Antipodean Posted November 28, 2006 Share Posted November 28, 2006 From http://theomegasector.com/index.php?showtopic=4659 comes this interesting tidbit... Bill (William Shatner) ... said that "J.J. [Abrams] is committed" (as in determined) "to having Leonard and I, Leonard and me, in the film." in response to fan questions about Star Trek XI, though he isn't sure how it will be done, or even what role they would play, wondering if they would be Kirk and Spock as Academy Instructors, or something else. "It's easy for Leonard, because Spock's alive. But I'm dead." he said, speaking of his character Captain James T. Kirk. He also quashed the Matt Damon as Captain Kirk rumor - the idea was booed by the audience - and said that "I think they're going to go with unknowns," as to any potential casting or recasting of Kirk & Spock. Audience reaction to the idea of a recast was fairly tepid, but between Matt Damon and unknowns in a recast, unknowns received applause. Shatner and Nimoy reprising Kirk and Spock was cheered, of course. Bill also dated his conversation with Abrams as having taken place, "about three weeks ago." and found at http://trekweb.com/articles/2006/11/23/JJ-Abrams-Pleased-to-Have-Both.shtml it seems that Abrams himself is talking about Shatner & Nimoy being involved in the film. Abrams : I jumped at the chance to be involved with Star Trek XI. We don't want to say anything about the specifics of this movie, but the involvement of William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy means a great deal to us on many levels, not the least of which is just the respect of who they are and what they do. They are the carriers of this torch and, without being too reverential; we want to show them the kind of appreciation and admiration they deserve. Curiouser & curiouser!!! It's looking pretty definative though, don't you reckon? But why'd they have to go and leave Takei out, huh? :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TetsuoShima Posted November 28, 2006 Share Posted November 28, 2006 That's the first good news I've heard about Star Trek XI ever since word got out that there was going to be a Star Trek XI. :) They could do Kirk as a holocharacter or something... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TFMF Posted November 28, 2006 Share Posted November 28, 2006 It would have to be a pretty minor role IMO. As i've said before - Shatner (and Nimoy as well) have passed their time. And i think they could easily get Takei if they wanted - he'd also jump at the chance of working on ST again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gjnave Posted November 29, 2006 Share Posted November 29, 2006 Star Trek likes to tie everything together. i.e. the augment 3 parter in Enterprise where at the end Soong says something to the effect of "i think ill start working on androids" - (which then of course makes us think how cool that his work eventually led to Data); or DS9's Trials and Tribulations where we get to see the old Kirk & Spock and see that Sisko was throwing triblles on Kirk. As for cameos, how Star Trek generally handles these kind of things is through some sort of "fun" scene where you see the actor for a few brief moments and it leaves you thinking "that was cool" but not having a real bearing on the whole show. Like a sort of guest appearance for the fans. I would not be surprised at all to see Shatner and Nimoy in the movie (Star Trek is all about the family and the memories) but I can't imagine it being a very big one. More as Abrams said "a handing off of the torch". But then again, ive been wrong before. :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest c4evap Posted November 29, 2006 Share Posted November 29, 2006 Good stuff. On a side note: I think Matt Damon would make a fine young Kirk if he could get Shatner's syntax down. As for young Spock...well, I thought about it a long time but couldn't think of anyone. A friend suggested (are you ready..?) Jim Carrey!!! Yes...I kid you not. The more I think about it the more I like the idea. Thoughts..? c4 B) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antipodean Posted November 29, 2006 Author Share Posted November 29, 2006 Good stuff. On a side note: I think Matt Damon would make a fine young Kirk if he could get Shatner's syntax down. As for young Spock...well, I thought about it a long time but couldn't think of anyone. A friend suggested (are you ready..?) Jim Carrey!!! Yes...I kid you not. The more I think about it the more I like the idea. Thoughts..? c4 B) No. And NO. N.B. Abrams has already put paid to the Matt Damon as Kirk rumour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenebrae Posted November 29, 2006 Share Posted November 29, 2006 How about the Affleck as Spock? Carrey actually is a pretty credible actor... I think a lot of people would struggle to imagine him doing such a humourless character though. Does this mean that we're definitely getting Kirk embarking upon panty raids against Orion slavegirl sororities? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gjnave Posted November 29, 2006 Share Posted November 29, 2006 They need to get unknowns to play the characters. For one thing, a guy like Matt Damon or Jim Carrey are not going to want to get stuck in a role for a long time --- I would assume that this movie will have followups. Second... by bringing in a known actor they are bringing too much history with them. I know that Bakula worked for some people in Enterprise, but honestly i never could get used to seeing Mr. Quantum leap. Thirdly (and basically tying into point 2), by bringing in an unknown, that person can really "become" Kirk or Spock to us... much like Patrick Stewart or Brent Spiner with their characters... you look at them and dont think of the actor, you think of Jean Luc Picard or Data. If you bring in Jim Carrey you will always think of him as Jim Carrey who played Spock, etc... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenebrae Posted November 29, 2006 Share Posted November 29, 2006 Sorry, I'm just not ever going to say "A prequel with Spock and Kirk is good". I'll believe it when I see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slug Posted November 30, 2006 Share Posted November 30, 2006 They should have had Nimoy and Denise Crosbie in Nemesis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antipodean Posted November 30, 2006 Author Share Posted November 30, 2006 They should have had Nimoy and Denise Crosbie in Nemesis. Either that, or they just shouldn't have made Nemesis in the 1st place... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurion Posted November 30, 2006 Share Posted November 30, 2006 Yes, Sela and Spock should have been in Nemesis instead of Shinzon, the clone... Regarding the new movie, I'm still not sure it's a good idea to return to the Kirk/Spock younger years. Personally, I'd rather see something post-Nemesis or entirely new. One thing is certain, though: the next movie will be absolutely amazing or just a piece of garbage. No middle ground there, IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antipodean Posted December 1, 2006 Author Share Posted December 1, 2006 One thing is certain' date=' though: the next movie will be absolutely amazing or just a piece of garbage. No middle ground there, IMHO.[/quote'] Agreed. But you know, I was skeptical about the movie... but I'm starting to get my hopes up that Abrams won't bugger it up. I just keep praying that it won't be a reboot - it'd be tragic I reckon, to throw away all those years of trek cannon like dust to a breeze, a real disservice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chiggy Posted December 3, 2006 Share Posted December 3, 2006 The big problem I`m having with Star Trek is that there precious little ending to anything. We know that Kirk is dead, Data is dead, Cisco is gone............but what about all those other characters? Are we to assume that everyone else lives happily ever after? To start a film which breaks away from the norm i.e. the chronological time line that all Star Trek films up to now have followed is a crazy mans idea. Sure.......I would go to see a film that brings some closer to the Spock character but not to see the early years..........the early years as far as I am concerned are the original episodes. Star Trekking, across the universe On the Starship Enterprise, under Captain Kirk Star Trekking, across the universe Boldly going backwards for Star Trek XI because we eventually found reverse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenebrae Posted December 3, 2006 Share Posted December 3, 2006 Sisko didn't die - he went off to chill with his wormhole homies, he returns in the DS9 novels. To be honest, I don't see why they're so keen on going back. Enterprise was a stunning failure... and so now they think RE-IMAGINING Kirk. Bah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slug Posted December 3, 2006 Share Posted December 3, 2006 I would be quite suprised to hear that you'd actually tried to read any Trek novels. As I've stated before, I'm always suprised to hear that anyone who has ever been involved with a member of the opposite sex, or their own for that matter, has attempted to read Trek fiction. Except the Garak novel maybe, apparently that's awsome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest c4evap Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 SNIPPET: ...chronological time line that all Star Trek films up to now have followed... LOL. c4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenebrae Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 I would be quite suprised to hear that you'd actually tried to read any Trek novels. As I've stated before, I'm always suprised to hear that anyone who has ever been involved with a member of the opposite sex, or their own for that matter, has attempted to read Trek fiction. Yeah... I've touched boobs - I guess that's why I've never seen the point of reading Trek fiction. Ever. Although, maybe I'd make an exception for Garak... nah. Maybe if they made it an audio book read by the actor so I could listen to it while slagging off people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antipodean Posted December 4, 2006 Author Share Posted December 4, 2006 hah! Check out the topic drift!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chiggy Posted December 5, 2006 Share Posted December 5, 2006 I`ll eat a Star Trek novel if this film is a success. Its a recipe for disaster. Look what happened to Star Wars when they also went into reverse gear! There is far better scope for a film which features the crews of the Enterprise, Voyager and DS9 teaming up to fight some deadly threat to Federation, far worse than the Borg. This will unite the fans of all three series and bring an ending to some of the characters. To all of that it would have to be a very long film............so make it 3 hours long...........and call it the Anniversary Film. PICARD must die! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now