine any cirumstance whereby the 2 could ever work together now.

Sequel talk is just ridiculous. No big budget movie will ever focus on an 80 year old former leading man.

Nimoy is only involved as they needed someone to help with marketing for the ST relaunch.

Badly handled by both parties and the fans lose out on seeing the original Kirk one last time.

Hope the movie is incredible otherwise forget seeing anymore Star Trek for at least a decade.

50. ByGeorge - September 18, 2008

I believe Shatner . But it sounds like he wanted a film which resurrected Kirk as the plot. If I were a stockholdein Paramount – I’d vote against that.

For those who want Shatner to reprise his role why don’t you pool your financial resources and make your own fan-made movie featuring Shatner as Kirk? Paramount will sell you the rights to his character if the price is right. Put your own money at stake here. You can take the risks Paramount shied away from. It’s only YOUR money at risk. Put a 77 yo Shatner into a movie about resurrecting elderly Kirk who has been dead to the public for 14 years and is unknown to the next generation. It’ll be a sure hit and the return on your money is guaranteed!! Better yet, Shatner has some decent resources – maybe he can put up the cash for that sure thing blockbuster movie. Go for it!!

51. TrekMadeMeWonder - September 18, 2008

OK. I gotta say it.
I will not see this film without an appeance by Mr. Shatner.

Who, by the way, looks great..

The Women!!!

52. TrekMadeMeWonder - September 18, 2008

Oh man.
A Freudian typo?

53. ensign joe - September 18, 2008

tread well my friends.. for the water is murkey and there be strange things a-dwellin..

Shatner is definitly in the movie.. I can prove it.

When time travel is discovered in the future it will be by a Trekkie.. This individual futurely known as the Trek Collective.. will go back in time to prevent the non-inclusion of Shatner as James T. Kirk in Star Trek (2009).. knowing how ridiculiously awsome JJ et al remade Trek, the Trek Collective cannot stop the on-screen death of Kirk as preventing that death would prevent the reboot from occuring.. therefore instead of preventing Kirk’s death, the Trek Collective ensures his return in Star Trek (2009)..

QED

54. ensign joe - September 18, 2008

why else do you think JJ knew that Shat woudln’t do a cameo.. Trek Collective yo..

55. Alec - September 18, 2008

I have stayed away from the recent Shatner threads, because there is nothing new to discuss. The storytellers can only offer Shatner a cameo; and Shatner is only interested in a substantial part. Fine. If both of these facts remain true, there is no way Shatner can be in the movie. End of Story.

Shatner’s idea for his character’s resurrection is asinine: a terribly ad hoc fan-boy solution to a problem of his own making. I cannot imagine that many people, even those who, like me, are fans of Shatner, would be at all happy with this ‘solution’. It is the stuff of a bad episode, not a feature film. Clearly, Shatner’s resurrection would detract too much from the essence of this film. Nimoy bridges the gap between old and new. Anything more would shift focus away from the ‘new’ crew.

56. Driver - September 18, 2008

If you want something done right, you’ve got to do yourself, Mr. Shatner.

57. Matthew_Briggsuk - September 18, 2008

For god sake rather than put the reels of this movie into a vault somewhere can we not do this with Shatner.
He was the one that signed that contract in 1994, he was the one that took that pay cheque and he was the one that filmed 2 ways of his charecter to die. Yes Spock died and he came back but that was because he is a unique charecter and had the abilitty to “save his soul”.

JJ et al wasn’t doing the “bring back Kirk story”.

For god sake let it drop. If he’s in it after all this then that would be awsome, but if he’s not then let it be.

In Shatners own words

“Get a life”

58. Brian B. - September 18, 2008

#47

Anyone should be free to bash the shat there buddy, especially when he’s whining like a 5 year old.

59. jr - September 18, 2008

After JJ’s film is released to DVD, Shatner ought to ‘be creative’ and edit himself back in and see if it really does work.

Perhaps he could even say the imortal words: ‘Space, the final frontier…’

60. SirMartman - September 18, 2008

I would be very interested in a 3 story type thing,,about saving Kirk,,(Shatner)

Like the “Search for Spock” type of story line,It would be an instant hit movie.

Im looking forward to this new Trek movie,but Im very shocked Mr Shatner didnt hear from JJ,

I wonder how JJ will address this ??

61. Mark Anton - September 18, 2008

First of all, why would they want to bring back Captain Kirk when he is already there in the form of Chris Pine? This is a different timeline. It wouldn’t make any sense to bring back Kirk as an old man, because in this new film series he’s only about 30 years old. William Shatner was a great Captain Kirk. But isn’t it important for the new film to embrace the new actors, and for the audience to accept them as legitimate TOS characters? I think that Mr. Shatner should politely stop talking about the film for a while . I hope they will have an honored place for him at the premiere. It’s just too bad we have to wait until May for it to come out. That will just delay further the making of a sequel, which I certainly hope they’re able to do.

62. rehabilitated hitch1969© - September 18, 2008

One more thing – I hate to say it, but Shatner’s lack of respect for Star Trek shines no brighter when he talks about how “easy” it would be to resurrect him using the Jurassic Park method. That’s the cheasiest idea – worse than Borg Nano iPods – that has ever been mentioned.

Let me get this straight – The greatest captain in starfleet is either a walking zombie OR an entirely new person cloned from the DNA of the zombie? That’s the movie you want to make? Oh it’s no big deal. It’s science fiction, as he waves off. Just get him back and not for a cameo either.

What disrespect and insult to those of us who your character really mattered. The fact that he still can’t see the importance… it’s not just bringing back a character that he non-chalantly killed off for 30 pieces of silver. It would be VERY important to us HOW that was done, and that we could be reassured – like with Spock – that we are getting back our captain INTACT.

But this isn’t 1994 anymore either so who even cares. Just as James T. Kirk refused Sybok to take away his pain. We must keep the pain of the loss of James T. Kirk so senselessly so long ago. It’s what makes us who we ARE. We need this pain.

THE WOMEN!!

=h=

63. NDP - September 18, 2008

I do not believe Shatner in this video. I now believe he is in the film.

64. John from Cincinnati - September 18, 2008

Let’s examine the science fiction of bringing Kirk back. Yes, DNA can be extracted and a physical being that looks and talk like Kirk can be recreated, but it won’t be James T. Kirk. All of Kirk’s memories and experiences can not be reproduce. Spock left his Katra in McCoy, his essence, so it could be returned later. I just don’t see how this solution could be viable.

The only viable way to get Kirk back would be through Time travel or alternate reality.

65. alice cooper - September 18, 2008

I do like the Shat but wouldn’t be that bothered if he was in this film or not? He knew what he was doing when he made Generations so tough SHIT on him if this isn’t a hoax?!

66. NDP - September 18, 2008

To clarify my statement above….Shatner says he was never offered a role or cameo but says he met with JJ several times….for what coffee?

This is a bunch of bulls— to hide the fact that he is in the film.

67. The Last Maquis - September 18, 2008

I need Beer.

68. sean - September 18, 2008

I have no interest in reading any more of this tiresome crap about Shatner.

69. rehabilitated hitch1969© - September 18, 2008

You conspiracy dudes that think that Shatner is somehow in this and it’s all lies are going to be very disappointed.

In my estimation, Sir JJ and the team have been more than gracious and respectful in addressing the situation. I personally would have told Shatner to go F himself. And I would have done it very publically with the way he’s speaking to them.

I can’t BILLieve that after being so disrespectful that he has the audacity to suggest keeping a sequel open for him. The man’s arrogance knows no limits. And to me of course, its all rather cute and what I expect from our captain. But if I were Sir JJ… and I was serious about what I did for a living and my art, my reputation, all that… I would never work with Shatner, I would go out of my way not to work with him on Star Trek simply for the disrespect.

Pull yours out Bill, let it fly, it doesnt matter because I am Sir JJ and MINE IS BIGGER. (talking macintosh computers, of course). That would be MY response. SO Sir JJ has been most gracious I think.

THE WOMEN!!

=h=

70. Desertrat - September 18, 2008

Dear Bill,

DROP IT!
DROP IT!
DROP IT!
DROP IT!
DROP IT!
DROP IT!
DROP IT!
DROP IT!
DROP IT!
DROP IT!

Have I made myself clear?

I used to be a huge fan of yours until this whole mess started and I am now seeing you in a much different light.

71. justcorbly - September 18, 2008

Shatner’s refusal to accept a cameo role is tantamount to declaring that any future Trek movies should center on him as long as he is alive. That’s both silly and arrogant.

If we are to believe him.

That said, making all this noise about Shanter not being in the movie, and then having him appear on screen when the film opens would generate a hell of a lot of publicity.

72. SPB - September 18, 2008

THIS IS OBVIOUSLY A PUBLICITY STUNT:

Because SOMEBODY is outright LYING. Either JJ Abrams, or Shatner. I’d like to think either of them is better than that. Unless it’s an elaborate hoax all in the name of fun. I hope.

73. Mike in Iowa - September 18, 2008

After seeing William Shatner’s “rebuttal video,” I’m having second thoughts on whether or not it was a good idea to work Leonard Nimoy into STXI. Am I the only one? Could a lot of this online “drama” been avoided if there were no original cast members in the new movie?

Here’s my point: Any time you contrive a story to work an actor back into a part they have aged or grown out of, it’s a mistake. I’m now hoping that the story line for STXI is sensible enough to include Nimoy’s Spock in such a way that it doesn’t seem to be too obvious a salute to the die-hard fans.

Such an appearance would smack of hocum, and this franchise has had far too much of that.

74. dalek - September 18, 2008

Shatner had nothing but nice things to say about JJ. The bottom line was he wasn’t approached, which most of us suspected all along.

No conspiracies. No surprise endings. Just zero negotiation.

75. montreal paul - September 18, 2008

I love Shatner and his Kirk.. but he wanted a death like Nimoy had. He was fully aware of what he did when he accepted the part in Generations. That, and the fact that he was quite vocal about NOT wanting a cameo, that JJ and gang didn’t give him the cameo or SMALL part in the movie.

By doing both those things.. he talked HIMSELF out of the movie. He should have never accepted the role in Generations.

I love ya Bill.. you are a fellow Montrealer.. but you dug your own grave. pardon the pun.

76. Orb of the Emissary - September 18, 2008

Captain Kirk died in Generations, period. William Shatner should accept the fact that he accepted the role in Generations, knowing it would mark the death of his character. He is most likely also aware that the beginning of this movie takes place post-Nemesis, meaning Kirk has been dead for a few years by this point in the Star Trek timeline. Besides, bring Kirk back from the dead would in a way diminish Generations, IMHO.

77. TrekMadeMeWonder - September 18, 2008

76. Orb of the Emissary

The general audience does not care or know about the ST timeline or Human vs. Vulcan lifespans.

Not an issue for me.

78. Pierre - September 18, 2008

You know, I’m starting to think that this is all part of some kind of viral ad campaign for the movie. Abrams says one thing, Shatner says another all to mask the fact that Shatner will actually be in the movie in a cameo role. I’m starting to feel just a bit manipulated….

79. josepepper - September 18, 2008

My God Bill

Give it frieking UP

You are really becoming a characature of yourself in a negative way

80. montreal paul - September 18, 2008

just something to add… I did love his novels in which Kirk was brought back. I think it was a pretty good idea and i did love that series of novels. But… that was a book and this is the current movie. What’s done is done.

81. Kev-1 - September 18, 2008

He’s only reacting to the claims he was offered a part. He says he was not. I don’t see why that isn’t true. His transporter idea isn’t that bad. Any movie that has Old Spock talking to young Spock in person could accommodate Shatner’s idea without raising an eyebrow.

82. Sands - September 18, 2008

Rumor:
Emperor Nero Information:
Nero is half Romulan and Half Vulcan who cut off his pointed ears, out of hate for all Vulcans and specially his father Spock.

83. Capt Mike from the Terran Empire - September 18, 2008

Ok. Shat. You are the greatest and the best Kirk. But. Enough already. We all love you as the Kirk. But it’s time to move on and let another bodly go where you have gone before.

84. ByGeorge - September 18, 2008

#82

So he goes back in time to kill off his own father before his own conception? Nero can’t be too bright IMO.

85. Kevin O - September 18, 2008

I am a big fan of William Shatner and he will always be Captain Kirk to me. With that said, for Star Trek to continue and prosper it must be with a fresh start. It is time that William Shatner let it go and be happy with the fact that because of him and what he has done that Capt Kirk will live on for a long long time

86. The Insider - September 18, 2008

HURRAY FOR KIRK!!!

Aaahhh …. I don’t care I’d still want to see Kirk in the new movie!

If they can have Sam Jackson called back for a scene that fans demanded in the movie SNAKES ON THE PLANE, Juuuuust to say “THERE ARE SNAKES ON THE MU£&%ING PLANE!!!”

I’m sure fans cane bring Shatner back too…

;)

87. Magic_Al - September 18, 2008

I don’t get tired of Shatner. I do get tired of Shatner-bashing. The Shatner articles on this site are clearly headlined and generally segregated from other information. Nobody is forced to click on them!

I’m curious how much money it would take to get Shatner on Phase II nee New Voyages. Shatner said he wouldn’t do fan films but that probably only means he wouldn’t do one for free or just scale. Phase II can obviously outdo a DirecTV commercial on artistic and entertainment merit, it’s should be just a question of being able to write as big of a check! Online donations perhaps?

88. jack - September 18, 2008

#84

How do you know 2262 Nero’s conception is before or that Nero is trying to kill Spock or if Nero is the bad guy who goes to the past . Eric Bana has said his role in the film is like a cameo.

89. A.S.F.33 - September 18, 2008

#43 I agree. Shatner bashing is always rampant on this site and Shatner fans are often shouted down or just vanish..

Bill is RESPONDING to JJ’s coment about the cameo. Doesn’t Bill have the right to get his side of things out there or is only JJ alowed to speak on this issue?

90. Spocko - September 18, 2008

Wow, William Shatner really wants to be in another Star Trek movie. I knew he’d bring up the dinosaur thing again when he started talking about how he brought back Kirk.

91. Devon - September 18, 2008

#89 – I agree.. Shatner is only responding to what’s asked. Just as J.J. was. Though personally I wish they could actually speak in person though and see if anything is very fruitful instead of going back and forth online.

92. Devon - September 18, 2008

Having said that, I think the “molecule” thing sounds a little forced but WHY would they be doing it in regards to the movie? In that case, they should be using it to bring everyone back in the movies.

93. Resident nEvil - September 18, 2008

86: “Aaahhh …. I don’t care I’d still want to see Kirk in the new movie!”

Kirk IS in the new movie.

I wonder if anyone on James Bond fansites, when talking about Quantum of Solace, says: “I can’t believe Bond isn’t going to be in this movie!”

94. Closettrekker - September 18, 2008

#24—-“BRING BACK KIRK!”

They are. It’s William Shatner being left out….not James Kirk.

#35—“It’s so sad to see hwom many Abrams worshipers and Shat bashers we have on the TrekMovie. For me, thes people aren’t Star Trek fans, they only TOS nerd fans.”

I like most of Abrams work, and I liked the first 20 years of Shatner as James T. Kirk. I don’t care to see a 2008-2009 portrayal of Jim Kirk as William Shatner. I’d rather see JJ Abrams bring my favorite Star Trek characters to life again for a new generation, and in their youth.

Does that make ‘me only TOS nerd fan’?

#81—“He’s only reacting to the claims he was offered a part. He says he was not. I don’t see why that isn’t true.”

I’m sure it is true. Abrams NEVER said he was “offered” a part. That was simply something that ‘some fans’ assumed when he said that a part had been “written” for him by Bob Orci and Alex Kurtzman.

#84—Who says that assasination is his goal? There are other avenues of revenge than murder, particularly with time travel in his arsenal. There is certainly the potential for high drama in that scenario, as I have said all along.

Personally, as much as I would love to see “TEI” referenced in such a significant way in STXI, I think that such a plot twist might be rather difficult for the average moviegoer to follow, and therefore unlikely as a back story for STXI.

It’s more likely, IMO, that Nero is a member of a disenchanted faction of the Romulan military that is pro-actively unsupportive of the changing political climate on Romulus. Spock has been very active in facilitating that change, and they would not likely be too fond of him.

My guess is, Nero and his cohorts have some “changes” of their own in mind, and it has something to do with a young Spock.

95. Author of "The Vulcan Neck Pinch for Fathers" - September 18, 2008

Bill, head back to the Nexxus.

Please.

96. The Underpants Monster - September 18, 2008

No such thing as bad publicity. As long as Shabter keeps talking about the movie, it’ll be on everybody’s radar.

But of course nobody went to him with the cameo idea, because they already knew he wasn’t interedted in cameos.

97. Closettrekker - September 18, 2008

#89—“Bill is RESPONDING to JJ’s coment about the cameo. Doesn’t Bill have the right to get his side of things out there or is only JJ alowed to speak on this issue?”

He is allowed to speak, obviously. However, he should have read the article himelf instead of apparently relying on second hand information (and I’m assuming that is the case, as opposed to Bill lacking basic reading comprehension skills).

Abrams NEVER claimed that Shatner was offered a part and refused…

He said that Orci and Kurtzman had written a part for him…

When he said that the part did not meet Bill’s standards of significance, he was referring to the fact that it was a “cameo”, which Bill made very clear he was not interested in.

And what’s with everyone who thinks Shatner is wrong for a 2009 Star Trek film being labeled a “Shat Basher”? IMO, that’s every bit as inappropriate as insulting Bill for his weight or whatever else.

Nothing will ever change my feelings about watching a young William Shatner portray JTK. But that has nothing to do with STXI. You can be a fan of the man’s work, and still feel that his appearance in this film is unwarranted.

98. trans - September 18, 2008

Shatner calls out JJ Abrams’ lie about writing a scene for him.

Why would JJ Abrams and his writers start writing a scene for Shatner, without asking him if he would be up for it?
Do you think they wrote Nimoy’s part before asking him if he would be up for it?

Shatner would never call JJ Abrams a lier, but I will!
JJ Abrams is lying!
They never wrote a scene for Shatner.
They never wanted him in the movie from day one.
All that we are trying to find a way to fit him in was all bull!

Now the Question is: What else is JJ Abrams and crew lying about?

99. JB - September 18, 2008

I love the Shat, but quite frankly, having grown up with TOS, I think he forgot how to portray Kirk a long time ago (must be that mad cow thing again – Denny Crane!). During every single one of the films, even TWOK, I found myself asking, “When did he forget how to portray Kirk?” Looking back at the 7 films he was in, in my view his performance in TMP came closest, followed by TWOK, but it quickly turned into a tongue-in-cheek cliche from there. Granted, a lot of bad writing is equally to blame in the films. Ultimately it just wasn’t the same Kirk on the big screen most of the time.

100. Robert Bernardo - September 18, 2008

Bill’s video message seemed to be a very honest appraisal of the situation, sprinkled with a bit of Bill humor. Good job and thanks for clarifying your role.

101. montreal paul - September 18, 2008

98 – trans

And you have proof of this how? Why would you even say such a thing? Of course a pitch and some rough copy of the script was written before Nimoy was asked.

In Generations… the lines that were written for Doohan and Koenig were written for Kelley and Nimoy but both tuned it down so it was rewritten slightly to be Chekov and Scotty.

Calling JJ a liar is very slanderous without proof. I suggest you chill buddy.

102. Izbot - September 18, 2008

Two days ago on the “Shatner Makes Comic Books” thread I predicted the following:

“64. Izbot – September 16, 2008
I’m gonna predict it now:
Next May the new film will be huge. The franchise will be invigorated. Longtime Trek fans will be pleased. New fans will join us. All will be harmonious on earth.
Fastforward a few weeks after the release. We’ll get news that Shatner has agreed to — nay, requested — a cameo in the sequel.
I’m sayin’ it now. Mark your calendar, you have been warned.”

Wow, that was fast.

103. lodownX - September 18, 2008

I say NO to an “old & puffy” Kirk… James T. would never have let himself go…. damn it. Its over. This is nothing more than a stunt to promote his website.

104. The Enterprise - September 18, 2008

How about a CG TOS era Kirk? I’m sure it could be done

105. BashtheBash - September 18, 2008

Dear Shatner-Bashers,
Shatner has been apart of and a icon of Star Trek for 42 years.
No one has seen Abrams/Orci/Kurtzman’s Star Trek.
why stand up for Abrams/Orci/Kurtzman and bash Shatner.
You guys (not all) act like Abrams and Orci and Kurtzman are gods in Star Trek.
You stand up for Abrams/Orci/Kurtzman so much to the point that you will rip on Classic Trek.
Trek-Fans attacking all other Trek?
How about much money does Abrams and Orci and Kurtzman pay you guys to write on this site?

106. JimmyMac - September 18, 2008

Shat is 100% definately in the movie. This is a PR stunt.

107. steve623 - September 18, 2008

Re: #9 – “He’s old, washed up.”

Shatner’s won, what, 3 or 4 Emmys on a hit show in the last 5 years or so? If that’s “washed up” evetry actor in Hollywood would like to be washed up.

Wishing don’t make it so, kid.

108. sean - September 18, 2008

So just to be clear, the ‘Shat’-lation on this is: “Hey guys, I totally wouldn’t have accepted the part you wrote for me, because I don’t do cameos. You knew that, because I go around everywhere telling everyone I don’t do cameos. A lot. But I wanted you to come to my house, sit down for some coffee, and ask me to do something you knew I wouldn’t do because I told everyone I wouldn’t do it. Then I’d tell you I wouldn’t do it, because I wouldn’t. I mean, how does that not make sense to you?”

109. captaingoesdownwithship - September 18, 2008

I got an idea. I am a big trekkie and love canon like the rest, but I saw on youtube once someone recreate the ending that would be just like paramount editing the ending to where shatner doesn’t die and that youtube video look flawless. Problem solved and now you got Kirk alive in the future. Plus as shatner and others have said, its sci fi so one can come back to life many times.

110. ByGeorge - September 18, 2008

#98

One of the writers (Orci) posts on this site and said he had written a scene for Shatner. He also said he will post that scene on this site after the movie premiers. Please don’t call the writer a liar. I’d retreat and call it a misunderstanding rather than call either party a liar.

111. Pizza - September 18, 2008

No one offered me a roll! Waaaaaa

This is so old and tiring!

112. Redjac - September 18, 2008

The Shat is tha MAN!!!!

Not sure if he should back in Trek…I just think there’s too much water under the bridge (no pun intended). Let’s just move on with the new cast…

113. Energize - September 18, 2008

The movie is dedicated to Shatner

114. Andy Patterson - September 18, 2008

I’m not reading a single post here yet.

I will say that I love that Bill is still stirring it up.

I also think that we don’t have to get Kirk’s DNA or whatever. We can just go back in time and pretend that movie didn’t happen.

115. Leonel - September 18, 2008

*sigh*

116. Closettrekker - September 18, 2008

#98—-You have no basis for that whatoever. What you are saying is libelous, and you will only do so under cover of internet anonymity.

#101—He has no proof. He’s probably a troll we would otherwise recognize, posting under a different name.

#105—You are completely irrational. Not wanting to see Shatner in this film is NOT “Shatner-bashing”. People like me can love what he did as Kirk for decades, yet believe his time in that role is over. Liking the “original” Kirk and wanting to see him in STXI are two different things.

And of course Bill’s comments are going to incite such coments as “let it go” and what not. He was responding to something that wasn’t there.

Abrams said that Orci and Kurtzman wrote a scene for him. Orci confirmed that. JJ also made it clear that the scene was a “cameo”, something which at the time, Bill had made equally clear he was not interested in.

Later, Shatner implied (on The View) that he would have been open to such a part.

Now he has stated definitively that he would not.

Shatner has every right to answer these questions any way he chooses, but when he chooses to continue to complain, he (and those who label everyone else a “Shat-Basher”) must accept that some people will tire of it. That’s the way it is. He has a choice. He doesn’t have to respond that way. He could, instead, choose to handle it with grace. That’s not Shatner, and that’s fine. His personality is what alot of people like about him. But he is a big boy. I doubt that anyone on the internet is hurting his feelings.

Stop labeling people who disagree with you. It’s immature, and just as inappropriate as the comments which personally insult BIll Shatner.

117. Chris M - September 18, 2008

I wish Deforest Kelley were still with us so he could look William Shatner in the eyes and say: “You’re deas Jim!”

As much as I would have loved to have seen William Shatner in the new Star Trek Movie the reality is that Captain James T. Kirk died in Star Trek: Generations and that is not something that can be undone!

I remember shedding a tear as Captain Kirk died and William Shatner uttered that final sentence: “Oh my!”

It was a sad and yet ineviatable end to the Characters life. I take solace in the knowledge that part of Captain Kirk will live on forever in the Nexus. A place where he could achieve something he never really got out of life. HAPPINESS!

118. Anthony Pascale - September 18, 2008

sands/bashthebash/trans/etc
you are welcome to your own opinions, but not your own facts. And posting under multiple names repeatedly is a violation. Plus it appear you are a previously banned troll, so goodbye…again

119. Andy Patterson - September 18, 2008

114

“We can just go back in time and pretend that movie didn’t happen.”

Which is what I already do. Also….I know Shatner is heavy but he also looks like he’s been pumping iron too.

120. The Underpants Monster - September 18, 2008

#108 – ROFL! That’s how I would have put it if I had a better sense of humor.

121. EMTSACHMO - September 18, 2008

Mr. Shatner you need to make your books into movies .

122. Izbot - September 18, 2008

98. trans –
“Now the Question is: What else is JJ Abrams and crew lying about?”

It’s all a conspiracy!! JJ Abrams really hated Star Trek as a kid and his goal in life was to become successful enough in Hollywood to take over the franchise — just so he can destroy it!! Here’s some of the other lies he’s told us:

1.) He will respect canon.
LIES!! He plans on contradicting things we all *know* are canon! In the new movie James T. Kirk is a Klingon! From the planet Alderaan!! It’s supposed to take place in the year 400 Billion AD! Eddie Murphy co-stars — as Pluto Nash!

2.) He will avoid camp and cheesiness.
LIES!! He’s directing it like an Ed Wood movie! The Enterprise (which he deliberately misspells “Interprize” because he hates us!) model is made of balsa wood and scotch tape and hangs from very visable strings! They’re re-using the music from the old Batman TV show as the film score!

3.) He’s making the film something both longtime fans and non-Trekfans can enjoy.
LIES!! He wants to trick everyone on earth into coming to see his movie opening weekend to make a public mockery of all us Star Trek fans!! He plans on filming “the weirdos in the audience” (his words!) and putting them up on the screen with insulting captions underneath!! THEY’RE ALL GONNA LAUGH AT US!!

–Yeesh! Get *over* your paranoia!

123. ByGeorge - September 18, 2008

#114

But when anyone even remotely suggests “Reboot” or “Altered Timeline”, which would enable them to bring back the character as a young man and redo Kirk’s life, many on this board go nuts.

Getting Kirk’s DNA sounds similar to cloning Picard in Nemesis – which bombed. Too outlandish of an idea for your mainstream audience. Trek is supposed to be science fiction not pure fantasy. I though rebooting with an altered timeline was pushing the limits enough. I wouldn’t go too far away from science and a plot the audience will buy.

124. Amazing Bizzaro - September 18, 2008

I’m waiting for the night Shat comes home ‘wasted’ from some Hollywood party clicks on the camera-do-hickey and says what he REALLY feels.

125. Jeffries Tuber - September 18, 2008

I think Paramount has hired Harvey Mudd to run its publicity department.

We already know that Nero’s revenge against Kirk creates alternate timelines. It’s no leap to assume that these different lines include Kirks that died young and Kirks lived beyond GENERATIONS. So the “we’re not smart enough to solve this thing” is malarkey.

I’m not saying Shatner’s a gold digger, but he definitely aint no broke actor.

So why would appear this desperate, unless there’s something in it for him?

126. Denise de Arman - September 18, 2008

Amazing#124- Oooh… THAT would be a fun thread…

127. ByGeorge - September 18, 2008

It is more important to discuss whether Shatner’s daughter is HOT or NOT.

I’d say HOT!!

128. Closettrekker - September 18, 2008

#125—“We already know that Nero’s revenge against Kirk creates alternate timelines.”

We do?

Who said that Nero is out for revenge against Kirk?

What did Kirk do to piss off late 24th Century Romulans?

That wasn’t even a well thought-out rumor!

It is much more likely that the “revenge” Nero seeks is directed at Spock, who is presumably still on Romulus helping to facilitate the changing political climate in the RSE.
There is also the possibility that Nero has some connection to the Romulan Commander that Spock seduced and later betrayed in “The Enterprise Incident”, enabling the Enterprise to slip away from a group of Romulan vessels with a stolen cloaking device.

If Nero has any ideas about revenge against a former officer aboard the NCC-1701, it would make much more sense for that officer to be Spock.
Don’t you think?

129. The Enterprise - September 18, 2008

Shatner is a master. He should do more one man show tours.

130. Xai - September 18, 2008

29. Shatner_Fan_2000 – September 18, 2008
“I BELIEVE SHATNER.

‘Nuff said.”

Of course you believe Shatner…look at your name.

131. Xai - September 18, 2008

41. Earl – September 18, 2008
#39
“I know that Anthony will delete my post, but I anway going to say: There is no free speech on this site, beacuse he deleting posts which don’t fit in the divine vision of mr. Abrams.”

If that was the case, Shatner’s comments would’ve been deleted. Be real.

132. Victor Hugo - September 18, 2008

The pocket books that Shatner wrote(or co-wrote) were terrific for me, and no movie would do them justice. They were epic, fun, they had the cast of all Trek series, they were a slugfest . It was the ultimate fan-fiction and I´m satisfied by it.

You see, i can get used to the concept with this new movie If I imagine as a imaginary fan fiction as well. But as Alan Moore would say, aren´t ALL the stories imaginary?

133. Xai - September 18, 2008

46. Earl – September 18, 2008
“#43 These aren’t truly fans, these Lost&Alias fanboys, which accidently get int the Star Trek world.

I now expect “delete work”. ;)”

You don’t get to determine who is a Trek fan and who’s not. Got something real to say, or you just here to troll?

134. Xai - September 18, 2008

51. TrekMadeMeWonder – September 18, 2008
“OK. I gotta say it.
I will not see this film without an appeance by Mr. Shatner.”

Who’s going to monitor you?…You’ll see it.

135. Closettrekker - September 18, 2008

#123—“But when anyone even remotely suggests “Reboot” or “Altered Timeline”, which would enable them to bring back the character as a young man and redo Kirk’s life, many on this board go nuts.”

Exactly. Someone is going to be upset either way, so why not just leave it alone. The question to me is not whether Kirk can (within the ST Universe, anyway) be resurrected and once agan be depicted by William Shatner, but whether that is the best course for a creative team that is trying to attract new fans to the franchise.
One of the ways Abrams is trying to dispel some of the preconceived notions about Trek within the mainstream movie-going audience is to show that ‘this’ incarnation of Star Trek is different.
Please, no cornball gimmicks– like reconstructing James Kirk’s DNA (Shatner is out of his mind!), or attempting to justify a “correction” of Kirk’s death in Generations. What could possibly be the reason for that in the story?

This is not a mediocre budget fanboy film (like TSFS). This is Paramount’s $168 million Summer Movie.

Sure, you could have Shatner’s Kirk simply appear at the end of the film (assuming the film ends as it begins–post Nemesis), and just pretend that something was altered in the past which resulted in Kirk somehow escaping the Nexus. But why? For what purpose? Personally, I don’t care to see something so blatantly gratuitous.

136. Closettrekker - September 18, 2008

#134—He’ll be there opening weekend…just like the rest of us who take the time to post on this site.

137. Captain Robert April - September 18, 2008

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again.

Do a CGI animated direct-to-DVD version of Shatner’s “The Return” and the issue of how to bring him back is done.

Why CGI? The story takes place almost immediately after “Generations”, around ten years and, in Shatner’s case, forty pounds ago. So, if you go the Beowulf route (if they can turn chubby, balding Ray Winstone into Sean Bean’s stunt double, they can do anything) , you can make Shatner, and the rest of the cast of characters, look like they did back in the day, and even have McCoy show up as told in the novel (just need someone who can sound like De Kelley).

138. Anthony Pascale - September 18, 2008

Earl
Final warning for trolling

it is not for you to determine who is and is not a fan

139. Lurker - September 18, 2008

# 125: Exactly. It’s obviously about money in some sense…

And sorry #98, but Orci & Kurtzman explained that they indeed wrote the script AHEAD of offering it to Nimoy, WITH his character in it already, in the hope that he would indeed read it and accept the part. They took a chance.

So it’s not so inconceivable that they at least attempted to write a small scene for Shatner as well — which Orci and Abrams have essentially confirmed. We also know that either JJ or both of the writers met with Shatner at least once, if not a few times, before pre-production began — this is confirmed by Shatner as well.

The only thing that is now in dispute is whether or not the part was actually formally *offered* to Shatner, and whether further discussions about said part were had…Abrams seems to indicate that this is so…unless he’s speaking of his outer/industry knowledge of Shatner’s “demands”, rather than from personal experience… but if so, it certainly isn’t made clear…

140. DEMODE - September 18, 2008

its a hoax. Kirk (Shatner) will be in the film. And I, as will many other grown men, cry when we see him alive again.

141. tom - September 18, 2008

Sounds like they are negotiating in public now. Team Abrams can make the cameo work. Put it in Shatner”s contract that the scene won’t be deleted. What do you think Bob Orci? With all the time left who knows?

142. max - September 18, 2008

#98. There’s no lie. They tried to write a scene but it didn’t work, so they couldn’t offer him a role which did not exist. If you read JJ’s statement, there’s nowhere that he claims they actually offered Shatner a role in any official way. There’s no contradiction (A point Shatner himself seems to miss himself, curiously).

Honestly, Shat seems to be doing some deadpan comedy in this video. Just look at her face. She’s trying not to laugh. I’d take most of what he said as a joke.

I know these Shatner threads are tedious and all, but it keeps coming back up over and over again. What can this site do other than keep reporting it. Its beyond our control and we have to live with it. ;)

143. TrekMadeMeWonder - September 18, 2008

Xai…

Of course I’ll see it.
Because, I know Shats’ gonna’ be in it!

Closettrekker…
“Sure, you could have Shatner’s Kirk simply appear at the end of the film (assuming the film ends as it begins–post Nemesis), and just pretend that something was altered in the past which resulted in Kirk somehow escaping the Nexus. But why?”

You have to have a pretty conventional story arc that the sudience can wrap thier heads around. Nimoy, Time Travel, Romulans, a new ship, a new crew, there is alot going on in this flick, I am sure. Remember, this is a movie is targeted at the Next Generational audience.

Some plot holes like character ages will be forgiven if this movie delivers (as it should).

Don’t worry Xai! I’ll be first in line at the movies next May!
Yes. FIRST!!!

The Women!!!

144. Xai - September 18, 2008

I don’t see why William Shatner felt the need to address JJ’s quote. Did it hit a raw nerve? Another poster responded to me on a different thread, and they stated “Who knows what was said between the two men?” Shatner initially said he never talked to Abrams, and I believe in this and other interviews he said he did, so apparently something took place.

I dislike labels and agree with Closettrekker. Because someone states that they’d prefer to not have William Shatner in this movie, does not make him or her a hater or basher. And those that accuse others of lying owe some apologies. This site is read by more than just fans. Debate need not get personal.

145. Kobayashi Maru - September 18, 2008

Me thinks he doth protest too much!!!
There has got to be something cooking on all fronts, a conspiracy by JJ Shat and the bean counters at Paramount, not to mention marketing… that has been stoked for years now by all of us running these threads for miles speculating at debating …
Paramount must love this!
Consider that the franchise was pretty well milked dry by Nemesis, it sputtered to a halt with Enterprise, and now Star Trek has become exciting again! Remember it was the studio that has put this film in suspended animation till May, the last Star Trek summer release was STV, nearly 20 years ago.
They want JJ to do some further work, and they have 6 months to do it.
“There are always possibilities.”

146. Thomas - September 18, 2008

I kind of resisted believing it, but I’m starting to come around to the idea that this whole Shatner/JJ thing might be an elaborate put-on. Why else would Shatner keep bringing it up? What good could it possibly be to continue talking it up, especially if the movie is almost “locked”? What if this is JJ’s preliminary hype machine?

Whatever it is, something awfully fishy is going on.

147. Xai - September 18, 2008

143. TrekMadeMeWonder – September 18, 2008
Xai…

“Of course I’ll see it.
Because, I know Shats’ gonna’ be in it!”

_I wasn’t worried about anything but your meds.

148. Odkin - September 18, 2008

Much as I would love to believe that this is a publicity stunt, I don’t think it is. I just don’t think JJ and crew would want to get tangled up in the negotiation and personality nightmare that might come from trying to involve Shatner. Abrams is trying to accomplish too much in this movie to risk compromising it over Shatner’s star demands and script suggestions.

That said, we all love you Bill, and hope that the next one is ALL ABOUT YOU. Start negotiating. Get in shape. We all want a “Bring Back Kirk” film. Kirk’s death cursed the franchise. There is a limited time window where this can be fixed!

149. Balok - September 18, 2008

Nobody tops Shat in TOS, nobody. I’m a real TOS die-hard, but I don’t see any point in bringing him back as the old Kirk.

150. Closettrekker - September 18, 2008

#139—Abrams never claimed that a role was offered to Shatner.

He only said that Orci and Kurtzman had written a scene for him, and implied that it was a “cameo”, which we all know Bill had no interest in (since he has repeatedly said so).

Orci said that Shatner “required a role larger than the movie could sustain”.
He went on to say that he was referring to Shatner’s “I don’t do cameos” statement when he said that, and nothing else.
Abrams comments are in line with that. It’s that simple.

It isn’t complicated at all, except that Shatner is responding to something that Abrams did not say. He probably got Abrams’ “imaginary inference” about an “offer” that never happened from the person who asked the question. Second hand paraphrasing often stirs up unnecessary stuff like this. It’s very absurd, really.

151. Closettrekker - September 18, 2008

#148—“We all want a “Bring Back Kirk” film. Kirk’s death cursed the franchise.”

No “we” don’t…unless you mean one in which Kirk has been recast (along with the rest of Star Trek’s A-Team) in his (and their) youth.

William Shatner was never actually Captain of the Enterprise…James Kirk was.

152. VOODOO - September 18, 2008

This film may be great as is, BUT it would be better with Shatner in it.

153. Xai - September 18, 2008

152. VOODOO – September 18, 2008
“This film may be great as is, BUT it would be better with Shatner in it.”

That’s yet to be seen.

154. Xai - September 18, 2008

146. Thomas – September 18, 2008

“Whatever it is, something awfully fishy is going on.”

Ahh, he’s just doing it for the halibut.

155. Closettrekker - September 18, 2008

#152—Given the concensus “against” ‘Generations’ (and in particular, Kirk’s death scene), wouldn’t that movie have been “better” WITHOUT Bill Shatner?

It seems to me that Shatner’s inclusion in ‘Generations’ is exactly what has most fans up in arms about the “need” to “correct” what that film did to begin with…I seriously doubt that Berman and co. would have gone through with the plan to kill James Kirk if he had not signed on to do it in the first place. Killing him “in absentia”? I doubt it. It would most likely have been a completely different movie.

156. warptrek - September 18, 2008

I think Shatner wasn’t describing the transporter at all. It sounded like he was describing some alien artifact from one of the episodes.
Anyway, if u wanted to brink back Kirk it would only have been natural to do another ‘Search For” movie instead this time it would be Spock putting it all on the line to bring back his friend. Things coming 360 degree full circle. From a character point of view Spock would’ve definitely have done it. He did it for Pike, why not Kirk? The challenge in this scenario would be to include the new cast in that story somehow. Of course all this is moot with the film practically in the can.

157. D Rob the Knowledgable - September 18, 2008

Please, people. This is such a scam. Shat is sooooo already in this film. Can you not see this????

158. Kobayashi Maru - September 18, 2008

#156
It was supposed to come out this Christmas,
It’s being held till May!
We should’ve been talking about the DVD by then.

159. Andy Patterson - September 18, 2008

125
“So why would appear this desperate, unless there’s something in it for him?”

Points…a back end.

123

You misunderstand me. I’m not thinking sensible, commercial marketing ideas. I’m thinking totally selfish beliefs. I don’t believe that movie happened. Kirk’s still alive as far as I’m concerned.

160. TrekMadeMeWonder - September 18, 2008

Funny how a specific Google search for “trekmademewonder,”
has been beamed off the internet.

B-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-l-l-l-l-l-l-z-z-z- z – z .

; )

161. Xai - September 18, 2008

157. D Rob the Knowledgable – September 18, 2008
“Please, people. This is such a scam. Shat is sooooo already in this film. Can you not see this????”

I’ll wait here for the evidence..ready?

162. Xai - September 18, 2008

160. TrekMadeMeWonder – September 18, 2008
Funny how a specific Google search for “trekmademewonder,”
has been beamed off the internet.

B-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-l-l-l-l-l-l-z-z-z- z – z .”

15 seconds of fame ended already?

163. TrekMadeMeWonder - September 18, 2008

LOL!!!

The Women!!!

164. Closettrekker - September 18, 2008

#156—“From a character point of view Spock would’ve definitely have done it. He did it for Pike, why not Kirk?”

Spock put his career at risk for Captain Pike (as Kirk did for Spock). Asking me to buy that Spock would put billions at risk by intentionally altering the past (assuming that he would even get word on Romulus that his friend did not actually die aboard the Enterprise-B) is something entirely different. Spock would never put one man (even JTK) above the timeline he knows. That wouldn’t be Spock. That would be some irresponsible criminal we do not know.

And (if he were to “correct” what happened to his friend)why wait until the late 24th Century to do it? For all Spock knows, Kirk died nearly a century before.

165. Bruiser - September 18, 2008

ENOUGH ALREADY!!! about Sh#tnerd either being or not being in this movie!!!

I only read the article, not the more than 150 comments under it, so excuse me if someone else in fandom has already said what I just said.

I’ll see the movie in May….if he’s in it, fine. If he’s not, fine.

But I’m getting sick to death with having to listen to Tubby’s egotistical BS. I mean, this guy thinks he’s God’s Gift to movies. WRONG.
He seems to think “Star Trek” needs him. WRONG.
A big-time, old-school leading man type. WRONG.
Get over yourself Billy-Boy. PLEASE.

His ego spills out in just about every word he speaks.
I’m sure that there are people on this board who have read and seen just about every interview this guy has given in the last 42 years.
Have you seen the ones in the documentaries that accompany TOS dvd releases and the Special/Collector/Director Editions of the movies on dvd? Every damn word he says is BORING. His whole demeanor is BORING. Ever see the dismal on-set interview he gave during the filming of “Star Trek IV?” He acted so aloof and disconnected that I’m sure he was having some serious gas pains that day. He acted like he couldn’t have been any LESS interested in being stuck playing Kirk again.
I recently watched “Mind Meld” again after a couple of years of it collecting dust in a box. He added NOTHING to the conversation he had with Nimoy. The thing that strikes me the most about the guy is he can’t recall plots of hardly any of the episodes or anything that happened off-camera while making the series. That’s stuff I can somewhat forgive him for. But he can’t even remember episode names without flubbing them. For someone who cleary (and admittedly) has a shoddy memory about this stuff I think it’s pretty ironic that he “wrote” 2 books of “Star Trek Memories.” Thank God for fan-boy ghost writers to help you along, huh Bill???

He’s been busy for atleast 30 adding NOTHING to the franchise, except a great dramatic performance in “Star Trek II.” I’ll give him his due on that. But no doubt he could be a first-class pain to his co-stars and has denigrated “ST” fans in the past. His ego won’t allow him to admit he was a bitch to his fellow cast-mates or even acknowledge or remember what their gripes are or were. But, hey, atleast the franchise has provided some great post-series paychecks to the man.

Now he’s busy crying cuz JJ won’t let him in.

WS: Get A Life. Ride Your Horses. Enjoy Yourself. “Star Trek” will get along fine without you.

166. TrekMadeMeWonder - September 18, 2008

164. Closettrekker

Old age brings on Vulcan madness. Terrible thing.

Nice post!

167. ByGeorge - September 18, 2008

#155

Here is my conspiracy theory.

According to Shatner in an interview with Howard Stern he said that they were going to kill off his character to advance the TNG films no matter what. I hate to agree with Shatner but I think this could be true. TNG just never caught on like TOS did. Berman had to have known this so in an effort to generate more interest in TNG he hoped that killing off Kirk in Generations would cause some to transfer their interest from TOS to TNG. Trying to strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.

Here is the interview:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7WFEmtrIrI

168. MAT - September 18, 2008

Bob Orci

.. where are you?
.. are you going to weigh in on this?

We are all waiting.

169. Green-Blooded-Bastard - September 18, 2008

I have repeatedly stated I think people should forget Shatner being in this movie, and recommended just judging the movie on it’s on merits when it comes out, but I s**t you not the more I see Shatner publicly wishing he was in the movie and JJ and Orci saying there wasn’t anything they could do, the more I’m thinking this really is all a ruse just to surprise us with one hell of a cameo at the end of the film. This latest post is the one that really got me thinking. I hate to lean that way because I have been a staunch believer in Abrams and Orci’s past statements, but if it were true, it would only have to be stated once by each party and that would be it.

Example: Seymour Philip Hoffman was rumored to be the Penguin in the third Batman movie, however, he publicly denied it. Never heard another word about it. Shatner and Abrams have been saying the same things over and over and now I’m wondering if they simply have been overacting. Shatner’s been known to do that :)

170. TrekMadeMeWonder - September 18, 2008

He’s probably lurking, reading every post and thinking of new ideas that would have been even cooler.

171. Katie G. - September 18, 2008

U n b e l i e v a b l e.

172. dyaleleon - September 18, 2008

Give it up, dude.

173. Jabob Slatter - September 18, 2008

William who?

174. sherlockfreak - September 18, 2008

You know, I really wish everyone would let this go. If JJ hadn’t brought this up again out of the blue, Shatner wouldn’t have to address it again. We know he’s not in it, they know he’s not in it, most people have moved on already. Shatner himself has moved on–or would have except for the fact that people keep asking him about it.

Look, we all are tired of hearing it, so why does it keep coming up? It almost felt to me like JJ brought it up to keep people thinking about the movie–“if I keep saying Shatner’s name, people won’t forgrt this movie’s coming out next year…” If that’s the case, then he’s using Shatner very poorly.

I dunno… it just seems odd to me.

175. Thomas - September 18, 2008

174. sherlockfreak,
It’s stuff like this that’s started turning me onto the idea that this might be an elaborate plan on the part of JJ and Shatner.

176. Pr011 - September 18, 2008

Bored now.

177. BUengineer - September 18, 2008

Bill, Please give it up. Kirk is dead. It would cheesy to bring him back. Let the legend of Kirk remain untouched.
JJ you made the right choice.

178. Harry Ballz - September 18, 2008

He looks good for a 77 year old, but it IS time to move on….fresh blood and all that!

179. JR - September 18, 2008

I was never offered a role in the film…. not even a cameo…. WHY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

180. Doug in Kabul, Afghanistan - September 18, 2008

#101: I agree…

the world of TREK does not, should not, revolve around Mr. Shatner, a man I very much respect.

As to an earlier post suggesting a role would not be written without consulting an artist… that is so wrong. I don’t write things, nor do I suspect do Abrams, Orci and Kurtzman, with the thought that an external force is going to control the outcome.

I seem to recall Mr.Shatner saying in many posts “I don’t do cameos.” So if he is in the movie, great… if not, well, life goes on.

Realizing we all have our own opinions about what TREK is, or should be, it saddens me to see so many folks up in arms… practically poking one another in the eye just so they can be right…. as someone said…. chill!!!

181. Gary Seven of Nine - September 18, 2008

43. danpaine – September 18, 2008

“…You ‘bashers’ sound like a bunch a whiners.”

**And so does Shat!

Just think…if Shat followed Nimoy’s lead with Generations, we wouldn’t be having this discussion…!

151. Closettrekker – September 18, 2008

” William Shatner was never actually Captain of the Enterprise…James Kirk was.”

**The best insight on this thread!

I’m picturing Shat in the Genesis Cave screaming into his communicator: “Jaaaay Jaaaaaaay!!!!!!!!” [echos and fades-out as the camera pans across the island in “Lost”

182. Third Remata'Klan - September 18, 2008

Oy.
Get over yourself, Bill.

183. THX-1138 The Fandom Menace - September 18, 2008

The horse is dead, Jim. Quit beating the poor thing.

184. Cheve - September 18, 2008

You can’t have all the movies in the saga about the old cast coming back as their old characters.

It would be ridiculous.

Also using the resurrection of Kirk as the plot of a movie doen’t convince me at all. The closest thing to a full part that I can think off without feeling it is too silly would be Kirk comunicating from the future with the main cast from a moment in time when he isn’t dead yet or an adventure in the Nexus itself.

185. tk421 - September 18, 2008

How about a Shatner cameo like Nick Fury’s

You know, after the credits for a few seconds.

We track Older Spock going back to where ever he goes back to and Shatner steps out of the shadows so to speak.

The thing is, nobody has to explain how/why Kirk is alive. That’s the damn fun part. How was he resurrected? Was it like the Shatner books? Who knows? It’s just for the fans. It won’t ruin the flow of the movie that way.

Plus of course they get repeat viewers for those who left too soon.

186. Thomas - September 18, 2008

185. tk421
Other have posted similar ideas on previous threads, but that’s still the best idea I’ve heard yet.

187. jhoward - September 19, 2008

Here’s a hypothetical:

Let’s assume the movie, as rumored, involves a probable tampering with the timeline.

Let’s say that in the beginning Shatner was approached for a part in the movie which involves the return of Kirk at the end – the big surprise of the film. For the sake of the argument, let’s assume Shatner accepted the part. Now, from this point, J.J. and co. have 3 options:

Option 1) Announce that Shatner and Nimoy are returning to Star Trek. Problem: People go into the theater expecting an adventure that involves old Kirk and Spock, but for the majority of the film only see Spock. Kirk returns at the end. Audiences are let down because it’s only a cameo – not what they were led to believe. Plus the surprise ending is ruined because they were expecting Kirk to show up the whole time.

Option 2) Announce that Shatner’s involvment involves only a brief cameo. Again, the surprise is ruined because audiences will be expecting him to show up at some point in the movie.

Option 3) Lauch a publicity campaign of denials and half truths, simultaneously disguising Shatner’s involvment in the film while keeping everyone talking about it, thus building hype for the film and preserving the surprise.

Regardless, I can’t wait until this is all over just so we can know the truth of what went really happened – assuming we’ll ever know for certain.

188. Paulaner - September 19, 2008

OK guys, I am all against the secret conspiracy theory but… this could be the most effective viral campaign by Abrams and co. ;)

189. Admiral_Bumblebee - September 19, 2008

Every time when there is slow news about the new Star Trek movie, the issue of Shatner not being in it is brought back up and then BAM the interest in this movie is there again – strange.
JJ and Shatner are only talking via the internet on Shatner/Star Trek-websites? Strange, too.
Even if this ist not a ruse, it is great marketing!

And yes, Shatner should be in the sequel! Together with Leonard Nimoy! But I doubt that JJ will consider him. He will come up with some strange arguments about not putting him in the next time as well…
But the story could only be great, there would be some many possibilites of doing it and doing it right. Think about young Kirk having to rescue his older self without causing a paradoxon that would destroy the universe or some such.

Still, I don’t understand the decision of not putting William Shatner into Star Trek 11…

190. Mark Lynch - September 19, 2008

At this point, all I can see is that some people think Shatner is in the film and some don’t. And once again the posting goes on ad infinitum, ad nauseum…

I don’t care if he is or is not in. Just let’s shut up with all the bashing and name calling etc., it’s getting tired now.

Wait until May 2009 and then everybody can go either “See, Told you he was in it!” or vice versa. Until then what’s the point in going on like this?

191. Rog - September 19, 2008

J.J.’s a liar, just like Palin and Mc Cain…..oops I mean Mc Cain and Palin.

192. Shatner Lover! - September 19, 2008

“J.J.’s a liar, just like Palin and Mc Cain…..oops I mean Mc Cain and Palin.”
You have good humor Rog! Except how has any member of that group you have mentioned lied?

ps. Shatner is in the movie…

193. Scott Xavier - September 19, 2008

I will drop 5 tickets for 2 if Shatners in the movie. It would be worth it.

194. Anthony Pascale - September 19, 2008

Rog,
warning for trolling and attempted political hijacking (which ends right now)

And let me clear something up around here. Neither Shatner nor Abrams are lying. Their statements do not actually contradict each other.

195. Chris Pike - September 19, 2008

I’m just glad His Shatness didn’t have a hand in the screenplay…!

196. commander K, USS Sovereign - September 19, 2008

Shatner is in the movie. This is the first part of the viral campaign.

197. Lurker - September 19, 2008

Anthony, BobOrci, whomever:

Can we get shirts made up that say: “SHATNER IS NOT IN THE MOVIE.” ??

It would be a great souvenir no matter what happens!!

198. Chuck Watters - September 19, 2008

This may be a great hoax ——- lets see it play out . If the Shat dude is in the movie then Abrams and him pulled off an excellent publicity stunt ———-if he isn’t then the Shat dude better get over it !

199. That person in the background of star trek V - September 19, 2008

Truthfully I really dont care about william shatner in boston legal, TJ Hooker or hell even Kingdom of the Spider movie.

I do CARE that he was the orginal Captain James T. Kirk. Not Chris “Princess Diaries 2″ Pine.

It is disrespectful if J.J. is lieing this whole time, wouldnt surprise me though.

No worries this film will be leaked on aintitcoolnews or some other movie site before May easily and will finally put the rumors to rest if this is a “viral” ad like Cloverfield or really isnt in the movie at all.

200. That person in the background of star trek V - September 19, 2008

I have to also agree that he will be in that last scene when spock is pulled out of the coma or whatever he is rumored to be and will probably mention something like “arent you dead?” Wouldnt surprise me either if they put in a CGI Deforest Kelly.

201. Denise de Arman - September 19, 2008

Chris Pike#195- “His Shatness” – good one!

202. star trackie - September 19, 2008

I see the Shatnerphobes are out in full force. lol Why all the fear? Why are you all so afraid that the man who played Kirk for 4 decades just might appear with the man who played Spock for 4 decades? Just the very thought of the idea send you all into a tizzy. Amazing.

Personally, I have no fear of the man and should he grace the screen this may, alongside Leonard Nimoy, as Jim Kirk, I, along with millions more will simply smile and be delighted …all the time not wasting one thought on the ever dreadful nexus.

203. Lyle - September 19, 2008

This just in – William Shatner is IN the movie!

He plays the role of Commander T. J. Hooker IV, head of Starfleet Security.

204. Shatner_Fan_2000 - September 19, 2008

152. VOODOO
“This film may be great as is, BUT it would be better with Shatner in it.”

153. Xai
“That’s yet to be seen.”

No, if you love William Shatner’s portrayal of James T. Kirk, as many fans do, it’s already decided. I support the movie and hope it’s great even Shat-free – but, c’mon, Shatner + Nimoy would’ve ruled all.

202. star trackie
“Personally, I have no fear of the man and should he grace the screen this may, alongside Leonard Nimoy, as Jim Kirk, I, along with millions more will simply smile and be delighted …all the time not wasting one thought on the ever dreadful nexus.”

Right on, brother. JJ & co. dropped the ball on this issue.

205. Style - September 19, 2008

You know what Big Bill is speaking so much truth he is making JJ and his crew look like bafoons!!! I mean they couldn’t come up with the transporter idea! It’s like they aren’t even trying!

206. AdamTrek - September 19, 2008

JJ is HUGE on secrets, as has been proven time and time again. If Mr. Shatner has a bit part in the film, then he would be in on it. This is viral marketing at it’s best/worst.

THEY know we are listening. THEY keep bringing this up. Anthony keeps posting stories about this. It’s been going on too long.

Now that I think of it, they figure we need something as rabid fans to tide us over until the long-awaited trailer. Otherwise we wouldn’t visit the site as often and we’d lose interest.

207. ensign joe - September 19, 2008

Give em hell Bill.. never give up.. never surren oh wait..

Seriously though The Shat is a tour de force.. he’s riding high.. he’s not exactly a spring chicken anymore but you wouldn’t know it from how busy the guy has been.. he’s charging boldly into the future and I doubt any of you nay-sayers will effect him one lick..

Here’s to you Mr. Shatner: Cheers!

oh and about that whole jurassic dna thing.. don’t be narrow.. he’s just saying that it should be easy enough to find a way to do it if they really wanted to..

is it effect or affect? can’t ever seem to get those right…

208. Xai - September 19, 2008

204. Shatner_Fan_2000 – September 19, 2008
152. VOODOO
“This film may be great as is, BUT it would be better with Shatner in it.”

153. Xai
“That’s yet to be seen.”

No, if you love William Shatner’s portrayal of James T. Kirk, as many fans do, it’s already decided. I support the movie and hope it’s great even Shat-free – but, c’mon, Shatner + Nimoy would’ve ruled all.”

I respectfully disagree, VOO. You can’t judge something before it’s seen. This is a discussion for May10.
.

209. Izbot - September 19, 2008

204. Shatner_Fan_2000 –
“I support the movie and hope it’s great even Shat-free – but, c’mon, Shatner + Nimoy would’ve ruled all.”

I am really perplexed over this “bringing Shatner and Nimoy back would totally rule” stuff since Paramount brought Shatner and Nimoy back for STs I-VI already — and it did not always “rule” when they did. Again, a Shatner and Nimoy-centric film would appeal to longtime fans only. And not even to all longtime fans as we are seeing from opinions here. I certainly wouldn’t be excited about another movie with Shatner and Nimoy in top billing. They’re in their seventies, for chrissakes. Anyone see that horrible Eastwood film “Space Cowboys”? I didn’t think so.

If it is one of JJ’s patented surprises and a big viral campaign (which seems a little far-fetched but who knows?) and Shatner does have a cameo then that would be a great surprise. But not neccessary.

But we have been told there will be some surprise cameos in the film. ‘Big name’ actors in various small roles. I’ve always thought David Bowie would make a great Vulcan. And Harvey Kietel would be an awesome Klingon. And Willem DeFoe would be perfect as a Cardassian. Jack Black as a Tellarite…

210. TrekMadeMeWonder - September 19, 2008

All this Shatnet talk is nice for this flick.

But I really think this should definatley be the last voyage for any of the older generation actors. Shatner, Nimoy, Stewart, Spiner, All of them.

Let’s give the new crew a free play going forward after this one.
They’re the real future of the franchise.

211. The sweet and sour sauce package from mcdonalds - September 19, 2008

If this film bombs lets say what options would be left for the franchise.

1. Combination of all captains in one last big movie

2. Maybe make a tv show based on the enterprise B crew or C crew

3. Start a film series with the crew of the Enterprise F

4. Maybe go really deep in the future and have something with the Enterprise K

5. What about a show called Star Trek: Klingon and do a klingon take on the series

6. Go back to Zephran Cochran and make a film based on that era.

212. Jeffries Tuber - September 19, 2008

Closettrekker, You were all over this board last night.

I stand by my statements in 125. Of course this is about eliminating Kirk from the timeline, that’s why Spock is saving the day. If someone interrupted Spock’s timeline, he certainly wouldn’t be around the save himself in a timeship.

There have been several statements concerning alternate battleship dressings of the Enterprise and it’s just elementary that a time travel plot involves alternative timelines.

If KO really are trying to make this a Khan-like revenge story, then Nemo could be related to the Commander from “The Enterprise Incident” and Spock. Who knows?

But this clearly about someone trying to undo Kirk’s effect on the Universe.

213. Randall - September 19, 2008

Considering the viral nature of the advertising for Cloverfield, I would not put it past Abrams (and Shatner), that this is some kind of double bluff, and we will in fact see Shatner in the new film. The publicity is just too good. Even if it’s not true… it works to the new film’s advantage.

214. Jeffries Tuber - September 19, 2008

To clarify the above, I’m suggesting that even if Nero has unresolved rage at Spock, he’s targeting Kirk. Stealing the cloaking device was pretty much the worst thing that happened to the Romulans in the 23rd Century–and that was Kirk’s mission.

Spock’s communion with the unnamed Commander in “The Enterprise Incident,” resulting in her disgrace/exile/whatever, was probably Spock’s biggest personal foul in the original series… making it the most logical basis for a Khan-like plot.

And the original point was: alternate timelines = easy path to a living Kirk/scene for Shatner.

Closettrekker, I know you can’t leave this unanswered. Or have you been Kobayashi Marooned by my superior logic?

215. Robofuzz - September 19, 2008

I think JJ and Shatner protest too much. I am beginning to think maybe he is in the film after all.

216. krikzil - September 19, 2008

“Shatner had nothing but nice things to say about JJ. The bottom line was he wasn’t approached, which most of us suspected all along. No conspiracies. No surprise endings. Just zero negotiation.”

Yup. It seems like it all ended before it began back in those original pitches in 2006.

However, I am glad Shatner addressed the notion that he had been offered something in the interim. As I’ve said in several posts, I didn’t see JJ’s comments as implying some recent offer of a cameo but it seems like a lot of posters saw it that way.

As much as I love Nimoy, I have to agree with the poster above who stated that it might have been better if no original actors appeared. I think it would have been easier to accept something totally new and different without anything from the past intruding. Of course, we don’t have anything really to discuss about the movie so the Shatner debate does kill the time….

217. TrekMadeMeWonder - September 19, 2008

This is a viral scheme.

They dropped to many blatant hint at the start of it.

Shatner went to JJs for dinner, left and did not why he ever went there? C’mon.

218. krikzil - September 19, 2008

“I am really perplexed over this “bringing Shatner and Nimoy back would totally rule” stuff since Paramount brought Shatner and Nimoy back for STs I-VI already — and it did not always “rule” when they did. ”

I don’t think anyone means that they expected the 2 to be the stars in this new movie, just that it would have been cool for them to be together, if only for a scene, one last time. That’s how I feel. And actually, the original cast films all made money. It’s the last 2 TNGs that lost money in the end:

http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/series/StarTrek.php

219. Izbot - September 19, 2008

218. krikzil –
“I don’t think anyone means that they expected the 2 to be the stars in this new movie, just that it would have been cool for them to be together, if only for a scene, one last time.”

Actually there have been some very vocal people (who I was addressing) who seems to think the *only* way this film will succeed is with Shatner & Nimoy in the leads and no re-casting to younger actors. That perplexes me.

220. Earl - September 19, 2008

Here I am again, as some one said “troll”. It’s sadly that anyone who thinks different and support Shat is troll. Really sad.

I just only say to mr. Abrams and his crew this: You should bring back Saht into ST XII.

221. JP - September 19, 2008

grrr. Shat.

Why can’t you get it…

Kirk and Spock could be hanging out before the Ent-B incident. They could have a flashback then.

Grr.

Or JJ,

same with you mang.

I could’ve done it.

222. JP - September 19, 2008

rofl,

ya’ll

223. scott1 - September 19, 2008

“JJ, nobody ever came to me and said ‘we have a cameo”

If this is true, and I doubt Mr. Shatner would lie about it, then its clear to me that Bill Shatner got dissed by the studio and by J.J. Abrams by their action of never even “offering” him any sort of presence or role in the film. For that I’ll always carry a bad feeling about Paramount and Abrams as a result where the end product of Star Trek is concerned regardless of the story. Yeah, yeah I know it, just another Shatner fan speaking his nonsense. Well, so be it.

224. Shatner_Fan_2000 - September 19, 2008

# 219 Izbot … Well, you quoted me in your “perplexed” post, even though my quote you were replying to clearly said I support the movie!

I’ve never said “the *only* way this film will succeed is with Shatner & Nimoy in the leads and no re-casting to younger actors.” In fact, I think anyone logical could not expect the franchise to go on with 2 nearly 80 year old men in the leads. I agree with krikzil … just a bit of Shatner/Nimoy along WITH the new cast would’ve made the film something more. Leonard is nice … Leonard + Bill would’ve been something truly special.

225. krikzil - September 19, 2008

“Actually there have been some very vocal people (who I was addressing) who seems to think the *only* way this film will succeed is with Shatner & Nimoy in the leads and no re-casting to younger actors. That perplexes me.”

I get the whole recasting anxiety. I have mixed feelings about it but I’ve come to feel much better about it once I’ve seen the choices. But no matter how good this new group is, no one is gonna replace Shatner & Nimoy for me. However, I do hope to enjoy it and pray it keeps Trek alive. As for them being leads, sadly even a diehard like me knows it just isn’t viable for a lot of reasons but I can’t begrudge those who still want to see the boys in something new. Damn economics and the aging process!! ;)

226. TrekMadeMeWonder - September 19, 2008

As much as I want Nimoy AND Shatner in this movie, I hope they are wise enough to keep their combined screen time under 25 minutes. This will let the new crew have thier own time to shine.

And make it a LONG movie too, PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.

227. SpikedCanon - September 19, 2008

20 32 34 nothing needed to be said after your posts

228. ShrekMadeMeWonder - September 19, 2008

A sweet oder like honey. Ha Ha!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8LAA9SK2sM4

He could play an old guy.

Signed:
TrekMadeMeWonder’s youngest daughter.

229. Katie G. - September 19, 2008

If this is a ruse and a publicity stunt, it backfired in my case. I used to adore William Shatner. Now I can’t stand watching him in anything (cute commercials notwithstanding). I feel sick for him and his wife. It’s clear that some think it’s a gimmick but the problem is, he’s losing some of his fans because of it.

It has occurred to me that he is doing all of this media hogging because he said he was terrified at the thought of dying (something to that effect) in “Mindmeld”. Maybe he thinks if he keeps busy he won’t die (or at least he’ll be too busy to think about it). Either way, I feel quite sorry for the man.

230. Shatner_Fan_2000 - September 19, 2008

# 229 … It’s posts like yours that perplex me. Shatner gets asked these questions by the media 9 times out of 10. What should he do – turn and silently walk away?

As far as the video above, I think it’s great that he addressed JJ’s latest quote. Many fans want to know why he isn’t in the movie. I daresay that’s been the biggest/most covered issue related to this film thus far. And Bill is providing a bit of info. And it’s clear that he has no true animosity towards anyone. He has quite a life of his own to live. He is no longer dependent upon Star Trek.

231. THX-1138 The Fandom Menace - September 19, 2008

Has it been brought up here that Shatner is bringing this subject up without being prompted by some reporter’s question? I think he had the choice to just ignore Abrams’ comments ( which never said Shatner was offered a part), but he didn’t. I think it’s becoming more and more clear that William Shatner is stirring the pot. In a way, he is flaming youtube with this particular video.

William Shatner was a child hood hero to me because of Star Trek and captain Kirk, but I really don’t care if he is in this new movie. I enjoyed TNG without him, and it was a mistake to have him in the first TNG movie. I will be fine without having Shatner play Kirk in this flick.

232. Notbob - September 19, 2008

I’m telling you it’s stuff like this that makes me not believe the claims that Shatner and others do not have brief cameos.

Because J.J. Abrams said he wants to shock the audience. He said in interviews, back when Cloverfield came out, how he wants audience members to see things and to be shocked in the theater…not by spoilers. I would not be shocked if this all turns out to be one big hoax and Abrams and Shatner were in on it all along. Abrams found a way to have Shatner’s Kirk in it but wants to shock the fans. Shatner agrees to play along. And Abrams has to know and understand fans. He seems to be the guy who can appreciate what it’s like to be one. He doesn’t strike me as the type who couldn’t find a way to pull this off. He strikes me more as a type who knows how to do it and wants to surprise you. Like an parent or uncle who tells a child they didn’t get you anything this christmas because they’ve been too busy or that toy was not available. Then Christmas comes and they got said child the toy they really wanted.

Shatner is not washed out. He’s the true king of comebacks and the character he plays on Boston Legal has won him how many awards? He’s got another show in the works–a talk show–lined up.

And when real disputes used to occur between an actor and director/producer types, the offical word was always some lame story. They ould say, “they ended up going another direction.” Sure there would be gossip from writers etc. But you never hear the director and an actor going to the media telling their side of thstory. At least not for years. This smells like a hoax.

233. classictrek - September 19, 2008

well said shatner fan 2000

i need to get something off my chest on here. Im fed up with people ripping into mr shatner who is only responding to questions put to him.

If your fed up with hearing about this subject, then why the bloody hell are you clicking on the link to read about it? can i suggest you ignore it in future if your not interested in it and leave it to those who are, to get on and debate the issue in full.

there ive said it now. BTW just for the record, i recon this movie will be great but will have a gaping hole in it without shatner. the bloke is a legend.

Greg
UK

234. Scott - September 19, 2008

JJ is from Hollywood.
Where everyone is just a little
constipated & full of BS.

Maybe Shat is too sometimes,
but the bottom line is the old man
deserves to have his Kirk live again.

235. Jabob Slatter - September 19, 2008

Based on his last five or so performances as Kirk, I personally don’t believe Shatner deserves to play the role again. He has played Kirk as a buffoon since TWOK, if you ask me. At least Nimoy has maintained Spock’s dignity. He definitely deserves to play the role again.

236. Deebo Shanks - September 19, 2008

I’m betting he’s in it. I’m also betting he’s not playing Captain James T. Kirk. My guess? The return of Tiberius from the Mirror Universe. Just a thought…

237. TrekMadeMeWonder - September 19, 2008

236. Deebo Shanks

Way to go!

238. Charles H. Root, III - September 19, 2008

I bet Mr. Shatner IS in the movie and all this American presidential campaign like sniping between the two camps is part of an elaborate PR stunt.

I have no doubt they are all enjoying a fine single malt and cigar on the balcony of some high rise right now, laughing their asses off about this.

This would explain why Mr. Shatner has yet to contact me regarding my offer to feature him in ST:XI:Sweded.

Be sure to visit http://www.stxisweded. com soon for the latest updates!

239. Katie G. - September 19, 2008

#230. Shatner_Fan_2000

and

#233. classictrek

Quite a few people above were saying that they think that this was all a publicity stunt. All I am saying is it’s possible that it is being taken the wrong way by some. Some may think that Shatner is a cry-baby who won’t let it go hence they’re turned off. Others may think it’s he and J.J. having fun drumming up publicity at our expense.

I didn’t get angry. I calmly stated that it kinda turned me off. Why are you so angry? I have the right to read the news article to see what the latest poop is as much as you do. I have the right to express an opinion. Why are you so angry?

Sorry to burst any bubbles (and please correct me if I’m wrong) but the news that Shatner didn’t want just a cameo IS OLD NEWS!!! It’s not like it was just announced and he is just now replying to it.

Also – – we are all adults here and I don’t get why we can’t have differences of opinion(s) without the contempt when someone disagrees with you. Some of us like to talk and it sometimes is “Yay, Bill!!” and sometimes it’s “Boo, Bill!!”

Why don’t you take a deep breath and relax a little?

240. Steve S - September 20, 2008

So, nobody offered Bill a role. How about an English muffin?

I love Bill, but he has to get over it now. If this is a PR thing, he has to get over it now.

241. Closettrekker - September 20, 2008

#214—“Closettrekker, I know you can’t leave this unanswered. Or have you been Kobayashi Marooned by my superior logic?”

That’s funny. Actually, I have been busy trying to help my business (in Houston) recover from Hurricane Ike. I have been coordinating the unload of a new shipment without power in the building and use of cargo lifts, etc. I have also been scrambling to stay in touch with clients, etc.

Sometimes, mother nature doesn’t care about Star Trek. Go figure…

Romulans leaving the 24th Century to travel back in time to kill Kirk makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Not even a little bit.

It makes much more sense that Nero and his cohorts are unhappy with the changing political climate on Romulus. It would also make far more sense that they would be none-too-happy with Nimoy’s Spock, who is presumably still on Romulus helping to facilitate that movement. Romulans would have far more axes to grind with Spock. That is undebatable…

I do not believe that Nero is tied to the Romulan Commander and Spock. That is a possibility, but IMO, far too fanboyish for this movie.

However, there is nothing you can say which will convince me that Nero targeting Kirk (who, for all they know, has been dead for about a century) represents any kind of superior logic…especially compared to the scenario I presented you above. Spock is far more relevant to current Romulan politics than any long dead Starfleet Captain, whether he stole a cloaking device (as a result of Spock’s seduction and betrayal) 125 years before or not.

THAT is superior logic, my friend.

Nero going back in time to kill Kirk is just something, IMO, that someone assumed without stopping to think about how absurd that is.

242. Closettrekker - September 20, 2008

#212—“Of course this is about eliminating Kirk from the timeline, that’s why Spock is saving the day.”

Why would Romulans wait over 100 years to decide that the events in “TEI” were so significant that they must be undone?

” If someone interrupted Spock’s timeline, he certainly wouldn’t be around the save himself in a timeship.”

That assumes that Nero has already done something to disrupt Spock’s life. Since Spock is presumably still on Romulus, it is quite possible that one of Spock’s allies there has gotten wind of Nero’s plan and Spock’s time travel plan is executed preemptively or at least simultaneously (ala FC).

“And the original point was: alternate timelines = easy path to a living Kirk/scene for Shatner.”

Sure, as long as such a scene were beneficial to the story they wished to tell and met Mr. Shatner’s standards of significance. In fact, Orci and Kurtzman wrote a scene for him. Abrams said it did not work (meaning that it probably did not benefit the progression of the story), and that it was a “cameo” scene anyway, which Shatner had already made clear he was not interested in.

“There have been several statements concerning alternate battleship dressings of the Enterprise…”

The only things remotely like that which have been confirmed are indications that the Enterprise and her equipment will be more realistic and functional. Orci did say that “Anything which appears to violate canon will have a canon explanation”, which could imply that there are subtle asthetic changes to things as a result of Nero’s tampering, but the Enterprise design has nothing to do with Kirk (at any age).

“… and it’s just elementary that a time travel plot involves alternative timelines.”

Correction. A time travel plot involves the “potential” for alternate timelines. It also involves the potential for scenarios in which the interference is part of the timeline we already know, and is actually necessary for things to turn out the way they do.

If Kevin Smith is correct in pointing out that STXI “does not negate the original series or the movies…”, but is in fact, “part and parcel with them”, then that possibility is absolutely plausible.

Consider this. The timeline may be altered at some point, and then “restored” if and when Spock is successful. If STXI does not “negate” any of the series and original films, then this is at least partially true. My feeling has always been that Spock is at least successful enough to protect the outcomes of significant events, and Smith’s review seems to support that.

My whole point was that all indications are that this story is Spock-centric, thus calling for the casting of Nimoy and necessitating a scene with both he and Qunito as “two Spocks”.

I see no logic in the Romulans having any goal to eliminate Kirk, or any benefit to them doing so which could all of a sudden become so apparent to them after more than a century. They would have a hard time selling that to me. I don’t think it’s as simple as saying, “We don’t like you, Spock, so we’re going to kill your friend 120 years or so in the past”.

Moreover, as much as I would like to believe that Nero is Spock’s son who seeks revenge upon him, it would seem much easier for Nero to travel back to a time after “TEI” (when he had already been conceived), and simply assasinate Spock then. It would be very interesting to see how the writers would handle such a scenario (the whole Spock-Romulan seduction thing and Nero’s revenge). I still think it’s too fanboyish and requires too much backstory for the target audience of this film.

I think that, like in TWOK, the “revenge” element is very secondary and the primary theme is something else (like “aging” in TWOK). Bana himself said that his role is very brief (even describing it as like a cameo).
The primary goal seems to be depicting the origins of the Kirk/Spock bond (not the “alternate” origins), and the villain story is probably just a vehicle for telling that story.

243. TrekMadeMeWonder - September 20, 2008

Timeship, TIMESHIP. What is TIMESHIP?

IMHO time travel is gonna need one good explaination for it to work for me. The Time SHip is NOT cutting it. Star trek VI had a ‘Time Ship’. It was a clunky, old, dirty, Bird of Prey (Don’t tell the Klingons I said this.)

That’s why I sugessted some sort of Vulcan soul travel in my lot synopsis.
That would leave ‘older Spock’ to be visible only to himself in the past.
Plus I think it would add to the dynamic of a wholly logical younger Spock having to contemplate his own changling, by himself.

Aparently anyone with a Warp capable ship can achieve Time Travel.
Or, is that formula only known to the Federation via “Tomorrow Is Yesterday?”

Drop the ‘Time Ship.’

I know Janeway would be against such an Idea.

244. TrekMadeMeWonder - September 20, 2008

Yes, I know. Typos.

That was supposed to be a reference to Star Trek IV, everyone. ; )

245. Tommy 2 Tone - September 20, 2008

I think you’re right Closettrekker (#242) about the Kirk/Spock bond origins being the primary goal/plot of the movie. It’s the current movie fad in handling franchises, i.e. Batman Begins, Casino Royale. So now it’s time for “STAR TREK XI”, aka “Kirk Meets Spock”. And that is the beginning of ST despite the Enterprise mini-series prequel.

If I were a movie producer here’s what I would do with ST movies at this point: take body doubles and get the best Hollywood CGI artists and create younger TOS characters and use the voices of the remaining TOS cast members for a full length prequel movie. And I don’t mean the type of cgi characterizations used in the latest Star Wars movie. I’d want to see the most life-like human facial cgi possible. Maybe the cgi isn’t ready for that yet, or would be too cost prohibitive.

246. Xai - September 20, 2008

243. TrekMadeMeWonder – September 20, 2008
Timeship, TIMESHIP. What is TIMESHIP?

Drop the ‘Time Ship.”

Sure, I’ll they will go back and just revise and film new stuff for you.
Or perhaps Orci could borrow the timeship and go visit himself…

247. classictrek - September 20, 2008

#239 Katie G
thank you for your comments. Lets address one thing first. im not angru – im just hacked off with people leaving vitriolic feedback re the shat in this movie.

you can check any of my previous posts (and there have been many on this forum) and you will see that im usually polite, respectful and am positive overall.

However, im getting tired of all these shatner bashers who seem to have nothing else better to do than come on here and slag him off for the sake of it. Fine if it is a constructive arguement but statements like hes too old, too fat , hes all washed up and so on are direspctful to a guy who has contributed hugely to star trek over the years.

i know that no one is above critiscism but lets have some decent reasons why he shouldnt appear other than the ususal stuff.

you have to agree that if people are so fed up with this item of trek news then dont click on it!! its as simple as that. click on something else of interest and let us who get on with it. BTW im not angry just hacked off with this situation – and im allowed to be hacked off.

thanks for your concern for my health but i dont need to take a deep breath.

Greg UK

248. Closettrekker - September 20, 2008

#243—“IMHO time travel is gonna need one good explaination for it to work for me. ”

Time travel has been a staple of Star Trek since the very first season, and it has never required anything more than a casual explanation (slingshot around the sun???). I don’t see the problem.

“The Time SHip is NOT cutting it. ”

Compared to what? The Guardian Of Forever (since that was such a more convincing bit)?

I did not need anything more than my imagination to justify time travel in “Tommorow Is Yesterday”, “Assignment: Earth”, “City On The Edge Of Forever”/ “Yesteryear”, or TVH. I don’t feel any different about the supposed “timeship”, which IMO, is probably just a warp-capable shuttle which can sustain the stress of the same kind of time travel we have seen before.

Consider this…Spock was calculating formulas for time travel over a century prior to going to Romulus. Would it be so unbelievable then (at least within the ST universe) that he would have, a century later, modified a small ship to make that kind of time travel most efficient? It seems like a very “Spock-like” logical development to me…

” I know Janeway would be against such an Idea.”

I trust Spock with that kind of technology alot more than I would trust her, especially given her (Admiral Janeway) irresponsible behavior in the Voyager finale…

#247—“i know that no one is above critiscism but lets have some decent reasons why he shouldnt appear other than the ususal stuff. ”

-Like the fact that his character died?

-Like the contention that a resurrection gimmick might be detrimental to the goal of attracting new fans and dispelling the preconceived notions out there in the mainstream moviegoing public about Trek movies?

-Like the contention that one of Abrams goals is not to be campy and contrived?

-Like the opinion of many Star Trek fans (like me) that Shatner began “phoning in” his Kirk portrayals in the mid-late 80’s?

-Like the ‘apparent’ fact that the STXI storyline has nothing to do with Shatner’s Kirk?

-Like the fact that Shatner made clear that he would not be happy with a cameo role, and the creative team made clear that the story would not support anything more?

Are those not “decent” reasons? I certainly have seen alot more of that than comments about his age and weight in the past year or so of this debate…I think you are ignoring those legitimate arguments and/or criticisms and are only paying attention to the less substantive ones.

There are plenty of us who love the overwhelming majority of his work as JTK, yet do not believe he is right for this film.

I don’t think it is Shatner who cannot let it go…I think it is some of his fans. Some of them are like that Japanese soldier on a South Pacific island in the 1960’s who thought he was still fighting WWII.

It’s over. He won’t be in the movie, and when you give the film a chance, you might see that he was never right for it to begin with…

249. Nightmare - September 20, 2008

248. Closettrekker
(The office’s of Bad Robot / Paramount Spin Control)

“It’s over. He won’t be in the movie, and when you give the film a chance, you might see that he was never right for it to begin with…”

– Sounds like you have seen this movie already

-“Are those not “decent” reasons? ”

-Nope, I don’t buy it….

250. Closettrekker - September 20, 2008

#249—“-Nope, I don’t buy it….”

What don’t you “buy”? Having very little detail of the story to go on, what possible benefit to it can you have determined there to be in Shatner’s presence? How can you have determined already that an appearance by a dead character will help advance the plot of this film?

“Sounds like you have seen this movie already”

Then you, Sir, need a refresher course in the English language and/or reading comprehension.

“(The office’s of Bad Robot / Paramount Spin Control)”

And once again, I do not have to have any ties to Abrams or Paramount in order to form my owm opinion. I have been a grown man for a long time, and quite capable of forming and supporting my own opinions. Continuing down that road only accents the weakness in your ability to argue your point. That’s rather pathetic.

251. Nightmare - September 20, 2008

250. Closettrekker

Settle down, don’t get your knickers in a twist.

We all know you are “know all, end all all, of all things Trek”

Long live Shatner / Kirk

THE WOMEN!!

252. Nightmare - September 20, 2008

Goodbye!!

253. Xai - September 20, 2008

#251 Nightmare

You don’t like what’s being posted, don’t read it.

254. Nightmare - September 20, 2008

253. Xai

I said GOODBYE!!

I’m tired of You and Closettrekker bashing all things Shatner.
(And I am sure I’m not the only one)

You two are starting to sound like an old married couple.

This is my last post, and my last visit to this Anti-Shatner forum.

‘Shatner Project’ here I come….

255. asc1138 - September 20, 2008

8. Anthony Thompson

Why do you even frequent these post if you are so sick of it? If you don’t like it, don’t read it. People like you are what we should be YAAAWWWNING about. Go some where else to talk about how your so sick of hearing about Shatner. He has more fans than you’d like to believe, so just deal with it!

256. asc1138 - September 20, 2008

Nightmare – September 20, 2008

I second that bro!!!!!!

257. Xai - September 20, 2008

Nightmare and asc1138

Goodbye…. don’t look back..

people generally leave after saying it.

If I or closettrekker truly posted “basher” things .. such as “fat” or “washed up”.. Anthony would be warning or banning us. We’ve expressed opinion. If you can’t handle it, sorry. Goodbye it is then.

258. Xai - September 20, 2008

:: waves::

259. Closettrekker - September 20, 2008

Adios…(bears huge grin on face).

260. Xai - September 20, 2008

Aloha!

261. JWM - September 20, 2008

Cripes, I don’t like the idea of having Nimoy in the movie, and pending what happens with it, I am going into it regarding it as a crutch that they didn’t need in the first place. I reserve the right to be pleasantly surprised and change my mind depending on the film. :o)

262. Xai - September 20, 2008

#261 JWM
I respect that. I’ve seen a few fans who have already judged the film and found it unworthy based on…. nothing.

263. Closettrekker - September 20, 2008

#261, #262—I too respect that opinion. At least it isn’t a complete prejudgement.

I was/am thrilled to hear of Nimoy’s involvement in the story. Spock was/is my favorite Star Trek character. I am curious to see how Nimoy and Orci/Kurtzman/Abrams see his character now, and how he has developed since we last saw him on Romulus.

264. Xai - September 20, 2008

#263 Closettrekker

As odd as it sounds (speaking of a Vulcan)… I think he will either be calmer, more resigned or more emotional (for a Vulcan). He obviously has an agenda that a few to a billion souls depend on.

But, I could see where they would want him on an even keel to contrast against his younger (quinto) self. We’ve not “seen” him in years and it may not be good to have him grow too far from his base.

265. Closettrekker - September 20, 2008

#264—It doesn’t sound odd to me at all, although it may appear odd to the younger Spock, since he has yet to progress into comfort within his own skin, as he did post V’Ger. Quinto’s Spock should still be struggling with his half-human heritage and what it means, IMO. Their scene together has the potential for being “classic”. That much is certain.

266. Xai - September 20, 2008

Agreed. A capper to a Spock v Spock conversation. Either two simultaneous raised eyebrows or Nimoy’s Spock giving his alt a small smile…to the chagrin of his youthful self. (Or vice versa)

267. Xai - September 20, 2008

Another essential is a Spock/Spock?McCoy conversation. Both Spocks agreeing and McCoy shakes his head.

268. Xai - September 20, 2008

Spock/Spock/McCoy.

Typonians off the starboard bow. Ready phasers.

269. Katie G. - September 20, 2008

#247. classictrek

Hi, Greg.

It’s quite possible that I erred in assuming that your post was attacking me and I got a little defensive because I wasn’t just bashing William Shatner for the sake of bashing. I loved him as Kirk. I really enjoyed him as Hooker. I loved his commercials (Priceline, All-Bran).

It’s just this thing with J.J. that has got my panties in a bunch. It’s been going on for so long that I think the average adult would have let it go by now and it makes me feel almost embarrassed. And, at the risk of starting a new war, I do think he could politely defer the question saying “I think everyone knows the answer to that question now” and make jokes (as he so frequently likes to do…) and change the subject. I said that in January 2008 and REALLY got bashed. He doesn’t have to be snotty or sarcastic about it. I wouldn’t appreciate that either. ANYWAY…

Maybe I should just not express my opinions any more. It’s just not worth the aggravation.

Sorry if I misunderstood the content of your post.

The problem is, he IS heavier than he was in “Generations” and his face has changed as well (as age does to all of us over the years) AND I’M NOT BASHING. I’m just making an observation. Unfortunately, even if I say that nicely, I get ripped to shreds. Anyone with half a brain can see that he looks rather different. Also, it would take a lot of time to undo his death and explain the aging. I’m all for it if a talented writer can make it happen. Unfortunately, at this time, no one is available that can accomplish that with a modicum of credibility. Also, as J.J. has said, that’s not the movie he was given to make.

Even if J. J.’s motive is to deliberately not include Shatner, it’s kind of not our business. It’s between the two of them. Only they really know what happened. I had just better stop reading these threads. They make me roll my eyes and then I get bashed for telling everyone that I’m rolling my eyes.

Guess I don’t learn from my mistakes very well. From now on, I’ll try to pass over the potentially volatile threads so as to not upset anyone.

Anyway, I again apologize for misreading your post. Hope I didn’t offend you.

270. Jabob Slatter - September 20, 2008

Katie G. you steal my heart. Keep stirring the pot.

Shatner looks these days like a tick that has engorged itself past the point of safety. Don’t be afraid to say so.

271. SPOCKBOY - September 21, 2008

Bill had his “end of the character being played by him” scene in Generations, now Nimoy gets his, in Trek 11.
That’s fair isn’t it?
Sadly though, I have a feeling that Mr. Shatner may appear in the film after all…. in a dedication…. “This film is dedicated to the memory of William Shatner”
Don’t get me wrong, Shatner is my boyhood hero and when he’s gone I will be deeply saddened, but with the incredible amount of work he’s doing -commercials, books, Denny Crane, web stuff, add infinitum, he reminds me of a 76 year old light bulb that’s burning incredibly bright just before it burns out.

272. SPOCKBOY - September 21, 2008

I still love the Shat.

273. Ahmed Abdo - September 21, 2008

I’m going to watch the movie anyway, but I do feel bad about the fact that Shatner will not be in that one. There is no reason whatsoever to not have him in it.

274. Xai - September 21, 2008

273. Ahmed Abdo – September 21, 2008
“I’m going to watch the movie anyway, but I do feel bad about the fact that Shatner will not be in that one. There is no reason whatsoever to not have him in it.”

Then you have not read this or other threads, or have chosen to ignore or disagree with other opinions. Your choice, but there ARE reasons, especially those given by the production team.

275. Mr. Bob Dobalina - September 21, 2008

Boy are you guys easily suckered. They say he is not in it, so it must be true…they wouldn’t lie about such a thing…

Geez. Reality check kids, yes they would!! Enjoy your crow this May!

He’s in.

276. Xai - September 21, 2008

#275 Mr. Bob

Enlighten me to your thought process or evidence.
If it’s a “gut” feeling on your part, don’t bother trying.

277. Lostrod - September 21, 2008

#245

Given the current progression of computer processing and technology, it is only a matter of time when entire movies will be made with photo-realism and NO human actors.

Classic actors from the past will ‘live’ again on the big screen. Their likenesses will be licensed from the estate. Voice synthesis will recreate the original actors’ voices in new dialague.

Imagine a new western starring John Wayne and Clint Eastwood. Sean Connery back as 007.

Or a new film featuring the original cast as they appeared in TOS. It can happen and probably will.

Regards,

278. Lurker - September 21, 2008

This whole thing is just too weird…

I keep going back to Nimoy’s quote last year:

“If I had been there, I wouldn’t have let you die…”

279. Podcast # 192 - “In a Mirror, Darkly” : TREKS in SCI-FI - September 21, 2008

[…] new web video series and he clears the air about why he isn’t in the new movie.  Click HERE to see what “the Shat” has to say to JJ Abrams about this topic.  Hopefully this […]

280. TrekMadeMeWonder - September 21, 2008

248. Closettrekker

“Time travel has been a staple of Star Trek since the very first season, and it has never required anything more than a casual explanation (slingshot around the sun???). I don’t see the problem.”

My point about Time Travel is that is a bit of a worn out and immature plot device (esp. at the movies,) and ULTIMATELY the AVERAGE Star Trek Time Travel story resolves with no real progress in any of the time lines, or without any lasting character development. Time Travel ULTIMATELY has ZERO effect on our characters thereafter.

Time Travel makes Star Trek just spin in place. You don’t ever really go anywhere. No new worlds and new civilizatons are explored that result in a real change in the main characters, or a story that can be further built upon.

For example.

City on the Edge of Forever: They go back in time. Kirk falls for Edith. Uppon returning they all realize that things are the same again – AS IT WAS SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN. Kirk realizes that Edith has now been dead for 300 years. The main characters all seem pissed. They all move on, seemingly wishing it never happened. Nice story, but no real lasting effect on Trek history.

Assignment Earth: Enterprise is thrown back in time. The discover Gary Seven. Alot of action happens, but ultimately everything is set back to its proper time and order, as it SHOULD HAVE (and did) HAPPENED.

Tomorrow Is Yesterday: They go back to record 1968’s history(?) Alot of action happens, but ultimately everything is set back to its proper time and order. Right down to Mitchell not realizing it ever happened.

All Our Yesterdays: Kirk, Spock and McCoy are thown back into a planets history. Each meet some unique characters. Spock falls in love. But ultimately our characters are returned to the proper time. The characters Kirk meets are wholly forgettable. For McCoy and Spock, they realize that Zarabeth has been dead serveral thousand years. No effect on future episodes or characterizations. Again. The characters are disgusted with the events that transpired.

Also, for me, Time Travel has so many other TECHNICAL problems too. Paradoxes and all that. Listen, the show was called STAR TREK. AS in TREKKING TO THE STARS. NOT TIME-TREK.

Just consider Closettrekker, that if you lived in the 24th century, and a close friend of yours died. Would’nt you just turn the ship around and head for the nearest star for a sligshot effect to save thier life?
It cheapens your friends life and what they stood and died for, it make the technology way too powerful and open for absue, and destroys the whole blasted timeline.

JJ has said that this is a movie for the general audiences. Once this movie comes out, I think you may agree with me, that by adding all these diferent ‘un-Star-Trekking’ elements to the plot, it is not really going to help tell a great or continuing Star Trek story. This Trek, seems to be written as, yet another, ‘bottled’ episode that cannot be bulit upon or added to in a sequel, or three movie story arc.

That’s why I hope our promising writers have considered all of this beforehand and are going to add a new twist to the dreaded time travel storyline. The twist, i believe, will be in not having the whole ‘young TOS crew part of the movie’ seem to be an element that happened long ago and is now irrelevant by the time that the movie ends.

From what I have heard, an alternate timeline, which cannot be tampered with, may be the only promising end solution.

My two credits worth.

The Women!!!

281. classictrek - September 21, 2008

katie G -post 269

thank you for your kind reply which i was pleased to read for several reasons. To be honest i logged on here tonight with the sole intention of quitting this forum. Your post has reinstated my faith in humanity. I was so dejected to read some of the comments on here that i thought whats the point. that would have saddened me immensley.

As you say i was not having a go personally at you i can assure you of that. Some participants on here have lost all sense of common courtesy and are unecsasrily blunt.

your apology is completly accepted and please do continue to put your thoughts onto this forum. Thank you for your understanding- its great that you can re visit whats been said and change your mind. thats a very good quality and not everyone has it.

I too am sorry if i didnt convey my own thoughts clearly. we love the shat but have different ideas about this movie and thats fair enough. I just think its a shame if we miss a golden opportunity. as you say we’ll probably never know the reasons except JJ and the shat.

many thanks again for you kind message.

Greg
UK

ps i hope that ‘nightmare’ and ‘asc1138′ continue to contribute to this forum.

282. Xai - September 21, 2008

Katie G

The threads are to give your opinion on, if you choose. Don’t skip something for fear of a “bash”.

283. Please Stop Shatner - September 21, 2008

Can William Shatner please just stop? He is embarrassing himself at this point, and frankly I don’t even want to see him in a cameo anymore. This back and forth is just stupid and frankly, I can only see Shatner making more and more noise as the release draws cloatner. Shatner was responsible for one of the worst Trek movies out there (ser. Don’t get me wrong – William Shatner’s Kirk TOS – TWOK is great. Probably around Voyage Home, he stopped playing Kirk and just played ShV) and then cashed a big paycheck to kill Kirk off in Generations.

284. Katie G. - September 21, 2008

#270. Jabob Slatter

Very sweet. Thanks!

Oh – – and

“…Shatner looks these days like a tick that has engorged itself past the point of safety. Don’t be afraid to say so.”

LOL!! I spit all over my monitor screen when I read that. I was blowing a bubble with my Bazooka Joe bubblegum when I was reading it and nearly blew the whole mass onto the screen! The image reminded me of a Gary Larson cartoon in the paper:

A mosquito (on someone’s arm) is so full of blood it looks like it’s going to blow and its buddy is screaming “Pull out!! Pull out!!” Priceless.

#281. classictrek

Wow – – Greg – – very generous. Thank you. I am SO GLAD that I apologized and that it kept you from leaving.

I TOTALLY get what you’re saying and I do get upset at flagrant bashing as well. I have to be very careful because if I see one poster attacking another poster there is something in me that feels compelled to jump in and defend them. Don’t know why. It sometimes gets me in trouble. Instead of posting about the article it sometimes derails into posting about each other and Anthony HATES THAT. (HE ALSO HATES TOO MANY UPPERCASE LETTERS!!) Sorry, Ant. Couldn’t resist…

#282. Xai

Well, Xai, remember that really bad one in January where the poster said everyone who said Shatner was complaining was a liar? That has left me a little gun-shy. If you go back and read it, when I first posted I went full-out. Now I really hold back. It was very unpleasant and I don’t want to repeat the experience with anyone else. However, it will be hard to resist these because when I see the headline I just have to know what Mr. Shatner is saying. You know, “enquiring mind” blah blah blah.

I’m glad these threads are kept and stored. Next May we’ll be sitting in the theatre either going “YES!!!” or “AW, CRAP.”

Have a great week, all.

Goodnight.

kg

285. Closettrekker - September 21, 2008

#280—Once again, time travel stories have always provided great moments and features (whether on tv or at the movies) in Star Trek history (at least, IMO, involving the TOS-era characters). As for it being “worn out”, I don’t see it that way. I couldn’t care less about TNG-era stuff, so if it was overdone then, I wouldn’t recognize that. The last time I saw a TOS-era time travel story, it was made released in 1986! Before that, it was a 1972 animated episode, and before that, it was the late 60’s! I am willing to watch another one. And judging from the poor numbers at the box office for the TNG-era films, people should not be too worn out on any time travel stuff done in those either. How can audiences be “worn out” on time travel plots when most of them never payed to see how they played out in the first place?

In fact, the most critically acclaimed episode in TOS history (COTEOF) has its plot based upon time travel. Its most mainstream friendly film (TVH) was also a time travel story. It’s been there from the beginning…To me, it’s just as much a part of Star Trek as “the planet of the week”…
Time travel is just a plot device. It’s existence in that plot will not determine whether it’s a good film or not. They still have to tell a good story, and I like that they are tying where the TNG-era left off to the beginning of the TOS-era. Time travel is, IMO, a logical way to get that done.

286. TrekMadeMeWonder - September 21, 2008

285. Closettrekker
They still have to tell a good story, and I like that they are tying where the TNG-era left off to the beginning of the TOS-era.

Is that from TrekMovie news. Where did you hear that?

287. Iowagirl - September 22, 2008

Some here seem to think that writing a scene for someone and then remain silent about that scene instead of meeting with this person and offer him that scene just is the logical thing to do. Same people seem to think that it would be logical for this person to say “Let’s just leave it at that”. Curiouser and Curiouser, said Alice…

288. krikzil - September 22, 2008

True that, Iowagirl.

289. Long Live Kirk - September 22, 2008

Umm, no Iowagirl. Its not logical. Because if the scene is just a cameo, and the person has already said they won’t accept the cameo, then you don’t present it to him. Professionally, its insulting. Its as simple as that.

290. Shatner_Fan_2000 - September 22, 2008

#250 “I’m tired of You and Closettrekker bashing all things Shatner.
(And I am sure I’m not the only one) You two are starting to sound like an old married couple.”

LOL!!! Hey, isn’t it time for Aunt Hilda and Uncle Horatio to go back to Florida?? I hear the shuffleboard is fabulous this time of year.

#281 “I just think its a shame if we miss a golden opportunity.”

You are far from alone in that opinion, Greg. Unfortunately, it seems the opportunity has indeed been “LOST”. JJ & co. dropped the ball on this issue. And don’t quit posting. As Kirk said to Commodore Decker, “We’re stronger with you than without you!” :-)

291. Closettrekker - September 22, 2008

#281—-“ps i hope that ‘nightmare’ and ‘asc1138′ continue to contribute to this forum.”

Why? Doesn’t it bother you that anyone who disagrees with them gets a label of “Shatner-basher”, regardless of whether that label is appropriate? Or do you agree with them that if anyone does not wish to see Shatner in this film, it constitutes “bashing”?

“I’m tired of You and Closettrekker bashing all things Shatner”—Nightmare.

“This is my last post, and my last visit to this Anti-Shatner forum.”—Nightmare.

What kind of contribution is that? There are plenty of people I disagree with who regularly contribute to our discussions here….Nightmare, however, has never been one of them. His only contribution to this thread has been to flame other posters and this site in general. Were you aware of that before you asked him to stay?

#286—“Is that from TrekMovie news. Where did you hear that?”

That’s from right here, and that news is about a year old…That is why the story begins in the post-Nemesis era instead of being a true TOS prequel and starting prior to the forming of the relationships among the “Big Three”. One of the stated goals of the creative team is to “tie it all together”.

#287—I only think it’s logical when the person the scene was written for makes clear that he would be unhappy with such a scene. If the director had simply decided that the scene would not work (which is also the case), then a “thanks but no thanks” meeting might have been in order, IMO. However, when Shatner himself declares publicly that he is not interested in that kind of scene, why bother, especially when you know that you are unwilling to write another more significant scene (since you have determined that the story will not support such a scene)?

In retrospect, I wish he had called Bill and told him what had been decided. But so what if he didn’t? He certainly did not have a responsibility to do so, just as he had no responsibility to “correct” someone else’s decision to kill the character.

The bottom line is this. Shatner did not want a cameo. He still doesn’t. What the writers had determined that the story would support was a cameo. The director decided that even that wouldn’t work. That had alot of meetings involving alot of people. Some things came of those meetings, and some things did not. I’m sure JJ did not call everyone back, especially if they puiblicly declared non-interest in what was being discussed as a possibility.

#290—Please tell me I am not Aunt Hilda in this scenario…How did you do in the storm?

292. Iowagirl - September 22, 2008

#291

As Bill explicitly states that he’s never been offered a role, how could he be unhappy with that role? His “no cameo” statement obviously was a general statement; it can’t have been an answer to a direct offer, as this offer never existed. Whether Bill or not would have been interested in a cameo or not does not matter at this point, as he wasn’t offered one. Bill was never offered a role, JJ never called him. Simple as that.

293. Closettrekker - September 22, 2008

#292—“As Bill explicitly states that he’s never been offered a role, how could he be unhappy with that role? His “no cameo” statement obviously was a general statement; it can’t have been an answer to a direct offer, as this offer never existed.”

” But the truth is I wouldn’t have wanted to do a cameo…”—Bill Shatner, from the article above.

He still maintains that he wouldn’t have done it, which IMO, justofies their assumption that he was being sincere when he said, “I don’t do cameos” (at least when it comes to Star Trek).

294. Shatner_Fan_2000 - September 22, 2008

Hey Closet, do you do cameos?

295. Xai - September 22, 2008

292. Iowagirl – September 22, 2008
“Bill was never offered a role, JJ never called him. Simple as that”

I’m not sure it was that simple. There was a time that Bill never admitted to having met JJ, then when he did say he’d met him, he wasn’t sure what is was about.

Until someone that was present and aware of what was going on writes this all down, I don’t think there’s a definitive answer.
—————————

296. Xai, - September 22, 2008

A general comment.

If I decide to truly “bash” Shatner or another poster, you’ll know it. There will be a ban on me shortly afterward. I don’t intend on doing it.

However, I think there is bashing on here. I don’t not agree with name-calling or insulting Shatner, Nimoy, JJ Abrams or anyone else, including fellow posters. And I have stated that in the past.

But…
Having an opinion that differs from yours when it comes to Shatner or other subjects is not bashing.

297. Closettrekker - September 22, 2008

#294—-I’m afraid I would require a larger role than this movie could sustain…. :)

But if when I die, I would like my kids to reassemble my DNA for one last hurrah….Jurassic Shatner style!

298. Closettrekker - September 22, 2008

I should add that I prefer they “reassemble” me to appear in my old age, as opposed to my prime…

:)

299. star trackie - September 22, 2008

#283 “Can William Shatner please just stop? ”

Uh…no. Not when he is asked the question. Don’t like Shatner, don’t read a Shatner themed article and thread. It’s simple as that.

300. Greg2600 - September 22, 2008

Shatner’s response was very good, and made the point I have been screaming about for 14 years. Bringing Kirk back is absurdly easy. It’s fiction, you can make anything up. The key is having a story where he is needed, fits in, and should be a part of. This movie meets those criteria 100%. If they were doing another TNG film, or some other new crew, I would say no, what point is Kirk there? But this film is about TOS crew, and they even have Leonard Nimoy. My lament all along is that they went out of their way to write a script with Nimoy having a big part, and NEVER thought, oh, what if we had Shatner, too? This is my biggest regret. I don’t know how these guys call themselves Star Trek fans and not seize on that opportunity?

As a result, once the script was done, they then quickly were slammed in the face with the fact that Shatner is still extraordinarily popular with Trek fans! So with that, not to mention Nimoy’s urging, they hastily tried to shoe horn Shatner into the script. Even I knew that was going to be a major problem. However, the problem is NOT that Kirk is dead, it is that they couldn’t find the room in the script for Shatner. At least I hope that is what it is. Because otherwise, these guys are not the all powerful and genius writers people say they are. About 10,000 of us Fanboy losers out here could come up with a fairly easy way of bringing back Kirk in this film.

PS: I’ll repeat again. J.J., stop talking about Shatner. Leave the man alone already.

301. classictrek - September 22, 2008

Hi Katie G

thanks again, its good that we have been able to iron things out and i appreciate you taking the time to respond. I didnt want to leave this forum overall so your comments made me feel good that people can talk and disagree without hostility even if our opinions differ.

I have to say ( and i get no pleasure in this) that there are some people on here who are very confrontational and extremely blunt. I dont know if they mean to be but the tone of their messages does not make pleasant reading. Yes you can disagree with someone but you dont have to attack what they believe and ridicule it. You can put it in a way thats going to be at least constructive. This forum is not about one person getting the upper hand or last word over another poster.

What surprises me is that this is on a star trek forum where you might expect a bit of rodenberry’s universal Eutopian outlook. However im saddned to say that some feel that personal insults and snide remarks are the way forward.

post #291 clossettreker
I am up for debate with anyone who wishes to discuss Bill shatner in this movie – as long as it is done in a respectful manner beffitting the great television series that we all love. surely why we are all here.

Do you object to me wishing that other regular forum posters continue on here? People should be encouraged to come forward and join in and we should treat each other with at least common levels of decency.

Greg UK

302. Shatner_Fan_2000 - September 22, 2008

#300 …

Great post Greg, I agree 100% with everything you’ve said!!

303. TrekMadeMeWonder - September 22, 2008

Any more Shatner articles this year and we wil know he is in it.

304. Closettrekker - September 22, 2008

#300—“J.J., stop talking about Shatner. Leave the man alone already.”

It’s been Shatner fans here on this site demanding for a year that Abrams explain what happened. He finally says more about it, and now you want him to stop. That’s funny.

“Bringing Kirk back is absurdly easy. It’s fiction, you can make anything up.”

That’s never been a question. The question is, is that the best kind of story we can tell? I sure hope not.

” The key is having a story where he is needed, fits in, and should be a part of. This movie meets those criteria 100%. ”

Not according to the creative team behind it. How would you know better than them?

“Shatner required a role larger than the movie could sustain”.—Roberto Orci

That was clear long before Abrams told us about the cameo scene Bob and Alex wrote for him, and that it did not work well.

#301—“Do you object to me wishing that other regular forum posters continue on here? People should be encouraged to come forward and join in and we should treat each other with at least common levels of decency. ”

Of course not, as long as they adhere to the standards you mentioned at the end of your post.

As you can plainly see, the posters in question (particularly, ‘Nightmare’) do not. Calling people names and labeling anyone who disagrees as a Shatner-basher is not in line with common levels of decency. Do you not agree? Can you find a single post by “Nightmare’ which contributes anything to this thread other than flaming?

305. Xai - September 22, 2008

#300 Greg2600

“As a result, once the script was done, they then quickly were slammed in the face with the fact that Shatner is still extraordinarily popular with Trek fans! So with that, not to mention Nimoy’s urging, they hastily tried to shoe horn Shatner into the script. ”

-Where’s that from? I’ve not seen anything that says Shatner’s cameo was after-the-fact. Where’d I miss that? It sounds violent.

“The key is having a story where he is needed, fits in, and should be a part of. This movie meets those criteria 100%.”

-The actor killed his character, and that’s why Nimoy has a “bigger” part. Where did you see a script? We MUST have yet another Trek character rise from the dead? Does no one actually make the ultimate sacrifice as a hero in the Trek future? If he had not killed Kirk 14 years ago, I’d have no problem. The only man that does the ressurection-thing right was a carpenter in the Middle East a loong time ago.

“PS: I’ll repeat again. J.J., stop talking about Shatner. Leave the man alone already.”

– Well ya know…. just like Shatner…if he gets asked a question…

306. Xai - September 22, 2008

300. Greg2600 – September 22, 2008
” I don’t know how these guys call themselves Star Trek fans and not seize on that opportunity? ”

-If I write a story that follows canon, (old) Kirk is dead after saving the lives of fellow Starfleet officers and billions of people. For a person to be a fan does not mean they have to subscribe to the thought process of reviving (old) Kirk. Their story seems to follow the fact that Kirk died on Veridian III.

We don’t always get what we want, not do we get to question if the other guy really is a fan.

307. Closettrekker - September 22, 2008

#306—Yep.

As for my opinion, the only criticism of Shatner I really have is his performance in the last 3 films in which Kirk was depicted. I think his performances in those films were “phoned-in”, and substandard. That means I like 83 of Shatner’s 86 live-action performances in Star Trek!

But I am defined as a “Shatner basher” simply because I think it’s time to move on…and apparently, now I am less of a Star Trek fan….please.

That is not for anyone else to decide.

308. Iowagirl - September 23, 2008

#293
I’ve never denied that he doesn’t want to do ST cameos. I’ve just said that his (in)famous October 2007 statement was *not* meant as an answer to a specific role he had been offered, because this offer obviously never had been made. So, if I understand you correctly, Abrams’ argument now is “well, you see he doesn’t want to do cameos, so we were well advised to not offer him the cameo we had written for him because he wouldn’t have accepted it anyway”…Makes sense…lol.

#295
I agree that there are probably things going on we’ll never know about, and there certainly are inconsistencies on both sides. But I was just referring to Shatner’s most recent statement that he was never offered a role, an information he’s always been very consistent about.

309. Closettrekker - September 23, 2008

#308—-Anyone who deduced from Abrams statement that a role was offered was simply mistaken. Frankly, I’m not sure why Shatner felt it necessary to make his response directly to Abrams, when it should have been made to those fans out there who misinterpreted JJ’s revelation that a scene had been “written” (and that is far from a suggestion that one was “offered”).

Why go to the trouble of telling JJ what he already knows?

“JJ, nobody every came to me and said ‘we have a cameo.’ Maybe you wrote it, but it never presented itself to me. But the truth is I wouldn’t have wanted to do a cameo, because that you would have clipped that out. It doesn’t fit. You said in your statement you were having trouble fitting it in anyway. But nobody every asked me and I am just sorry that I am not in your wonderful movie and I would have loved to have been in it. ”

It looks to me as if Shatner saw something in JJ’s words that wasn’t there as well. Either that, or Bill never actually read Abrams comments. He may have simply seen one of a dozen or so (very easy to find if you just google JJ Abrams) erroneous paraphrasals (Is that a word? Oh well…) on the internet, and responded to that.

310. Long Live Kirk - September 23, 2008

#299 – Umm, yeah, because William Shatner on his own Web episodes has the “interviewer” – which I think is his daughter…ask him questons about the role. This isn’t some independent news agency barging down his door with questions about Star Trek – its classic propaganda ala “infomercials”This is Shatner asking himself the question and give the answer – and his purpose is to only draw attention to him.

Simply put, you don’t offer something to a professional like William Shatner when you know he has already rejected it. Its insulting to someone like Shatner and if you do so, Shatner could have accused Abrams of only offering a cameo when he already said he doesn’t do cameos.

311. Capt. Fred - September 23, 2008

I used to love the Shat too, but his whining is getting on my nerves.
Like the one guy a couple hundred posts above me said,

Dear Mr. Bill,
DROP IT!
DROP IT!
DROP IT!

And I know that if I don’t like the article, I shouldn’t read it, but almost every other Shat-related article here is “Nobody Offered Me A Role” or “I’m still not in the movie” or “I don’t even have a cameo” or “Bring Kirk back with this crazy DNA reviving thing”. And he told his loyal fans to “get a life”?

312. Greg2600 - September 23, 2008

Xai, Shatner was not in the original script. Orci has never given the indication publicly that Shatner was considered, only Nimoy. Abrams basically said they wrote the script with Nimoy, on the outside change he would do it. He met with Shatner and he seemed to have the impression that he was to be in it. Later Nimoy told Shatner this. They attempted to add him during the summer of 2007, after Nimoy signed on. So where I am mistaken?

Only one character has been resurrected in Trek in a subsequent film or episode, Spock. All the others have stayed dead. This isn’t the World Wrestling Federation. Doing it twice would not have been catastrophic.

Closettrekker, the issue with J.J. is that he keeps saying different things. And keeps bringing up the issue. When Shatner is asked, he gives the same answer every time. They didn’t ask me, I think it’s a mistake on their part, I would have loved to do it, the end. I’m waiting for J.J. to say he flipped a coin, Shatner is heads, tails he isn’t, and it came out on tails.

313. Closettrekker - September 23, 2008

#299—“Uh…no. Not when he is asked the question.”

But didn’t his daughter ask the question? It wasn’t as if he was asked by some EW journalist who has conveniently been asleep for a year.

I don’t buy this as a legitimate interview at all. This was very much a case of Shatner feeling as though he needed to shout this out to the World, under the guise of a direct response to Abrams.

Shatner is not unintelligent. If he read JJ’s comments at all, he would know that Abrams never said that anyone offered Bill that scene, only that one had been written and it didn’t work.

So why would he go out of his way to tell Abrams something which he already knows (and make his comments directly to JJ)?

JJ Abrams was asked a question…Shatner went and got a soapbox. It’s not the same thing… (assuming JJ did not participate in the interviewer’s conception!).

314. Closettrekker - September 23, 2008

#312—“Closettrekker, the issue with J.J. is that he keeps saying different things. And keeps bringing up the issue.”

Nope. Reporters ask the same question all the time, and have been for over a year. He doesn’t “bring it up” at all—unlike Shatner, who is now getting his daughter to ask him a question in order to provide him with a forum.

Abrams has been consistent all along. Over a year ago, JJ said that he wanted to find Shatner a role, but that it would be difficult. He cited such obstacles as the character’s death in Generations as well as the writer’s strike.

Now he says that Orci and Kurtzman wrote a scene for him which amounted to a cameo, but that it did not work, and that it was less than Shatner would have required anyway. The fact that the scene was written at all indicates that they made an effort, which is exactly what he said all along. Unfortunately for Shatner fans—even if it had worked within the story—Shatner apparently would not have done it anyway.

That meshes perfectly with what Orci said months ago, that “Shatner required a larger role than the movie could sustain”. Orci also alluded to Shatner’s “I don’t do cameos” statement as the reason for that conclusion.
Now that Abrams has stated that Bob and Alex wrote the scene and that it was considered (and Orci has confirmed that here), all of that makes perfect sense.

The only party involved who has been “inconsistent” is Bill Shatner, specifically by claiming that he would not do a cameo, then publicly (on The View) wondering why he didn’t get one, and now (once again) claiming that he would not have done it.

I don’t see the contradiction at all on JJ’s part. I see no reason not to take him at his word that he wanted to make a Shatner appearance fit, but that it just didn’t work, and would not meet Shatner’s stated standard anyway.

What did he say which was contradictory? Please elaborate.

315. trekpenchant - September 23, 2008

There is a solution to bringing Kirk back… although maybe not for a TOS era film… but in a TNG/DS9/Voyager/Spock movie…

one word:

Hologram

316. ByGeorge - September 23, 2008

#312

Shatner is also inconsistent:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ccs-2c4D8x4

317. Closettrekker - September 23, 2008

#315—“Hologram”

Hey, there’s no need to use that kind of language! Next you’ll be telling me that the NCC-1701 needs a ship’s counselor, a child on the bridge, lasting peace with the Klingons, and an android pinnochio!

:)

318. Xai - September 23, 2008

312. Greg2600 – September 23, 2008

Huh? Give me a hint where you got that. I don’t recall it. Because Orci never said Shatner was considered, it’s quite possible that the Shatner cameo was written and dismissed at that time. Like I said, give me something to substantiate that claim, would ya?

As for the Trek death and back to life list.
Spock
Chekov
McCoy
Scott (I think)

Who did I miss?

319. Xai - September 23, 2008

Shatner wouldn’t play a hologram …in my opinion.

320. Closettrekker - September 23, 2008

I think the film should star Frank Caliendo as William Shatner.

Has anyone seen those directv commericals?

His Shat is almost as good as his John Madden…

It’s definitely “Priceline Shat”, as opposed to Captain Kirk or Denny Crane. Anyway, I think it’s hilarious.

321. Iowagirl - September 24, 2008

#309

I think we agree on the “no offer” part, don’t we? A scene being written for Shatner and not even being offered to him – that’s exactly the point! That.is.the.point. Abrams is saying well, we had written a scene for him, but it didn’t fit in, Shatner doesn’t want to do cameos, bla bla bla. And Shatner says, well I even haven’t been offered that role which was written for me (“Maybe you wrote it, but it never presented itself to me.”) Shatner knows very well what he’s talking about and he knows very well what Abrams has said; he just thinks this scenario to be rather odd – so do I.

322. Admiral_Bumblebee - September 24, 2008

But has Hollywood reached the point at which actors have to read websites on the internet in order to be aware that someone is offering them a role? And if they don’t read those websites they don’t get the role? Wouldn’t it have been the normal way that JJ Abrams sends William Shatner the script or the part of the script in which his character would appear and then both sides agree to do or not do it? Does this have to happen via the internet in public?

Also, IF JJ Abrams wanted to have old Captain Kirk in this movie and surprise the audience with his appearance, how could he have do this? When it was revealed that Leonard Nimoy would be in the movie, everyone simply had to ask if William Shatner would be, too. So how do keep it a secret without saying “no comment”? A “no comment” mostly means “yes”. So how do you keep such a thing a secret?
I’m not saysing that I believe William Shatner will be in the movie as Captain Kirk, but if this should be the big surprise of Star Trek 11, then everything would fit. A great publicity stunt, in which they “lie” or play a part, argue publicly etc. in order to keep Shatners appearance a secret and promote the film and when the movie opens everyone will be suprised.

323. Closettrekker - September 24, 2008

#321—But he shouldn’t think it is odd, IMO, considering that Abrams was correct in assuming that even if it would have worked, Shatner wouldn’t have done it.

If you tell me, “I don’t eat green beans”, and that happens to be one of the things served with dinner that evening, I probably won’t even offer you the serving dish. I would most likely pass it the other way.

Would you find that odd?

324. TrekMadeMeWonder - September 24, 2008

William Shatner = Johnathan Harrs.

GET ON BOARD SOON BILL!

Find a reason, Make it Stick.
But never let anyone else take that center seat.

325. XAi - September 24, 2008

#324

“GET ON BOARD SOON BILL!”

I would wonder if he even CAN get “on board” at this point.

326. trekMadeMeWonder - September 24, 2008

I think Shatner was ALWAYS supposed to be in this film.

Either JJ made the mistake of revealing the ending to him, before anything was signed, or Bill is way more savy a business man, than any of us give him credit for. Plus, c’mon. His close friends with Nimoy!

Like I said “The Green Screen is ALWAYS lit in Holywood!”

C’mon guys! Make it happen!

327. Long Live Kirk - September 24, 2008

Shat said publicly he won’t do a cameo. Abrams and Orci had written a cameo for him, saw Shat’s quote and decided not to embararss him professionally or offer a “token” part just to claim they offered him a part and he rejected it.

Simply put, Abrams exhibited professional courtesy whereas Shatner has not. They could have offered him the part, Shat would have turned it down, and instead of Shat claiming he was never offered a part, he would be complaining that they offered him just a cameo and that William Shatner does not do cameos – which is patently untrue – because whenver Shat shows up (besides his TV show) its always in the mode as “special guest appearance” – see Saturday Night Live, the Emmys etc.

I’m sorry that some people can’t see the obvious.

328. Long Live Kirk - September 24, 2008

And yea, Shatner is pretty Web saavy so I’m sure he follows or has his daughter follow, what is going on with the movie via the Web. So as soon as Shat started seeing rumors of a possible cameo for Kirk, he gambled by publicly proclaiming the he doesn’t do cameos. He gambled that his public statement would force the powers to be to rewrite it into a meatier part. He failed, and I think thats the best for long term Trek fans.

329. TrekMadeMeWonder - September 24, 2008

Which makes me wonder if TrekMovie is good for Star Trek ;)

I had to wait for this article to leave the main page before saying that.

330. krikzil - September 24, 2008

“There was a time that Bill never admitted to having met JJ, then when he did say he’d met him, he wasn’t sure what is was about.”

Uh, not true. As early as Nov 2006 he was talking on the Late, Late Show about having met with JJ and the writers about the movie and the problem with Kirk being dead. In August ’07 at the Creation con he stunned us all by saying that he’d never heard back from JJ from those original meetings. He said the same thing in his Jan ’08 interviews and the Feb ’08 interviews at the Star Trek Exhibit at the QM. As Iowagirl states, he’s been consistent on this point: he met with them and then never heard from them again.

As for this recent response, Elisabeth Shatner reads that JJ quote verbatim to him and he responds. I’m glad he did because quite a few fans DID misunderstand JJ’s comments. And let’s remember, quite a few posts on this site claimed Shatner’s “I don’t do cameos” remark occurred much earlier than it really did which muddied the waters.

“…he just thinks this scenario to be rather odd – so do I.”

Me too. If they really were so certain he wouldn’t do a cameo — based on those 2006 meetings — well then WHY write this scene in the first place? And if you were “desperately” trying to find a way to put him in the movie, then uh, why no communication with the actor to parse his feelings on the matter to be absolutely certain? Yes, Shatner did say “I don’t do cameos” on his website but his actual AP interviews as “I’m reluctant to do a cameo”. But by October it didn’t matter anyway….filming was literally days away in early Nov. so it’s moot.

331. TrekMadeMeWonder - September 24, 2008

Good analysis.

Still hope its all a ruse.

332. Iowagirl - September 25, 2008

#323
I wouldn’t know there were actually green beans for dinner, because I wouldn’t have been invited at all. I would probably read about it in the September Issue of “Great Green Beans Parties of the Year” where you would be cited saying ” Well, Iowagirl wasn’t here because I assumed she didn’t like green beans, so I didn’t invite her at all, and I didn’t tell her about the party, because she wouldn’t have fit in anyway”. I truly hope you wouldn’t do that to me.

#330
Yes, very good analysis, Liz, and thanks for quoting me.

333. Closettrekker - September 25, 2008

#330—“If they really were so certain he wouldn’t do a cameo — based on those 2006 meetings — well then WHY write this scene in the first place?”

I don’t think we can assume it was written after “I don’t do cameos”. I have yet to see anything which is a clear indicator of that. In fact, that seems rather unlikely with the onset of the writers’ strike. That would have required squeezing it into a tight timeframe between Shatner’s statement and the strike.

#332—So let’s assume then, that I did not become aware that you didn’t like them until they were already prepared :)

And I would not do that to you. I am sure you would be a lovely addition to any party.

334. Iowagirl - September 25, 2008

#333
– So let’s assume then, that I did not become aware that you didn’t like them until they were already prepared :) –

Well, it would have been worth the trouble asking me. Who knows I maybe would’ve changed my mind if I learned that you had prepared them just.for.me. :)

– And I would not do that to you. I am sure you would be a lovely addition to any party. –

Thank you so much. I’m so glad this time it will be your party and not JJ Abrams’. ;-)

335. Shatner_Fan_2000 - September 25, 2008

Hey guys, not that anyone asked, but I ate green beans last night! Can I come to the party? :-)

336. Iowagirl - September 25, 2008

#335

Of course – things have changed. Not being asked is the new number one prerequisite for coming to the party. ;)

337. krikzil - September 25, 2008

“I don’t think we can assume it was written after “I don’t do cameos”. I have yet to see anything which is a clear indicator of that. In fact, that seems rather unlikely with the onset of the writers’ strike. That would have required squeezing it into a tight timeframe between Shatner’s statement and the strike.”

? I’m not assuming it was written after Bill’s cameo remark in 10/07– my post says “based on the 2006 meetings”. The scene had to have been written well before 10/07 since filming & the writers strike were looming in Nov. I’m just musing that given the 2 parties never talked beyond the 2006 pitches according to Shatner, that’s the only time Bill could have indicated anything to JJ & Co. at all about the size of his role or his requirements. And so, if he was that adamant back then — and they never bothered to check back in with him and pursue it — it just begs the question: why write a scene at any time? Now, maybe if JJ had thought that written scene HAD worked, they would have given him a call, who knows? But it just seems weird to me that TPTB never spoke to him in 2007.

“Yes, very good analysis, Liz, and thanks for quoting me”

I was reading your posts and nodding my head in agreement and thinking, ah….a kindred spirit. ;)

338. Closettrekker - September 25, 2008

#337—“I’m just musing that given the 2 parties never talked beyond the 2006 pitches according to Shatner, that’s the only time Bill could have indicated anything to JJ & Co. at all about the size of his role or his requirements”

Orci made it clear –right here at trekmovie.com—that his “Shatner required a larger role than the movie could sustain” comment was based solely upon “I don’t do cameos”.

Furthermore, Abrams has said nothing which suggests that their assessment of Bill’s “requirements” was supported by anything else.

Shatner may very well have made his demands clear in that meeting back in 2006, but there is nothing out there which supports that theory. Nor is there anything out there (yet) which indicates one way or another when the scene in question was written, except that writing such a scene after making the determination that Shatner wouldn’t do it would make no sense. If we should speculate at all, I think it would be most reasonable to conclude simply that the scene was most likely written prior to the creative team making that determination. I doubt that Bob and Alex would intentionally waste time in their own pretty busy schedule (on and off the Star Trek project)…and I certainly won’t assume that.

339. krikzil - September 25, 2008

“Orci made it clear –right here at trekmovie.com—that his “Shatner required a larger role than the movie could sustain” comment was based solely upon “I don’t do cameos”. Furthermore, Abrams has said nothing which suggests that their assessment of Bill’s “requirements” was supported by anything else. Shatner may very well have made his demands clear in that meeting back in 2006, but there is nothing out there which supports that theory. … I doubt that Bob and Alex would intentionally waste time in their own pretty busy schedule (on and off the Star Trek project)…and I certainly won’t assume that.”

Clear? I respect Orci as a fan of his work and have trouble believing that his statement was a direct reponse to Shatner’s October 07 comments because I just find that scenario utterly implausible (which is why I always come back to the original pitches). They never speak to the man since talks in 2006 and then base everything — i.e, his willingness to even do a cameo; the size role he wanted — on something he said to AP and on his website less than a MONTH before filming (and a strike) was to commence in November 2007?? That just makes NO sense and these are very bright guys. And JJ made it clear in his remarks that he didn’t think the scene worked anyway. Again, it doesn’t seem plausible that anything Shatner had to say in October 07 could have had any bearing on his being in the movie at that point. (Now god knows what all he might have said or done in the 2006 pitches.)

While I find the whole situation curious/odd, given their obvious love of Trek, I don’t think they would see writing any Trek scene as a “waste”. (And despite my professed puzzlement about the whole situation, I DO look forward to reading it next year.)

340. Closettrekker - September 26, 2008

#339—“…it doesn’t seem plausible that anything Shatner had to say in October 07 could have had any bearing on his being in the movie at that point. (Now god knows what all he might have said or done in the 2006 pithes).”

“Clear? I respect Orci as a fan of his work and have trouble believing that his statement was a direct reponse to Shatner’s October 07 comments because I just find that scenario utterly implausible”

Orci said that he was referring to “I don’t do cameos”, and nothing else. I’d say that’s making it pretty clear. Again, not only is that the only support the creative team has given for their conclusion, but Orci went out of his way to clarify that it was based upon nothing else.

As for what Shatner said in the 2006 meetings, it is very possible that he made some inital comments about requirements for his possible role’s significance, and the “I don’t do cameos” statement only put the nail in the coffin (along with the fact, as you alluded to, that Abrams did not find that the scene worked well within the movie). However, there is nothing out there which points to that.

341. krikzil - September 26, 2008

Star Trek Magazine March interview published in June 2008:

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, and got his blessing as well, which was amazing. We talked in the meeting about the fact that Star Trek had killed Kirk and that was going to be a big stumbling block to an organic introduction of the character, but we would do our best. Subsequently he said he would require a slightly larger part than maybe this movie could sustain so we’ve kept him in the back of our minds, and now with another year to go, who knows?”

During the interview, Orci was asked if Shatner could be worked into the film. Orci stated he didn’t think it was likely, but “never say never.”

Trekonline comment in that June thread:

Orci: “By the way, when I said that Mr. Shatner subsequently said he wanted a larger role, I was referring to his public statement that he did not do cameos. Nothing more.”

I have to say this is even more curious than I remembered it. This confirms that they did meet back in 2006, Kirk’s death was perceived as a big problem but that they’d do their best. Now, to me that does seem like a door was left open and I can then understand Shatner’s confusion when he never heard from them again. Moving on, he states that it was Shatner’s subsequent public comments about wanting a role larger than the movie could sustain that was one problem. Uh, wait a minute. That’s quite a leap in the timeline — from 2006 to Oct 07 and just implausible and illogical — no talks between parties for over a year; script written, casting complete and filming/strike about to start in early November?

Sorry, still don’t see how an October 07 remark can put a nail in a coffin that was already underground — and moldering like Captain Kirk. ;)

But then, if WS’s 10/07 remark was taken as the end of it, why then a “never say never” months later In March ’08?

342. Closettrekker - September 26, 2008

#341—-He used the word “subsequently”. No matter the leap, it was still subsequent.

And, like you said, he went on to clarify that he was only referring to the public statement that he did not do cameos.

“…Kirk’s death was perceived as a big problem but that they’d do their best. Now, to me that does seem like a door was left open.”

I think it was, as evidenced by the fact that a scene was actually written. That would certainly mesh with Abrams’ claims that they wanted to find a role for him.

“why then a “never say never” months later In March ‘08?”

One of Orci’s later comments sheds some light on this. Being pressed for time, I won’t search for it, so forgive the paraphrasing…

He said something to the effect that STXI (or Zero, whatever) might open new doors for the future of Captain Kirk. I think he meant that as a reference to the “possibility” of a permanently altered timeline, in which the character of JTK’s fate might yet be uncertain.

However, any potential decision to bring him back later would not be Orci’s alone. Whereas he is often speaking retrospectively about the collective decision to leave him out, I think in this case (“Never say never”), the fanboy may have come out a bit in him.

After all, he’s a fan too.

343. krikzil - September 30, 2008

“He said something to the effect that STXI (or Zero, whatever) might open new doors for the future of Captain Kirk. I think he meant that as a reference to the “possibility” of a permanently altered timeline, in which the character of JTK’s fate might yet be uncertain.”

ST Zero…kinda sounds like a soft drink… As for an altered timeline…sign me up. Anything that could erase Generations has my full support. :)

“the fanboy may have come out a bit in him. :

Yeah fanboys!!

344. NCC-1701-A - October 11, 2008

all i can say is bring back kirk i may be a second gen fan of the shows but star trek started with JAMES T. KIRK and all i can say is i hope they do bring back kirk i have all the Star trek books by willam Shatner and they rock i hope they will listen to resaon the death sceen in genrations sucked kirk said it him self many times “I will die alone” and he did not
so

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