One man's theory on why Shatner is going to be in Star trek

[gastrof]

Re: One man's theory on why Shatner is going to be in Star t

StarMan said:
^Doesn't seem very Picard like.

Then again, perhaps such Un-Picard-like behavior was the first step towards the Un-Picard-like behavior later observed (see: taking a dump on the prime directive all for a spin).

God, I sound *angry* over that. Sorry, I'm not.

From what we hear, Kirk was all "right on the money" early in his career. In Lt. Kirk's classes, you either sink, or swim.

Later, perhaps, he became the cowboy we know.

Picard? Some people are late bloomers.

 

[EliyahuQeoni]

Re: One man's theory on why Shatner is going to be in Star t

I doubt very much that Spock would disrupt the time stream for purely selfish reasons. Traveling back in time to repair damage done by others is one thing, doing unforseeable damage by trying to tell Kirk about his fate is quite another.

When Spock disobeyed orders to save Pike he had served with him for over 11 years and known him for close to 15. Hardly a "short time." And taking Pike to Talos IV didn't have the potential of distrupting the flow of history.

 

[gastrof]

Re: One man's theory on why Shatner is going to be in Star t

Belar said:
Spock served under Pike for eleven years (Memory Alpha).

Thank you, Belar.

Add to the 11 years of service all the years that passed after that (up to the events of THE MENAGERIE), and I'd say we have evidence that Spock knew Pike longer than he's known Kirk.

 

[shortround]

Re: One man's theory on why Shatner is going to be in Star t

You are right he(spock) did know pike longer but now that he(spock) is going back in time he(spock) will introduce young spock to young kirk so they(young spock/old spock) will know pike and kirk about the same amount of time.
God I hate time travel and reboots

 

[Superman]

Re: One man's theory on why Shatner is going to be in Star t

Belar said:

Superman said:

Belar said:
Welcome to this board, shortround. William Shatner won't be in Star Trek XI. Period.

You have ZERO PROOF OF THIS.

PERIOD.

\S/

You mean more proof than Orci, Abrams, Nimoy AND Shatner continually stating it? I for one don't need much more. But YMWV. Period.

So you honestly believe that they're going to come out and say this?:

"Oh yeah, Shatner's in the film. He plays himself in the 24th century. He's alive."

Riggghht.

The fact is, Abrams has proved time and again that he loves misdirection and mystery.

So simply using statements made by him and others that Shatner isn't in the film is a ludicrous basis for "fact."

\S/

 

[StarMan]

Re: One man's theory on why Shatner is going to be in Star t

Misdirection is one thing; flat out lying is another.

 

[Son_of_Soong]

Re: One man's theory on why Shatner is going to be in Star t

Guess it depends whether he can live with lying.

 

[Michael]

Re: One man's theory on why Shatner is going to be in Star t

Superman said:

Belar said:

Superman said:

Belar said:
Welcome to this board, shortround. William Shatner won't be in Star Trek XI. Period.

You have ZERO PROOF OF THIS.

PERIOD.

\S/

You mean more proof than Orci, Abrams, Nimoy AND Shatner continually stating it? I for one don't need much more. But YMWV. Period.

So you honestly believe that they're going to come out and say this?:

"Oh yeah, Shatner's in the film. He plays himself in the 24th century. He's alive."

Riggghht.

The fact is, Abrams has proved time and again that he loves misdirection and mystery.

So simply using statements made by him and others that Shatner isn't in the film is a ludicrous basis for "fact."

\S/

Hey Superman, the thing is I really don't want to fight. You're right; I don't know for a fact that William Shatner won't be in the movie. But because of the producer's comments I think it's very unlikley. We will see. Maybe we have to agree to disagree here. So let's leave it at that.

On another note, and please don't get me wrong, will you be able to enjoy the movie even without Shatner? And again, I mean this question in all seriousness.

 

[JoeZhang]

Re: One man's theory on why Shatner is going to be in Star t

He's dead - he fell off a bridge. Shatner is not going to be in this movie.

 

[Son_of_Soong]

Re: One man's theory on why Shatner is going to be in Star t

I thought the bridge fell on him :-P

 

[Arlo]

Re: One man's theory on why Shatner is going to be in Star t

Ya know, I would be glad to have the Shat back if it meant having Generations officially declared non-canon.

 

[Son_of_Soong]

Re: One man's theory on why Shatner is going to be in Star t

Aint going to happen, the Destruction of the Enterprise D was kinda important :-P

 

[blaXXer]

Re: One man's theory on why Shatner is going to be in Star t

cant we condense all those shatner stuff into one single topic?

 

[Maxwell Everett]

Re: One man's theory on why Shatner is going to be in Star t

Superman said:

Belar said:

Superman said:

Belar said:
Welcome to this board, shortround. William Shatner won't be in Star Trek XI. Period.

You have ZERO PROOF OF THIS.

PERIOD.

\S/

You mean more proof than Orci, Abrams, Nimoy AND Shatner continually stating it? I for one don't need much more. But YMWV. Period.

So you honestly believe that they're going to come out and say this?:

"Oh yeah, Shatner's in the film. He plays himself in the 24th century. He's alive."

Riggghht.

The fact is, Abrams has proved time and again that he loves misdirection and mystery.

So simply using statements made by him and others that Shatner isn't in the film is a ludicrous basis for "fact."

\S/

It's not ludicrous, it's reasonable. It is simply all the evidence we have available to us at this point, because we aren't insiders.

Look, this isn't my conversation... and I'm not trying to pick a fight... because this is such an inconsequential argument in my opinion... but I'd just like to stand up for logic for a moment and point out that in the absence of a confirmatory picture or video of Shatner, in costume, standing before Abram's Panavision camera, delivering lines, YOU ALSO do not have any proof that he IS in the film. Until that happens, you are merely arguing from ignorance.

And ignorance is not evidence. The fact that we fans cannot prove 100% that Shatner is NOT in the film does not prove that he IS in the film. In other words, not being able to prove to your satisfaction that Abram's isn't lying doesn't prove that he is. To argue this way is to make an argument to ignorance.

The "fact" that Abrams "loves misdirection and mystery" does not in any way serve as evidence that Shatner is or is not in Star Trek XI.

All we have are the statements of Abrams and Co. that he was not written into the screenplay and it was not the story they were telling. That sounds -- at least -- credible, and until we have a reason to believe otherwise, you should find it credible too. Also, something may change between now and December.

Now let's just hope we enjoy the movie when it arrives. I, at least, will give it a fair shot -- with or without Shatner.

 

[scotthm]

Re: One man's theory on why Shatner is going to be in Star t

gastrof said:
If, however, we're saying Kirk was rescued from Enterprise B before the nexus ribbon grabbed him, then that leaves the entire TNG crew dead at Soran's hands, along with the people of the planet in that system, because Kirk wouldn't have been in the nexus for Picard to ask for help from.

You do know that Kirk and Picard are both still in the nexus? Picard just imagines that they escaped and defeated Soran.

Now back to topic.

I don't expect Shatner to be in this film, but if changes to the timeline can alter the design of the Enterprise, or other incidental things we're going to see, I don't see why it couldn't subtly alter Kirk's future to the point that he never enters the nexus and is among the living a bit longer than we'd previously thought.

---------------

 

[Son_of_Soong]

Re: One man's theory on why Shatner is going to be in Star t

If the series deals with alternate realities then in one of them Kirk probably survived Generations.

 

[Superman]

Re: One man's theory on why Shatner is going to be in Star t

^^^That would seem to be a real possibility, given recent story leaks (see Trek Today news story in the news sidebar)

And Belar, I don't want to fight, either.

As to whether or not I'll enjoy Trek XI without Shatner, well, the truth is...I don't know. I can't say until after I see the film.

However, if he really isn't in it (proof of which right now is like proving/disproving God's existence) than I'll be extremely disappointed and will probably not watch the film more than once.

\S/

 

[JoeZhang]

Re: One man's theory on why Shatner is going to be in Star t

 

[Kinnison]

Re: One man's theory on why Shatner is going to be in Star t

scotthm said:
You do know that Kirk and Picard are both still in the nexus? Picard just imagines that they escaped and defeated Soran.

If that means that the last three Trek movies are just a bad dream, then I'm all for it! (Hides)

 

[PointedEars04]

Re: One man's theory on why Shatner is going to be in Star t

Spock wouldn't disrupt the timeline for personal reasons. City on the Edge of Forever?

Jim, Edith Keeler must die.

For the good of the future, and all those unforeseen consequences, old Spock will not tell young Spock about the future, unless it is absolutely necessary to completing the task at hand.