Report: No Original Star Trek Actors In Sequel |
jump to navigation

Report: No Original Star Trek Actors In Sequel December 20, 2011

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Nimoy,Rumor,Shatner,Star Trek Into Darkness , trackback

A new report cites a source (presumably attending the LA premiere of Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol) who claims the upcoming Star Trek movie will not have any original Star Trek stars in it. So no Shatner, Nimoy, etc. See more details below.


Report: No (original) Star Trek stars in Star Trek sequel

Showbizz 411 had this bit in their report from the Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol premire:

The next “Star Trek” installment, directed by J.J. Abrams, will have no members of the original cast. No Shatner, no Nimoy. No classic recipe Kirk, Spock, Bones, Scotty, Uhura, Chekhov or Sulu. The last “Star Trek” film featured Leonard Nimoy as Spock. But sources close to the next film, many of whom worked with Abrams on the new “Mission Impossible,” confirmed for me last night that none of the originals has been invited back this time. “MI4″‘s Simon Pegg, who now plays Scotty (original Scotty, James Doohan, is in space heaven now with original Bones, DeForrest Kelly), quipped, “That would involve time travel. And if the real Scotty showed up, that would be something.”

As for the actors themselves, Leonard Nimoy has said on a number of occasions that he does not expect to return for the sequel and he feels that he has passed the baton to Zachary Quinto and the new crew. As for the rest of the original Star Trek crew, all (especially Shatner) would love to get a chance to suit up again.

As noted by TrekMovie before, many crew members (in addition to the producers) of the fourth Mission movie are also working on the Star Trek sequel, however this report is from an unnamed source so should be treated as rumor.

Leonard Nimoy in 2009 "Star Trek" – report says he and his fellow original series stars will not be seen in the sequel

POLL: Do you want an original star in Star Trek sequel?

Want classic Trek actor in Star Trek sequel?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...



1. Tom - December 20, 2011

Hopefully Bob can shed some light

2. Tom - December 20, 2011

Isnt Shatner doing a one man show for 15 weeks? That would pretty much tie him up for most of the shooting schedule. So it seems that this would be true at least for Bill

3. Tom - December 20, 2011

Anthony you are usually pretty solid in confirming or debunking reports like this. Any thoughts??

4. scifib5st - December 20, 2011

I think Nichel would make a great mother for Zoey

5. Dom - December 20, 2011

If the original cast appear in anything, it’ll need to be in animation (who wouldn’t like some DC Universe-style Treks?)

No, even though it was beyond wonderful to see Leonard Nimoy in ST09, the new cast was so good, he wasn’t really necessary to the film.

6. Adam C - December 20, 2011

Reboot Q to delete this timeline :)

7. Dee - lvs moon' surface - December 20, 2011

I voted…”No – time for new crew to go it alone”…

:-) :-)

8. Captain Hackett - December 20, 2011

Future Star Trek movies belong to new crew, period.

9. Captain Hackett - December 20, 2011

And…. NO SHAT!

10. bill hiro - December 20, 2011

“original Scotty, James Doohan, is in space heaven now with original Bones, DeForrest Kelly”

That’s a tad flippant, isn’t it? Those were real people with real families who have had to grieve and suffer their loss. Why not just say they’ve “passed away” instead of the smart ass-ier “in space heaven”? That’s so tacky and cheap. To say nothing of the fact that they couldn’t bother to spell DeForest Kelley’s name right.

11. Paul B. - December 20, 2011

#1 – What is there to shine light on? From the start, everyone involved in the films has been pretty clear that there was no plan to use original cast in the sequel, and this report confirms that. Nimoy has been clear that he doesn’t plan to return. Orci and Abrams have been clear that this isn’t going to continue the first film’s story directly and that they didn’t plan to use Nimoy’s Spock in this one.

Seriously, I’m sure Bob (since you’re on a first-name basis with him) has better things to do than “shine light” on an old, standing, unsurprising, and repeatedly confirmed story: No original cast in the sequel.

12. Tom - December 20, 2011

11 Paul B

Sorry I offended you Paul. As for Bob I did not mean to offend either. Isnt that what he posts as?

13. Chris H. - December 20, 2011

Agree completely with #11.

This is not news.

14. Brian K - December 20, 2011

Relax bill, I found no offense in that, I thought it was pretty affectionate. I would have referred to it as “Trek Heaven” though……

15. Paul B. - December 20, 2011

#12 – Sorry if I came across rough there. I just get aggravated at this idea that Bob Orci (and others) is supposed to be on call to clarify every little thing for us, as so many people posting seem to assume. So, when I saw you suggesting that he should shine light on something that seems painfully clear, I snapped. Sorry ’bout that.

Maybe I should have left it at the question: What’s he supposed to shine light on?

16. Magic_Al - December 20, 2011

It may not be news but it is a milestone. This will be the first Star Trek movie in which none of the main cast carried over from a Star Trek television series.

Shatner’s baton-passing appearance was Generations. It could have been better but that was it.

17. Viking - December 20, 2011

I suppose this puts to bed the question, ‘To Shat, or not to Shat?’

18. Viking - December 20, 2011

Of course, this doesn’t exclude an appearance by Bakula, who would be still riding Scotty ass for beaming Porthos the Third into the middle of an asteroid…………!

19. Tom - December 20, 2011

15 Paul B.

.No sweat Paul. Since the report came from “unnamed sources” I just thought it should be challenged. It seems the sources were from the mission impossible team. So it is pretty easy to narrow down who they are talking about, I did come across as taking the trekmovie staff and Bob Orci for granted. Point taken

20. Matt - December 20, 2011

6. Adam C – December 20, 2011

I agree Adam. Nice to know that I’m not the only one who isn’t satisfied with the crap they are putting out know. A movie with Q would be great…the ideas/crew/ships would be endless.

21. jesustrek - December 20, 2011

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO…please back to Leonard Nimoy ;)

22. jesustrek - December 20, 2011


23. Matt - December 20, 2011

I’d rather have an animated trek series on tv and the actors from the previous treks can voice their parts. Lower production costs..easy for actors to do voice jobs..and we get our Trek back on tv.

24. - December 20, 2011

Great, end the Shatner speculation but leave us all hanging about whether Khan will be in the movie or not.

25. Dr. Cheis - December 20, 2011

Wouldn’t mind seeing Picard…

26. CarlG - December 20, 2011

@7, 8: Quite so.

27. Commodore Adams - December 20, 2011

GEEZE people, stop voting for original actors in the movie, Nimoy was nice but its time for Star Trek to move on. These new movies are the time for these young actors to shine, they don’t need hand holding or baby sitting. They have earned the right to do it on their own and I strongly believe there need be no cameos!

28. BeatleJWOL - December 20, 2011

They might slip Spock Prime into one of the last comics before the film, just to put a nice bow on that tied-up loose end, but otherwise this is fine by me!

29. El Chup - December 20, 2011

It doesn’t make sense to have anyone other than the big three feature in this reboot. I’m sorry fans of Takei, Koenig and Nicholls, but show-horning them in would service no purpose other than gratuitous fan masturbation and wouldn’t fit quietly into the story.

As for Shatner, I feel his appearance should’ve come in the last movie. It made some sense to have an appearance with him in some way along with Nimoy since the timelines of old and new crossed. But, again, to have him in the sequel seems gratuitous and makes little sense from a filmaking point of view. The same applies to Nimoy as well. His role in the first movie was clear, but an appearance in the second would be largely pointless It would really service no purpose other than to tell the audience that Star Trek just can’t move past the original cast.

I am the biggest fan of TOS, so much so that I even resented TNG when it first debuted. The reboot is hard for me to fully accept because for me the style of the TOS series & movies is very different from the Abramsverse and the recasting is something that I am not comfortable with to this day. Shatner et al were Kirk and Co and anyone else still feels like an cheap immitation. That is not to say that the new cast are in any way poor talent, but I just feel that once you don’t have the TOS actors’ personalities in these characters then the actual characters aren’t the same. For me, when I watch the Abrams movies, I treat it as if I am watching an entirely different crew (which, from a certain point of view, they are).

But, at the end of the day, no matter how much love I have for the TOS crew, there is a new set of actors and it would be nothing short of insulting and patronising for the studio to keep wheeling out the old guys. By the time this next picture comes out most of the cast will around the same age as the TOS actors were in 1966. Hell, to put things into further perpective, all of the TNG cast and several of the DS9 cast are already older than the TOS crew were when they made Star Trek VI. Do people realise how insulting it is to them for the studio to effectively say that the new cast can’t go it alone, but rather still need to have octoganerian actors to hold their hands?

I’d love to see one more adventure for MY Captain Kirk & crew. But the time has now passed. It’s time to let go.

30. Sebastian S. - December 20, 2011

Let the new cast get out from under the classic cast’s shadow and spread their own wings a bit…


31. NuKhan? - December 20, 2011

I said long ago under a different handle and I still think that aside from Q, the only oldTrek character who could, given JJ’s new rules on time travel, return and have a logical reason to be there in-story, would be Ben Sisko…namely from a time after the DS9 series finale, while he was up in the Wormhole with The Prophets…they being non-liner and extra dimensional.. either that or a cameo by Scott Bakula as an elderly Jonathan Archer, or Jolene Blalock as an elderly T’Pol (assuming she wasn’t on Vulcan when it…as Beavis and Butthead would say, ‘got sucked into a giant bunghole in space’ (and yes that is what that black hole effect came out looking like LMAO)…of course they could bring in Whoopi Goldberg as Guinan…:)

32. NuKhan? - December 20, 2011


33. The Unknown Poster - December 21, 2011

I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again about getting Shatner back in Star Trek (and I’ll quote Sarek): Do it now. While there’s still time.

One say, life will intercede and end the debate for good.

Would it be better to save Shatner for a later film? Ofcourse. But time is of the essence here.

I dont care how they do it. I dont care if it’s time travel (which is always a big seller despite people’s qualms about ‘going there’) or a temporal rift or Q snapping his fingers and making it so.

Quite honestly, the fact they’d have to “explain” Generations would be easily answered in one of two ways: 1) Nimoy’s Spock explains it to Pine’s Kirk (and this the audience) or the story is a grander time epic featuring Picard who explains it (and can use “flashbacks” in the form of Holodeck).

Just get it done. I want to see Shatner as THE James T Kirk on screen one last time before it’s too late.

34. El Chup - December 21, 2011

@ 31 – None of those are ever likely to happen.

@ 33 – The time has already passed. I find it a bit dissapointing that you are so desperate to see an 81 year old Captain Kirk that it really doesn’t seem to matter to you whether or not it makes sense or has a positive or negative impact on the movie.

35. MJ - December 21, 2011

I must say, those of us who have been arguing for several years to not have Shat in the new Trek movie have finally prevailed here. I can remember a poll just 1.5 years ago where still a majority of Trek fans were in favor of Shat having at least a small role. I think Harry, myself and others have finally made our case stick here with Trek fans, and we’ve definitely changed a lot of minds here with our sound reasonings on not including Shat in the sequel.

36. Eric S - December 21, 2011

“Gary Mitchell, please report for duty at Enterprise Boarding…Attention, Gary Mitchell…”

37. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 21, 2011

We won’t see Gary Mitchell in the sequel because he died in the comic retelling/re-imagining of that TOS episode.

38. Mike Thompson UK - December 21, 2011

Shatner should have been in the last one. What they had written for him.

However at the time of watching, the new cast were so good together I thought then its time they went ahead alone. Warp 2

39. Greenberg - December 21, 2011

go on then, have a cry about something that’s completely non-offensive and innocuous. Make the internet impossible to wade through for those of us with a spine.

40. Jay - December 21, 2011

I’m fine with only the ST09 crew, but I’d love a cameo of sorts for Bakula/Archer though.

41. Rob - December 21, 2011

@ NuKhan?:

The Beavis reference is Wonderful.

And I think that if they decide that Trek 13 is going to be the last one with the current reboot cast, then they should bring in Spock Prime, and Bat-S#it crazy Avery Brooks, and Admiral Archer, and Shatner if he’s still alive and kicking, and gay Takei and anyone else who wants to participate, for a three hour time and reality hopping adventure. Might as well.

42. Lope de Aguirre - December 21, 2011

I would hvae loved to see Nimoy again as Spock Prime.

Besides him, I only would have enjoyed actors of TNG or DS9 but portraying other characters (Patrick Stewart, Jeffrey Combs, Marc Aliamo, J.G. Hertzler…).

43. The Unknown Poster - December 21, 2011

#34 – Clearly I dont think the time has passed. It’s not desperation on my part. It’s simply the fact I understand why many people want a movie without him but I can see a time when that will change and by then it will probably be too late.

I also agree that the part they wrote for him before would have been as close to perfect as we could get and I wish he had done it. One can hope they eventually film it and put it in on some special edition release sometime in the future.

I just think Shatner would sell and would be a great “moment” for us long time fans. It’s only a negative if it’s done poorly. I would, ofcourse, want it done right.

44. Schultz - December 21, 2011

Phew! Thank God. No original Star Trek actors! Thank you! I have nothing against Spock Prime returning one day, if Nimoy agrees to star, but enough with the time travel and crossing into alternate universes, okay?

45. Christopher Roberts - December 21, 2011

I was watching the Captains documentary last night and think its a shame there’s no chance of Shatner appearing in Trek 2013. Bakula too actually.

Any chance they could create that scene which was written for the Trek 2009, while there are sets standing? Pine’s Kirk with that hologram greeting, handed to him by Nimoy Spock? They could then re-release the film with allsorts of other tweeks for the fanbase and do a limited run at the cinema, in the months leading up to the sequel. Or a expanded cut on Blu ray/DVD.

46. VZX - December 21, 2011

I for one am glad that the original actors will not be in it, and I am not alone. According to the poll, it looks like the choice “NO” is leading by 59%.

It would be stupid to have Shatner in it at this point. I do hope for Nichelle Nichols to do the computer voice, though.

47. NuKhan? - December 21, 2011

@34 ahem…I know they’re very unlikely..I was merely saying that theoretically speaking JJ’s time travel rules severely narrow the THEORETICAL pool of people to pick from for a cameo/role IF that were to occur, and before you say it was offtopic or irrelevant, re-read the poll choices.

48. Danpaine - December 21, 2011

Not really news at all, I agree. As much as I love the original crew, their time has truly passed.

Though it could have been better with *much* better writing in a couple of cases (ahem, Generations), it was a good run.

Do it right, kids. You’re carrying the ball now.

49. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - December 21, 2011

Long Live the Shat.

50. Tom - December 21, 2011

45 Christopher Roberts

I totally agree. It would be a nice way to get Shatner and Nimoy involved without infringing on the new cast. They usually invite people to the set and could be done while the sets are up. However i dont know what the cost would be in terms of getting them to do it , but do know it would surely be a pure gem of a bonus feature on a blu ray /DVD.

51. Damian - December 21, 2011

I think this is the right move. Kelley was there to pass the baton to the Next Generation, just as Nimoy was there for Star Trek (2009). It’s time to move on. Really, the only cameo that would possibly work without some weird time travel, space warp, wormhole theory would be Scott Bakula as Archer. That’s really the only case where you could slip him in for a moment and not have to have some convuluted explanation why he is there. I think that’s unlikely (the only reason I can think of would be if Bob Orci was as dissappointed with “These Are The Voyages” as many Enterprise fans and wanted to give him a proper send off).

52. portho's bitch - December 21, 2011

Sadly Spock prime is a bit of a “catch 22″ somehow you have to eliminate him from the mix or else he is the all-knowing sage of advice…… AAlthough I’d love a moment between Spocks regarding Khan…much like new Spocks comment regarding Kirk’s giving Nero a chance at being rescued in ST2009.

53. VOODOO - December 21, 2011

At some point I would at least like to know Spock prime’s fate. Hopefully in their third film they can get Shat and Nimoy and maybe Patrick Stewart back one last time.

54. Dovile - December 21, 2011

Me too, I’d love a cameo with Scott Bakula as Archer, as he’s supposed to be still around there somewhere as an admiral.

Also I’d like to see T’Pol just to make sure she wasn’t on Vulcan when it … you know:) I liked her on Enterprise, and the series didn’t say much what happened to her later, it would be interesting to find out. As a Vulcan, she’s long-lived anyway, so no explanation would be needed. As the first Vulcan to serve with humans etc, she should be someone quite important among her people by now.

I love the original cast, but I too don’t see a way to bring them in without convoluted explanations. NN for the new computer voice would be great though.

The only other character I’d like to see and who wouldn’t need a lot of explanation, would be Q. He’s omnipotent, so he can go to whatever time or timeline he likes. I’d love to see J. de Lancie as Q, I don’t know if anyone else could play him so well.

55. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 21, 2011

Yes, I am all for seeing Scott Bakula come back in a little cameo as Admiral Archer. That could work.

Spock prime is busy helping rebuild a new Vulcan homeworld. He should remain silent about what he knows. It pertains to the alternate universe he came from and may or may not that much relevance as to what might happen in the universe he is in now.

The person who could have the biggest problem with such knowledge is the young Kirk. If he *knows* too much and comes across a situation that appears to be so similar, if not identical, to what prime Spock has told him, he would easily find himself hamstrung when it comes to making important decisions and constantly be second-guessing what the other Kirk did or didn’t do in such a situation. A commander simply can’t function properly in those circumstances and I think that prime Spock should be more than aware of this difficulty.

It also places a totally unreasonable burden on the shoulders of the young Kirk, when it comes to Starfleet questioning his orders and actions, given what they may have been told about the other Kirk’s performance. The two Kirks may be the same people, but they are living in a different time and space.

56. Bringbacktrekagain! - December 21, 2011

I think it shouldn’t be about singling out who ‘should’ be back in a Trek movie from the original TOS cast, I think it would be awesome to have all of them, the one’s that remain come back …it would be seen merely as a tribute.

57. Allenburch - December 21, 2011

The poll does not offer the option I would vote for:

Yes – Nimoy and Shatner

58. DS9 IN PRIME TIME - December 21, 2011

I do have to say that I am excited for the new crew to boldly go on there own but a part of me longs to see the original crew as they are the ones we grew up with. I am torn in half.


59. Red Dead Ryan - December 21, 2011

Yeah, at one point I did want Shatner in the sequel, but I changed my mind as the movie kept getting delayed. I finally decided that after a space of four years in between films its finally time to stop the baton passing and get on with the new adventures with the new cast.

That said, I always knew from the start that Shatner would NOT be in the sequel, because he’d want a fairly big role, and Abrams isn’t the one to be appeasing the fanboys.

60. Factchecker - December 21, 2011

Disappointing….was hoping to see more with Nimoy.

61. Alice - December 21, 2011

I’m actually glad that there will be no prime universe characters in the sequel. I loved Prime Spock in the previous movie and his inclusion tied the two universes brilliantly but it’s time to move on! Bring new characters and new adventures! I wouldn’t mind the original cast or the cast of TNG to have cameos as different characters/aliens but to reprise their old roles wouldn’t do the sequel any good! It’s time for the franchise to move on.

62. Steve - December 21, 2011

If JJ and crew don’t put out a film that FINALLY cuts the cord to all previous Trek, the rebooted franchise is just never going to take off as it deserves. I’ve been a hardcore Trek fan for 40+ years, and I believe we’re the ones that dragged the franchise down over time. Trek never soared like the Star Wars franchise, because Trek pandered too much to the fan base. That’s why the films were all just minor successes, and the TV series were fairly low-rated syndicated fares (none would’ve survived more than one season on the major networks…) Honestly, it’s amazing that it survived the way it did.

But now that Berman and company are finally gone, and JJ is at the helm, there’s finally hope. They put out by far the best Trek movie ever made, and actually pulled in fans who wouldn’t have been caught dead going to a previous Trek movie. So, just say NO to Khan, cameos from previous actors, or any other remake of previous timeline stories. Let’s get excited for something NEW!!!

63. Starbase Britain - December 21, 2011

The boat was missed with the 2009 film on getting both shatner and nimoy in.

Its a great shame because it would have been wonderful to see them both again as kirk and spock even in a flash back/hologram sequence.


64. Alice - December 21, 2011

#62 I completely agree!

65. William Kirk - December 21, 2011

No Shatner, no money from me :-)

66. Graham Laurie - December 21, 2011

I won’t be parting with my cash either if Bill Shatner isn’t in it. Wasn’t impressed with Abrams’ 2009 “Dude where’s my Starship?” effort and I think the next one will be just as bad. Chris Pine is a VERY poor replacement for the Mighty Shat. Only performances that gained pass marks for me were Zach Quinto (Spock), Karl Urban (McCoy) & Zoe Saldana (Uhura), the rest of them were lamentable and I say that as someone who rates Anton Yelchin very highly as an actor having been impressed by his performances in “Terminator: Salvation” & “Fright Night”. Anton is a great Kyle Reese & Charlie Brewster, but a poor Pavel Chekov.

67. NuKhan - December 21, 2011

@41… Ummm bats*it crazy Avery Brooks? Exactly where do you get THAT insult from? And gay Takei? Was that a homophobic slur aimed at Takei? DF?

68. Kev-1 - December 21, 2011

Not really news because I’m sure very few people expected Nimoy to return, and far fewer any Shatner role. If Paramount were going to do anything with the TOS cast, it should have been something resolving Kirk’s disappearance from the 23rd century (no way Spock would not have returned the rescue favor); would have made a great TV special. But looking back, we’re lucky we got any more orig. TOS Trek at all, for which I’m grateful.

69. Jack - December 21, 2011

62. Agreed.

63. I get fans wanting to see them together again. But, heck, we could have been mad that Nimoy didn’t take a (cameo) part in Generations. And, even that hologram fanwan… er, scene that was reportedly written didn’t have the two of them together (Shat’s Kirk was long dead). Yeah, anything is possible — so there could have been a musical dream sequence, I guess… (some good words rhyme with Spock).

Trek VI was a graceful goodbye.

And, it’s not like any of the original cast members are recluses who we’d be amazed to see again after a long absence from the public eye — they all get as much press (or more) in their 70s and 80s as anyone in these new Trek flicks does now.

70. Cervantes - December 21, 2011

While I knew it was unlikely that Shatner was ever going to get a moment in this sequel after his exclusion from the first reboot, it’s still disappointing to have this confirmed.

Pity we couldn’t have seen him paired with Nimoy one last time during the first one, and even that neat ‘unfilmed’ cameo scene would have been something.

However, my biggest bugbear with the movie series remains the onscreen travesty that is ‘Prime Kirk’s’ GENERATIONS death due to a ‘buckled bridge’, and the fact that Picard was then seen to simply leave his body covered in rocks. Even if Kirk had been seen to be taken/transported somewhere for a full-blown ‘send-off’ by Starfleet – befitting the stature of someone who’d saved it so many over the years – then it might have seemed a more satisfactory conclusion to the movie for me and others. As it stands, the whole way it was handled sticks in my craw.

However, there is a way I can currently discard that particular movie as it stands. I’ve mentioned in the past that there is a ‘fan edit’ of it called ‘Kirk-less Generations’ available that mainly concentrates on the NEXT GEN crew…and while it might be a better alternative than the original in certain ways, it’s not quite the answer I was looking for. There’s a trailer for it on Youtube though, and it’s worth seeking out online.

However, I’ve got my own fully worked-out total recut of GENERATIONS ending ready to incorporate into a ‘fan edit’ of my own now…as I’ve found that it’s actually possible to re-arrange certain footage so that not only can ‘Prime Kirk’ be seen to continue to LIVE ON in the movie…but that he can also be seen to do so with a certain satisfactory fun and panache…

I hope to make this available some time next year for others who may be interested, and will give everyone a heads up about it when the time comes. ‘Prime Kirk’ LIVES!

71. Cervantes - December 21, 2011

And even Picard then comes out of it better, of course…

72. Thomas - December 22, 2011

68. Kev-1

There’s nothing to really resolve from the 23rd-century perspective. At that point, they didn’t understand anything about the Nexus, so they had no idea Kirk had been literally swept to a place beyond spacetime. Besides the destruction of the two El-Aurian ships, a sizable portion of the Enterprise-B’s engineering section had been blasted away, leaving Starfleet to come to the very reasonable conclusion that Kirk had died. Certainly Scotty and Chekov had no reason to believe Kirk was alive anywhere, considering what happened.

73. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - December 22, 2011

There was no L.A. premier for Ghost Protocol

74. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - December 22, 2011

There was no L.A. premiere for Ghost Protocol. The only U.S. premiere was Tuesday nights Premiere screening in New York

75. MJ - December 22, 2011

@73 @74

Dude, it’s been all over the U.S. in IMAX since last Friday already. Read the papers! :-)

76. The Unknown Poster - December 22, 2011

Generations failed due to a terrible plot device and very illogical story telling. Really nothing made sense. Guinan recognized the Borg in TNG but no one from her species bothered to tell the Federation about it? Come on…

I’d be up for an Archer cameo though it was stated in the Prime timeline he died the day after the Enterprise was commissioned…since I’m far too lazy to look it up, did the changed timeline impact the comissioning date of the big E?

Also, T’pol serving at Archer’s side in his final days would make sense and be a “valentine” to the fans that wouldnt need any explanation to the general audience.

77. Damian - December 22, 2011

76–In the prime timeline, the Enterprise was launched in 2245 with Captain April. In the altered timeline it was about 10 years later. Scott mentioned Admiral Archer (which Bob Orci has stated is the same Jonathan Archer from Enterprise), but it was never clearly stated if Archer was still alive at that point of time when Kirk and Spock met up with Scott.

For me, I’d wouldn’t mind a brief scene with Archer and Scotty making amends, if for no other reason that Archer never seemed the type to hold a grudge forever. Maybe one where Archer would tell him he reminds him of another engineer he knew.

78. Damian - December 22, 2011

76–Also, it was indicated in Voyager that certain people in Starfleet were aware of the Borg, but they were unable to learn much more about them, probably because the Borg made very few visits to the Alpha Quadrant until Q sent the Enterprise to the Delta Quadrant. There’s a pretty good article in Memory Alpha about the history of the Borg.

79. Tom - December 22, 2011

Although this seems to be consistent with what we have been hearing, has it actually been confirmed with any certainty? Anthony still has this filed under rumor

80. Chain of Command - December 22, 2011

I hate how incredibly ignorant some of these articles are from these other sites. “original Scotty, James Doohan, is in space heaven now with original Bones, DeForrest Kelly”. To me that’s not funny or even remotely clever. It just sounds like an idiot trying to be journalist. I mean, seriously, who writes like that? It’s like when De Kelley died and there were articles titled; “I’m dead, Jim.” Seriously? How respectful.

81. Kev -1 - December 22, 2011

72- Thomas. I have to respectfully disagree. I think Spock could have figured out the Nexus in between 3-D chess moves, with time to spare. Even in ST2009, in advanced age, he solved transwarp beaming like some people cook up lunch. LLAP.

82. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 22, 2011

Spock prime did not solve the transwarp beaming equation. He knew the formula that the older prime Scotty had spent many years working on.

Yes, I think that the (papz) media can be flippant and disrespectful in the way they report *facts* sometimes. More often than not, I have an impression now that the media are actually reporting rumour and fantasy and making it appear as *factual*. However I thought that was where James Doohan, DeForest Kelley and Gene Roddenberry’s ashes are now, floating in space *heaven*.

83. Lanny J. Luttrell - December 22, 2011

Star Trek
The Last Trek, Trip, Voyage.
Kirk has to be rescued from Chal before an asteroid destroys it.
Kirk doesn’t want to leave his dead wife behind, and no one knows where his son Joseph is, or do they?

84. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - December 22, 2011

75 re read my post, i said premiere. the original article said,
“A new report cites a source (presumably attending the LA premiere of Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol)” I was letting Anothny (who wrote the original article) that there was not a L.A. premiere of Ghost Protocol, I would know, I would have been working at it had there been one.
Hence I was indicating to Anthony that the source he mentioned in the article didn’t get it at the L.A. premiere cause there was not one in L.A.

Further more on Monday night there was a M.I. event in new york that was billed as the U.S. premiere, even though the movie had opened nationwide on IMAX last Thursday night.

try reading posts before responding to them

85. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - December 22, 2011

edit button would be nice should have read
Further more on Tuesday night there was a M.I. event in New York that was billed as the U.S. premiere even though the movie had opened nationwide on Imax last Thursday night.

86. captain kirk - December 23, 2011

why they just make a flash forward scene, in which shatner plays an older captain kirk in the distant future. with his grand children telling his exploits as a young captain of the enterprise many years earlier? The movie it self can serve as a flashback story while old kirk is being interviewed by a news reporter or someone. This premise would not require time travel. Just a look ahead to what the time change did to the future. Remember what changes the past , alters and changes the future. It is amazing none of you would consider this or how the alterations in time affected the future, especially in the next generations timeline.

87. Indy - December 23, 2011

I agree, they did the same thing to harrison ford, when he played an older indiana jones in the year 1950 in an episode of the young indiana jones chronicals tv series years ago. The episode was called mystery of the blues. I know this cause I got that episode on dvd.

88. captain kirk - December 23, 2011

why they just make a flash foward scene in the future shoing an older kirk. this premise would not require time travel, just a look ahead at what the change in the timeline has done. Especially in the next generations timeline. this would involve shatner” kirk being interview by a news reporter or someone. He tells of his exploits of his much younger days as a young of enterprise. Harrison Ford did the same thing years ago playing an older indiana jones in 1950. On one episode of the young indiana jones chronicals tv series. The episode was called mystery of the blues. I know this cause I got it on dvd, as well as other episodes of this tv series.

89. billyboy - December 24, 2011

Glad they’re not having any of the old actors reprise their roles in the next film. If it’s a new “alternate timeline” it needs to stand on its own and establish something different from the prime timeline. I wouldn’t mind giving some of the veteran Trek actors a little cameo role as a different character as a “wink” to the fans (Ethan Philips brief appearance as the holographic maitre’d in ST: First Contact being a perfect example). I wish Michael Dorn had played a non-Worf character in the last one, it had been a bit of a tradition to find a way to fit him into every Trek movie since Star Trek VI.

Since there were no nods at DS9 or VOY in Star Trek 2009, my vote would be to give a regulars from one of their casts a cameo in the next film (maybe Jeri Ryan as a bitchy orion waitress, or Armin Shimerman as some burnt-out low-level bureaucrat at starfleet command)

I also wouldn’t mind using younger versions of TOS-DS9-VOY characters if they’re played by NEW actors (i.e. we meet Dr. McCoy’s girlfriend, Emony Dax, and she gets 1 line), but nothing too blatant. And hell NO to Scott Bakula as a 150 year old “Admiral Archer”. I don’t care if it was already established he lived a long time and made Admiral, that distracts way too much from the story and I never liked Bakula as Archer anyway. He was great in Quantum Leap but lousy in Enterprise, IMO. I don’t want ANY of the old actors playing their prime universe characters in this movie. And who the heck wants to see Bakula covered in latex and hobbled over in a walker? At least DeForest Kelley was a natural at playing a cranky old man.

90. Baroner - December 24, 2011

Not having Shatner reprise his role as one of the greatest characters ever created, one last time before he FREAKIN’ DIES, is a DISGRACE.

We owe over 45 years of ST to this guy. ST is what it is because of him and Nimoy. The franchise has been revived in stellar fashion and we now need to pay homage to the REAL JTK. Cutting him from this film so that the new jacks can “go it alone” is asinine. Work him in somehow! It will be cool and it will be the right thing to do.

91. Tom - December 25, 2011

90 Baroner

Well said!

92. Graham Laurie - December 25, 2011

Here here Baroner, Rick Berman & JJ Abrams, the destroyers of Star Trek!!!

93. Keachick - rose pinenut - December 26, 2011

#92 – No, the only people destroying Star Trek, or at least my enjoyment of it in all its incarnations, are people like you, forever bitching and slagging off the various producers who have brought Star Trek to our big and small screens.

94. Trent Fenwick - December 28, 2011

There will never be a consensus with Trek fans, some love the originals and some love the new generation, I like most of it. My personal feelings are that it would be nice to see Bill in a Star Trek movie one last time before he die’s
a little homage to the original Kirk.

95. Baroner - January 4, 2012

#94 speaks the truth. I disagree with #92, although I do personally think that anyone responsible for writing the unspeakably horrid death scene for Kirk in Generations should be strung up for that misstep alone.

96. jon smith - February 1, 2012

JJ has already develoed the story arc. Movies are planned through 2016. These films are an INTENTIONAL change of timeline by the original Spock. The idea is to have a 4 movie arc that climax with kirk (played by shatner) remembering his times aboard the enterprise during the dedication speech at the end of his career. Spoke changed time to bring his friend back to life. JJ was also VERY Close to using the shatnerverse novels and using the films to make them cannon, but decided against it becuase of the continuity aspect and wanting to have a “clean slate” for the newer generation..thrusters on full.. is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.