A word to Bill Shatner....

I never thought I'd hear myself say this, but I hope this film TANKS. Then hopefully we'll no longer see them trying to reinvent the wheel. Then just maybe we'll get something fresh and move forward.

 

All you want is rehashes of TOS so how do you expect to move forward?

The only reason TOS is alive today is thanks to all the other Trek series you dismess as "trying to reinvent the wheel"

Of course you want the film to fail because if it doesnt that means Trek can (as it has) survive without the holier than thou TOS.

 

This is how I feel about the TOS characters themselves, not the actors.
I want TRULY new stuff, not recasting characters that somebody else created.

 

Then you know nothing. Because rehash is all we're likely to get with just a little glossier finish.

 

Huh? Please show me when/where JJ Abrhams EVER produced anything 'Star Trek' before.

That's like holding Alexander Salkind responsible for the 1950ies Superman series in 1978, when he tried his first take on the Superman mythos.

 

^^ C'mon.. You don't want facts to get in the way of yet another singular minded Trek purist rant.

 

I don't give a shit. Abrahms is beholding to those signing his paycheque--they have the final word. Besides which I don't have any confidence in him either. He can say all he wants and it's just more goddamned hype in a world spilling over with super hype over all manner of mediocrity.

There are those who are predesposed to like this forthcoming project and good for them and thats their right. Or maybe they just haven't seen enough shit in life or come accross enough broken promises. But TPTB and anyone associated with them have burnt all bridges of credibility with me. Fuck 'em. They'll have to produce a freaking miracle to lure me back and I don't think they can do it.

Furthermore as far as I'm concerned Star Trek is DONE. It will never come back they way I'd like it to. In my heart I would love to see more NEW adventures of Kirk, Spock et al and the Enterprise, but I live in the real world and know that will never happen again except in my imagination. Simply because Shatner is Kirk, Nimoy is Spock, Deforest Kelly is McCoy and all the rest, but they are now gone and/or no longer what they once were. And the wonderful creative team that was TOS' crew production is also past.

And I'm okay with that because nothing lasts forever. I don't need or even want new faces on characters that are already well established and cemented in my mind. That would be like some interloper trying to step into my father's place or my best friend's and trying to convince me that they're really those I know and love--ain't gonna happen so they might as well not waste the effort trying. I wouldn't mind some new Star Trek, but let it be something genuinely new and moving forward rather than trying to ressurect ghosts.

You guys wanna think I'm irrational, then fine. Think whatever you like, but I've got a pretty good sense of bullshit when I see or hear it and we'll see what comes done the pipe.

And while I suspect Shatner regrets letting himself be talked into letting Kirk be killed off I still think he should give this a pass and stay as far away as possible from this thing. He's made his mark and should just let it go. Candidly Nimoy should do the same. I'd actually respect them more if they did veto any participation in this project.

So what the hell was TNG? And DS9? And VOY? And Enterfake? Weren't those new interpretations as crappy as most of it was?

TNG was actually a valid idea that regrettably was mostly messed up. But if it had been done well it would have been something to admire. And thats my point: learn from the original, both good and ill, and apply that to something NEW and go forward.

 

I'm fully aware of the precedent. In fact, I mentioned in my post that Shatner has done it before. Still dont think Nimoy will do it without Shatner. He's retired for one thing. The TNG episode was different. In Unification the story was Spock-centric. This movie is (allegedly) about the early years of Kirk and Spock. No matter how popular Spock is, Kirk was always the star of the show. He's the Captain. I can see Shatner without Nimoy. Cant see it the other way around.

Oh, and theres no need for the rolly eyes. When I said "story" I was referring to the "Nimoy in Shatner out" story (the subject of this thread), not the script for Trek XI. I'm not one of those internet lunatics that plans to boycott this film if it isnt precisely what they envisioned in their heads. Step into any thread in FoT and you'll see I'm postive in regards to this new adventure.

Of course I actually know nothing. I'm merely speculating, but unfounded speculation is one of the building blocks upon which the internet was built.

Why should we stop now?

 

Yes, because William Shatner always overacted. In every single frame of film he's ever been filmed on. Not just a handful of season three episodes, but every episode of TOS and everything he's worked on since then. That's why he won all those Emmys.

 

But do we really want an overacting caricature of Shatner? This new Kirk has to do a tough balancing act.

 

Why does it have to be an overacting caricature? The new actor doesn't need to play it for laughs by pretending to be William Shatner. He could just sneak in a few subtle mannerisms of Shatner sprinkled in certain scenes of the film, if he wanted to. Daniel Craig occasionally spruced his lips like Sean Connery in Casino Royale.

 

Shatner won Emmies for how many SERIOUS roles? (Boston Legal and The Practice don't count for "serious roles", IMO.) And how many for playing Kirk?

Just checking?

 

To add a bit more kindling to the fire, it was predicted that one day the original would be recast as far back as 1979-1980.

From Susan Sackett's book, The Making of Star Trek: The Motion Picture :

Like others, I too prefer the Shatner-Nimoy-Kelly trio. Like others, I have a favorite Bond and Superman/Clark Kent. But I am prefectly willing to allow others come in and bring something new to the table.

All this is just fear that the image of perfection that one holds in one's head will be shattered. It is like getting a new toy and realizing that it isn't as bright and shiny as your imagnation made it seem when you first saw the commercial for it.

And if the new guys don't do it for anyone, then the original still endures. It's there. It will always be there. Just as George Reeves' Superman is still there. Just as Chris Reeve's Superman is still there. Routh's Superman didn't just eradicate those when he did Returns, and I still enjoyed it.

 

30 million people per week didnt consider TNG to be crappy so while your entitled to your opinion it holds very little weight.

Just take a look at your quote, its clear that no matter hgow good any Trek is youll never accept it, and why? because its not TOS.

As I said TOS wouldnt be the "icon" it is today if it werent for all the other Treks that added to its legacy.

And TrekBBS would have a significantly smaller membership if TOS were the only Trek made.

In all honesty I find TOS to be comical and not at all interesting. But do I need to bash it just to make myself feel better about Enterprise being cancelled after 4 seasons or Nemesis not being a good movie? no.

You TOS Fundamentalists have a twisted 1 road vision of everything Trek related.

But since Fundamentalists are a small minority Trek can survive despite your protest and progress quite nicely with its legions of no so fundamentalist fans.

 

Why should a much younger Kirk act exactly as he did in TOS?

 

This guy has the general "fundamentalist" concept right (re:Trek) but generally-speaking he's all over the board!

 

Am I an odd bird? LOL! My favorite Star Treks are in this order; TOS, Enterprise and TNG. I liked Voyager and DS9 all right, but the three I listed are my three favorites!