HAL.9000 won't be responding to your post.


It's true enough. What's Curtis up to, these days?![]()
Doesn't matter.
I guess it better not, eh?
Nope.She was still the better Saavik.
Meyer clearly preferred the woman he cast in the part, as opposed to the replacement brought in when she declined to return, as well.
Nurse Chapel certainly had hopes in that direction.[There was a common misconception in the 23rd century that Vulcans were made of wood.
![]()
I'm shocked at the number of people here who believe wikipedia instead of the reports, based on documentation made available by Paramount, that Kirstie Alley was offered less money for a larger role, and that was the main reason she turned down STIII.
I'm shocked at the number of people here who believe wikipedia instead of the reports, based on documentation made available by Paramount, that Kirstie Alley was offered less money for a larger role, and that was the main reason she turned down STIII.
I would hardly call her role in the movie larger, as a matter of fact, I would call it about the same if not smaller.
If only because of her bustline.Perhaps if Alley had accepted the role it would have been larger?
I wonder if Curtis' career went south because Nimoy made her act so wooden in the film. That flat acting wouldn't exactly encourage others to hire her.
If anybody likes Alley better than Curtis, more power to you. But for my money, Curtis was immeasurably better.
Oh my God. I think you two just discovered... opinions.
I just found myself wondering whether TWoK would be better/worse/the same without Saavik. I can imagine it logistically, but that's about it.
I seem to remember that Ms. Alley was a longtime Star Trek fan who really wanted the part, whereas Ms. Curtis took it as just another job. Naturally, trekkers preferred the former.
But you'd think that the fact that Curtis did more Trek stuff afterward would have neutralized that bias by now.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.