Things were a bit quiet from the Shatner camp since his odd ‘gas’ statement a few weeks back, but now he is again talking up JJ Abrams and Star Trek XI. Shat is promoting his new gameshow ‘Show Me The Money’ but interviewers always get around to asking about Trek. The Shat tells UGO
I met with Mr. Abrams, and they’ve got a really good plot going, and they’re trying to find Mr. Spock and Captain Kirk, the elderly ones. How you get a dead Captain to communicate with himself, younger, is going to be a very arduous plotting, and I’m going to be interested to see how they solve it.
MeeVee and Zap2It also appear to have ‘new’ interviews with Shatner, but his answers are so similair it is possible they are based on a conference call with each reporter recording it slightly differently. TV Guide’s full interview (which was previewed last week) seems to be unique to them and Shatner talks a bit more about JJ and being dead…
TVGuide.com: Have you had the opportunity to talk to J.J. Abrams about the new Trek film he’s doing?
Shatner: I had a long talk with him, yeah. He’s going to morph Spock into Kirk — I’m starting that rumor.TVGuide.com: Who would you cast as the young Captain Kirk?
Shatner: I think it’s essentially uncastable.TVGuide.com: Unless you could get Jesus Christ.
Shatner: Or Moses. But Moses would have to shave.TVGuide.com: Might J.J. keep the door open for you to cameo in the film?
Shatner: I don’t know how they’re going to do that. I’m dead…. It’s one of those science-fiction puzzles that needs to be worked out. [Chuckles]TVGuide.com: But you could be a different character, a "wisdom-filled elder."
Shatner: Well, now, I don’t know that either one of those things, "wisdom-filled" or "elder," is in me. The words do not resonate.TVGuide.com: You are looking pretty damn good in that new DirecTV/Star Trek commercial.
Shatner: They’ve got me CGI’d. I am doing [the new footage], but they’ve got a computer program trying vainly to make me look younger.TVGuide.com: What do you say to some fans’ concerns that this is the last we will see of you as Kirk?
Shatner: It’s possible….
Shatner seems a bit obsessed with this whole death thing. Of course he brought himself back to life in his own series of books so he knows it can happen. It is still more likely that Abrams would just set the scenes between STVI and Generations or cast Shat as the ‘wisdom filled elder’ in the TOS era…but as he says it is scifi so anything is possible. One thing is for sure, Shatner seems back on board the pro Abrams/Trek XI bandwagon…at least for now. Of course we all know what will be the determining factor…will JJ show him the money?
Shatner and Nimoy should be in this film as Kirk and Spock.
And Nicholas Meyer should polish up the script.
It appears Star Trek may indeed , *may* mind you, just infact be relevant again.
What can be said that hasn’t infact been said before on this subject?
Here’s my take on it.
To the naysayers, it’s a retroactive gimmick to bring life back into a sagging franchise.
To the proponents, it’s getting back to basics and finally rediscovering Trek.
One thing is for certain however, no two characters are more immediately identifiable to the Star Trek brand than James Kirk and Spock. Including the Enterprise.
It’s entirely possible Star Trek is after all dependant upon these core characters given the lukewarm mixed success of departures from the original. If that is the case, Star Trek’s overall run is synonymous with the mortality of Shatner and Nimoy, and as a brand is finally in it’s sunset years.
If not, and the concept can indeed survive beyond any single character or plot device, it would seem no writer has yet discovered that magic angle to transcend Star Trek above and beyond it’s own concept to make it universal.
It seems assembling a generic crew, slapping uniforms on them, giving them a Enterprise X variable ship, and throwing them in space isn’t what makes Star Trek resonate, so that formula is not Star Trek.
If we assume Star Trek has resonated in the pop culture mindset, much like a Sherlock Holmes, Star Wars, Frankenstein, or any other pop culture literary or motion picture classic, it would have to be identifiabilty with archetypical characters so eventually a reboot would be in order- every generation or so. The characters of Kirk, Spock, Bones et. al are stripped down to their core archetypical components and every generations new flavor takes over the reigns and “interprets” these characters for the sensibilities of that viewing generation, including all the nuances, slang, dynamics, and lexicon that defines the viewing generation.
If this Movie fails, it will speak volumes about the state of Star Trek. Literally.
No longer will sequel X continuing the adventures of characters X, Y, and Z be good enough to merit financing, so any continuing adventures with established characters won’t happen.
“Move Star Trek forward” has already been demonstrated to not work either, again, simply assembling a generic crew and putting them aboard whatever version of the Enterprise is high tech enough, thematically, conceptually, and artistically is no different than the failed experiment “Enterprise.” The audience didn’t relate.
So if I were in charge of the Star Trek brand, I would begin some studies into defining Star Trek. What does “Star Trek” mean anyway?
What general consensus can be arrived at to give meaning to the concept of Star Trek.
In many ways, Star Trek is a property and creation with identity crisis.
By trying to be all things to all people, it typically fails utterly. But as Nicholas Myer has rightfully observed, when Star Trek defines it’s genre and what it is aspiring to be, some of the more successful episodes and films are the result.
Star Trek cannot remain the nebulous, vague, ideological concept it may have been originally intended as, while it’s noble and nice with a beer in the woods, a mass audience doesn’t relate to such high brow philosophies unfortunately. That’s a sad reality of culture.
I think first and foremost, Star Trek has to stop fearing pissing the fans off. The fans have really brought nothing to the table in terms of Star Trek.
While we all enjoy pretending our devotion in time and dollars over the years has resulted in each of us personally being responsible for the longevity of Star Trek, in many ways, we are solely repsonsible for the current crisis Star Trek is enduring. These message boards have been a SPLENDID example of that I believe.
Infinate diversity in infinate combinations again is fine with a beer in the woods, but it doesnt sell tickets or fill seats.
I believe Star Trek has to first define itself again before it can go forward, and by defining itself risk alienating a certain segment of fandom, in favor of broadening it’s appeal to a mass audience..
To become viable, John and Jane X must have a casual interest in Star Trek.
For all those that attack George Lucas, like it or lump it, he did it his own way, and at the end of the day didn’t bow to a consensus.
While he may have made modifications to appease a very vocal minority, he didn’t really have to, it was arbitrary. His final stamp was “GEORGE LUCAS” approved.
Star Trek has to be the same way. There are too many chefs brewing too many broths, resulting in mediocrity and a mess. This serves NONE of our interests.
Why would it be MORE likely to set the film before Generations? That would be from a market standpoint–stupid.
To bring in Shatner, and NOT bring Kirk back post-Generations would be about as dumb as killing Kirk in the first place.
The draw of the movie is not seeing some young guy playing Kirk. It’s Shatner and Nimoy. The excitement and buzz comes from Shatner and Nimoy.
Shatner and Nimoy are older than they were when Generations filmed. It would be simply more entertaining to see Spock return the favor.
Generations stunk. Too many people want to see Kirk return and have that ride off into the sunset ending to ignore.
Bringing in Shatner and NOT addressing Generations is too Rick Bermanish.
Two parallel plots involving older and younger versions of Kirk and Spock. Bring back kirk.
Theres an even simpler solution.
“Jim, can you hear me?”
“Sp-Spock, what happened, where am I?”
“Sickbay. It would seem Dr. McCoy’s customary penchance for arriving at a favorable outcome on the positive side of random probability has infact served you particularly well on this occasion.”
“What?”
“You contracted a rather volatile case of Ghanliogonic-milofibriosis.”
“How long have I been out of it Spock? I had the most disturbing dream.
A bald Frenchmen perpetrating himself off as the Captain of the Enterprise had me killed on an alien planet for some empty cause. It was horrible.”
“Indeed. That most certainly sounds like a disturbing dream Captain.
Thankfully, that is all it was. ”
“Right. Time to return to duty, I’ll say one thing, there is nothing worse than illness induced dementia. Damn, that one was particularly bad.”
“There is only ONE Captain of the Enterprise Jim. It has always been the case, and it shall always be the case.”
Note – William Shatner to appear on “Planet Mancow” this Saturday Night (Nov. 18th), 9:00pm ET on the FOX NEWS Channel.
There’s no way that Shatner’s appearence or non-appearence in the film makes it any more or less “relevant” as a movie. Frankly, if the appeal of “Star Trek” is based on Shatner’s availability and enthusiasm then it will soon be over for good anyway — and if that’s the case, then it certainly should be.
To be honest…I really think that it would be lame to shoehorn Shatner and Nimoy into a new movie. There is always this promise of ‘fresh start’, but Hollywood doesn’t seem to have the guts to do it. I really don’t connect Shatner and Nimoy to the characters anymore. They’ve moved on and we really should too. Let some new blood take the stage.
Here’s a quote from a proposal to “re-imagine’ TOS that I think sums it up nicely:
“There’s a reason Star Trek: Classic worked. Not only did it convey a spirit of adventure, of optimism, of genuine heroism, the characters it utilized could not possibly be more iconic. They are classic, archetypal characters.
The warrior, the priest, the doctor…
– Kirk
– Spock
– McCoy”
If in fact some of you think that “Shatner and Nimoy HAVE to be in this film, or you’re nuts”, then that saddens me, because then I agree with DB:
Star Trek will be linked to the mortality of these two stars, and that means we won’t have any new movies/series for much longer.
#2 – Josh – Beautifully written!! (except that you know how I feel about certain segments of fans actually having some good ideas that are at times worth listening to)
#4 – Josh – Do you really think that using the infamous “Dallas dream sequence” will be satisfying to the intelligent film goer? Or were you being facetious?
>>“There’s a reason Star Trek: Classic worked. Not only did it convey a spirit of adventure, of optimism, of genuine heroism, the characters it utilized could not possibly be more iconic. They are classic, archetypal characters.
The warrior, the priest, the doctor…
– Kirk
– Spock
– McCoy”
This new movie can still put butts in seats without Shatner and Nimoy if it is done right. The formula is simple really…go back to what made Star Trek great. Keep things consistent, for example, don’t make an enterprise that looks more high tech than the one in TOS but rather use sublte improvements that match today’s movie making technology.
Nobody bought into “enterprise” because it didn’t match well with TOS. The uniforms resembled TNG and Voyager and the enterprise bridge had to many high tech gadgets and screens on it WHY!?
Berman and company didn’t get it.
Undo Kirk’s death bring in Spock and hey presto, thats the recipe for making love!
How did shatnet resurrected Kirk from the dead in his new book?
#12 – I AM NOMAD – Are you quoting the Harry Connick Jr. song? Great album… :)
#13 – Billy Bags – Check out wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_T._Kirk
Scroll down to the “Death and resurrection” section.
It is going to be post nexus.
Spock will save Kirk from the nexus. And the circle will be complete.
Kirk and Spock get to ride off into the sunset. While the younger versions of Kirk and Spock have a series of very hit films.
That is what the majority of the public wants from Star Trek.
BRING BACK KIRK + SPOCK!!!!!
Um boys.Kirk was BURIED then Picard laid a bunch of rocks on top of his gravesite.
Maybe they can swab the mouthpiece of one of his old communicators then clone him.
There were copies of Guinan in the nexus. There must be copies of Kirk.
Several people have mentioned what a poor plot device the nexus was. There are so many holes in the idea of the nexus. That Kirk could easily be written back in.
In case no one noticed…Shatner and Nimoy are OLD!
Don’t get me wrong, I love those guys but it’s time to move on.
Let this new guy cast new actors.
Swab the mouthpiece, LOL, love it! Or think of all the DNA he must have left in the various quarters of his female companions!
And speaking of being buried by rocks, in the previous Shatner thread, I referenced a “mystery” post that I saw, which then disappeared, (I swear on my sweet grannie’s resting place). I later found as I hit the back button on my browser the bugger was still in there, screen grab of which is here:
http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r195/lao3d/Picture7.jpg
Sounds a little far-fetched to me but stranger stuff has happened. I hope its not something like that, as there is so much more to be mined in the pre-five year mission history of these characters.
Jon,
Picard remained in the Nexus. He desired Kirk to come with him so “his” wish was granted. Everything in the later part of “Generations” is unreal. It all took place in the Nexus — I’ve heard this idea on several occasions.
Yes, the Nexus is a huge, huge plot hole – – –
— Just a thought
#21 – Lao3D – That’s not a bad idea… I presume that it’s Kirk pre-Generations then?
What are your thoughts?
And Anthony… why was that post removed? Too close to the truth?
I would be a little surprised if they went with this story. Like Star Trek II, it’s nice to build upon an existing episode, but I thought that they were going to reach out to new fans… this seems like it requires (or at least will have the most impact with) some prior knowledge of the series.
#24
“.. would be a little surprised if they went with this story. Like Star Trek II, it’s nice to build upon an existing episode, ”
So, instead of screaming “K-A-A-A-A-H-H-H-H-N!”, he’ll be screaming “G-A-A-A-A-A-A-R-R-R-R-R-Y!”
Of course, the clever plot device will be that Mitch tried to kill James **R.** Kirk, rather than James **T.** Kirk — or, maybe, he changed his middle name to throw-off the hunt by Mitch? “James R. Kirk?” “Starship Captain of U.S.S. Enterprise?” “You want to destroy him?” “Looks like me?” “Sorry…Got the wrong guy! That’s my evil twin — LOL!”
#25
“Da_ned transporter accidents, you know”
Maybe JJ is going to film some of Shatners novels…”The Return” was indeed an incredible story and presented us all Generations! Don’t forget the V’ger connection to “Star Trek: The Motion Picture”. After “The Return” Kirks character changed to a kind of logically thinking Spock, while Spock became more human. Too bad that DeForrest Kelley past away a few years ago. Berman and Paramount missed many chances.
John N. — 24 — exactly my thoughts. You can’t have half the audience scratching their heads going “Wait, when did that happen?” But if they are bound and determined to get Shatner and Nimoy back on screen, its a workable theory at least.
Actually, I’m pretty sure that post disappeared by some odd web glitch, but I love a good conspiracy theory!
Wow, that’s weird, I expected something more controversial? ;)
And come on, they killed Spock and brought him back, and to be frank, although, I was glad they did, it was somewhat initially disatifying… the Death of Spock in TWOK was one the most powerful scenes of the TOS film series, in my humble opinion. Kirk’s death in Generations… blegh! It totally sucked, and having it reversed bothers me none in the least. The fate of Trek XI(i hope there is no number officially) depends upon story and casting… it’s great that everybody loves Kirk/Spock but I hope production keeps in mind Dr.McCoy, etc. The triad should be cast together even if Dr.McCoy only shows up later. There was that other Doc Bryce(?) who I guess can go down like a red shirt… ;) It would be actually be nicer if the oldster versions of Kirk/Spock had a much meatier role than bookends, and perhaps have actually a more climatic punch if they have some sort of stake in the outcome of the past, somehow? Anyway, going with the Gary Mitchell angle… what if that wacky Nexus thing was a shock wave from the original Galactic Barrier(where in the heck did this idea originate? And I was never sure, if it meant as I thought, edge of galaxy, or in fact, Universe? Baffling, like Trek5 ;) ) Perhaps, at some conclusion, the oldsters Kirk/Spock must set out beyond the barrier? Really, I hope with all of the melodramatic possibilities, that we get some science fiction in there. With all the mysteries of our Universe… the expansion rate, dark matter(?), and the that particles are theorized to appear out of seemingly empty space(watching too much PBS,heh,heh) I really hoping we get something new posited, and not a POS nexus plot device… With all my railing against ST:TNG’s blandeness, at least, there was some new sci-fi ideas explored occasionally… at least until they hit the big screen, and don’t nitpick that, I know I might be wrong, the point is, it wasn’t memorable.
That’s what TREK XI needs to be; memorable, and not in a BAD way. ;-P
Amen to all that TomBot, especially about McCoy. He was always the straw that stirred the drink, so to speak. And some new science in the science fiction would be nice as well. But I’m not holding my breath…
How ’bout this for a Gary Mitchell scenario — He emerges, like the Vampire LeStat, from his rocky grave, vowing vengeance on the one who imprisoned him, only to find Kirk had already been killed during a cheesy fight scene in the California desert. Enraged, he resurrects Kirk with his god-like powers so he can kill him again. And again if there’s a sequel.
One thing I realized when I went to the “Wrath of Khan” screening in Hollywood last night… is that they NEVER should have brought Spock back. The death of Spock would have been a wonderful capper to the series… and would have spared everyone the embarassment of Trek III and the stereotyped characterizations of Trek IV… Here I am sounding like an old Fogey. :) Maybe I am. lol
Daren Doc, if there was not Spock past “The Wrath of Khan” then we would have never gotten “Reunifications: Part I and II” which were some of the most well-written trek ever. In that episode, Spock took on the characterizations of Kirk (cowboy diplomacy) and Picard was bestowed Sariks logic, making him more like Spock. Brilliant.
I’d love to see the return of Gary Mitchell. And I’m sure the “R” from James “R” Kirk in WNMHGB is on the “to do list” to be fixed in TOS:Remastered.
Seriously. Nimoy does not act anymore and Kirk is dead at the age Shatner is now. I would be happy to see them in a framing sequence or flash forward but they are not going to star in the movie.
Aren’t all TOS fans old fogeys, Daren?:)
It did cheapen his death and I never bought the whole quasi-religious katra hooey either. But I have to admit I was glad to have him back — god I’m such a hypocrite!
Wow… Daren… From your Tribble review I realized you were picky, but this is taking it to a new level.
I don’t think that I could ever get on board with the idea of leaving Spock dead. And while Trek III is not the best of the films, how can you call Kirk and his command crew throwing away their careers to rescue their friend ‘an embarrasment’?
Gp,
Some argue that never getting “Reunifications: Parts I and II” would be a vote for letting Spock stay dead… I remember watching those shows and getting all enthusiastic at Spock’s return at the cliffhanger ending of part I, then to be extremely disappointed at the, to my mind, dreary plodding plot developments and near sleepwalking acting by Mr. Nimoy in Part II. It looked to me at the time as just a cheap publicity gag by the studio to get the TNG fan base to go out and see Star Trek VI through a cursory connection between the two projects. I still hold that opinion.
And as to all TOS fans being old fogeys? Not if I have anything to say about it. lol I’m slowly endoctrinating today’s youth through the magic of the TOS Animated Series… :) It’s a gateway drug, to be sure… that’s how I got hooked. lol
The public won’t buy a convoluted storyline to accomodate an elderly Kirk’s return.This is all Trekkie hooey.
Face it guys .Kirk’s dead .That’s how he died.That’s canon.They need to make a movie from one of his adventures drawn from his younger days.
So here is my suggestion – since they’re bringing back Shatner’s Kirk, make it clear that Kirk is back from the dead by setting the framework portion of the story in the late 24th century, after the time of Kirk’s death on Veridian III (2371). Have Kirk in a post-Generations Starfleet uniform — the kind seen in the last three Trek films. Make a passing reference to the Enterprise E, or have a title card on the screen that established that the “older Kirk” part of the film takes place in, say, 2375 or 2379 (the “current” Next Generation time period). Anything to establish the date is AFTER Kirk’s death.
There’s no need to explain HOW Kirk came back from the dead– he’s known for cheating death after all. Leave that to the imagination of future story tellers.
And Shatner and Nimoy both look much older now, so the 24th century timeframe works better than pretending the framing portion of the film takes place, say, in the Classic Trek movie era.
It would be so simple—just a few lines of dialogue anywhere:
Use the lines that Spock used in Star Trek VI:
Officer: reacting to what seemed like a hopeless situation: “Then we’re dead.”
Kirk “I’ve been dead before.”
Or the line from Alien:
Officer: “I thought you were dead.”
Kirk: “I get that a lot.”
Or:
Spock: “Admiral… Jim… I am… pleased to see you again.”
Kirk, teasing: “Your quite logical relief that Starfleet had not lost a highly proficient captain, I suppose?”
Spock, almost a smile but not: “No. I have missed my captain, and my friend. It is… good to have you back.”
Just a few lines of dialogue, appropriate to the characters, and the fans are left with the knowledge that Kirk somehow escaped his fate on Veridian III and lives on, a hero, he and Spock reunited. Fans would be a lot more invested in the “Young Kirk,” knowing that he would continue to cheat death and thrive all those years later, rather than seeing the “new” young Kirk and knowing of his final, meaningless death on an unheard of planet. THAT might make sequels a little more likely as well.
The fans would love it.
What do you think, Mr. Abrams? Mr. Nimoy? Mr. Shatner?
I’m too busy doing power lunches to answer.
I’m too busy photographing busty naked women to answer.
I’m too busy rolling around in suitcases full of cash from my new gameshow gig. :)
Cool, I want to see Shatner and Nimoy as Kirk and Spock again.
Kirk and Spock are more identifible then then Enterprise?
That is a serious load of dingo’s kidneys.
It astounds me how many people on this site think that some unexplained, unrationalized, uncreative, throw away re-introduction of Kirk is a good idea.
It’s this blatant lack of regard for script, story, and innovation that will sink any film.
Yeah… the fans will love it. And the critics will pan it. Why? Because it’s lazy… because film critics HATE Deus Ex Machina.
And the masses will be swayed by the critics. And then it will be a commercial failure. And then… no more movies for who knows how long.
Now… having said that… if you want to devote the proper screen time to develop a resurrection STORY… to get the audience emotionally involved, then that’s another thing.
Ever wonder why people make bad decisions? It’s because they let one factor that they deem desirable to overwhelm all of the ofther factors that tell them its a bad idea.
That’s what’s happening in this forum. I would LOVE to have Shatner back as Kirk. But you guys are letting that cloud you into making a bad decision. The film would suffer from any of these “unexplained” plot holes.
Leaving it to your imagination worked for Hitchcock because he was playing on the element of fear and suspense. You don’t leave major plot holes unexplained. That just makes for a bad movie.
Think of it this way… Star Trek V… oh look… Spock now has a half-brother that was never mentioned before. Oh look… now we can cross an energy barrier that could never be crossed (I know it’s explained in the books… unfortunately, the film doesn’t pause for 10 minutes and prompt everyone to pull out their novelizations, turn o page 278 and please fill in this hole).
Good story telling? I think not…
What he said :)
lol… looks like we’re on the same page on this one… :)
I feel your pain John N. I’m a huge Trek fan, but I don’t need to see Kirk and Spock in a film again. I let that crew go with The Undiscovered Country….and I’ve been waiting for the creative forces behind Star Trek to do something new with the material ever since. The last time Star Trek really tried to do something new was with The Next Generation….Gene presented a more mature, responsible Star Trek, full of wonder. Next Gen used to have episodes that would send chills up my spine with the level of home and imagination put into them. Since then, the creative teams have just been trying to ‘go back’ and rehash everything all over again. They really don’t know how to make Star Trek grow into its next stage of development. Perhaps people should stop trying to resurrect Kirk, and instead try to resurrect Gene.
Good point New Horizon, the whole issue that happened with Trek after Gene Roddenberry passed on was that the stories moved away from the characters and more on the sci-gimmicks that can be used. Pre-circa 1991 the stories implemented notions and ideas of characters within the environment, where post 1991 the characters began to take the back burner and the concept of “what haven’t they been through before” came into play. Now, new and interesting subjects of plot are fine but when they begin to take more importance in the writing then to say “where are our characters now in their lives” then u lose the whole essence of Trek.
The fact of the matter is Shatner and Nimoy bring a ton of media attention to the project. They also bring a certain amount of credibility to the project. As well as help at the box office.
Their mere appearance elevates this film to the level of an event film. It also give the franchise a chance to introduce a new/young crew to carry on their legacy.
It makes sense on all levels.
It’s a no lose scenerio for the Star Trek franchise.