menuBarBack
Beam Up News | Join | Your Account
Home
Advanced Search
boxBottom
STAR TREK BBS

Flash Forward Shuts Down Production.

Slowness

Kindle or Nook? Opinions--please!

AVATAR run time, IMAX, budget & marketing

boxBottom
News Tribblets

Nov 23 | Chuck returns to NBC with a special two-hour show on Sunday, Jan 10, 2010, before returning to its regular time slot, Mondays at 8pm on the following night. It's return to prime time television can be attributed to a successful fan renewnal campaign last year. CHUCK is a one-hour, action-comedy series that follows Chuck Bartowski (Zachary Levi, "Less Than Perfect") -- a computer geek who is catapulted into a new career as the government's most vital secret agent. This upcoming season will include some special guest stars, including Brandon Routh of "Superman Returns" who will play CIA agent Daniel Shaw in an episode, and the addition of SUBWAY restaurant as a major advertiser to the show. Chuck averaged a 4.0/6 rating last season, about eight percent better than the recently cancelled "Trauma". Ratings-challenged Heroes moves back an hour when Chuck returns on Monday nights. STAR TREK VOYAGER's Robert Duncan McNeill serves Chuck as a supervising producer and director.

0 comments

Nov 17 | Originally hired as co-executive producer to help with the second half of the show's first season, Kevin Murphy has now taken the reins of Caprica, the Battlestar Galactica prequel on Syfy, according to The Hollywood Reporter. He now serves as an executive producer along with Ronald D. Moore, David Eick and Jane Espenson and oversees the day-to-day functions of the show.

0 comments

Nov 12 | Star Trek star Zachary Quinto is loosely attached to star in the romantic dramedy Whirligig, reports Risky Business.Quinto would play the lead role in the independent Canadian film, which is aiming to shoot early next year. The movie centers on a man who, in a misguided attempt to woo an older woman, befriends the woman's adopted son.Chaz Thorne is directing the pic, based on a screenplay by Michael Amo, creator of the Canadian supernatural series "The Listener."

0 comments

Nov 11 | The CNS Foundation, is hosting an on-line charity auction at www.charitybuzz.com.   One of the items they are auctioning is a signed movie poster of the new Star Trek movie which has all the cast members and writers.  The president of our organization is Carol Abrams, JJ's mother,  and she arranged for the donation from Bad Robot Production Company.  J.J. Abrams is also a major donor to their organization. The funds raised will go to help find a cure to neurological disorders in children.  The auction link is here.

0 comments

Nov 10 | Candice Bergen, Charles Lisanby, Don Pardo, Gene Roddenberry, Tom and Dick Smothers and Bob Stewart have been selected as the next inductees into the Television Academy's Hall of Fame. They will be honored at a Jan. 20 ceremony at the Beverly Hills Hotel. "This year's inductees have challenged and shaped popular culture, changed television for the better and entertained us royally while doing so," TV Academy Chairman-CEO John Shaffner said. More info at the Hollywood Reporter

0 comments

boxBottom
Stardates Calendar

:

News Story

Features

William Shatner Says He Would Certainly Consider an Appearance in Star Trek XII

Features

By GustavoLeao / 01:47, 17 October 2009 / Star Trek: Nemesis

The Canadian Press posted a new interview with Star Trek star William Shatner and here are few excerpts from the article.

Shatner said he has no real news on whether he might be considered for the next "Star Trek" movie, although he'd be interested if the script made sense. Director J.J. Abrams has said he wanted to involve Shatner in the last movie but decided against it since his inclusion would conflict with the franchise's original storyline.


"I think the problem they have is getting the character I played into it, and the physical change I've had in 45 years, and how do you rationalize it in the story - I don't know," he said.


"If they should write a decent involvement in the story to what I would do, I would certainly consider it."

The full interview is here.

Newsday.com also posted a new interview with Shatner, and here is an excerpt.

His newest comic book is the fourth in a series he developed based on "TekWar," his science fiction novels, set in the 22nd century when "tek" is an illegal, addictive, mind-altering digital drug.


"It's not your grandfather's comic book anymore," Shatner said. "It's filled with lust and licentiousness, it's filled with sexual innuendo - absolutely! It's a mature thing."

The full article is here.



More Top StoriesComments
Nov 24Harlan Ellison Wants to Work with J.J. Abrams in Star Trek XII2
Nov 24Cover and Info for Star Trek Movie Adaptation Comic Book3
Nov 24Scott Bakula on Why He Played the Role of Captain Archer in Enterprise12
Nov 24Leonard Nimoy Talks About Star Trek XII and (Not) Watching New Movie with Shatner0
Nov 23J.J. Abrams and Chris Pine Talk How Gratifying That Star Trek was Well Received, Working with Leonard Nimoy and Star Trek XII4
Story Archives...Browse:   

Talkback

43 comments Post New | Help
View:

Done is done fellas. | Report this post to moderator
By: cdydatzigs (Odo's file, contact) @ 09:10:11 on Oct 18, 2009

Quote:
The Prime universe still exists alongside the new one - just like the Mirror universe exists. You can't erase what has already happened.

Sure you can. If you go back to a time before what has "already happened" and change it so that the events that unfold are different. This is about as simple a thing to understand as I can imagine. I don't care that the old universe is gone, so I am not going to try and desperately legitimize the notion it exists in some "parallel" dimension still. It only exists as a potential universe IF you go back and prevent Nero from destroying the Kelvin and make sure he isn't noticed either. Unless you do that? The "prime" universe is done, save for our DVD collections, novels and comics. We're never going to see it on the big screen again anyway, it's just easier to accept reality than kid yourself because you are fond of the past.

--------

-- Steve
"If a sixth Star Trek television series is ever realized, it will be set in the new universe." -- cdydatzigs, June 15, 2009.


Reply
Reply 		Quote
Quote

  • RE: Done is done fellas. | Report this post to moderator
    By: Bucky (Odo's file, contact) @ 15:03:44 on Oct 18, 2009 | Edit History (1)

    We're never going to see it on TV or movies again, I agree with that. But saying that entire realities just blink out of existence is downright goofy, especially in a Star Trek multi-verse that has been presented numerous times across all series. Do you think all of those parallel and alternate timelines simply never, ever existed? I don't buy it. Hell, how would have Sela been born if Natasha Yar hitching a ride on the Ent-C had blinked out of existence? If the Yesterday's Enterprise timeline doesn't exist, therefore she doesn't exist, and therefore Sela doesn't exist. Yet they all do.

    --------

    An elephant never forgets . . .TO KILL!


    Reply
    Reply         		Quote
    Quote

    • RE: Done is done fellas. | Report this post to moderator
      By: Captain's Blog (Odo's file, contact) @ 17:06:02 on Oct 18, 2009

      Agreed. But I also think that the movies can mine this new universe, and a TV show the Prime universe.

      --------

      "I would be happy for Star Trek to come along decades later with a new group of minds. I'd love someone to say, 'Besides this one, Gene Roddenberry's was nothing!'" - Gene Roddenberry

      "...I think it would be wonderful years from now to see Star Trek come back with an equally talented new cast playing Spock and Kirk and Bones and Scotty and all the rest, as they say tomorrow's things to tomorrow's generations..." - Gene Roddenberry


      Reply
      Reply             		Quote
      Quote

      • RE: Done is done fellas. | Report this post to moderator
        By: cdydatzigs (Odo's file, contact) @ 10:12:18 on Oct 19, 2009

        Quote:
        Agreed. But I also think that the movies can mine this new universe, and a TV show the Prime universe.

        The prime universe will not be see on the big screen or television again. Why would Paramount go to great lengths to revamp the franchise to great success, only to go back to what general audiences were not interested in for a TV show? This demonstrates (a) you have no idea how Hollywood works (b) you are FAR too emotionally attached to the former universe or (c) all of the above. The new universe is all we are going to see from here on out, better to come to grips with that now.

        --------

        -- Steve
        "If a sixth Star Trek television series is ever realized, it will be set in the new universe." -- cdydatzigs, June 15, 2009.


        Reply
        Reply                 		Quote
        Quote

  • RE: Done is done fellas. | Report this post to moderator
    By: Ichthus (Odo's file, contact) @ 10:22:46 on Oct 18, 2009

    The concept of the Prime Universe still existing is independent of whether it will be used or not. It doesn't have to be used just because it exist. Oh sure some "brilliant" executive could think it's a good idea to revisit the Prime Universe but I doubt it (at least for awhile).

    What JJ Abrams has done was tie the new Alternate Universe into the Prime Universe making it part of the same canon. Events will unfold differently and independently of the Prime Universe but will become part of the Star Trek canon. There can be hints and nods to the Prime Universe (within reason of course) but not binding the Alternate Universe to what has come before.


    Reply
    Reply         		Quote
    Quote

  • RE: Done is done fellas. | Report this post to moderator
    By: Captain's Blog (Odo's file, contact) @ 10:17:06 on Oct 18, 2009

    Again, real scientific theory says that you can't change history - only create another divergent universe at the point of 'change'. Therefore, the Prime universe does still exist. This is what Orci and Kurtzman intended.

    --------

    "I would be happy for Star Trek to come along decades later with a new group of minds. I'd love someone to say, 'Besides this one, Gene Roddenberry's was nothing!'" - Gene Roddenberry

    "...I think it would be wonderful years from now to see Star Trek come back with an equally talented new cast playing Spock and Kirk and Bones and Scotty and all the rest, as they say tomorrow's things to tomorrow's generations..." - Gene Roddenberry


    Reply
    Reply         		Quote
    Quote

RE: Trek XII does not need Shatner | Report this post to moderator
By: StillKirok (Odo's file, contact) @ 13:53:13 on Oct 17, 2009

Quote:
This comment shows a basic lack of understanding of Sci-Fi.

Both universes run parallel - in one Kirk is definitely dead after Generations - in the other, we do not yet know.

Have you ever watched any episode of Star Trek? If you have, you know that pretty much what you said is simply wrong. In Star Trek, when one travels in time and changes history, the original timeline is gone. This concept has been shown on pretty much all of the Trek series', except maybe Enterprise. The prime timeline is gone.

Generations no longer is a barrier for Shatner's return, as if it ever was one.

Quote:
But you still have to explain how he's alive after he died in Generations! It's just much more difficult to make work in a storytelling sense than you'll acknowledge. But then you'd be happy with any crappy storytelling gimmick that brought back Shatner.

You seem to have almost no faith in Abrams' writing ability. They can do it. It's a question of if they CHOOSE to do it. Of course, with the prime universe gone, there's no need to even acknowledge Generations anymore. Even Abrams said that this new timeline removes all barriers.


Reply
Reply 		Quote
Quote

  • RE: Trek XII does not need Shatner | Report this post to moderator
    By: Captain's Blog (Odo's file, contact) @ 17:08:04 on Oct 17, 2009

    The new movie is current with real scientific theory on time travel/parallel universes - previous Treks with 'alternate timelines' are outdated. The Prime universe still exists alongside the new one - just like the Mirror universe exists.

    You can't erase what has already happened.

    --------

    "I would be happy for Star Trek to come along decades later with a new group of minds. I'd love someone to say, 'Besides this one, Gene Roddenberry's was nothing!'" - Gene Roddenberry

    "...I think it would be wonderful years from now to see Star Trek come back with an equally talented new cast playing Spock and Kirk and Bones and Scotty and all the rest, as they say tomorrow's things to tomorrow's generations..." - Gene Roddenberry


    Reply
    Reply         		Quote
    Quote

  • RE: Trek XII does not need Shatner | Report this post to moderator
    By: katefan (Odo's file, contact) @ 14:12:57 on Oct 17, 2009

    Well, you threw in a qualifier; except maybe Enterprise. So right away you invalidate your argument.

    And like I've said elsewhere; red matter is a maguffin, it allows the seemingly impossible to be possible. Also, I have said that Star Trek has violated/contradicted it's own internal logic before. In Voyager, for example, they claim you can only go straight when moving at warp speed yet we have seen before ships turning while under warp.

    Second, if Generations is wiped out, then the prime timeline is wiped out, which means Kirk Prime alive or dead is now wiped out. If Generations is not wiped out and there is an opportunity however small for Kirk Prime to make an appearance then you have to acknowledge the primeline still exists. Hmmm, tough choice there, isn't it?

    As for Abram's writing ability, we have a high degree of faith in it. We also have a high degree of faith in his judgment. The fact that he felt Shatner's appearance in Trek XI was not worth the literary gymnastics it would have taken to get him into it is plenty of proof that he is a sharp producer and knows how to trim the fat (badump-bump).

    --------

    "Oh, I'll wake up
    To any sound of engines,
    Ev'ry gull a seeking craft..."

    Kate Bush, And Dream of Sheep


    Reply
    Reply         		Quote
    Quote

    • RE: Trek XII does not need Shatner | Report this post to moderator
      By: prometheus 59650 (Odo's file, contact, web site) @ 15:12:43 on Oct 17, 2009

      Quote:
      Second, if Generations is wiped out, then the prime timeline is wiped out, which means Kirk Prime alive or dead is now wiped out. If Generations is not wiped out and there is an opportunity however small for Kirk Prime to make an appearance then you have to acknowledge the primeline still exists. Hmmm, tough choice there, isn't it?

      If his head explodes you're cleaning it up.

      But he's already proven a tendency for the timeline existing or not depending on his immediate needs in an argument.

      --------

      "We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of our culture." ---Pastor Ray Mummert speaking of those who favor Darwinian Evolution over Intelligent Design.

      "If this is your God, he's not very impressive. He has so many psychological problems; he's so insecure. He demands worship every seven days. He goes out and creates faulty Humans and then blames them for his own mistakes. He's a pretty poor excuse for a Supreme Being." ---Gene Roddenberry


      Reply
      Reply             		Quote
      Quote

      • RE: Trek XII does not need Shatner | Report this post to moderator
        By: katefan (Odo's file, contact) @ 18:01:25 on Oct 17, 2009

        I just may have to make that my signature so that every time he sees me, he sees it. >:)

        --------

        "Oh, I'll wake up
        To any sound of engines,
        Ev'ry gull a seeking craft..."

        Kate Bush, And Dream of Sheep


        Reply
        Reply                 		Quote
        Quote

RE: Trek XII does not need Shatner | Report this post to moderator
By: StillKirok (Odo's file, contact) @ 09:52:00 on Oct 17, 2009

If Abrams were actually sincere, which obviously he isn't, then Shatner would not be shoehorned. He would be part of the movie, as Nimoy was.

Quote:
Generations happened. It is canon and though you don't like what happened in it, it is 100% official meaning Shatner's version of Kirk is DEAD. Whether it was a "worthy" death or not, he died. Get over it already.

Actually, in canon, the prime universe is no longer in existence, which means Generations is no longer relevant. It was not a worthy death, but thanks to Abrams, it no longer matters. Kirk's future is uncertain again, because the prime universe is gone. That is canon. Get over it already. To call Shatner irrelevant to the franchise is really ridiculous. The guy will always be relevant to the franchise. He made it what it is. Without Shatner, there is no franchise.


Reply
Reply 		Quote
Quote

  • RE: Trek XII does not need Shatner | Report this post to moderator
    By: cnathanw (Odo's file, contact, web site) @ 10:53:10 on Oct 17, 2009

    [i[Actually, in canon, the prime universe is no longer in existence, which means Generations is no longer relevant. [ei]

    This comment shows a basic lack of understanding of Sci-Fi.

    Both universes run parallel - in one Kirk is definitely dead after Generations - in the other, we do not yet know.


    Reply
    Reply         		Quote
    Quote

  • RE: Trek XII does not need Shatner | Report this post to moderator
    By: The Magrathean (Odo's file, contact) @ 10:28:51 on Oct 17, 2009

    But you still have to explain how he's alive after he died in Generations! It's just much more difficult to make work in a storytelling sense than you'll acknowledge. But then you'd be happy with any crappy storytelling gimmick that brought back Shatner.

    The larger audience isn't going to be as thrilled with Shatner coming back that they'll overlook bad storytelling.


    Reply
    Reply         		Quote
    Quote

Lesson in Shatnerspeak: | Report this post to moderator
By: prometheus 59650 (Odo's file, contact, web site) @ 09:33:27 on Oct 17, 2009

"Decent involvement" means "almost as much screen time as Pine."

--------

"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of our culture." ---Pastor Ray Mummert speaking of those who favor Darwinian Evolution over Intelligent Design.

"If this is your God, he's not very impressive. He has so many psychological problems; he's so insecure. He demands worship every seven days. He goes out and creates faulty Humans and then blames them for his own mistakes. He's a pretty poor excuse for a Supreme Being." ---Gene Roddenberry


Reply
Reply 		Quote
Quote

  • RE: Lesson in Shatnerspeak: | Report this post to moderator
    By: Captain's Blog (Odo's file, contact) @ 16:46:05 on Oct 17, 2009

    True.

    --------

    "I would be happy for Star Trek to come along decades later with a new group of minds. I'd love someone to say, 'Besides this one, Gene Roddenberry's was nothing!'" - Gene Roddenberry

    "...I think it would be wonderful years from now to see Star Trek come back with an equally talented new cast playing Spock and Kirk and Bones and Scotty and all the rest, as they say tomorrow's things to tomorrow's generations..." - Gene Roddenberry


    Reply
    Reply         		Quote
    Quote

Oh, I'm sure Shatner would. | Report this post to moderator
By: Muldfeld (Odo's file, contact) @ 09:08:24 on Oct 17, 2009

The one thing for which I respected Abrams was not giving into this egocentric, talentless windbag who dissed DS9 as "too dark and depressing". What a prick!


Reply
Reply 		Quote
Quote

Here we go... | Report this post to moderator
By: Captain's Blog (Odo's file, contact) @ 05:04:06 on Oct 17, 2009

I think the window for that has closed.

--------

"I would be happy for Star Trek to come along decades later with a new group of minds. I'd love someone to say, 'Besides this one, Gene Roddenberry's was nothing!'" - Gene Roddenberry

"...I think it would be wonderful years from now to see Star Trek come back with an equally talented new cast playing Spock and Kirk and Bones and Scotty and all the rest, as they say tomorrow's things to tomorrow's generations..." - Gene Roddenberry


Reply
Reply 		Quote
Quote

  • RE: Here we go... | Report this post to moderator
    By: StillKirok (Odo's file, contact) @ 05:57:06 on Oct 17, 2009

    Yeah, but Abrams is likely as full of crap about using Shatner in the next movie as he was last time. Shatner is obviously very interested in coming back. But the ball right now is 100 percent in Abrams' court. There's still no reason to believe Abrams is serious about it.


    Reply
    Reply         		Quote
    Quote

    • RE: Here we go... | Report this post to moderator
      By: Kamen Rider Blade (Odo's file, contact) @ 12:38:37 on Oct 17, 2009

      As always, YOUR refusal to allow for even the slightest possibility of Abrams being sincere in his interest in working with Shatner somehow says more about YOU than it does about Abrams.

      Just because the man would like to work with Shatner, does not automatically mean he's going to compromise his work just to add him to a story he doesn't belong in, as you seem to think he should.

      --------

      "Oh relax, Cupcake. It was a joke."- James T. Kirk


      Reply
      Reply             		Quote
      Quote

    • RE: Here we go... | Report this post to moderator
      By: Captain's Blog (Odo's file, contact) @ 07:34:44 on Oct 17, 2009

      Abrams merely expressed an open mind in using Shatner - but clearly it was too difficult using Kirk Prime in the first movie in any meaningful way. The next film can't be another time travel yarn; so unless they use flashbacks, Shatner won't be doing any more movies. He did agree to be killed off.

      --------

      "I would be happy for Star Trek to come along decades later with a new group of minds. I'd love someone to say, 'Besides this one, Gene Roddenberry's was nothing!'" - Gene Roddenberry

      "...I think it would be wonderful years from now to see Star Trek come back with an equally talented new cast playing Spock and Kirk and Bones and Scotty and all the rest, as they say tomorrow's things to tomorrow's generations..." - Gene Roddenberry


      Reply
      Reply             		Quote
      Quote

    • RE: Here we go... | Report this post to moderator
      By: GustavoLeao (Odo's file, contact, web site) @ 06:58:36 on Oct 17, 2009

      StillKirok, I am sorry, but stop those "Abrams is likely as full of crap" posts or they will be deleted. Just a warning. Just dont be a troll, okay ?

      Gustavo

      --------

      TrekWeb.com Supervising Editor

      gl2000@uol.com.br


      Reply
      Reply             		Quote
      Quote

      • RE: Here we go... | Report this post to moderator
        By: StillKirok (Odo's file, contact) @ 07:46:58 on Oct 17, 2009

        Not trying to be a troll. Just listening to Scotty's grandmother.


        Reply
        Reply                 		Quote
        Quote

        • RE: Here we go... | Report this post to moderator
          By: Archangel (Odo's file, contact) @ 23:06:12 on Oct 17, 2009

          You can vent a lot more over on the boards. The news article talkbacks need to be cleaner.

          --------

          "If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy."

          -James Madison


          Reply
          Reply                     		Quote
          Quote

        • RE: Here we go... | Report this post to moderator
          By: Kamen Rider Blade (Odo's file, contact) @ 12:34:45 on Oct 17, 2009

          Then quit trolling just because YOU got YOUR hopes up unrealistically high regarding the slightest possibility of Shatner appearing in this most recent film when it was NEVER guaranteed to begin with (again... unless I missed that interview with Abrams, Orci, Kurtzman, or anyone else where they said "Star Trek 11, STARRING William Shatner").




          --------

          "Oh relax, Cupcake. It was a joke."- James T. Kirk


          Reply
          Reply                     		Quote
          Quote

        • RE: Here we go... | Report this post to moderator
          By: katefan (Odo's file, contact) @ 09:29:06 on Oct 17, 2009

          You don't have to try and be a troll, it comes naturally to you.

          --------

          "Oh, I'll wake up
          To any sound of engines,
          Ev'ry gull a seeking craft..."

          Kate Bush, And Dream of Sheep


          Reply
          Reply                     		Quote
          Quote

          • RE: Here we go... | Report this post to moderator
            By: StillKirok (Odo's file, contact) @ 09:45:29 on Oct 17, 2009

            Says one of my stalkers.


            Reply
            Reply                         		Quote
            Quote

            • RE: Here we go... | Report this post to moderator
              By: katefan (Odo's file, contact) @ 10:37:47 on Oct 17, 2009

              And here with go with the persecution complex again.

              We don't respond to all your posts, just the ones where you present yourself as an unreasonable ass who thinks Abrams is the anti-christ and figures Shatner's involvement in a Star Trek movie at this late date in his career after he 1) allowed Kirk to be killed off and 2) has prostituted himself for Priceline and has pretty much destroyed his value as a viable actor in any future 'Trek endeavor is wholly unreasonable regardless of the mountain of evidence against you in both cases.

              --------

              "Oh, I'll wake up
              To any sound of engines,
              Ev'ry gull a seeking craft..."

              Kate Bush, And Dream of Sheep


              Reply
              Reply                             		Quote
              Quote

              • RE: Here we go... | Report this post to moderator
                By: Kamen Rider Blade (Odo's file, contact) @ 12:32:02 on Oct 17, 2009

                Quote:
                And here with go with the persecution complex again.

                Isn't it cute that he thinks people responding to/disputing his batshit crazy Shatner worshipping somehow equals "stalking"?

                And by "cute", I of course mean, "completely idiotic".

                --------

                "Oh relax, Cupcake. It was a joke."- James T. Kirk


                Reply
                Reply                                 		Quote
                Quote

    • Trek XII does not need Shatner | Report this post to moderator
      By: katefan (Odo's file, contact) @ 06:27:07 on Oct 17, 2009

      1) Kirk died in Generations. Trying to explain that away would be a convoluted process requiring a movie in itself much like Star Trek III, The Search For Spock.

      2) Shatner is over seventy years old and out of shape, and while Spock can do action he is seen more as a cerebral character. So using Nimoy in XI in a purely intellectual works. Seeing Shatner huff it around in Generations was a stretch but seeing him try anything like that now would be embarassaing.

      3) The young cast already got their sendoff from the old guard, they don't need Shatner cluttering things up for them.

      --------

      "Oh, I'll wake up
      To any sound of engines,
      Ev'ry gull a seeking craft..."

      Kate Bush, And Dream of Sheep


      Reply
      Reply             		Quote
      Quote

      • RE: Trek XII does not need Shatner | Report this post to moderator
        By: StillKirok (Odo's file, contact) @ 07:45:34 on Oct 17, 2009

        Generations is less relevant now than it was before now that JJ destroyed the prime universe and anything that happened in it.

        When you are Shatner's age, you should be in the kind of shape he is in. People half his age have trouble keeping up with him. That's a laugher. Plus, I guess you didn't see Wrath of Khan, when Kirk's performance was not physical, but cerebral, as he defeated Khan with his captaincy genius. No one but a complete idiot would expect the flying drop kick and double fisted punch.

        As for the young cast getting a sendoff, who cares? That's the dumbest reason yet not to use Shatner. There is no situation, none, where William Shatner, or the appearance of any of the original cast, would hurt a Star Trek movie. Any of the original cast would only enhance it.


        Reply
        Reply                 		Quote
        Quote

        • RE: Trek XII does not need Shatner | Report this post to moderator
          By: The Magrathean (Odo's file, contact) @ 10:32:02 on Oct 17, 2009

          Quote:
          There is no situation, none, where William Shatner, or the appearance of any of the original cast, would hurt a Star Trek movie. Any of the original cast would only enhance it.

          This is your problem. Right here. That statement is just the biggest load of BS.

          Trust me, just about everyone can see that statement is false. Including J.J., Kurtzman, and Orci.


          Reply
          Reply                     		Quote
          Quote

        • RE: Trek XII does not need Shatner | Report this post to moderator
          By: katefan (Odo's file, contact) @ 09:27:50 on Oct 17, 2009

          1) Generations still happened, it is still canon. Just because you would like to ignore it won't make it go away. Shatner was foolish enough to allow Kirk to die in that movie; if he had been smart like Nimoy he would have protected his character better. Heck, he should have taken a page from Nimoy's book where Star Trek II was concerned; during the shooting of that film Nimoy had second thoughts about killing off Spock and asked to have things changed to offer the chance of him coming back. Shatner made no such provision, unless you count his string of self masturbatory Star Trek novels.

          2) I am sure I am going to be in worse shape by the time I am Shatner's age. Then again, I have never been an action star. And sure, in Khan he was cerebral, but in III and Generations he was all out action hero and was even older, and in V he was mountain climbing (or at least his body double was). This tells me Shatner is more inclined to relive his youth rather than accept reality.

          3) Who cares? Well, the millions of people who saw Star Trek XI. And yeah, there can be situations where Shatner's appearance could detract from the rest of the cast and that is when he is stealing time from the younger cast that captured the 97% approval rating from the critics and the positive response from a majority of Star Trek fans.

          --------

          "Oh, I'll wake up
          To any sound of engines,
          Ev'ry gull a seeking craft..."

          Kate Bush, And Dream of Sheep


          Reply
          Reply                     		Quote
          Quote

          • RE: Trek XII does not need Shatner | Report this post to moderator
            By: StillKirok (Odo's file, contact) @ 09:48:58 on Oct 17, 2009

            Generations did happen. It is canon. I never said otherwise. Congratulations on figuring that out. Of course, by the same logic, the prime universe was destroyed. That is also canon. It happened, whether you like it or not.

            Live by canon, die by canon.

            And Shatner DID try to save Kirk. Rick Berman, the man who flushed Trek down the toilet, wouldn't allow it.

            As for Shatner being an action star, if you could read his own comments, he even acknowledges that the character would have to be written age appropriate.

            Who cares? Obviously a lot of people, given how this issue is always a hot topic. The people who saw Trek XI, while significant, are nothing compared to the people who know Shatner as Kirk.

            It's not stealing time from the younger cast. That's a ridiculous assessment.


            Reply
            Reply                         		Quote
            Quote

            • RE: Trek XII does not need Shatner | Report this post to moderator
              By: Captain's Blog (Odo's file, contact) @ 16:50:08 on Oct 17, 2009

              Shatner had the option to say no to Kirk's death; but he took the money instead.

              --------

              "I would be happy for Star Trek to come along decades later with a new group of minds. I'd love someone to say, 'Besides this one, Gene Roddenberry's was nothing!'" - Gene Roddenberry

              "...I think it would be wonderful years from now to see Star Trek come back with an equally talented new cast playing Spock and Kirk and Bones and Scotty and all the rest, as they say tomorrow's things to tomorrow's generations..." - Gene Roddenberry


              Reply
              Reply                             		Quote
              Quote

            • RE: Trek XII does not need Shatner | Report this post to moderator
              By: katefan (Odo's file, contact) @ 10:45:32 on Oct 17, 2009

              First of all, only you think the prime universe was destroyed. Second, if the prime universe was destroyed then there is no way Prime Kirk can appear in the new movie. So why are you wasting your time on this thread in regards to 'Trek XII if there is no way Prime Kirk can appear in it.

              Shatner could have stuck by his guns and said he wasn't doing the movie. Guess the money was too good, huh? And now he says the character has to be written age appropriate after embarrassing himself in Generations. Better late than never, huh?

              And the people who know Shatner as Kirk don't necessarily need to see Shatner as Kirk again. Apparently Pine as Kirk went over pretty well considering 'Trek XI's box office numbers. Pretty good pay off regardless of Shatner's lack of involvement. Of course you think Shatner's involvement would have increased the box office numbers but that is pure speculation. And even if he were in the movie you never did explain how JJ Abrams could have 1) brought a dead character back to life, 2) involve him in the story and 3) not detract more time from the younger cast.

              And Shatner not stealing from the younger cast is par for the course. According to old cast members like Nichelle Nichols and George Takei the man was a selfish dick and not the demigod you seem to think he is.

              --------

              "Oh, I'll wake up
              To any sound of engines,
              Ev'ry gull a seeking craft..."

              Kate Bush, And Dream of Sheep


              Reply
              Reply                             		Quote
              Quote

        • RE: Trek XII does not need Shatner | Report this post to moderator
          By: cdydatzigs (Odo's file, contact) @ 08:27:12 on Oct 17, 2009

          Quote:
          Generations is less relevant now than it was before now that JJ destroyed the prime universe and anything that happened in it.

          Generations happened. It is canon and though you don't like what happened in it, it is 100% official meaning Shatner's version of Kirk is DEAD. Whether it was a "worthy" death or not, he died. Get over it already.

          Quote:
          When you are Shatner's age, you should be in the kind of shape he is in. People half his age have trouble keeping up with him.

          He would still be an 80 year-old man with a huge gut and shoe-horning him into a film that absolutely does not need him would be embarassing. Why tarnish his legacy by doing this, honestly?

          Quote:
          As for the young cast getting a sendoff, who cares? That's the dumbest reason yet not to use Shatner.

          Paramount cares, J.J. cares, us fans care. We have a gem of a franchise again. A franchise that general audiences love, why would we muddy that up with someone who hasn't been relevant to the franchise in 15 years?

          Quote:
          There is no situation, none, where William Shatner, or the appearance of any of the original cast, would hurt a Star Trek movie. Any of the original cast would only enhance it.

          I think you are getting the word "enhance" confused with "distract".

          --------

          -- Steve
          "If a sixth Star Trek television series is ever realized, it will be set in the new universe." -- cdydatzigs, June 15, 2009.


          Reply
          Reply                     		Quote
          Quote

        • RE: Trek XII does not need Shatner | Report this post to moderator
          By: Captain's Blog (Odo's file, contact) @ 08:15:14 on Oct 17, 2009

          Except that story-wise, you'd be shoe-horning a character into a movie, just to please Shatner and a minority of fans.

          --------

          "I would be happy for Star Trek to come along decades later with a new group of minds. I'd love someone to say, 'Besides this one, Gene Roddenberry's was nothing!'" - Gene Roddenberry

          "...I think it would be wonderful years from now to see Star Trek come back with an equally talented new cast playing Spock and Kirk and Bones and Scotty and all the rest, as they say tomorrow's things to tomorrow's generations..." - Gene Roddenberry


          Reply
          Reply                     		Quote
          Quote

          • RE: Trek XII does not need Shatner | Report this post to moderator
            By: FSJGuy (Odo's file, contact) @ 08:21:13 on Oct 17, 2009

            Only way to bring Shatner in then, since "the prime universe no longer exists" is to show him as older New Universe Kirk, which removes any drama from the new movie(s), so thank you but no.

            Btw anyone know why my old Star Trek DVD's stopped working, they all play but its just a blank screen for
            2 hours..weird...


            Reply
            Reply                         		Quote
            Quote

            • Funny, mine just | Report this post to moderator
              By: prometheus 59650 (Odo's file, contact, web site) @ 09:39:57 on Oct 17, 2009

              ....say "Timeline erased" no matter what buttons I push.

              --------

              "We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of our culture." ---Pastor Ray Mummert speaking of those who favor Darwinian Evolution over Intelligent Design.

              "If this is your God, he's not very impressive. He has so many psychological problems; he's so insecure. He demands worship every seven days. He goes out and creates faulty Humans and then blames them for his own mistakes. He's a pretty poor excuse for a Supreme Being." ---Gene Roddenberry


              Reply
              Reply                             		Quote
              Quote

        • RE: Trek XII does not need Shatner | Report this post to moderator
          By: Captain's Blog (Odo's file, contact) @ 08:10:42 on Oct 17, 2009

          The Prime universe still exists...

          --------

          "I would be happy for Star Trek to come along decades later with a new group of minds. I'd love someone to say, 'Besides this one, Gene Roddenberry's was nothing!'" - Gene Roddenberry

          "...I think it would be wonderful years from now to see Star Trek come back with an equally talented new cast playing Spock and Kirk and Bones and Scotty and all the rest, as they say tomorrow's things to tomorrow's generations..." - Gene Roddenberry


          Reply
          Reply                     		Quote
          Quote

Promenade










TrekWeb Merchants
Amazon.com
Amazon.co.uk
Amazon.ca
Amazon.de
Barnes & Noble

Get Firefox!

Privacy Policy | About Us | Legal Notice | Contact Us | | Get Firefox!
© 1996-2009 TrekWeb.com and Steve Krutzler. All rights reserved.