Shatner "I don't know how they can do (ST 50th) without me"

[Shalashaska]

...saying Shatner isn't Kirk? You can just fuck right off with that.

I don't think so. William Shatner is an actor. And let's be real: he's a pompous, arrogant, overweight, hammy one at that. In recent decades, he hasn't played a straight-up dramatic role, and is primarily gold in his meta comedic shtick. That his fans worship at the actor's feet is their issue.

James T. Kirk is a character Shatner was able to play decades ago. If you find that a bitter pill to swallow; take it up with God for aging people, or Shatner for not caring enough to do the work involved.

They shouldn't do a 50-year retrospective without him, but they sure as Hell should not do a movie with him.

I love how you're putting this TV show character above a real human being, the same one that made this character as popular as it is today. You say you want Kirk, but not Shatner? Well then, too bad, you're not fucking getting Kirk.

It blows my mind. Did Shatner have an affair with your girl? What makes you hate him so much?

 

[Kemaiku]

Two actors are currently able to represent Kirk at any Trek event, and I'd settle for whichever one didn't throw the hissy fit and ask too much to attend. Handy thing having a spare these days.

 

[Jedman67]

I love how you're putting this TV show character above a real human being, the same one that made this character as popular as it is today. You say you want Kirk, but not Shatner? Well then, too bad, you're not fucking getting Kirk.

It blows my mind. Did Shatner have an affair with your girl? What makes you hate him so much?

Chill dude, don't take this so personally.

 

[2takesfrakes]

Something like "A STAR TREK SPECIAL" could do without William Shatner's involvement, but half a century ago ... The Shat was obviously the focus of STAR TREK - he's got to helm this celebration. I hope they give him a lot of rope, too. It doesn't have to be so formal and dignified. Let him do his thing. I'm not a fan of William Shatner, per se, and I much prefer Patrick Stewart's reading of "Space ... the Final Frontier," but The Shat's showmanship and charm as the good captain made him a cultural icon. I'll be really disappointed if William Shatner's not leading the 50th Anniversary celebration.

 

[137th Gebirg]

Agreed. He is the de facto patriarch/elder statesman of the franchise. It would make less than zero sense not to include him in some fashion.

 

[Amaris]

Agreed. Shatner's alive, still relevant, and in good health. He was a foundational cornerstone for a franchise that is now celebrating its 50th year. Having him speak or present some kind of memory just makes sense.

...Not really. Neither Shatner nor any of the other TOS cast are relevant to the modern incarnation of Trek. I enjoyed Nimoy's cameo in ST09, although it was more fanservice than any real need for him to show up.

Not to the modern incarnation, no, but if you're doing a 50th anniversary, they're going to play in there somewhere.

 

[Drone]

...Not really. Neither Shatner nor any of the other TOS cast are relevant to the modern incarnation of Trek. I enjoyed Nimoy's cameo in ST09, although it was more fanservice than any real need for him to show up.

The modern incarnation of "Trek" is 6 years old. To represent it as the only article relevant to a 50th anniversary show of the franchise, is basically reducing it in conception to merely being a lead-in for the first episode of the new series. Don't even describe it as a commemorative program in any way if that's the case. Just call it Trek: The Adventure Continues or something to that effect and make it a promotional piece essentially, for those irreplaceable touchstones of the franchises' history, the two films, with tantalizing teasers of the debut to follow.

If it's going to be presented in any way, shape, or form as an acknowledgement of the vast history, lore, and consequences of Star Trek, that made those two epics possible, by the way, stow the "relevant" argument where it belongs, in one of those never seen onboard shitters. Those core fans that CBS is really concerned about will get the new show to satisfy their taste for Trek going forward, this program doesn't need to be subordinated to them as well. Oh, and Shatner does need to be there if he is still ambulatory at the time.

 

[Jedman67]

Not to the modern incarnation, no, but if you're doing a 50th anniversary, they're going to play in there somewhere.

...Not really. Neither Shatner nor any of the other TOS cast are relevant to the modern incarnation of Trek. I enjoyed Nimoy's cameo in ST09, although it was more fanservice than any real need for him to show up.

The modern incarnation of "Trek" is 6 years old. To represent it as the only article relevant to a 50th anniversary show of the franchise, is basically reducing it in conception to merely being a lead-in for the first episode of the new series. Don't even describe it as a commemorative program in any way if that's the case. Just call it Trek: The Adventure Continues or something to that effect and make it a promotional piece essentially, for those irreplaceable touchstones of the franchises' history, the two films, with tantalizing teasers of the debut to follow.

If it's going to be presented in any way, shape, or form as an acknowledgement of the vast history, lore, and consequences of Star Trek, that made those two epics possible, by the way, stow the "relevant" argument where it belongs, in one of those never seen onboard shitters.

I was thinking of the TNG movies and DS9/Enterprise as part of the "modern" trek, as well as the Abrams stuff.
And again, to solely have Shatner represent all that is trek just won't cut it for me. To have all the original cast would be a different story. Or perhaps members of the main cast from all the shows. But I have no interest in seeing a Shatnerfest, which seems to be what some people are advocating.

Those core fans that CBS is really concerned about will get the new show to satisfy their taste for Trek going forward, this program doesn't need to be subordinated to them as well. Oh, and Shatner does need to be there if he is still ambulatory at the time.

I doubt CBS gives a damn about the relative handful of hardcore trek fans. This is supposed to be a new mainstream scifi show, and requires far more viewers than there are core fans.

 

[eyeresist]

...Not really. Neither Shatner nor any of the other TOS cast are relevant to the modern incarnation of Trek. I enjoyed Nimoy's cameo in ST09, although it was more fanservice than any real need for him to show up.

I agree it makes sense that any anniversary special would feature the Nu cast. Shatner would be a 'special guest'. Though I can imagine some funny mock rivalry between him and Pine.

They shouldn't do a 50-year retrospective without him, but they sure as Hell should not do a movie with him.

Movie, TV special or wine and cheese party; I don't believe his presence is necessary unless it includes Koenig, Takei and Nichols as well.

Shatner is much more important to the franchise than those three. Also, Shatner is a popular contemporary figure and has commercial draw that the producers would want to use. There's much greater reason to include him than the others.

 

[Drone]

The modern incarnation of "Trek" is 6 years old. To represent it as the only article relevant to a 50th anniversary show of the franchise, is basically reducing it in conception to merely being a lead-in for the first episode of the new series. Don't even describe it as a commemorative program in any way if that's the case. Just call it Trek: The Adventure Continues or something to that effect and make it a promotional piece essentially, for those irreplaceable touchstones of the franchises' history, the two films, with tantalizing teasers of the debut to follow.

If it's going to be presented in any way, shape, or form as an acknowledgement of the vast history, lore, and consequences of Star Trek, that made those two epics possible, by the way, stow the "relevant" argument where it belongs, in one of those never seen onboard shitters.

I was thinking of the TNG movies and DS9/Enterprise as part of the "modern" trek, as well as the Abrams stuff.
And again, to solely have Shatner represent all that is trek just won't cut it for me. To have all the original cast would be a different story. Or perhaps members of the main cast from all the shows. But I have no interest in seeing a Shatnerfest, which seems to be what some people are advocating.

Those core fans that CBS is really concerned about will get the new show to satisfy their taste for Trek going forward, this program doesn't need to be subordinated to them as well. Oh, and Shatner does need to be there if he is still ambulatory at the time.

I doubt CBS gives a damn about the relative handful of hardcore trek fans. This is supposed to be a new mainstream scifi show, and requires far more viewers than there are core fans.

I didn't say that an anniversary show would or should be a one man extravaganza. That would be unrealistic and foolish. By all means, such a production should include as many of the major characters from the other series that are willing to participate, as well. They all do represent the tapestry that is Star Trek over the past half-century.

I mistook your previous comment to say that this show should focus on the world of the two recent films and the new series exclusively. That's what I thought you meant by relevant. My apologies for the error.

As to your last line, I did in fact say that the new fan base generated by the films is the core audience for the upcoming show and that the Prime Universe is no more as a broadcast or film consideration. I've said that in other posts as well so I essentially agree with that statement, with the caveat that I do think the show runners wouldn't just shrug their shoulders at the idea of attracting some of the Prime viewers, so I would anticipate that the production will likely be less action oriented than the films and include some contemplative or philosophical content about the zeitgeist in which the show takes place that will also appeal to that older audience cohort.

 

[Arpy]

They shouldn't do a 50-year retrospective without him, but they sure as Hell should not do a movie with him.

Movie, TV special or wine and cheese party; I don't believe his presence is necessary unless it includes Koenig, Takei and Nichols as well.

Shatner is much more important to the franchise than those three. Also, Shatner is a popular contemporary figure and has commercial draw that the producers would want to use. There's much greater reason to include him than the others.

Those three are the only others among the original cast still alive. Would you not invite Deforest Kelley were he still with us either?

A retrospective should include all originals still with us. Someone earlier suggested I cared about a character more than a living person; I'd rather not imagine the lifetime achievement sting of being an original cast-member and not being invited to a 50-year retrospective while another cast member is.

I think you absolutely include everyone around from every Trek era - Roddenberry's, Berman's, Abrams'. Screentime succumbs to the limits of the medium, but everyone's there. Even those not still around (Roddenberry, Coon, Bennett, Nimoy, etc) should be appreciated for their pivotal contributions to the franchise. It would also be hilarious if fired writers and producers who were regardless responsible for beloved episodes/movies were all invited to some important gala and had to grudgingly deal with it ultimately out of respect to each others' part in the cultural phenomenon.

 

[eyeresist]

Those three are the only others among the original cast still alive. Would you not invite Deforest Kelley were he still with us either?

Kelley and Nimoy formed the Big Three, together with Shatner. I'm not saying don't invite the others, but it's a mistake to put them on the same level as the stars.

 

[Arpy]

Shatner-Nimoy-Kelley were the stars of the show, Shatner-Nimoy more so, and Shatner most (especially as Nimoy doesn't quite translate without the ears). But the fans have canonized them all. The idea of "the crew" took off both during TOS movies and especially during subsequent series. Shatner's still the guy, but making Priceline the whole shebang (you know some Hollywood accounting exec would consider it)? In The Voyage Home, Spock "stood with his shipmates;" I'd expect no less than that spirit during a 50-year retrospective of all Star Trek.

 

[eyeresist]

Perhaps they could have an Oscars-style "Salute to the Second (or third, or fourth, or fifth) Bananas".

 

[Arpy]

Perhaps they could have an Oscars-style "Salute to the Second (or third, or fourth, or fifth) Bananas".

Yikes?

But perhaps they should, if all some fans want to remember is their prom-king.

 

[tharpdevenport]

I appreciate he wants to be a part of new Trek projects so much, but come on.

Time to resurrect an old picture I made:

 

[Drone]

It would also be hilarious if fired writers and producers who were regardless responsible for beloved episodes/movies were all invited to some important gala and had to grudgingly deal with it ultimately out of respect to each others' part in the cultural phenomenon.

He's long gone, but if that were not the case and he was still ambulatory and sound of mind, it would indeed be interesting to have this fellow, who might not necessarily meet the criteria you set above.

The Man, The Legend, Fred Freiberger!!!!!

 

[Samuel T. Cogley]

I think it is important to Shatner that he would get paid, but I suspect he would do it on the cheap.

He turned down the role of "Chef" in "a very special [sweeps week] episode of 'Enterprise'" because of price, a concept they later rejigged for Jonathan Frakes and the finale.

Well, I meant that I suspect Shatner would take a decent role on the cheap.

The 'Chef' idea was stupid, so I am glad to see that he passed on it.

 

[plynch]

A 50th Anniversary show without the first actor who portrayed the hero and protagonist of the first, iconic show for three groundbreaking seasons and six movies is preposterous. Sorry, Chris, Captain Kirk looks and sounds like Wm Shatner. If they had made some new Next Gen movies would you then not invite Patrick Stewart?

Bizarre.

 

[Arpy]

A 50th Anniversary show without the first actor who portrayed the hero and protagonist of the first, iconic show for three groundbreaking seasons and six movies is preposterous. Sorry, Chris, Captain Kirk looks and sounds like Wm Shatner. If they had made some new Next Gen movies would you then not invite Patrick Stewart?

Bizarre.

I'd love to see Shatner in a retrospective (a documentary or gala), but I don't think he can play Kirk looking like he does today. Actor and character have evolved along divergent paths over a lifetime.

Unless Shatner's portraying a Kirk who's been retired from Starfleeting for decades... A man who's more "epicurean" in his golden years... Is that James T. Kirk? From our universe?

Patrick Stewart's commented on how he wishes he could have played Hamlet, but that that's not going to happen.

Throw 50lbs on Stewart and then invite him to play Picard, last seen on that bridge in GEN? I don't think he'd accept.