Perhaps he's playing Sarek?
Not to say that the New York post is always correct but it has a better ranking then say the National Enquirer. So I would say that Shatner might have been in New York or a reporter saw him at some show and got a little "interview".
If they got Nimoy and not Shatner then I would say the new movie will be "STXI"Ashes Of Eden".
Bring on the return of Nimoy as Spock and Shatner as Kirk.
Very hard to believe. Nimoy would not do a cameo in Generations with Shatner, who both claim are each other's best friend. Nimoy has stated over and over he is done with acting and done with Spock-- and he would do it only if the role made sense. Shatner can't get him interested in a very funny premise for Free Enterprise 2. So is this cameo role so great he would accept it even without Shatner?
Plus, would Shatner care that much if he wasn't part of it? Would Abrams not be interested in Shatner if he really did want part of it?
Doesn't make sense. Even if true though, it won't keep me from seeing the movie.
--------
-
Yeah, this doesn't sound sensible.
Besides, Shatner wouldn't have any right to be mad. He knows that Kirk is dead and that he doesn't look young enough to pull off younger-than-Generations-Kirk.
--------
Click here to check out my band, ego tree , and the Ego Tree site at myspace. Listen to/buy the CD for $9.99! ALSO AVAILABLE ON iTUNES!!
-
The fact that Kirk is dead is a pretty good reason why they wouldn't incorporate Shatner.
Plus, Leonard is getting old, maybe he's not as interested in a substantial role that will cost him time and stress. He might be more inclined toward just a cameo in his old age.
A cameo of Spock on his deathbed or continuing his "Unification" endeavor on Romulus are both good framers for a flashback cameo. Really, as shitty as it was, Kirk had his sendoff. It's time that Nimoy had the same.
--------
"What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived."
~Picard
I say fans of the Shat and TOS should boycott this film if this rumor is true (I'd bet the house it's false)
The Shat is Star Trek. Nobody cares about Star Trek w/out him.
-
Quote:
The Shat is Star Trek. Nobody cares about Star Trek w/out him.
LOL!! I love how you bait people into emotional responses with such statements. No one could believe such a sentiment; it would be ridiculous for anyone to support such a thought. I mean, after all, he's just a fucking actor. LOL!!
-
Quote:
Nobody cares about Star Trek w/out him.
You really, really need to stop acting like you have the power to speak on the entire world's behalf.
This new movie needs to reach out to more people than just "The Shat's" fanbase. Believe it or not, many of us like Star Trek itself even without Shatner.
I hope Abrams and his group only put Shatner in the movie if it makes sense and adds to the story, rather than as a sop to the old fanbase. And it's not like fans like yourself have done enough to deserve more Shatner Trek anyway. Heck, if the fans of "Jericho" can convince CBS to bring back the series, I don't see why legions of Shatner fans couldn't have convinced Paramount to bring back Shatner. But y'all didn't have the true passion. Or maybe there just aren't enough of you, after all...
-
First of all this story is most likely not true.
Secondly, you may like Star Trek without Shatner but the general public clearly doesn't.
Just look at the ratings + box office returns since his departure.
Nemesis didn't even make $50 million the year it came out.
The ratings for Ds9-Ent were a disgrace.
Yet, Shatner's book "The Return" (about Kirk's return) is the best selling Star Trek book ever.
When the tv series ratings were falling who did they turn to? THE CAST OF TOS EVERYTIME and they delivered some of the best ratings those programs have ever seen.
Why do you think Paramont is bringing back Kirk + Spock?
I will say it again. The public does not care about anything that has to do with ST unless it has William Shatner + Leonard Nimoy playing Kirk + Spock. The numbers prove the point.
Would you prefer they continue to run the series into the ground by making tv series that nobody but people who post on boards like these watch?
Or, would you prefer Shatner + Nimoy to make ST relevant again to the mass public?
-
The lack of passion and numbers is a load of crap. It's there. The fact that people are still clamouring for Shatner's return after all this time speaks volumes. You don't exactly see people complaining about Data or Riker.
Fact is, Paramount has never given a crap about the fans or their wants. That's why Trek was run into the ground.
Not bringing in Shatner would only prove that they didn't learn a damn thing.
-
Nothing to back up your assertions except for a possibly delusional belief that everybody feels like you do.
The fact still remains, the Shatner fans have done nothing to earn a Shatner Trek movie, nor do they deserve one. When there was an opportunity to step up and let your voices be heard by the powers that be, the Shatner brigade chose to just grumble discontentedly on message boards like these.
Whatever you think of the show "Jericho," you have to admire its fans who made themselves known to the people over at CBS by sending in all those peanuts. They stood up and made a difference. Shatner's fans didn't. They deserve whatever they get in the new movie--whether that's just a small cameo by Shatner or even no Shatner at all.
-
Excuse me--Shatner fans have done nothing to earn a movie?
How about building a billion dollar franchise?
William Shatner doesn't need to audition. He is PROVEN gold.
No one crumbled. The Shatner fans have been loudly proclaiming the same thing for years: BRING BACK KIRK.
The death in Generations was ridiculous.
You shouldn't compare Star Trek to anything else. You don't know what you're talking about.
The truth is that Jericho wasn't run by Rick Berman and the jackasses at Paramount.
The fact remains that Paramount ignored the cries for Kirk's return for years, and the result was a pathetic decline of the franchise.
Sending in a peanut wouldn't have made a different to those idiots.
-
Ah, StillKirok. All your posts show clear signs of you living in the past.
You say Jericho wasn't run by "Rick Berman and the jackasses at Paramount." Well at this point, Star Trek isn't either. Berman's gone. All the execs have been changed over at Paramount. When word first hit that Abrams was taking over the Trek movie franchise, that's when Shatner fans should have risen to action, instead of wallowing in bitter complacency.
The Shatner brigade doesn't deserve another Shat Trek movie, because instead of putting an effort into making it happen--like when fans saved TOS, or when fans saved Jericho--they've come to feel an unjustified sense of entitlement, under the delusion that they and they alone made Trek a phenomenon. I mean, how can you say that it was just YOU who built a "billion dollar franchise?" Such arrogance!
;)
This is likely bullshit, though.
--------
The autumn days swung soft around me, like cotton on
my skin. But as the embers of the summer lost their
breath and disappeared, my heart went cold, and
only hollow rhythms resounded from within.
Oh. Well if the bastion of credible journalism known as The New York Post says it's so, it MUST be the case.
If this is true, then JJ and company have lost points with me. Standing back and looking at TREK objectively, anyone with a brain knows that Shatner is more famous than Nimoy, by far. TOS was once upon a time dominated by Spock/Nimoy, but those days are long gone. Shatner is big, and still in the spotlight with his career successes in recent years. Not to have KIRK but Spock only is the first crack in the JJ armor. Perhaps he will come to his senses and correct this wrong...because MR and MRS JOE PUBLIC, young and old, KNOW who William Shatner is.....
Nimoy just takes pictures of old women....I mean, do the math here...And I think PARAMOUNT's bean-counters will. Shatner will be in this movie, mark my words. We all know that BOSTON LEGAL will work in some kind of Kirk/Trek tie in on that show as the new TREK movie gets closer, which means free advertising. If Shatner is angry, Kelly will surely support his star and NOT tie in with Star Trek. In fact, I could easily see Boston Legal's writers taking snipes at JJ, and LOST, even though both are on ABC.
This will be fun to watch. I'd hate to be JJABRAMS up against the wit of Denny Crane and, even more, Alan Shore!
Chaotic
-
I don't undestand in the other post you were ranting on about how they should get rid of the fans and all this venting about how great this is. Now with this story you are suddenly upset? So did you wake up on the other side of the bed today or did the new meds kick in?
Quote:"Shatner will be in this movie, mark my words"
I would like this but I truly doubt it.
-
Oh, gimme a break. You hear that, JJ? They might make fun of you on Boston Legal! You should be quaking in your boots right now, LOL!
JJ's gonna do whatever's best for the movie. If that means no Shatner, so be it.
-
This is probably true and I, frankly, do not understand the reaction. Some people on this site have been carping about Abrams adhering to "canon" and not reboot. Now some of the same people are upset that he is sticking to canon. Kirk is dead if you go by the basic rule that televised/film Trek is the only canon. You can't have it both ways.
-
Sure you can have it both ways: Shatner appear as Kirk's grandfather / father.
I think most people will appriciate Shatner in the movie even if he is shoehorned into the story.
Personally I guess I'll be afraid of this movie at least until I see it. The consequences for Star Trek's reputation and future could be catastrophal ...or not, if we're lucky...
-
... it is just too stupid to be true. AS you say, it makes no sense to include Nimoy, but exclude Shatner. I do not think they would be that stupid... erh... could they?
Perhaps, part of it has to do with how much money they are asking. How much would these two cost the movie? What is the budget for the movie?
--------
All message content � 2003 by Stilgar sietch_tabr[-at-]bigfoot.com, permission to reprint specifically denied to Michael Wong mike@stardestroyer.net ....
"This used to be a Funhouse
But now it's full of evil clowns"
Pink, Funhouse
BELOW Abrams-Trek: "It sounded like a good idea in the begining"
Sounds untrue.
But to have the older Spock without the older Kirk is ridiculous -- unless they were trying to validate Berman's killing off of Kirk -- however we all know Abrams and co are better storytellers than that!
--------
"Men don't use sex to get what they want. Sex IS what they want" - Frasier
-
Star Trek for me, has been Shatner and Nimoy and the others for that matter, for 40 years, you can't just press the refresh button and come up with the same formula for success that the old Trek has to this day.
Its fine to want to make a film for old fans and new alike, but we are talking about legends and familiarity here, not just something that you can rehash and expect people to love unquestionably. I cannot forget the last 40 years and the history of the future, just like I couldn't forget my own mom or Dad.
-
Let Abrams deny it. Or someone from Star Trek.
If it's true, I've lost a lot of faith in this production.
If they want to respect the franchise, you don't start by disrespecting William Shatner.
Rick Berman did that. Look where it got him.
-
Agree it sounds untrue:
Please no cameos, please no cute Kirk's grandfather appearance by Shatner etc... and please no convoluted attempts to keep to the "canon", lets just have a fun Kirk, Spock & McCoy movie that keeps the spirit of Trek but moves in its own direction.
--------
- - - - - - - - - -
masonReloaded
www.vojax.com
(1)
| 
