shatner will be in XI

[rotorbotor]

You are a kindred spirit.

You are seeing a significant point that WILLIAM SHATNER is the DEFINITION of Kirk Such that the two are indefinable apart.

The paradigm which you realize in your view drives at the dichotomy of the dual aspect that William Shatner himself said his shadow was not a dark shape without light but was Kirk.

William SHATNER SHOULD AND MUST BE IN THIS FILM as he defines Star Trek without equivacation or iconic despair.

I understand from a source that the REAL reason for the delay and postponement is William Shatner who will be in the film in such a way that 2 films are being shot that he is one but not both allowing people to see both versions and nearly doubling the gross for the film.

Abrams proves his geniuosity again.

That man is cunningness on legs.

 

[Arlo]

^ As of May, 2009, Chris Pine is Kirk. Get over it.

 

[CommanderRaytas]

The fun part is we all end up clicking on these threads and posting our opinions no matter how many there have been already.... over and over and over again.

Tee-hee.

 

[archeryguy1701]

rotorbotor said:
William SHATNER SHOULD AND MUST BE IN THIS FILM as he defines Star Trek without equivacation or iconic despair.

Given a choice between Shatner Trek and Avery Brooks Trek, I'll take Brooks Trek any day. So, the Shat isn't doing a whole lot of defining of anything for me.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

rotorbotor said:
I understand from a source that the REAL reason for the delay and postponement is William Shatner who will be in the film in such a way that 2 films are being shot that he is one but not both allowing people to see both versions and nearly doubling the gross for the film.

You're still wrong about this fabrication.

 

[archeryguy1701]

Starship Polaris said:

rotorbotor said:
I understand from a source that the REAL reason for the delay and postponement is William Shatner who will be in the film in such a way that 2 films are being shot that he is one but not both allowing people to see both versions and nearly doubling the gross for the film.

You're still wrong about this fabrication.

Each time he says that, I think he's trying to be funny/ sarcastic, but he keeps saying it with such conviction that I can't help but think he believes it.

 

[Captain Robert April]

How about Shatner being in the film gives hardcores like me less of a reason to avoid this film like the plague?

 

[archeryguy1701]

Captain Robert April said:
How about Shatner being in the film gives hardcores like me less of a reason to avoid this film like the plague?

How does Shatner's presence make the movie more watchable? And, conversly, what will Shatner's presence do that Nimoy's won't?

 

[Tralah]

^I was wondering the same thing Archerguy. It seems as though some people believe that Shatner's presence will imbue this picture with success and make it into a Star Trek movie that wouldn't otherwise be worth watching. I can't seem to understand that line of thinking.

 

[EliyahuQeoni]

rotorbotor said:William SHATNER SHOULD AND MUST BE IN THIS FILM as he defines Star Trek without equivacation or iconic despair.

I'm not sure how he can define Star TRek since there has been more Trek made without him than with him.

 

[Rarewolf]

rotorbotor said:
William SHATNER SHOULD AND MUST BE IN THIS FILM as he defines Star Trek without equivacation or iconic despair.

Out of about 700 Star Trek stories Kirk's in less than 100 of them. It managed ok until they thought prequels were the answer.

 

[Jack Bauer]

Tralah said:
^I was wondering the same thing Archerguy. It seems as though some people believe that Shatner's presence will imbue this picture with success and make it into a Star Trek movie that wouldn't otherwise be worth watching. I can't seem to understand that line of thinking.

Some people just want to blow the Shat.

 

[starburst]

I think it will give it more of a cheesy comic value if hes in it. It may go down well with some fans (as long as he plays an older Kirk not Pine's Kirk) but non Star Trek fans arent gonna be too bothered and are probably going to associate it with the mickey take that Star Trek has given itself, not helped by Shatner making jokes out of himself and the show on his other projects.

EDIT: That said if they did find a credible way to put him in the film at some point which wont adversley affect the story and doesnt try to overshaddow the new Kirk with the old one then I would love to see him as Kirk one last time

 

[rotorbotor]

archeryguy1701 said:

:

Given a choice between Shatner Trek and Avery Brooks Trek, I'll take Brooks Trek any day. So, the Shat isn't doing a whole lot of defining of anything for me.

Avery Brooks is not relevant.He was Johnny come lately.

In other words he only existed because of William Shatners success in creating Star Trek as an iconic show.

Without him DS9 would never exist.Sisko would not exist.

William Shatner created Star Trek by virtue of his charisma and screen presence.


He is and was the STAR of the show.

You cannot separate him from this.

His uniqueness made Star Trek a success with clear goals.

Leo was a co-star who rode on William Shatners coat tails and later wrote a book hating his character as it typecast him.


I have decided that if William Shatner is not in the film than I will boycott it as I feel his death in Generations was mishandled and not heroic enough.If Spock can be brought back so can William Shatner.

I think I would like to start a group of Bring Back Shatner Trekkers who can express their feeling to Abrams and pressure him to include Shatner.


I ask for permission from the all powerful moderators if I can start a separate and my own unique thread in which I will explain how to do this?

 

[Roger Wilco]

rotorbotor said:
I think I would like to start a group of Bring Back Shatner Trekkers who can express their feeling to Abrams and pressure him to include Shatner.


I ask for permission from the all powerful moderators if I can start a separate and my own unique thread in which I will explain how to do this?

You should wear a Star Trek uniform (or buy one if you don't have one already), and picket the movie set/Paramount Pictures/any other public place with a gigantic "BRING THE SHAT BACK!"-sign.

And be sure to bring a friend who can make pictures of you in your daily struggle for us here.

Don't give up, Venceremos!

 

[Akiraprise]

You should join forces with these people.
They could use a strong ally like you. Send them an e-mail instead. :thumbsup:

 

[StarMan]

rotorbotor said:
The paradigm which you realize in your view drives at the dichotomy of the dual aspect that William Shatner himself said his shadow was not a dark shape without light but was Kirk.

Ok, you used "paradigm" and "dichotomy" in the same sentence.

Cut it out.

 

[StarMan]

BTW: Another five kittens were viciously mauled to death by a rabid dog.

And who do we have to blame?

Yes, you.

*points at you*

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Captain Robert April said:
How about Shatner being in the film gives hardcores like me less of a reason to avoid this film like the plague?

You're speaking only for yourself, not a hypothetical significant group of "hard core fans."

rotorbotor said:
I have decided that if William Shatner is not in the film than I will boycott it as I feel his death in Generations was mishandled and not heroic enough.If Spock can be brought back so can William Shatner.

To steal someone else's topic title: I Don't Care Any More.

 

[ST-One]

Captain Robert April said:
How about Shatner being in the film gives hardcores like me less of a reason to avoid this film like the plague?

Oh, come on!
'Hardcores' like you wouldn't want to miss any opportunity to bash every second of this film.