Greg Grunberg Wants Recurring Star Trek Role – Should He Be New Harry Mudd? August 14, 2010
by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Abrams, Celebrity, Star Trek sequel (2013) , trackback
Heroes Actor Greg Grunberg is a life-long friend of Star Trek producer/director JJ Abrams and has appeared one way or another in almost every JJ Abrams production, including an audio cameo in the 2009 Star Trek movie. Now the actor says he has bigger aspirations for Star Trek’s future.
Grunberg wants a recurring Star Trek role
Greg Grunberg is like JJ Abrams’ good luck charm. After schedule conflicts kept him from appearing on screen in the 2009 Star Trek movie, JJ still worked him into the film as the voice of Kirk’s stepdad (in the Corvette scene). But Grunny wants more for the Trek sequel (and apparently beyond). Here is what he said about his Star Trek hopes in a new podcast interview with Video ETA:
We constantly run ideas by each other like friends do. I talk to him every day. I always say "oh cool, is there a role for a big Jew in that movie? maybe something?" I am always trying to stick myself in there somewhere. I was supposed to play Olsen in Star Trek, the red shirt who doesn’t pull his cord and dies. I am actually glad. The actor who did that did a good job, but I would love to play something that could re-occur. So it was good that my face wasn’t on screen. So hopefully I can play something. But it is up to them.
So what role could Greg play. Last year I talked to Grunberg and he said that he would "absolutely love" to play Harry Mudd, even with the big mustache and the earring. The lovable rogue Harcourt Fenton Mudd (originally played in two episodes of the original Star Trek by character actor Roger C. Carmel) would be a fun classic character to bring into this new universe. And of course there are other classic roles for Grunberg, or possibly a new role.
Grunberg wants a recurring role in Star Trek
- maybe as the new Harry Mudd
POLL: Greg Grunberg as new Harry Mudd?
What do you think of the Grunny as Mudd idea?
Loading …
Comments»
MUD WAS AWSOME
Harry Mudd is way overrated in my opinion. He is too much a character of the 60’s. I just don’t see how Greg Grunberg (or anyone else for that matter) can play him convincingly without resorting to a Jack Black impression. And I don’t want to see Grunberg in any Trek movie. He’s an overrated actor in my opinion.
Good God no. this actor is terrible.
I’d love to see Grunny in the next movie- and I don’t care what role it is- even a really lucky ‘red-shirt’.
That would rock…
Dear JJ,
Just give him the red-shirt role in the sequel, so you can kill him and not have him bug you again.
-jas_montreal
He could be Captain Nepotism!
I want Harry Mudd, but I would much rather see him played by someone else.
He would be absolutely perfect for Harry Mudd. He’s got the size and the sense of humor. Now, who would play his nagging wife (if featured)? I vote Lili Taylor.
Mudd… was… in… THREE Episodes!
Mudd’s Women
I, Mudd
Mudd’s Passion
(And yes, I already know that Roddenberry asked people to NOT treat “the animated Trek as “canon”.)
I don’t mind if he’s in a new role, but let’s try to keep from drawing on old characters. New timeline, new ship, new crew, new adventures!
CHRIS PINE: Look, man, I won’t have any of your foolishness around here.
SPOCK: He’s never broken the law, at least not severely.
ELMER FUDD: I just want to get that wascilly wabbit!
CHRIS PINE: Then why do you have all these hot chicks enslaved?
ELMER FUDD: Oh, I just get so lonely… I have to dwug them since women don’t weally like me because of my widiculous way of speaking.
SPOCK: It’s the 24th Century. We can cure speech impediments.
CHEKOV: Keptin- the woman may be wery, wery beautiful but they have taken the keys to my Wolwo! I still have payments to make on that Swedish wessel.
Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr…
@2, how about if they cast Jack Black as Mudd?
Seriously though, I don’t see Mudd as fitting in with Abrams group. At least not the Mudd like was in TOS.
Jack Black I could see as Mudd. I could see Robert Downey Jr. as Mudd.
#12
Not really a big Jack Black fan, though he was great in “School Of Rock” and “Peter Jackson’s King Kong”. He was also good in that old “X-Files” episode. But I find his acting to be bad when he goes the over-the-top Chris Farley route.
And as I said earlier, Harry Mudd is a product of the 60’s. He reflects the 60’s, with his “hipiness” and somewhat sexist attitude towards women.
That is why I don’t like the character. It is why the character SHOULD NOT be brought back. If he is brought back, the writers would have to write him differently to appeal to the new crowd. Those changes would make Mudd too different of a character, thus making the whole excercise moot. They might as well bring back different characters from TOS. I’d rather see Janice Rand, Number One, Nurse Chapel, Gary Mitchell, Kor, Kang, Koloth, the Gorn, Tholians, Andorians, etc. in the sequel. Those characters don’t need too much updating. They are timeless. Harry Mudd is not. He is outdated and not needed.
I like Grunberg, but Harry Mudd is a weak character. Give him something better to do.
I get nervous when random celebrities say that they want to take a turn in a Trek movie. To me it sounds like, “Hey, I’d like to play the nostalgia game too.” Trek doesn’t need celebrity actors playing dress up, but actors committed to creating (and participating in) a character.
If the new Trek were on TV, I wouldn’t mind, because you can always make a better episode next week. When you only get one film every 3 or 4 years, however, every aspect of the film has to be solid – no room for “do my buddy a favor” roles tacked on.
I don’t wanna sling any Mudd (nayuck-yuck) but here’s a novel idea—how about some NEW characters for this NEW universe? Dunno, just seems strange to go to all the trouble of getting an aquarium just like the neighbor’s’ and then putting the same kind of fish in it. At least put a rubber ducky in there or a castle and a diver figurine with a little seaweed shrubbery around it… uh… hmm, well, there was supposed to be a point in there somewhere… ;)
A big “Yes” from me !!
:oD
No more Grunberg. If he absolutely has to be in the movie, just make him a red shirt and have him do something stupid and get himself killed. Maybe he’ll be the “I’ll go check if the coast is clear” guy and get shot in the chest.
I don’t know about Grunberg. I don’t care if he plays something, but I honestly think PAUL GIAMATTI would be a wonderfully devious Harry Mudd!
No, not Harry Mudd.
Probably a new character. But, really, um… Grunberg isn’t the most charismatic actor. I know he’s JJ’s friend, but… uh…
14, Mudd was a lot of things, con man, thief, loudmouth, cheater, bootlegger…and many many more I’m sure, .but he was never a hippie. Not quite sure where you got that impression..
Harry Mudd could probably be a terrific villain! Here we have a man who is the antithesis of the Roddenberry “evolved” human being! He’s greedy, he’s a liar, a seller of women, a drug pusher, a smuggler… Knock the cheese factor down a few notches, let him be funny without being a total bafoon… And don’t make him the main villain. Make him a middle man, a glorified goon to someone truly dangerous. Oh, and did I say PAUL GIAMATTI as MUDD? COME ON, Supreme Court! You know it would be awesome!
Paul Giamatti would be great…as would Penn, of Penn and Teller.
But no Grunberg, he’s a nice guy but he just doesn’t have the acting chops to go as broad as it would take to play Harry Mudd.
If there is going to be no Khan than there should definitely be NO HARRY MUDD!
Mudd was the worst character from the original series. NO room for him now. Keep moving forward with new stories and new characters.
I thought the point of the reboot was to REBOOT the franchise? I don’t see how redoing past characters would do that. Though it does avoid the work of the writers having to invent new characters to challenge the crew of Enterprise. And if we know one thing about Hollywood..they don’t do anything that challenges the mind.
I don’t get all the fond memories of Harry Mudd.
For my money “I, Mudd” was the single worst hour of TOS that was ever produced. It is an absolutely dreadful episode.
Andy Richter for Harry Mudd.
I believe Grunberg’s acting skills are perfectly commensurate with the current creative team’s writing skills.
How’s THAT for diplomatic? Boo-yah :)
Even having Grunberg as Mudd in the brig for a short scene would be a hilarious send-up
How about no Harry Mudd at all….
I’m so sick of hearing about this guy. Didn’t he even say at one point that he wanted to play Spock?? (not a chance)
And, I wish everyone would stop talking about Harry Mudd.. LAME!!!! You’ve got to be kidding me.
Harry Mudd? *Sigh* Next!
Can a role be “recurring” if he shows up in one, maybe two movies?
These actors are gonna be moving on after the next movie, possibly it’s sequel which probably won’t be out for 5 years. Assuming booming careers, Trek is probably going to eventually take the backseat for some of the cast. Conflicts will arise – characters cut, recast. Just look at X-Men. James Marsden left X-Men 3 to take a role that was smaller than what his “Cyclops” role was and probably would have been.
Bit of a tangent, but recurring? Only if they make a TV show – with the obvious recasting. So… reboot #2?
Mr. Grunberg, I grew up watching Roger C. Carmel, I admired Roger C. Carmel, we all enjoyed the character of Harry Mudd being played by Roger C. Carmel.
You, sir, are no Roger C. Carmel!
If not Harry Mudd, how about Cyrano Jones? (Before you answer, keep in mind that I’ve sniffed a lot of glue today.)
I’d rather see Harry Ballz than Harry Mudd :-)
#36
I hope you haven’t been sniffing Krazy Glue. Because that makes people go Krazy! :-)
37
Or how about my cousin, Muddy Ballz? He likes sitting in mud puddles!
Nothing against the casting, but I was just never a big fan of the Harry Mudd character. I think Greg Grunberg is a very talented actor, and his ‘vocal cameo’ in Star Trek 09 was very funny. But I just don’t think that he and the preposterous, over-the-top Harry Mudd character are such a good fit.
And all the same, but I really don’t want to pay $10 to see “The Wrath of Mudd.”
No. Beacause there will be no new Harry Mudd! Mudd was a fun, but ulimately very hokey character.
I have to agree with those who say that Mudd wouldn’t be right for the next movie. The way Carmel played him, it would be really hard to see anyone else in the role. That said, I wouldn’t want to see him brought back, because he’s so smarmy and bizarre. He’s just a really weird and frankly slimy character, the sort of person with whom you wouldn’t want to be left alone in the same room.
#38
I hear “Mudd” is good for Ballz!
Wouldn’t it be preferable not to retread past characters wherever possible? There is no reason why the Enterprise crew should run into Harry Mudd in this timeline.
I’d be beyond disappointed if they went for Mudd. First off, time for something new, and I never saw Mudd as a serious character, just kinda something funny added to the show. I hate to say this, but I’d rather even Khan than Mudd, at least Khan was serious. But either way, do something new for the love of god.
To everyone who wants to see entirely new characters/alien races for the sequel: Remember “Insurrection”? We got the Son’a and Bak’u who were never seen before, and never seen again. They were not interesting. At least the Son’a weren’t. The Bak’u might have worked better if it were the Jem’Hadar who were trying to relocate/exterminate them.
A good mix of familiar and the not-so-familiar would work best, in my opinion.
This would work.
I’d rather see Robert Downey Jr. as Cyrano Jones. Maybe he could be a bad Bounty Hunter out for Kirk’s head this time around or something different?
44 – the movie wasn’t bad because it had new alien races, but because the writing was logically flawed. It was correct to interfere with the Ba’ku, since they could’ve helped countless other Federation planets, and Picard was wrong to insist on the PD.
TOS had interesting aliens of the week all the time (whatever happened to “explore strange, new worlds?”) You just need a pure science fiction mind to write them, meaning their motivations should be unique enough to function as the classic SF “what if” device, which can then be followed through with all the implications.
46 – but why? Why stretch the alternate timeline concept any more than we have to? Isn’t it more likely that Cyrano Jones led exactly the same life as before, and that Kirk wouldn’t run into him?
I wouldn’t mind a cameo of Grunny as Mudd, but I think it would be more interesting (and more fun for Abrams) for him do some heavy prosthetic work.
…Perhaps a Klingon.
That way, was can again play spot the lucky Grunny!
Sorry, but I’ve only seen the guy in “Heroes,” where he was underwhelming. And his voice-over as young Kirk is driving sounds like he’s reading it and shouting.
Why is this even up for discussion?
If Trek2012 needs a “Big Jew,” let’s get Shatner on.
Guess I’m the only ALIAS fan here who enjoyed him as Vaughn’s partner Weiss.
I think that would be perfect, someone in the role who cares and wants to be there. I think it would take someone who wants that role to make it work, and work well.
Robert Downey, jr would be excellent in a role in Star Trek.
let him be a KLINGON!!!!
I personally hope to see some klingons, in trek 12, specially since they(In deleted scenes) seems to be a mix of augment-klingons and tmp-klingons, so i really hope they could be the main-species in next trek-movie, together with gorns or tholians or another species……..
I dont want reruns again! Give me NEW Star Trek adventures!
Maybe they could make him a bartender- wait that role was done -twice- although he would make a good ferengi
Maybe the transporter chief I think he and Pegg would work well together.
But I’m not sure we would need to see Harry Mudd again- kind of the jar jar binks of Trek to me.
But hey Grunny is fun to see for the most part and if they can create a role for him go for it.
I want to see Harry Mudd just to get on the nerves of people who like to pretend TOS was all philosophy and enlightenment.
Please make give us new stuff and let Mudd aside. No reruns !
I dont consider J.J Abrams’ Star Wars-ified version of Star Trek “real” Star Trek and the less that man has to do with anything with the name Star Trek attached to it the better. JJ Abrahms WRECKED Star Trek. Let’s see how he can continue to wreck it with … Harry Mudd! Woo frickety hoo! That J.J Abrahms needs a stiff kick in the head if you ask me. Weasel.
Greg could reprise his role as step-dad and the story could be about the crew’s families being kidnapped to use against them.. to surrender the ship or some other what-not perhaps? This could give loads of cameo ops and character development too.. but no harry mudd.. and no bloody khaaan either thanks! :)
The sequel needs a larger all-star cast with many recognisable actors making cameo appearances.
There need to be larger space battles with more starships.
I hope that James Kirk has several (human) love interests like James Bond and that they are played by Hollywood’s most beautiful young actresses.
The Jerry Goldsmith theme music from the Star Trek Insurrection end credits should be used at the end.
James Kirk needs to be quicker and more brutally effective with better fighting skills like Christian Bale in the Batman films, Daniel Craig in the James Bond films, Matt Damon in the Bourne trilogy and Liam Neeson in Taken.
Some how ‘epic film’ and ‘Harry Mudd’ don’t fit, IMHO.
Let’s hope Mudd is NOT part of the next Trek!
Harry Mudd as an occasionally recurring character in a tv series is one thing. Harry Mudd as an antagonist trying to sustain a major motion picture — nah. I’ll have none of this Mudd bath. The character is not powerful enough, unless the sequel is going to resort to comedy.
I didn’t care for Harry Mudd in the series, so it would take a lot for me to come ’round if he were in the film. If it was a small role I suppose I could live with him… I’ve got nothing against JJ putting his friend in the movie (happens in lots of movies…), but make him a red shirt or give him a potent role.
I also agree with those who’ve been calling for some A-list actors to appear in the sequel — especially in the antagonist role. They’ve got to do something about that foreign market…
Boy,not much of a sense of humor with fans these days…or imagination. Mudd was great and could be great in Bob Orci’s more than capable hands. Mudd can be treacherous, he can be funny, deceitful and threatening all at the same time. He could be working against the crew, as seen in Mudds Women or he could be unwanted baggage that tags along with the crew and helps save the day. The interaction between Mudd and Spock alone would be worth the price of admission. Having said that, I don’t think Grunberg is right for the role. You would need someone larger than life to pull it off and he plays everything fairly low key.
Why Harry Mudd because he’s fat??? I don’t want to see Harry Mudd or Khan! New territory please not rehash.
59. Are you on the wrong website?
@ 50 – “If Star Trek 2012 needs a ‘Big Jew’”…
WHAT THE F**K? Did I miss a post that made this comment okay somehow or are there not enough Jewish folks on this board for them to notice or care? Seriously?
Look…I don’t want this whole thing to turn into the Jennifer Lien thread…but Anthony, come on…
The list of actors and actresses who want to be in the new Trek is getting pretty long… a cast of thousands? Maybe so, at this rate. Which means less time to concentrate on the bridge crew and main cast. I don’t want some big, ensemble film with dozens of characters you never really get time to know. I don’t want big name celebrities overshadowing the main cast. I want a Trek film that focused upon the “family” of the bridge crew and allows for some good, in depth character exploration.
Just my ten cents (adjusted for inflation.)
Simon, re: #51
“Guess I’m the only ALIAS fan here who enjoyed him as Vaughn’s partner Weiss.”
Not just you. I enjoyed Alias back in the day too.
Which brings something else to mind — tying this into Christine Ellison’s numerous excellent points in #61 (I agree with all of them), including this one:
“I hope that James Kirk has several (human) love interests like James Bond and that they are played by Hollywood’s most beautiful young actresses.”
How about Jennifer Garner having a part in the next Trek movie ? It would be amusing seeing Kirk repeatedly hitting on her and assuming her to be just another soon-to-be-conquered femme fatale, until something happens to trigger Jennifer’s character suddenly having to use her martial arts skills against someone and showing herself to be at least as good as (possibly even better than) Kirk at martial arts.
Cue a suitable wisecrack by a momentarily-shocked Kirk watching Jennifer kicking the crap out of several villains simultaneously, coupled with a dry remark by McCoy and of course an arched eyebrow by Spock.
I’m a bit at a loss as to why anyone would want to base a new major, big-budget motion picture on Harry Mudd.
Good character? Yes!
Good villian for a high-budget blockbuster Trek movie?
No.
Yarn #16: I agree wholeheartedly. “Hey, I’d like to play the nostalgia game too.” It isn’t really worth commenting on such casual statements.
I still remember the time when Trek fans used to speculate about the exciting *new* adventures to come in the next movie, instead of discussing how to redo all the old stories and recast the old roles.
JJ wrecked Star Trek?????
Give me a break. Fortunately your opinion is in the minority. God forbid we ever get Star Trek Phase II on the big screen. That would suck.
Harry Mudd was BORING!!!
He was supposed to be Olsen in ST09? Isn’t he a little… fat to be… well, any character who isn’t supposed to be fat?
Weyoun, read up stupid.
j/k, but seriously Grunberg called himself a big jew, he was just quoting grunberg. realx:)
Maybe a subplot? No?
71.
Amen to what you said! Too many Trek fans are becoming pathetic nostalgia buffs instead of anticipating new adventures and characters.
No Grunberg.
I don’t want Harry Mudd in the movie.
And I haven seen Greg Grunberg in Heroes. He is only an average actor, who lacks charisma. They can easily find a more talented actor for the Star Trek sequel.
I would encourage the writers to let the idea of Mudd slide.
Ha! Mud slide! I crack me up!
#68- I agree TOTALLY!!!!
Repeat after me:
The Enterprise ran into Harry Mudd by accident.
The Enterprise ran into Harry Mudd by accident.
There is no reason why the Enterprise must run into Harry Mudd in JJ-timeline.
There is no such thing as fate.
harry Mudd? no
Cyrano Jones?…maybe
Repeat after me:
Cyrano Jones just happened to be visiting K-7 when the Enterprise arrived.
Cyrano Jones just happened to be visiting K-7 when the Enterprise arrived.
There is no reason why the Enterprise must run into Cyrano Jones in JJ-timeline.
There is no such thing as fate.
Grunberg is just a bad actor. His Heroes role was just embarrassing. he doesn’t have the chops to play Mudd. Tim Curry, maybe. But not Grunberg.
If it was someone else in charge of the new Trek films and not J.J, I’d bet Greg Grunberg would NOT be pushing for a role. Ditto for Kerri Russell when she said she wanted to be in the first film.
I hope the sequel doesn’t end up being a “J.J Abrams Alumni Reunion”.
He can play whatever original character he wants to play, as long as it remains plausible (and useful to the story) that the Enterprise would find him in both timelines. For example, the Enterprise could easily visit Eminiar 7 and I would expect all the same characters to be present, unaffected by Nero’s incursion. The question becomes, how would nuKirk deal with the situation? What is the difference between Kirk and nuKirk? I think that would be a good foundation for a story if we absolutely had to retread old ground.
However, it would be better to visit other worlds. They could’ve been visited by Kirk in the original timeline as well, except that we never saw those “episodes”. I would expect some overlap, since there is no reason why Nero’s incursion should’ve radically changed the plans for space exploration.
I think Mr. Grunberg could play Harry Mudd pretty well, but I’m generally against Harry Mudd being in the next movie. I really don’t think Mudd can carry a movie alone as the villain/antagonist (which I’m sure the studio will insist upon), and I’d rather not see Star Trek movies go the way of SpiderMan III and the Bruckheimer Batman movies, with lots of villains loaded up against Our Heroes ™.
59. Kevin From Australia
I can understand what you’re saying. For me this new Trek is fun but rather flawed. Its one saving grace for me is that it isn’t the Prime Universe. The Trek I grew up loving is still there. Will it continue someday? Who knows? Since members of the Supreme Court admit to being hardcore Trekkers, I want to see where they take their timeline from here, even if I don’t agree with some of the creative choices they made.
82. Boris… “Repeat after me: The Enterprise ran into Harry Mudd by accident.”
Um, you do realize that the Enterprise “ran into” Harry Mudd TWICE, right?
Oh and to address the topic at hand, I think Mudd could work as a catalyst for a larger set of events. He doesn’t have to be the central antagonist but I would be tickled to see him make an appearance!
As far as Grunberg playing him, I don’t know anything about the dude so I have no opinion about that.
Despite the poll saying yes to him being Mudd, the comments pretty much say “We don’t want Mudd” which creates a big issue in continuity.
Anyways, I don’t want to see Mudd at all. Aren’t we going with new in the reboot? Let’s meet NEW characters before we decide to bump into old. And maybe in this alternate reality Mudd has been arrested and is on some penal colony.
89 – Um, you do realize that the second time was also by sheer accident, not due to some sort of fate which would require their meeting in the alternate timeline as well?
MUDD: Watch your tongue, lad. You’re talking about Mudd the First. Well, anyway, I ran out of ideas. I simply ran out of things for them to do, and they insisted that I bring them more human beings. They need human beings to serve, to study. So I had to promise them a prime sample. A starship captain. Bright, loyal, fearless and imaginative. _Any captain would have done. I was lucky to get you_. So you are going to take over for me here, and I can get off this rock and back to civilisation.
I am so tired of hearing about the possibility of Mudd, or Khan. I don’t think the best direction is to recreate all the characters that were encountered during TOS. Don’t forget, it wasn’t a Reboot as much as it was an opening to an Alternate timeline (otherwise there would have been no reason to include Leonard Nimoy’s Spock, or the whole bridge scene explaining the alternate timeline) which doesn’t require the crew meet up with all of the same people.
I just hope the powers that be are aware that Trek Lore needs to be left alone and show some creativity with some new stories
I can’t stress how much I don’t want this guy stinking up a Trek movie.
90 – Wait, I thought that Orci and Kurtzman aren’t writing by poll, so what’s the point of this article anyway? TrekMovie readers aren’t some sort of official focus group. Any producer knows that polling fans is a BAD idea, as opposed to following one’s own vision.
#77″Too many Trek fans are becoming pathetic nostalgia buffs instead of anticipating new adventures and characters.”
This kind of stuff cracks me up. The whole concept of bringing back Kirk and his crew for a Trek reboot was based on nostalgia…and it succeeded beyond anyone’s wildest imagination, yet some actually want to argue that, to bring in other elements of the series is a bad idea. Amazing.
#94
I was only commenting on the poll that is has different results to the comments.
And just because this isn’t an official focus group or anything doesn’t mean people don’t take a look on this site. What is the best place for a writer to get an opinion on something than on a site where the fans are? It isn’t uncommon to hear about them hovering about to see our comments and ideas on things brought up in articles.
And it is also for the sake of discussion.
95 – No, it wasn’t based on nostalgia, otherwise it would’ve been more similar to the original. It was an attempt to find new audiences. Are you saying that whenever Batman is rebooted, it’s a matter of nostalgia rather than redesigning him for a new era? Batman isn’t read by 80-year-olds who are nostalgic about their childhood in the 1940s.
Also, there is a difference between preserving the essence of a concept (the triumvirate of Kirk, Spock, McCoy exploring the galaxy) and violating the basic premise of TOS, which was “to explore strange, new worlds…to seek out new life and new civilizations…to boldly go where no man has gone before.”
It’s like saying “Twilight Zone” should be rebooted with characters-of-the-week we know, as opposed to new stories in the same format. Kirk, Spock, and McCoy are like Rod Serling the narrator – they are part of the format – but the exact places they visit should be different all the time in order to provide us with satisfyingly unique science-fiction concepts.
96 – Writers shouldn’t be influenced by fans. They should just come up with an interesting idea and follow it to its logical conclusion.
Geez, most Trek fans seem more obsessed with the past than anyone. Why would we want to keep seeing things we’ve seen before? Khan, Harry Mudd, the Borg… Why don’t Trek fans want something new???
99-
Star Trek fans don’t know WHAT they want. Talk to 100 Star Trek fans and you’ll hear 100 different wish lists. That’s why I say that I hope the creative team comes up with something new and different. If you want to put old stuff in there, do it more as an “easter egg” like they did with the last film (tribbles, admiral Komak, etc), and not as a prime plot point.
99 – dead on. I’m not sure why this article was published. What’s the point of polling random TrekMovie readers?
I mean 100, not 99.
H.F. Mudd, could very well be different in this post-2233 Narada incident world.
In this version, he could be a merchant marine, with different attitudes and different sensibilities. He could be working with Pakleds, perhaps, and running a major salvage and trading network.
Even worse, his ship(s) could discover the Botany Bay. Oops!
In any version, if Mudd’s a brief character, this shouldn’t be a problem. Even in TOS, it made sense that Mudd was on the same spacelanes that the Enterprise was monitoring.
…make him the red-shirt Lt. Spinelli, and kill him quickly…
103 – but why do you think it likely that Nero’s incursion influenced Mudd as well? The writers must always bear this in mind if they want to preserve believability, since they chose not to go with a full reboot, but rather hold Nero responsible for the changes. I can’t wait for someone to argue that Nero changed the nature of the Q Continuum as well.
The Enterprise could run into Mudd, but why stretch credibility for no compelling reason?
Just never cared for the character. I guess you had to be there.
FWIW, unless things have changed (again), J.G. Hertzler is supposed to be playing Harry Mudd in one of the upcoming New Voyages/Phase II episodes.
Er No, these films are made for the mainstream and this guy and this character is an acquired taste..just like characters such as Q…a very acquired taste…Make the pic about a war with the Klingons and with Khan in the background.
He would make a great Harry Mudd!
I always found the Mudd episodes incredibly dates. Especially I Mudd with the robots and the bad acting at the end.
(Playing Devil’s advocate) Let me be clear, I LOVE the original series and I like Star Trek 09, but Harry Mudd is the worst character in the history of Star Trek. One could argue that everything campy about the original series was in every single Harry Mudd episode. With that said, I don’t see how people on here can cry and moan and whine to have all new characters in the sequels. Really? So J.J.’s movie all about destiny, means destiny doesn’t mean anything? Is that why all the original crew miraculously all managed to serve together, aboard the Enterprise! If that’s not destiny than there is no such thing as destiny. If all the original characters manged to serve together, then why no other original characters? That would seem to be irrational and unexplainable. No to Mudd but yes to other characters, Kor, Koloth, Kang, Trelane, Romulan Captain, the Talosians, Tellarites.
Grunberg would make the perfect Tellarite.
“Gee everyone, I know JJ.”
“JJ, can I please, please be in your big movie? Can I have another paycheck?”
It’s pretty bad he does this in public.
Why would anyone want Harry Mud in a serious movie? I hate his character, it’s stupid.
Mudd could work as a one-shot joke. Not a major antagonist. Like their in the Star Wars cantina and Mudd is hawking tribbles or something.
I would by that the Kelvin blowing up affected the Enterprise in the JJ-verse never running into Mudd. Because, let’s just play hypothetical, that engisn who got blown up by a random explosion in the background was a main factor influencing someone who sold Mudd a faulty warp plasma conduit and now that he doesn’t have that faulty warp plasma conduit, he never met the Enterprise. Or 9 billion other scenarios. Butterfly effect, people! Butterfly effect! (Gamma/Delta quadrants shouldn’t be affected at all)
No Harry Mudd please. Roger did a great job in the role so just leave it alone.
My two cents….save the cool “guest star” casting for MAJOR international stars that can help build the audience outside the US.
Say…Tom Hanks as Matt Decker for example.
Just sayin’.
Please, no Mudd. Even as a kid, I thought the over-the-top buffoonery of the Harry Mudd character seemed way more appropriate for a Lost In Space episode.
Harcout Fenton Mudd? in The next movie? That would be great, he’s always been a fun character, but has a menacing side as well. With the right actor, it could be fantastic. All the haters must have been raised on the dreadful and utterly boring cookie cutter normalcy of TNG. Give me great character actors like Roger C Carmel, or Stanley Adams, or William Campbell chewing the scenery any day. TOS was full of them…yes Khan included, Ricardo could chew it with the best of them….and that’s just one of many reasons that original Trek is the classic it is. JJ and company have returned Trek to its roots where strong guest stars were present at every turn. So hell yeah, bring on Harry Mudd…or Trelane…or Cyrano Jones..or any other number of great classic Trek guest stars…it’s part of the TOS recipe, no sense in changing it now…if you want TNG, fine, go watch TNG, but please keep that show’s “do’s and don’ts” as far away from 23rd century trek as humanly possible.
Just make him the red shirt that gets killed in every movie.
^ that’s an awesome idea. “OH MY GOD! THEY KILLED GREG GRUNBERG!”
yeah no.
Who’s this guy, never heard of him!
I nver liked the character Harry Mudd, I always found him to be annoying!
Ah Greg Grunberg, you’re biggest role is the pilot of the plane on Lost.
Could he pull off Q? With practice he would be a warm addition to this universe. You go, Greg.
Or perhaps Trelane/Q
#101:
I agree with that. Also (tangentially, I admit): the guys writing the new Star Trek movies shouldn’t be, either.
Mudd; Yes!
This idiot; No!
Cast a know hollywood star; Jack Black, Zach Galifanakis, Phillip Seymour Hoffman or some other popular, talented fat-ass.
114 – and of course, you haven’t stopped to consider that maybe every one of them wanted to serve on the Enterprise (like Uhura), and Nero’s incursion just wasn’t important enough to change their motivations. Has Nero’s incursion managed to turn TOS into a fantasy about destiny? What’s next – the Dominion isn’t a powerful force in the Gamma Quadrant any longer?
#101-
You’re dead wrong on that one!
Writers who ignore their fan base end up creating Jar-Jar Binks, while fanboys are busy publishing brilliant novels & comics that are far more appealing to fans.
The best thing a writer can do is consider his audience throughout the process, especially with material like Star Trek.
The trick is, to never let yourself exist outside of the audience in the first place.
How about Greg Grunberg as Harry Mudd or Cyrano Jones
How about dwnicolo as Gren Grunberg?
133 – So a writer needs an audience to tell him to be a good writer and write Jar-Jar Binks properly? It’s not a matter of whether he is or isn’t in the story, but of how he is written.
Harry Mudd was an amusing character in TOS times but I don’t think we need to see him in the sequel. The other aspect is that surely if any part came up that Greg Grunberg thought he would like to play, would he not have to audition for it just like any other actor? It would suck, if he didn’t and just got the part because he knew JJ Abrams, irrespective of whether he was the best available actor to play that particular part or not. A lot of people believe that many actors, directors, writers etc just get the jobs because of their connections. This would only reinforce that (erroneous?) belief and is not fair on the hardworking, genuinely talented people out there.
“James Kirk needs to be quicker and more brutally effective with better fighting skills like Christian Bale in the Batman films, Daniel Craig in the James Bond films, Matt Damon in the Bourne trilogy and Liam Neeson in Taken.”
Why? James Kirk is not a comic book character or a spy… He needs to maintain his fitness and any self-defence skills that he has learnt from the Academy but to be like these people mentioned above, no – not really. Kirk was a leader and strategist. Being able to effectively command 400+ people and gain their trust and respect are more important skills than being able to kick someone ass in a more brutal way. Besides, the reason he got beat up by the Romulans is because they, like their Vulcan cousins, are a lot stronger than humans, despite their appearance. It was a case of mostly biological superiority, which is why Spock was always able to beat Kirk in a scrap.
I don’t want this Star Trek reboot to look more like something from Batman or Superman or whatever…Yuk. Kirk, McCoy, Uhura, Scotty, Sulu, Chekov are all human beings, nothing more and nothing less, except for Spock of course, who is half-human.
I can see Grunny as Mudd, who is a totally F’up ambassador and needs Kirk/Spock to bail him out of some t!ts up negotiations with (Klingons/Romulans/Andorians/Orions, etc). when they arrive, he lays the blame at his drunken mentor’s feet: SHATNER.
Ever see him in Heroes? He’s pretty hammy. Let him be a Ferengi.
Paul G was already “Harry Mudd” in Planet of the Apes….
#133: “Writers who ignore their fan base end up creating Jar-Jar Binks,”
Given that only one writer has ever created Jar-Jar Binks, your assertion is demonstrably false and worthy of ridicule. Here’s some now.
Wouldn’t mind a Haryy Mudd, I hope we get Klingon’s in the next film maybe not as main Villains but on screen would be nice!
#133 and others, I think JJ and Crew should keep the same Mix as the first Star Trek Film they did, for Trek to get a new fan base you need to appeal to more then just hardcore fans and get out to the General Aducances. I would however not completely in the case of JJ and Crew ingore the fan base as well. Just keep an even mix.
I speak for ALL Trek fans. Anyone who disagrees with me is not only misinformed, but a horrible evil person.
Why are people talking about “the new” Khan, Q, Trelane, and Harry Mudd?
They blew up Vulcan, time for some fresh new characters.
Are there truly no more good ideas in Hollywood?
I’m not wild about a Harry Mudd flick. However, if Mudd was a bit part at some port of call who gets, say, no more than four minutes of screen time in each film as comic relief/convenient information source, that might be worth exploring.
133. Khan Was
Sorry, I gotta take issue with you on that one. Do you really think there’s a single writer, of any format, who writes whilst thinking about an audience? Was Lucas thinking about his audience when he first created the poor old Jar Jar character?
A writer writes because they are compelled to express something, whether it’s something they feel strongly about, something that intrigues or interests them, or even something about themselves. They do not write while trying to second-guess an audience.
As for “existing outside an audience,” a writer can be as much of a fan of something as the audience is. This does not guarantee they will write something that pleases every fan.
And as for “fanboys publishing brilliant novels and comics..,” I’d like to know, specifically, who you are referring to, which books and comics, and what, specifically, is “brilliant” about these fanboy works?
Vagueness is no substitute for a strong argument…
shatner should be mudd, jeffrey combs should be trelane
#145 “Are there truly no more good ideas in Hollywood?”
Go see Scott Pilgrim for an example of some good ideas..
perhaps a more interesting question is: Are there truly no more good ideas in Hollywood that can make enough money as the bad ideas wrapped in glitter and gold..
problem is, if it makes enough money then it was deemed a good idea..
ergo the definition of good idea is truly in question
oh and for the record I never liked Mudd in TOS…
If Harry Mudd needs to be in the film, his character should be reimagined and needs to be more shady and untrustworthy with a little humor as well. He would best be played by either Jon Lovitz or Oliver Platt IMHO.
#147 ” Was Lucas thinking about his audience when he first created the poor old Jar Jar character?”
You bet your bippy he was. Now maybe its not the audience you might expect. I have no doubt that entitlement ridden fanboys of the original trilogy were last on his mind, but the kids of the time..the kids…his kids…all kids were very prevalent in his creative process. Jar Jar was written, as was the ewoks, for kids. He knows kids are the real “force” that keeps that universe going. Hook em as a kid and you’ve got them for life. When Lucas crafted Jar Jar BInks, he new EXACTLY what he was doing.
150. John Locke
Right on! But forget Greg.
151. star
Good point, and I stand corrected…
137. I believe I’ve stated something similar in the past, just not as well.
145.
Have you seen Star Trek 09? It had “old” characters, they are called, James T. Kirk, Mr. Spock, Dr. McCoy, Scotty, Pike, Uhura, Sulu, Chekov. If you want something new it already ain’t happening or else they would’ve made a new movie with a new crew taking place after Nemesis. So, elements of future sequels are going to have nods to the past. This was a reboot not a new crew.
There is a prevalence of illogic among the Trek fan base. Somehow having the main original characters is ok, but guest villains and minor characters are not. Again, totally illogical and unjustifiable.
With that said, no Harry Mudd. Grunberg would make a good Tellarite.
They should just redo “Deadly Years” for the sequel. It’d solve everything. They could have Grunberg play that that stuffy Admiral and bring back Nichols, Koenig, Takei, and Shatner to play they aged versions of themselves.
And I realize that Chekov didn’t age in the original episode — but this is a reboot, for crying out loud! ;)
This is a very basic beef stew. It’s easy, delicious and inexpensive to make. While there are hundreds of variations of this traditional recipe, it’s hard to improve on this version’s savory and comforting goodness.
Serves: 12
Prep Time: 30 minutes
Cook Time: 90 minutes
Total Time: 120 minutesIngredients:
•3 lbs boneless chuck roast, cut into 2-inch pieces
•3 tbsp vegetable oil
•2 tsp salt
•1 tbsp freshly ground pepper
•2 yellow onions, cut into 1-inch chunks
•1/4 cup flour
•3 cloves garlic, minced
•1 cup red wine
•3 cups beef broth
•1/2 tsp dried rosemary
•1 bay leaf
•1/2 tsp dried thyme
•4 carrots, peeled, cut into 1-inch slices
•2 stalks celery, cut into 1-inch slices
•3 large russet potatoes, peeled and cut in eighths
•fresh parsley to garnish (optonal)
Preparation:
1.On medium-high heat, add the vegetable oil to a large heavy pot (one that has a tight fitting lid).
2.When it begins to smoke slightly, add the beef and brown very well. Do in batches if necessary. Add the salt and pepper as the beef browns.
3.Once browned, remove the beef with a slotted spoon set aside.
4.Add the onions and sauté for about 5 minutes, until softened.
5.Reduce heat to medium-low, and add the flour and cook for 2 minutes stirring often.
6.Add the garlic and cook for 1 minute.
7.Add wine and deglaze the pan, scraping any brown bits stuck to the bottom of the pan. The flour will start to thicken the wine as it comes to a simmer.
8.Simmer wine for 5 minutes, and then add the broth, bay leaves, thyme, rosemary, and the beef.
9.Bring back to a gentle simmer, cover and cook on very low for about 1 hour.
10.Add potatoes, carrots, and celery, and simmer covered for another 30 minutes or until the meat and vegetables are tender. Taste and adjust seasoning.
11.Turn off heat and let sit for 15 minutes before serving. Garnish with the fresh parsley if desired.
This is best made the day before if possible, for even better flavor.
In the Heroes episode 5 Years Gone GG played an alternate timeline version of his character that was evil, sadistic and cruel. And played it chillingly well. So saying he doesn’t have the acting chops to pull it off is uninformed.
And name one actor in hollywood who hasn’t used his connections to get roles?
I’m sure Grunberg is a fine person and actor, but he’s like the Ted McGinley of actors when it comes to popping up in tv shows. Ted McGinley can be good, but he’s like the human signal of jumping the shark when he appears on a tv show…witness Happy Days and Married w Children as two examples of a bunch. Grunberg is the same…his scenes in Heroes were the absolutely least interesting, and thank goodness he wasn’t in more of LOST. I hope he has a good and long caereer, just not with Star Trek.
#83 :There is no such thing as fate.
Unfortunately there is fate in the Abramsverse, as already evidenced by the Strange Encounters on Delta Vega. But I agree that it should not continue to be a storytelling concept.
The sad thing is that fan discussions like this one may give the producers and writers the impression that we want remakes instead of new adventures. Random celebrities are playing the nostalgia game, and we should be wise enough not to play with them.
We’re stuck with the Abramsverse, which is currently a second-rate Star Trek universe despite the success of the new movie, because it has pretty much destroyed its own potential. It relies on the formula “Okay, let’s blow up Vulcan and increase the ship a 16fold, but the people are all the same in all the same places.” If “Star Trek XII” continues to boldy go where TOS has gone before (or to secure what’s left of it), it will only corroborate the complex of inferiority of the Abramsverse.
@159
lol I think the same thing. In Heroes he was the one who irked me. I am not sure if its the role or the actor.
hmm ironically Harry Mudd is perhaps the only character and 2 ep in the 45 year ST history that I did not like.
Why do I get the feeling the ST writers are thinking of Harry Mudd because he is like the colorful Joker in batman?
If so they better spin the character into something fun, lively and dramatic, else it could be seriously damaging.
NO HARRY MUDD! Harry and the Salt Monster would be the worst characters to bring back. There are so many good characters in the classic trek world not to mention all the characters which have not been created yet! Think about it, how many characters can we dream up, don’t resurrect an old outdated derelict.
UGH how can 49% of you say yes to Harry Mudd, ah because the 49% are smoking opium. I love the original series, I don’t love Harry Mudd, it will never happen!
Good luck Greg. I hope Star Trek sends something nice your way.
How do you look in forehead ridges and Klingon casual wear?
I hope the next one is Klingon.
Mudd is one of the things about the old series I didn’t like.
160 – “Fate” is only the characters’ interpretation of events, one which didn’t seem significantly out of place in a Star Trek movie, since they were always prone to a bit of philosophy. However, Nero’s incursion shouldn’t be used as a mere in-universe explanation for a classic reboot (where it is obviously OK to bring back whoever and whenever), otherwise what’s the point of using such a convoluted device as opposed to taking the clean route of all the other rebooted shows and movies?
It is far more interesting to consider the idea of a half-reboot, where some aspects have changed but most haven’t, because Nero’s incursion just wasn’t that important to the larger picture. The potential of Abramsverse lies in contrasting the changed with the unchanged, by following the premise in a logical, _science-fiction_ manner, where the writers would be required to carefully consider the likely effects of Nero’s incursion, more carefully in fact than in the first movie.
There is no reason to believe that Starfleet’s space exploration plans would’ve changed much, but the characters have changed, so their reactions to the same planets and TOS characters should still be different and lead to different outcomes. The first movie showed us what changed, but the other movies could show us what couldn’t have possibly changed. And then, of course, there is no reason not to visit those worlds which the original Enterprise might have visited offscreen, in order to provide for the necessary variety in storytelling.
However, as noted, Harry Mudd or Cyrano Jones are extremely unplausible characters for the Enterprise to run into yet again by accident, after all the changes, unless we were to invoke fate again. However, that would be an unnecessarily Lostian device in the Star Trek universe, whose TOS era is already different compared to the current shows and later Trek because it was at least trying to be science-fiction, with science-fiction writers especially in its first season.
#147
I am 100% positive that when Lucas wrote episode one, he create Jar-Jar Binks to add appeal for a newer, younger audience. He has stated this in interviews, it’s not a secret.
The reason that character was such a failure is that he did not consider what would appeal to said young audience when he wrote it, he simply indulged his own sense of humor.
Your comments about feeling compelled to write something are true if you’re writing for the sake of art, but in the case of film & television; art has to play second to ratings. This is a business.
Every writer who’s trying to create a successful script asks themselves “what will my audience think?” throughout the process. It’s how you stay grounded.
Look at Quentin Tarantino, he is a huge fanboy & remains as such as he writes & directs; actors often comment on how he reacts like an audience member to his own dailies.
Thusly, he manages to identify with his audience more so than any writer of his generation, even when the audience aren’t comfortable with the topic at hand. He doesn’t just want to make a good movie, he wants to see a good movie, too.
Actually i would like to see Greg plays the significant partner to a gay Khan “Yikes” It’s all in jest , how about Trelane?
End, the comments on this thread! End!
Past 180 continue you shall not.
#160 “We’re stuck with the Abramsverse”
Sure, I can live with that!!
Now add in some Harry Mudd!!
Please, God, let there be no Harry Mudd in the next film.
That’s the first time I’ve prayed in years. I hope God hears me.
As a Trekker this is telling.
I went to the Vegas Trek Con 2010 at the LV Hilton and I observed something quite fantastical:
The convention was very TOS leaning. By that I mean, the majority of people dressed up were from TOS era. The guests were very TOS heavy, yes they had VOY, ENT, DS9 and TNG, but TOS was the dominant theme. Also, not a peep from anyone associated with the new Trek movie. No actors, producers, writer. No props, ships on display or for auction. Absolutely nothing.
I think it is quite evident that even after 44 years, the Original Series is still the most popular among the fans.
169. Khan Was
I concede about Lucas creating Jar Jar for the kids, something I overlooked not being a kid, myself (well, at least not at my age!)
However, I do feel that writing — as art — still takes (and must) take precedent over writing for the sole purpose of making $$$. Sure, I understand that the studios are out to make as much money as possible, and people are out to make a living, and so forth. But as a songwriter and recent author, I can’t say that the place where my stuff comes from (whatever mysterious realm that is) has anything to do with money. The “product” comes about on the basis of inspiration, love of the process and whatever moves me. If I sat down to write something specifically with the idea of making money, I think I would suffer a bad case of creative constipation.
I also believe that, while every creative person wants their “product” to be well-received, their first intention is to create something memorable, a good story, realized characters, great scenes, and so forth. To sit at the computer and think, “Ok, I’ve got to write something that the audience will absolutely love, and it will bring in truckloads of money,” is a faulty position from which to begin. IMO, of course…
174, I would think there would be more TOS outfits at cons simply because they’re ST09 costumes which are the newer, shiny (albeit retro) outfits readily available.
TOS…including, yes, Harry Mudd, will always rule supreme. That’s just the way it is. :)
I like Greg Grunberg, but I think Paul Giamatti or Philip Seymour Hoffman would make much better Harry Mudds.
I want Klingons!!! Put a turtle on his head, shove some fake bad teeth in his mouth and put him on the bridge of a BoP that gets blown up by the Enterprise in battle.
I like Grunny, but I do -not- want Harry Mudd in the next movie.
Kiss the movie goodbye if they put this guy in as Harry Mudd. Tell Orci and Kurtzman to expand on what they did. I am so tired of everybody wanting them to rehash classic trek. What the hell was the reboot ? Wasn’t it to do something different with established continuity? Create alternate reality and not subject to the rules of the prime universe. I do not want to see Harry freaking Mudd played by Greg Grunberg who played whiny ass Matt Parkman. Enough of this crap already. Give them new threats and take it higher than before. You people are some of the biggest nerds I have ever read in my life. Harry Mudd?
181 – Only kissed? Hell, that could be your mama you’re talking about. But I agree with you. Harry Mudd would make me dread this next film, and so far I’ve been looking forward to it.
How about Michael Emerson as Mudd? He is a better actor.
The thing is, I like Harry Mudd, so I’d rather the current team leave him be. I’d rather they not touch anything I care about, basically.
Lots of Klingons in the next film, please :)
Hey! I know! They can bring back Nomad, and Grunberg can be the voice.
Wow, over 1,500 votes in the poll and, despite the handful of squeeky wheels (myself included) that like to chime in here in the posts, the result is overwhelmingly in Mudd’s favor. NIce.
let him play Mudd in a post-credits scene…
Harry mudd was one of the worst character from Trek. Hope they don’t reprise him.
@175. Mate who do you know who is out there spending $100 million to just create art? The movie industry must be about making $$$.
If you can combine both great but art cannot get in the way of getting a return on investment that is always risky anyway.
I sometimes hear people use the term cash grab as if that is a sin but there is never a guarantee that money will be made back so you have to go for as much as you can.
Harry Mudd was sorta comic relief in TOS, I liked his character. And I dont really mind if he makes a cameo in the sequel, maybe he buddies up with Khan! :}
Im reading the screenplay for AVATAR, its a well written script (although I believe he had 15 years time to do many re-writes). now Im sure the JC wrote it from the heart, but he VERY much had the audience in mind as well. There are many “buttons” written in it that are there to get a reaction from the reader/viewer. I suppose thats just good screen writting (maybe).
Now weather he intended to make lots of money with it, I dont know. But I know he wanted to get a “message” across for sure. Now what I want to see when I look at a good Sci Fi script is all the right “buttons”, but NO political message but rather an Ethical one, dealing with morality. TOS did it best, but many of the classic Sci-fi masterpieces did as well. Maybe thats what we’ll get in the sequel.
Okay but many of those moral stories did have a politcal context. Omega Glory, A Private Little War, and Let That Be Your Last Battlefield leap to mind.
192- not to mention ‘The Trouble With Tribbles’…
…wasn’t that directed at the dangers of overpopulation???
A…right. Then there were those things our parents told us like not leaving your toys lying around, as in A Piece of the Action. I’m looking at you Dr. McCoy.
…and Mirror, Mirror was a message to not be duplicitious…
ok wait i changed my mind on the Grunberg as Mudd thing.
No way! i mean, the guy doesn’t even have a mustache for Pete Kirk’s sake!!!
I learned not to leave any witnesses from Conscience of the King, and to be careful for what one wishes from Shore Leave. Yes, so many morals. I learned everything I need to know from ST.
… and don’t lose your mind about anything… Spock’s Brain.
“Brain and Brain. What is Brain???”
So how would they make the next movie work with Khan, Harry Mudd, more Captain Pike and the Gorn all tugging on the plot at the same time? Maybe we can also throw in Finnegan, Gary Seven, the Tholians, the Energy Barrier, the Talosians, the Guardian of Forever, the Kelvans, Dr. Richard Daystrom, the Doomsday Machine and the Space Amoeba all into the same movie!
I sort of kid but honestly I hope the new movie just sticks to focusing on one major thread instead of showing us what everything from TOS looks like in the updated universe. Throw too much at an audience in one movie and you end up with a disaster worth complaining about for the rest of eternity, like Star Wars Episode I.
What? SW Episode 1 was the greatest movie of all time!
Sincerely,
Caddyshack II
Wow. Just where do some of you folks come from. Harry Mudd was consistently voted the most popular guest character in Star Trek in poll after poll back in the day along with Sarek and Cyrano Jones with Khan only joining them after Wrath of Khan. And one noting Mudd as comedy relief shows a lack of knowledge of the character. Mudd’s Women is NOT a comedy episode. I have zero doubt that the fine writers and the right actor could give us a great turn for Mudd in a Trek movie whether he was the main villain or just one of the supporting cast. And I am all for it. Indeed I still have my pirate queen with Cyrano and Mudd story all ready. Just get Ms. Ryder on the phone. ;)
And happy to see the poll reflect the way the old polls used to run. I guess you folks are still the minority. Good news. :)
I really hope that we get a NEW STORY! Something we have not seen. I really liked the movie and have been a TOS fan since the early 70’s. I hope that JJ and company take us “Where no man has gone before” like Gene did every week. A good story, with a few additional familiar names like Chapel or Rand, Commodore Wesley or Kyle and maybe another constitution class starship besides Enterprise….just saying….
And stay off drugs. City on Edge of Forever. Just say no.
And again I’m looking at McCoy
Yes. I would love him as Harcourt Fenton “Harry” Mudd. If that is is name.
#197: I learned that the galaxy is full of hot chicks just yearning to be taught about this Earth thing called kissing. This is fundamentally optimistic on a level seldom attempted :)
Boris #168 “There is no reason to believe that Starfleet’s space exploration plans would’ve changed much, but the characters have changed, so their reactions to the same planets and TOS characters should still be different and lead to different outcomes.”
My impression is exactly the contrary. The universe has changed around the characters, but they and their relationships are kept essentially the same with extremely unlikely twists (Delta Vega, Cadet to Captain, Spock Prime who suddenly believes in fate, etc.). Because the movie still attempts to be an origin story, although exactly this is precluded by its very premise. The end insinuates that from now on the new Enterprise will run into very similar adventures with them as in TOS. In this vein I wouldn’t be surprised to meet Harry Mudd and all the same people again. But it would be a flawed concept of nostalgia to carry on like that, irrespective of the statistical probability.
#174 “I think it is quite evident that even after 44 years, the Original Series is still the most popular among the fans.”
Yes. I too notice a TOS revival, quite unlike in the years when there was always fresh Trek on TV. However, this is a double-edged sword, because it may give the producers of Trek XII the impression that fans want TOS references in the movie, no matter how gratuitous they may come out.
Mudd…Khan…I really hope these new STAR TREK movies don’t become a series of “new actors playing classic villians”. I’d like to think the writers are creative enough to come up with NEW interesting characters instead of having to “go back to the well” for interesting ideas.
lol at the fools here, gettting as normal, spazzed out by something that’s not even official in the papers yet, seems like the the few smart peeps here like star trackie and chrisfawkes get the business and don’t let their sense of “entitled purist, fanatic way of thinking” when it comes to “protecting the sanctity” of Trek or Star wars, (remember it’s a MOVIE) which by the way are some of the most unhappy folks, now I didn’t say ALL, but lord if there isn’t a large sum of yous lol!
I really like Grunberg. He was great on Felicity and Heroes. Why not bring him into the Trek universe! The funny thing is that just the other day a person created the username “HarryMudd” on our social media game site
SocialCycler.com
What a crazy coincidence!!? Maybe it was Grunberg.lol