Shatner On Darfur, Halloween and Santa

In a new videoblog William Shatner discusses the real world connection for his latest Star Trek novel “Star Trek Academy Collision Course

And yesterday’s vlog discusses the famous Michael Meyers mask from the Halloween film series

And in a new interview with 411mania, Shatner discusses the book, his latest project ‘Stalking Santa’ (a mockumentary which he provides the narration), and how he picks his projects:

Tony Farinella: And my first question for you is after so many different roles on television and film, what still gets you excited? What gets your creative juices flowing after all these years?

William Shatner: Well, Tony, so many things. I’m, I think what an actor needs, or an entertainer in any of the various media, is a sort of childlike attitude of awe and wonder. And so as I move through the days and the week and the year, I find myself doing a variety of things that when they are finished and they have some success, I’m almost surprised.

I was mentioning “Exodus” as an example. It took two years to put this project together and issue the recording. I’ve done it myself, found a release, and it will be out there in Wal-Mart sort of thing, and it’s a really good performance of a, something that’s totally different, and it’s got a religious overtone, or a religious-historical overtone, and yet it’s entertaining.

I’ve got a book out there, a new book that’s coming out–a Star Trek book. It’s called “Collision”–“Academy–The Collision.” And it’s out there in the bookstores right now. A new Star Trek book dealing with the adolescents Kirk and Spock, and I started writing about a 17-year-old Jim Kirk and a 19-year-old Spock and took the Soldiers of Darfur, the tragedy that’s going there, the children soldiers, made them, updated them 300 years to a scourge that was happening then, and what the plans were going to be with Kirk and Spock adolescents.

That entertained me to tell that story. It entertained me to get this record going, and it’s entertained me to do this voice-over, this narration for “Stalking Santa.” So my year goes by, and you say, “Why pick that project?” and I sort of reverse the question and say, “Why not?” If I’ve got the time and energy, I like to do these variable things.

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments


interesting no pleas to be in StXI. but the hint that he still has the energy, and why not doa project.

“William Shatner: Good. Now you tell me how it’s going.”

I love this guy. :)

William Shatner IS Micheal Myers!

Maybe he should have been the new Dr. Sam Loomis in the Halloween remake instead of Soren.

At least we can say that Captain Kirk got his revenge on Soren, and in a much more gruesome fashion!

Omg! check out Sy Fy Portal site.

I can’t believe theres a Bring Back Kirk campaign

the site interview the organizer ….
and he said that some fans r getting ready to boycott the new film.

Hey thats a laugh about that mask,,

thats an interesting bit of trek triva.


Another story I saw on the IMB was about the filming of “Frankie and Johnny”

this is from the site,,,

# One scene called for actor Al Pacino to be “surprised” after opening a door.
Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country (1991) was filming in a nearby studio, so director Garry Marshall arranged for Kirk and Spock be on the other side of the door that Pacino opened.
( in full uniform)



It’s cool that Marshall would set that up. I love that guy. It’s also cool that Kirk and Spock would agree to hang around and do it.

I’m about 150 pages into “Collision Course.” Interesting so far.

#4 – I’ve known about that mask for ages, but I never connected the dots between it and Rob’s Zombie’s remake. That’s a hoot. :-)

#5 thanks just read the article, and there’s no quote from the campaign saying there’s a boycott. All the campaign manager has said is they arent behind anything. The guy who wrote the article mentions a boycott. There’s no quote from the suggesting anything. I get the newsletter and all the last one said was that there was a petition to sign to include him in the movie; not avoid it.

#9 I guess I misread it.

OOps! My bad. :/

Shat, no Shat, I don’t give a Shat. Yeah, I’d like to see Captain Ego in it along side the guy with the ears, but hey, I’ve been to every Trek movie on opening night since ST:TMP (I’d just gotten my driver’s license, and drove 15 miles to see it LOL).

Really. I’m not Shatting you. :D

I’m sorry, but I have a very hard time believing Shatner is anything more than a “creative consultant” on those Reeves-Stevens novels.

I imagine if it were a movie, the writing credits would read something like:

Story by William Shatner and Judith & Garfield Reeves-Stevens

Screenplay by Judith & Garfield Reeves-Stevens

As its my understanding Shatner brings quite a bit to the story stage, developing plot and characters with the Reeves-Stevenses, and then they basically go off and write it. So call it what you will, but I don’t think they just write abook and put Shatner’s name on it.

The PERFECT way to have a touch of Shatner in the movie is to have the Voice of William Shatner doing the “Space, the final frontier..” opening!

Spread the word!

Oh, and tell the boycotters that boycotting Trek is like boycotting an election. It guarantees that your side loses.

The Shatner voice over should have been at the beginning of every movie they made…as should have been the Alexander Courage theme.


Well, either he actually does write the books himself with Reeves-Stevens being the creative consultants, or you’re right and they put his name in big letters on the novels ALTHOUGH he’s just the creative consultant. The only conclusion to be drawn from the latter would be that Shatner’s name SELLS. This has already been proven by the copies of the books published (and sold) which bear his name.

I leave it to you which of the two scenarios causes more envy in you.

– Oh, and tell the boycotters that boycotting Trek is like boycotting an election. It guarantees that your side loses. –

In a democratic election, you can choose from different parties. If you decide not to elect, your vote is charged to the counterparty’s account. Here, we have only one party, one film, the audience is the elector and the counterparty at the same time. The choice is to go and see the film or to not go and see it. If you don’t go, your vote, your money will remain in your pocket and you will have remained true to yourself. That’s all and for me, it’s worth it.

#16 – Envy? I think not. Disgust, perhaps; cynicism, absolutely.

*LOL* So all he has to do is paint his face white and put on the grey jumpsuit,…


Michael Myers!

#4 DRE

LOL, I bet he’d have made a great Dr. Loomis in the remake…but he’d make for an even better ‘older Kirk’ in THIS upcoming re…re…remake!

Hey, I was just thinking it would be cool if they put Shatner in the movie. What do you guys think?

…Waitaminit! Shatner’s Jewish! What the frack does *he* know about Santa??? :) :) :) :)

The Shat needs to quit poundin’ down the burrito grande right before an interview.

17. Iowagirl

I think what 14. Dennis was getting at is that if you don’t go to Trek 08, and it doesn’t make the money that Paramount thinks it should make, then Kirk (Shatner or not) or anybody Star Trek related won’t be around for a long, long time.

I imagine this is what the internet would have been like in 1985. “Star Trek without Shatner? No one will watch it!”

The new Star Trek movie will suck.. I doubt any one gives a damn a about 2 very old actors that are seeking to make money over a franchise that has been run into the ground… however if there were a movie that involved .. TNG … Voyager…..DS9… with a way to bring in the “Enterprise crew”.. perhaps a trilogy like star wars… it would work… sorry shatner.. nimoy… your just putting the studio in a deficit

#24 doubleofive

Thanks for your point. But I think that’s basically what it’s all about. Either STXI will make the same money with or without the boycotters, then the result will be an individual one as stated in my previous post, or Paramount will make less money without the boycotters, then the boycotter’s success will be even bigger because they will have sent out the right message, the right signal. If this actually means that there won’t be sequels or anything, well, the people responsible for this film should have premeditated. Personally, I think it will be more like what I said in my first post, but if the boycotters are actually able to influence something – so much the better.

#24 you have hit the nail on the head. If this movie fails, I doubt we will se any Trek for a decade or more.

Iowagirl, I am curious, are you actually hoping Star Trek dies?

I think you are actually hoping Studio Execs are smart enough to figure out that they were boycotted and risk yet another failure to try to make a better movie. Won’t happen. Berman and company went as far as they could, but people didn’t go see the movies enough to justify another. The only reason THIS movie is being made is because of JJ. I promise you, if this one tanks, there will be no more for a very, very long time.

Boycott = DeathTrek

By the way, in an election boycott, the people boycotting are generally on the same side. Their lack of votes lets the opponents win. Sometimes I wonder if the organizers of such boycotts aren’t really working for the other side!

In this case, I suggest going to see the movie, even if you think you won’t like it but are in any way a Trek fan. Then, if you really hate it, organize a letter writing campaign. Then buy the DVD. If the studio makes enough money to justify another film, AND they are flooded with comments, JJ Abrams will listen to us. In my bumbling opinion, this is the best path to better trek.

Dennis, thanks for your answer. Just let me clarify one thing which is essential to me. I can only speak for myself, but I have a feeling that other boycotters basically have the same point.

Not including Shatner – aka the original Kirk – means disrespecting established ST lore, disrespecting the old fans, disrespecting the legend that has been there for 40 years, and which is the basis for this film. Without BBK and, thus, coming full circle, there is no coherent storytelling, and no meaning in showing us a young crew and their new adventures. An unforgivable imbalance is being created. In this context, it is not the boycotters who kill Trek, it is the film itself. And I rather see something destructive dead than that which is supposed to be destroyed.

By boycotting in the run-up to the film, we point that out very clearly and, maybe, we’ll be able to influence this situation for the better. To write letters after the premiere of the film would only mean to shut the stable door when the horse has bolted. I want Trek as much as you do, but I don’t want it at any cost, because that would surely bode ill for Trek. Not only because it has Trek on it does necessarily mean it has Trek in it.

And I still have some hope they don’t risk yet another failure while attempting to make a better movie – ‘cause that would be quite a paradox.

PS: Whatever significance “the other side” has for you; I can assure you that I neither work for Paramount, nor for;-)

In typical, childish form, some post just to bash Shatner.

#27 Dennis

Although a lot of what you say might seem to make sense, I think there is a flaw, and that is the fact that if any particular Movie proves a stinker in the eyes of many, but is STILL successful and makes a lot of money, and is a ‘financial success’ rather than an ‘artistic success’, then the studios are more likely to give the sequel to the SAME Director and give him even freer reign to do as he likes, RATHER than listen to any complaints / suggestions about the original…

Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you TIM STORY and his ongoing ‘Fantastic Four’ debacle…but there are many others too.

Can I just add that I truly hope this Movie is BOTH a ‘financial’ AND ‘artistic’ success…but if it turns out to be declared an ‘artistic failure’ and huge disappointment overall by audiences when it’s released, then I hope it doesn’t end up making a fortune and instead slips quietly away, rather than the film-makers getting the greenlight for more of the same, and being unjustly rewarded…