Shatner took Russian money. He'd been urged to rethink it for a long time but defended his actions for keeping his show on a Putin Propadanda machine until earlier this year when he hardly had a choice. Fuck Shatner. It seems like everyone that has to deal with him ends up regretting it. I can enjoy his performances in the past without connecting it to the person, but I won't go watch anything he's in, going forward.
Patrick Stewart had an amazing send off in Logan, but came back for a Doctor Strange cameo. Patrick Stewart had an amazing/awful (delete as applicable in several month's time) send off in Picard season 3 but may come back for another Star Trek movie. A pattern emerges.
Until Doctor Strange, Patrick Stewart wasn’t a part of the MCU. It would make sense he’d come back for that, despite his sendoff in Logan. With the Star Trek movie, they’ve been trying to get that crossover film made since Nemesis. And he likely would have been the lead had it actually been made back then.
You think Stewart took that role out of a desire to legitimise himself in terms of the MCU? I think he came back because he was offered a fat cheque for a small amount of work.
I seriously doubt he's bothered by which in-multiverse continuity his character was a part of. Especially since the version of Professor X he played was again not from the universe of 99.9% of MCU movies.
*shrug* It is possible to do both I suppose. I just don’t see why a sixty year veteran of stage, and screen both big and small, an OBE, a legend within both serious acting circles and commercial Hollywood, a literal icon who’s work will still be watched, admired, studied and remembered for decades after his death would be somehow be niggled enough that his iteration of Professor X wasn’t properly a part of the MCU to accept a role on the basis of becoming such, albeit tangentially. I think he doesn’t care. I think it’s even possible that he doesn’t know what MCU means. I certainly don’t think it’s kept him awake at night for all these years. But yeah, I suppose it is possible to do both.
Next thing you know they'll say Star Trek is dead because Gene Roddenberry hated Star Trek II as too militaristic, Star Trek III because they had James T Kirk destroying the 1701 to save his crew (because the back then suddenly the 1701 itself was his favorite 'character'...) My point? William Shatner himself forgets that he was in a lot of Star Trek that Gene Roddenberry didn't consider Star Trek. Had Gene Roddenberry been deceased at the time those two films were released, he'd be "...turning over in his grave..." back then too. And do remember that until he got a big paycheck in Star Trek Generations, Shatner didn't think Star Trek the Next Generation was actual 'Star Trek' either. As for "...Burning Bridges...", if you read comments over the years from Nichelle Nichols, George Takei, James Doohan, and Walter Koenig, William Shatner's been doing that in Star Trek since 1966. (personally I think that's more of their egos than anything unique that Shatner as the lead of his series was actually doing during the original Star Trek. Shatner was just acting like the majority of series leads of that era. He was responsible for carrying the show, so he made suggestions that he felt we're good for the show that was on his shoulders.) And really, are those latest comments any worse than his SNL "... get a life..." skit back in the '80s? So William Shatner doesn't think much of current Star Trek, and believes Gene Roddenberry wouldn't either. That's his opinion, and he's welcome to it; but Rod Roddenberry would probably disagree (although the latter would disagree only because he's getting a big paycheck for doing nothing but being the only Roddenberry left to put his name on the franchise, and if he didn't toe the line, Rod would have to get a real job and actually work for a living.) As a Star Trek fan since 1969, I don't care what other people (including Gene Roddenberry, and William Shatner) think regarding Productions they're not more than tangentially involved with, or not really involved with it all. I'm sure like Rod Roddenberry, if Paramount handed Shatner a check with enough zeros attached, he'd feel modern Star Trek was the best thing ever; and as for Rod Roddenberry, he's already gone on record stating that he believes his father would be proud of what they're doing. But yeah, in the end, I don't care what they think. I watch what I like and I avoid what I don't. And with respect to Star Trek there's a lot I like and some incarnations of Trek I don't like. But that's me.
I don't want to see William Shatner in another Star Trek production and that's all I have to say about that. And fortunately, that's not going to ever happen. No one's changing my opinion, so don't bother. 10 more people can reply to me and it's not going to make me say, "I see the light now! Shatner's great!" I hate to break it to a lot of you, but he's not. I haven't even bothered to read half the replies to me. I don't even see any point. I like Kirk, I don't like Shatner, and especially not these days. It's not that hard of a concept to grasp. "Star Trek wouldn't be here today without William Shatner!" Yeah, well, I think Leonard Nimoy and Spock had more than a hand too. Spock was the breakout character of TOS, not Kirk. As far as Patrick Stewart -- the actual topic of this thread -- as long as they have him play his age, whatever. It's fine. I think he'd be in a Streaming Movie anyway. As far as Cinematic Films -- that we go to the theater to see -- that's Chris Pine, all the way, if they can start shooting these things again. Exactly my position.
Ah. God. This conversation is a headache. I'm out. Maybe Stewart will do something and not much to talk about beyond that. *shrug*
Of course he's open to the idea, very few actors are not open to ideas. They might turn down specific projects for a variety of reasons but when the questions is about a hypothetical thing in the future the answer is pretty much always an automatic "Yes, if ...".