Shatner's Role In "Star Trek 2008" leaked

[Samuel T. Cogley]

Re: NICE !

JBElliott said:
There are two t's in the name and I'm write.

Well, if you are write, and Starship Polaris is a writer, then that makes him a little more write than you.

I, myself, am writest, so don't bother arguing with me.

 

[JBElliott]

Re: NICE !

Samuel T. Cogley said:

JBElliott said:
There are two t's in the name and I'm write.

Well, if you are write, and Starship Polaris is a writer, then that makes him a little more write than you.

I, myself, am writest, so don't bother arguing with me.

Dammit Cogley, I'm a physicist not a typist! I'm correct as well as write. The day is coming soon when I'll be vindicated.

 

[Joker]

Re: NICE !

What's with the sudden influx of "I SEE TEH FUTURE!" dickheads around here?

Between Matt, STARTREK11 and now this half-chewed swanker, they might as well not bother making the film at all, since we apparently already know everything.

 

[JBElliott]

Re: NICE !

Even if everything that is written here is perfectly correct, how many tickets does the group that reads all this amount to?

 

[Samuel T. Cogley]

Re: NICE !

JBElliott said:
Even if everything that is written here is perfectly correct, how many tickets does the group that reads all this amount to?

47

 

[Cary L. Brown]

Re: NICE !

Samuel T. Cogley said:

JBElliott said:
Even if everything that is written here is perfectly correct, how many tickets does the group that reads all this amount to?

47

I thought that the answer was "Forty-two."

 

[Dale]

Re: NICE !

Cary L. Brown said:

Samuel T. Cogley said:

JBElliott said:
Even if everything that is written here is perfectly correct, how many tickets does the group that reads all this amount to?

47

I thought that the answer was "Forty-two."

Usually it is, but in the Trek universe it's always 47.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Re: NICE !

JBElliott said:
There are two t's in the name and I'm correct. It's as clear as the nose on your face that that's what's happening.

You are certainly convinced, there's no question about it. That does not, however, have any bearing on the likelihood that what you believe is "clear" is actually true. It's not.

 

[JBElliott]

Re: NICE !

It is.

 

[Samuel T. Cogley]

Re: NICE !

Infinity.

 

[JBElliott]

Re: NICE !

Countable or uncountable?

 

[cooleddie74]

Starship Polaris said:
Everything falls into place once you know this, though. Shatner's part is small - a single scene - yet absolutely pivotal to the main plot. To know it is to know the climax and the dramatic crux of the film (sorry) so of course they've done everything they can to misdirect.

It gives Kirk's character the "meaningful" death his fans have been demanding. The existence of the whole Star Trek Universe turns on it.

Spock is able to go through with his mission only by remembering Kirk's own sacrifice of Edith Keeler as an inspiration and example.

Again, I notice that our board's two project insiders remain silent on this revelation.

Wow.

That story actually sounds amazing. Better than the first one leaked out to the Internet. Maybe both are a crock of shit and Shatner's not even going to be in the movie at all. I'll hold out judgment until we know more.