No Nimoy and No Other Cameo Makes Star Trek XII Something Something...

[backstept]

Re: No Nimoy and No Other Cameo Makes Star Trek XII Something Somethin

The film had Nimoy as Spock, but it also had Wil Wheaton, Greg Ellis, a W. Morgan Sheppard -- all actors who have appeared on Trek before (some multiple times). There may be others I have missed, too. I wouldn't be surprised if more familiar faces appeared in supporting roles like that. But big cameos like Shatner or Nimoy? I don't expect it.

they should bring Mark Sheppard in to play the son of William Morgan Sheppard's character :P

I don't know why but I absolutely love family stunt casting

Sorbo's wife played his character's wife in Andromeda
Jerry O'Connell's brother Charlie played his' brother's character's brother on Sliders
can't think of any more at the moment but I love it

 

[Hythlodeus]

Re: No Nimoy and No Other Cameo Makes Star Trek XII Something Somethin

Sorbo's wife played his character's wife in Andromeda
Jerry O'Connell's brother Charlie played his' brother's character's brother on Sliders
can't think of any more at the moment but I love it

Jeff and Beau Bridges playing brothers in the Fabulous Baker Boys
Martin and Charlie Sheen playing father & son in Wall Street & Hot Shots 2
Almost everything the Olsen twins did

 

[I am not Spock]

Re: No Nimoy and No Other Cameo Makes Star Trek XII Something Somethin

You had Alexis Denisof playing opposite Alyson Hannigan (her real life husband) in How I Met Your Mother, IIRC.

Martin Sheen showed up in Two and a Half Men, didn't he?

Zooey Deshanel playing a relative of Emily's in Bones.

 

[Captain59]

Re: No Nimoy and No Other Cameo Makes Star Trek XII Something Somethin

I'd like to see Scott Bakula as Admiral Archer in the transporter room as Porthos reappears...maybe with Scotty there saying, "thank goodness" or something like that.

 

[Aragorn]

Re: No Nimoy and No Other Cameo Makes Star Trek XII Something Somethin

I'd like to see Scott Bakula as Admiral Archer in the transporter room as Porthos reappears...maybe with Scotty there saying, "thank goodness" or something like that.

That could've been a scene at the end of the credits of the last movie.

Martin Sheen showed up in Two and a Half Men, didn't he?

Yeah, as the father of Charlie's stalker.

 

[Trekkie2]

Re: No Nimoy and No Other Cameo Makes Star Trek XII Something Somethin

There are certain characters that might be needed, in the next movie, to further elaborate on unexplained instances from the previous movie. Is this more of a case of, "I don't really want to know if Spock & Chapel, Spock & Kirk, Spock & McCoy, Spock & Saavik, Spock & Uhura...were a couple in TOS?

 

[Tarek71]

Re: No Nimoy and No Other Cameo Makes Star Trek XII Something Somethin

It just occurred to me that the next Star Trek movie may be the first one not to feature any actor or actress from a previous Star Trek TV series. Nimoy's participation was essential to the story of the last movie, but now that its plot has been wrapped up and he's supposedly retired, I don't expect him to be back.

Also, Majel Barrett can't come back to voice the computer. Unless Shatner is somehow shoehorned in since he allegedly wants to make a cameo, I can't think of how or why anyone from a past Star Trek show could be involved. What do you guys think? Would it be a good thing or a bad thing for this movie to not have anyone from a Star Trek series?

I can't help but think of all the talk (including a currently active thread, last time I checked) about how the decision to include "Star Trek" cast members in "Star Trek: Generations" was one of the things that hurt the film. I agree with those who also believed that being an all TNG cast film was one of the reasons "Star Trek: First Contact" was able to work so much better than its predecessor.

Personally I think it would be nice to see Shatner in a Star Trek movie again, just to hopefully somewhat make up for the unpleasantness of his appearance in "Star Trek: Generations", which was a shitty way to go out. On the other hand, I can't think of a way to bring him in that wouldn't be implausible to the point where it just feels like an irritatingly forced fanwank. I won't be crushed if he's excluded and I'd rather not see him in the movie if writers can't find a way to use him that's organic to the story.

They could always play different characters. They are actors after all. Shatner has joked about the height difference between him and Pine and they look alot less alike than Quinto-Nimoy did. I wouldnt even have him in there as Kirk. Would he agree to play a different character? I dont know, and I dont know if theyd want him too. Though that would be interesting.

Yeah, Generations wasnt the best send off, but whats done is done, and while future Kirk in this new timeline may well have a different destiny, I think the physical differences would make it a bit of a stretch. More than a bit.

But honestly I see this as the recasting of any other character. Sherlock Homes, James Bond, Clark Kent, King Arthur, Peter Parker, etc. The actors that portrayed them in the past have moved on, some have died, etc and thats that. I liked Basil Rathbone as Holmes, but I liked Robert Downey Jr. even more. James T. Kirk, Spock and the rest have likewise moved on. The characters are immortal, not the actors, and thats fine. Chris Pine is Kirk now and every bit as much Kirk as Shatner was. The character doesnt "really" look like any one actor. Kirk looks like whoever is playing him at that moment.

 

[BlobVanDam]

Re: No Nimoy and No Other Cameo Makes Star Trek XII Something Somethin

They could always play different characters. They are actors after all. Shatner has joked about the height difference between him and Pine and they look alot less alike than Quinto-Nimoy did. I wouldnt even have him in there as Kirk. Would he agree to play a different character? I dont know, and I dont know if theyd want him too. Though that would be interesting.

Yeah, Generations wasnt the best send off, but whats done is done, and while future Kirk in this new timeline may well have a different destiny, I think the physical differences would make it a bit of a stretch. More than a bit.

But honestly I see this as the recasting of any other character. Sherlock Homes, James Bond, Clark Kent, King Arthur, Peter Parker, etc. The actors that portrayed them in the past have moved on, some have died, etc and thats that. I liked Basil Rathbone as Holmes, but I liked Robert Downey Jr. even more. James T. Kirk, Spock and the rest have likewise moved on. The characters are immortal, not the actors, and thats fine. Chris Pine is Kirk now and every bit as much Kirk as Shatner was. The character doesnt "really" look like any one actor. Kirk looks like whoever is playing him at that moment.

At this point in time, I disagree. Those other characters didn't have one actor be that role for 40 years. Kirk WAS Shatner. Spock WAS Nimoy. That will change over time as these new actors make more movies in these roles (and even other actors in the future), but as of right now these characters were very much defined by the actors who portrayed them.

It is only over time that Pine and Quinto will add their own characteristics to the characters (as they already have in the small amount of screen time they've had), and those characters will become larger than the actors, such as James Bond etc. So I wouldn't say Pine is as much Kirk as Shatner was yet, or likewise with Quinto. Assuming this franchise continues its popularity, they will definitely get there with time, but with only one movie to their credit, they're not there yet. They barely got the time to establish all of the characters in Trek XI, so maybe after the next movie I'll be more willing to agree.

I don't want this to sound like whining at the recasting though. I think they did a great casting job overall, and the actors have already put their own unique spin on the characters, and I'm supportive of the new franchise. I hope that they can carry the movie franchise to the point where they do get the screen time that the TOS cast had. That would be quite a feat.

 

[MacLeod]

Re: No Nimoy and No Other Cameo Makes Star Trek XII Something Somethin

We tend to associate actors with a character depedning on a number of things such as when we grew up and who we say first in that role. Sherlock Holmes has been mentioned to me Jeremy Brett (from the ITV adapataions) is Holmes, because that is whom I grew up seeing potray that role. As for Bond to me that's Sean Connery, though I grew up when a different actor potrayed him.

 

[Greg Cox]

Re: No Nimoy and No Other Cameo Makes Star Trek XII Something Somethin

We tend to associate actors with a character depedning on a number of things such as when we grew up and who we say first in that role. Sherlock Holmes has been mentioned to me Jeremy Brett (from the ITV adapataions) is Holmes, because that is whom I grew up seeing potray that role. As for Bond to me that's Sean Connery, though I grew up when a different actor potrayed him.

I remember being appalled when I discovered that my little brother (who is seventeen years younger than me) thought that Roger Moore was the "real" James Bond, but that's just the way it works. Moore was the Bond he grew up with.

Roles get recast. People adjust. And we get to see classic characters reinterpreted by successive generations of actors.

Which is how it should be.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Re: No Nimoy and No Other Cameo Makes Star Trek XII Something Somethin

Sherlock Homes, James Bond, Clark Kent, King Arthur, Peter Parker

These are not the best examples, because these characters already existed in other published media prior to their portrayal by any actor. The same cannot be said for Star Trek characters.

Better analogies exist in other film reboots of television series, such as The Wild Wild West, The Brady Bunch, Get Smart, and Land of the Lost. Note that these other examples had varying degrees of critical and commercial success.

Personally, I accept the new actors in Star Trek, although I have preferences. And, I have a greater issue with the writing, especially of Scotty and Chekov. But since they are only minor characters, the issues I have aren't show-stoppers.

 

[Greg Cox]

Re: No Nimoy and No Other Cameo Makes Star Trek XII Something Somethin

Sherlock Homes, James Bond, Clark Kent, King Arthur, Peter Parker

These are not the best examples, because these characters already existed in other published media prior to their portrayal by any actor. The same cannot be said for Star Trek characters.

.

To be honest, that's always seemed like an arbitrary distinction to me. Dracula is from a novel. The Wolf Man is not. But was Lon Chaney Jr. more iconic than Bela Lugosi?

I think not.

 

[Tarek71]

Re: No Nimoy and No Other Cameo Makes Star Trek XII Something Somethin

At this point in time, I disagree. Those other characters didn't have one actor be that role for 40 years. Kirk WAS Shatner. Spock WAS Nimoy. That will change over time as these new actors make more movies in these roles (and even other actors in the future), but as of right now these characters were very much defined by the actors who portrayed them.

For the generations that saw Rathbone as Holmes, he was Holmes. We can forget in later generations, just how iconic he was as Sherlock in his day. And these are, with respects to Star Trek, bigger characters then Kirk, Bones, Scotty or Spock in many ways. In any case, as others have noted, there will always be some who regard Connery as the definitive Bond or Chris Reeves as the definitive Superman, etc. Thats fine. The characters live on, even though, alas, the actors are mortal.

For myself, I accepted Pine and Quinto as Kirk and Spock from minute one. The secondary characters of course are even more easily replaced.

 

[Tarek71]

Re: No Nimoy and No Other Cameo Makes Star Trek XII Something Somethin

Sherlock Homes, James Bond, Clark Kent, King Arthur, Peter Parker

These are not the best examples, because these characters already existed in other published media prior to their portrayal by any actor. The same cannot be said for Star Trek characters.

Well I am of course referring to the televised and movie portrayals. Yes Bond existed in novels, but Sean Connery and Roger Moore, etc brought him to life in ways that defined and embodied the character for 10s and 100s of millions of fans for decades. Superman, Holmes, Batman, etc were likewise brought to life by actors, some of whom were iconic in the role.

But this doesnt prevent someone else from stepping in and doing so in a way that not only puts a new face to the character for a new generation, but can even give many of us who are used to someone else, a reason to think anew.