Then why give us this speech and then not deliver? Why pitch us the fun blue sports wagon but then deliver the Family Truckster?
Paul Wesley's incarnation of James T. Kirk
- Thread starter Caeruleus
- Start date
Then why give us this speech and then not deliver? Why pitch us the fun blue sports wagon but then deliver the Family Truckster?
Here's my view and probably inaccurate. I think Sam pitched a Kirk as he regards him, and how his dad views him. But, this Kirk isn't there yet. He has the potential to be so, but lacks the experience to back up what his brother knows he can be around others, like Pike. It takes more experience, and support from people like Spock, to let it all the way out.
What I expect is Kirk will be that way in Season 2.
Shatner was a solid man in TOS, verging on a little overweight at times - but muscled overweight, not soft overweight. Pine was a bit more 2000s-fit, but not what I'd call slim. Wesley is just a lot slimmer and lanky. I don't feel like he could throw a punch.
I'm not body shaming, I'm the last one to do that. But Kirk as a character keeps himself fairly strong and clearly enjoys a burger (to the point that McCoy has put him on a salad diet before). Kirk 3.0 looks like he enjoys a nice tofu burger. And that's great; he seems healthy, but he isn't built like Kirk should be.
I'm not body shaming, I'm the last one to do that. But Kirk as a character keeps himself fairly strong and clearly enjoys a burger (to the point that McCoy has put him on a salad diet before). Kirk 3.0 looks like he enjoys a nice tofu burger. And that's great; he seems healthy, but he isn't built like Kirk should be.
^^^
Yep, that last part you mentioned is my main issue with his interpretation of the James T. Kirk character. (And I think it's a character aspect Kirk always had and would have even if he never met Spock.)
As for 'looks' IMO he looks as similar to William Shatner as Chris Pine does, so no the resemblance (or lack thereof isn't an issue for me.)
This Kirk has good bones. I see a stack of books with legs type, for sure. 8-10 years before TOS is a long time, a lot can happen in that time.
Some future encounter with a strange new alien could cause growth towards the Kirk we know he becomes. Or he'll simply grow up.
Some future encounter with a strange new alien could cause growth towards the Kirk we know he becomes. Or he'll simply grow up.
This episode was encouraging in so many ways and a real step in the right direction for the series - tone, production design, gravitas - even the cinematography some how captured a bit of the stylized dramatic lighting of the original series. Unfortunately, the choice of Kirk was not one such step. The guy is a fine actor but seemed well out of the tradition of Kirk. 1) he doesn't really resemble him much. Shatner, for all the criticism of having let himself go during the course of the series, was extremely fit and athletic at the beginning. This actor seems a little to pencil neck for me. This actor seems closer to a Rob Lowe than a Bill Shatner. It feels symptomatic of a broader problem where all the new Treks becoming a "no testosterone zone," lacking swagger. I suppose some say that's a good thing. To me the shows loose something when the Captains lack a kind of flawed swagger. When casting someone as iconic as Kirk, you need an actor that can - at least - physically live up to the legend. I agree with Sisko_is_my_Captain. There was a lot of talk about Kirk's qualities, but none of them were on display in the episode. That's why Chris Pine was such a great choice, he embodied/honored Shatner's approach, but made it his own as well.
Though it certainly wasn't entirely the actors fault, unfortunately, blowing that critical choice truly hurt the episode.
Though it certainly wasn't entirely the actors fault, unfortunately, blowing that critical choice truly hurt the episode.
No one is backing out of anything, but it is a way to describe Sam's opinion of his brother that does work, whether you want to take it or not.
Last edited:
The issue I have isn't that his Kirk is self-questioning at times (in private with people he trusts); it's that he displays that trait quite often in the episode, and "in public" in front of a crew.
I wouldn't have had an issue if they did a scene between Kirk and La'an ,(who I thought was his Exec on the Farragut) - but yeah, questioning himself as much as he did, and doing so in public.
^^^
Not something I believe Kirk would do.
Also, the way he performed the character, he came across as too deferential/submissive to Pike (who isn't even his superior officer) - and the Kirk of 2267 was never afraid to give a superior officer an earful when Kirk believed he was right - regardless of protocol or regulations (see TOS - The Menagerie, Court Martial, The Doomsday Machine for clear examples) - and it wasn't the writing - Kirk WAS giving Pike his thoughts, but not in a forceful or self-confident way <--- At least with how I saw his portrayal on the screen.
So yeah, these things are my main issues with his portrayal of Kirk.
Last edited:
I'll tell you, I'm not too keen on Paul Wesley's Kirk. Yet. And I find the creative claims that he is the way he is in "A Quality of Mercy" fairly odd - he's different because he didn't spend all that time with Spock and McCoy. But that would only have been six-odd months at the point of "Balance of Terror", correct? Though I suppose what we could end up with here is the revelation that Kirk and Spock, especially, had already forged a friendship several years prior to the moment that Kirk took command of the Enterprise. That would work.
Regardless, there's plenty of time for the character as we saw him to be "avoided", so to speak, and replaced with someone more recognizable - dare I say, more impressive. Whether the actor is the right fit for that arc remains to be seen, but the casting team has a great streak with modern Trek, IMO, so I'd be a bit surprised if it ends up a total failure.
Amusing anecdote. Neither of my roommates enjoy classic Kirk very much. Nor do they care for Pine's rendition, though they like him a bit better.
The off-kilter representation of Kirk as seen in Wesley's is probably the least offensive of the batch, so he's probably their favorite already by default, haha.
Regardless, there's plenty of time for the character as we saw him to be "avoided", so to speak, and replaced with someone more recognizable - dare I say, more impressive. Whether the actor is the right fit for that arc remains to be seen, but the casting team has a great streak with modern Trek, IMO, so I'd be a bit surprised if it ends up a total failure.
Amusing anecdote. Neither of my roommates enjoy classic Kirk very much. Nor do they care for Pine's rendition, though they like him a bit better.
The off-kilter representation of Kirk as seen in Wesley's is probably the least offensive of the batch, so he's probably their favorite already by default, haha.
As of BoT, we don't know how long they had all served together. It could have been a year or more.
Yeah, thanks. And in truth, people can have a serious impact on each other in a short period of time. It just felt a little odd to me, somehow.
I don't think there's ever any indication in TOS that this is a new crew with a new commander. The first season and even WNMHGB, show a group of people with a long standing working relationship. Some are closer that others. Our first data points are from the Menagerie, which indicates Spock has served with Kirk for two years and with Pike for the previous eleven. Placing Kirk assumption command in 2264. Some like to place WNMHGB in 2264, but I think it happens later in that two year period. Shortly before Corbomite, if going by production order. Which gives time for the crew to "gel".
If we go by TNG's "PARRELLS" ... They already are.Maybe Kirk can be non Caucasian or even female one day? The sky is the limit…
In the comics it already happened.Maybe Kirk can be non caucasian or even female one day? The sky is the limit…
According to Star Trek Encyclopedia it was 2263.
This has important implications on metaphysical, quantum and philosophical levels. Possibly on other levels that I have not been made aware of too. In a true multi verse any one can be anything or anyone at any time if we want them to be, and no one would ever know the difference as we all perceive the multiverse though our own perception and experiential existence so we can use our imaginations to ‘de-buff’ what is being dictated or enforced on to us. If we disagree with something we can agree to differ and view the difference through our own narrative and perspective which is acceptable to us and allows our opinion or impression to run parallel with that of another view or interpretation which differs. This is like us creating our own parallel universes in our minds. This means we can all get along because even if we see something differently we see it abstractly in a parallel way that is acceptable from both of our perspectives. I could look at Kirk and see a women, you could look at Kirk and see a man. Someone else could look at Kirk and see a ‘they’ or even a toaster. We are all looking at the same character though. Maybe Kirk should be portrayed in an ’artistically fluid way’? We are all looking at the same character as previously mentioned, we are just projecting our own physical perception of the character through our own unique lense? We have our own imaginations. We do need to respect the original intentions of the people who created the characters though, as they had a vision and as Star Trek fans we should try to respect this and make sure that TBTB follow canon. As long as a character embodies it’s original artistic intention as intended by their creator, physically it should not matter how they are portrayed? They do need to keep it realistic and not try to push boundaries for the sake of it, or to troll Kirk fans… we are still only human and we like familiarity. No one should change things for shock value or to make a point though. If it is not broken then there is no need to fix it. Kirk was never really broken, so in my mind he does not need to become a women… yet.
Similar threads
