Mr Abrams, why no Kirk yet a new ship design?

[RobertScorpio]

They are using Kirk's death in GENERATIONS as a reason not to bring him back. Yet, they seem to be tweeking aspects of known continuity by the very fact the ship won't look the same and some plot points my differ from what has come.

I am all for a reboot because I think the continuity of TREK has been stretched. I have no problem with just starting over and saying none of it happen. But I don't like how they can cherry pick what they will and will not follow, and use this as a reason to keep the most famous person ever involved with Trek, Shatner (sorry Nimoy just doesn't have Shatner's stature now) out of the movie.

 

[Balrog]

They are playing with the design, but staying true to story canon...

 

[StarMan]

^Yep. And unless TPTB are willing to devote an entire movie to ShatnerKirk's return, he's likely to stay dead. Christ, it's well over a decade now since Kirk went "Oh... my." and there's still a contingent determined to bring him back from the brink. Amazing.

Though I am amenable to Cogley's Boston Legal style ending. :thumbsup:

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

STC's ending would be fine. It doesn't appear to be what they're doing, though.

Of course, if they were going to do it they wouldn't want to talk about it.

Nonetheless, the "he's in but they're hiding it" conspiracy theory really doesn't fly. Abrams and his folks have been as direct about this as they can be under the circumstances.

Oh, and Kirk is in the movie - he's a major character.

 

[Outpost4]

Rest in peace, Captain Kirk.

 

[Arlo]

RobertScorpio said:
sorry Nimoy just doesn't have Shatner's stature now

I disagree with this statement on every conceivable level.

 

[shapeshifter]

Frankly I'm surprised Shat would want to bring Kirk back, doing so may contradict The Return thus dooming his novel canon to the trash heap.

As long as Kirk stays dead in the filmed canon, his novel canon stays intact. (unless they screenplay The Return)

 

[Woulfe]

The Enterprise was in MTV's PIMP MY RIDE, see the spinning rims on it ?
Shatner wasn't in that show, just the Enterprise
- W -
* Smirks *

 

[martin]

I have always preferred Spock to Kirk, so having a SPOCK-CENTRIC film is a plus point.

 

[Jessop]

Why not just get over the fact that William Shatner is not in this movie already? and so what if the ship won't look the same, how do YOU know it wasn't refit between construction and TOS?

 

[seigezunt]

last time I checked, Kirk IS in this movie. Just not Shatner.

 

[Holytomato]

Bring...Back...The...Shat!!!!...!!!!...!!!!

 

[archeryguy1701]

Mr Shatner: Are you on these boards somewhere orchestrating this movement? I only ask because god knows that every single one of your Trek books involves a Kirk resurrection, and at least 1 Kirk, if not 2 or 3. Listen, you've moved on. You're beyond Trek now. You've got a fancy new job with lots of money and awards in it for you. You don't need Trek. Just be happy you started quite the legacy. Stop egging us on, and allow fans to cut the Shat from their expectations.
Sincerely,
Concerned fan

 

[JonPaulWild]

The klingons seen in the Kirk era movies are different to those seen in the TOS TV series, so does that mean that the movies are a 'reboot'? At the time there was no explanation, and only due to a spin off show many, many years later we have a cannon explanation.

At the end of the day, James T Kirk is dead. Yes, he should of died a better and more heroic death, but what's happened has happened.

It's like bringing back Khan for another film. Maybe the best villan in Star Trek, but he's dead and that's that - same applies to the character of Kirk.

Also, am sure if the original people involved in 'The Motion Picture' thought that having the Enterprise as it appeared in the tv series would look good on the big screen then they would of done that, but no they changed it. However, all they had to say was that it was a 'refit' and obviously very plausible way to have the same ship on the big screen but look a million times more realistic and better.

At the end of the day the Enterprise has to be modified from the 1960's tv series look to the big screen of today for plausibility, and thus that means change. It's not so much a new ship design, it's just a highly detailed version of the 1960's tv show. There's no 3rd nacelle, and I suspect that there will still be the satellite dish style deflector.

So I just wish everyone would get over their little problems.

 

[JoeZhang]

Wait - people think that Shatner has more connection to his books than picking up a pay cheque?

 

[Kegek]

Well, I think there's two reasons:

1) From what I can gather, the film has ambiguous continuity. It'll change how everything looks and recast characters, but doesn't seem that concerned in simply overriding previous plots as well. I suspect it doesn't need to do to whatever it is it wants to do.

2) The writers, producers et cetera probably feel that the film works fine the way it is and inserting Shatner, even without explanation, wouldn't improve the film much. This is doubtless the more important movitator, keeping Shatner out for story reasons.

 

[Noname Given]

RobertScorpio said:
They are using Kirk's death in GENERATIONS as a reason not to bring him back. Yet, they seem to be tweeking aspects of known continuity by the very fact the ship won't look the same and some plot points my differ from what has come.

I am all for a reboot because I think the continuity of TREK has been stretched. I have no problem with just starting over and saying none of it happen. But I don't like how they can cherry pick what they will and will not follow, and use this as a reason to keep the most famous person ever involved with Trek, Shatner (sorry Nimoy just doesn't have Shatner's stature now) out of the movie.

Um, your premise is flawed. JJ Abrams 'Star Trek' DOES have 'James T. Kirk' in it (a new 'James T. Kirk'); AS WELL AS a new 'Starship Enterprise'. Also, from everything that's been leaked - the film ISN'T a reboot (and has leonord Nimor reprising the 'Mr. Spock' role in the 'future'; as well as two new actors also playing 'Mr. Spock'.

Makes perfect sense to me.

 

[Dale]

JoeZhang said:
Wait - people think that Shatner has more connection to his books than picking up a pay cheque?

Oh, I'm sure he has lunch with Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens a few times during the writing process, maybe even makes a few "Hey, what if Kirk did thus-and-such" suggestions.

 

[intense]

archeryguy1701 said:

Mr Shatner: Are you on these boards somewhere orchestrating this movement? I only ask because god knows that every single one of your Trek books involves a Kirk resurrection, and at least 1 Kirk, if not 2 or 3. Listen, you've moved on. You're beyond Trek now. You've got a fancy new job with lots of money and awards in it for you. You don't need Trek. Just be happy you started quite the legacy. Stop egging us on, and allow fans to cut the Shat from their expectations.
Sincerely,
Concerned fan

Now you listen to me you upstart.

I am the creator .I AM THE KIRK.

I want to be in this film .I am incensed that CAWLEY IMPERSONATOR HAS USURPED ME.

I will avenge me.

My people need me.I am the leader.

Now mind your own business.I am sick of your half breed interference.


Glowering Look.

 

[FlyingTigress]

Hey. He has already received the money for "The Return", so, that's not an issue.