The cast that wasn't

[A.V.I.A.F.]

Nurse Chapel - Anne Margaret

Yeah, I can see that . . .

(Any excuse to Photoshop a pic of Ann-Margret.)

Vast improvement over the original casting...at least in the looks department. But, Kirk would always be in Sick Bay...I know I would.

 

[AtoZ]

I think you could have made your point without this. Makes you sound petty and juvenile.

The cast of Jar Jar's, I mean J.J.'s Trek,

Shatner and Nimoy helped define Kirk and Spock. Kelly and to a lesser extend Doohan did the same for McCoy and Scott. In the hands of other actors they would have gone along a different path. Possibly a less memorable one. The rest of the cast were pretty replaceable and were replaced in several episodes with out the show skipping a beat.

The real key was chemistry. Shatner, Nimoy and Kelly had that. And I think Pine, Quinto and Urban have it too. Outside of nostalgic considerations, the folks in the movie playing Scott, Uhura, Chekov and Sulu are probably better than the originals.


IIRC, Lloyd Bridges was also considered for Kirk. Mark Lenard was a possible Spock. McCoy was written with Kelly in mind.
Landau was busy with Mission Impossible and I doubt he would consider Stonn a meaty enough role. Mostly Stonn stood there looking like a wounded puppy.

Not sure what YOU are getting at. Why is it I so often read stuff like this on Star Trek BBS? People make points or give opinions and the next thing somebody is there criticizing, poking holes or acting "the cop". Please tell me you weren't offended by the colorful remark of the OP.

Let's just have some fun and kick it on these boards. There's simply too much critical masturbation posted at times.

My two cents.

 

[controlfreak]

I think you could have made your point without this. Makes you sound petty and juvenile.

The cast of Jar Jar's, I mean J.J.'s Trek,

This.

And my reason for not participating in this thread.

 

[corpusearthling]

Malachi Throne (seen in "The Menagerie") was considered (or a backup) for McCoy.

Following on the comments above, it's clear that GR had a more dry show in mind, and that's also clear from the two pilots, the Hornblower comparison, and his previous show The Lt. Shatner says his response to the pilots was "it doesn't have to be so serious," so he did a lot to lighten the tone ... probably for the best, although I feel the early, somber episodes are some of the best ones.

 

[Nerys Myk]

I think you could have made your point without this. Makes you sound petty and juvenile.

The cast of Jar Jar's, I mean J.J.'s Trek,

Shatner and Nimoy helped define Kirk and Spock. Kelly and to a lesser extend Doohan did the same for McCoy and Scott. In the hands of other actors they would have gone along a different path. Possibly a less memorable one. The rest of the cast were pretty replaceable and were replaced in several episodes with out the show skipping a beat.

The real key was chemistry. Shatner, Nimoy and Kelly had that. And I think Pine, Quinto and Urban have it too. Outside of nostalgic considerations, the folks in the movie playing Scott, Uhura, Chekov and Sulu are probably better than the originals.


IIRC, Lloyd Bridges was also considered for Kirk. Mark Lenard was a possible Spock. McCoy was written with Kelly in mind.
Landau was busy with Mission Impossible and I doubt he would consider Stonn a meaty enough role. Mostly Stonn stood there looking like a wounded puppy.

Not sure what YOU are getting at. Why is it I so often read stuff like this on Star Trek BBS? People make points or give opinions and the next thing somebody is there criticizing, poking holes or acting "the cop". Please tell me you weren't offended by the colorful remark of the OP.

Let's just have some fun and kick it on these boards. There's simply too much critical masturbation posted at times.

My two cents.

It was a dig at the movie and Abrams. It really didn't need to be said. The topic was interesting without the addition of name calling/bashing that wasn't actually related to it.

I wasn't offended, just annoyed. Its the sort of thing I often read on Star Trek BBS and its petty and juvenile. As I said it makes an interesting topic some what unappealing to participate in.

Now this is a discussion ( and debate) board. Discussion can include countering opinions that you disagree with and criticizing them. Poking holes is discussion too. Playing cop, well I don't think I did that. Bottom line is this place would be pretty boring if it was nothing but people who agree 100% or were afraid to express an opposite opinion to an OP. The board should be fun and informative. Discussion and disagreement can be both.

 

[Kamdan]

I thought Roddy McDowall was up for the part of Trelane.

 

[Greg Cox]

Roddy McDowall was forty years old at the time. Given that the whole point of Chekov was to add some teenybopper appeal (the Russian thing was an afterthought), I can't imagine that they would cast McDowall as the next Davy Jones!

(And, yeah, the Jar Jar thing seemed like a gratuitous bit of snark that had nothing to do with the topic at hand. It's been two years now; I suspect people are just getting a little tired of people griping about the reboot at every opportunity.)

 

[controlfreak]

I think you could have made your point without this. Makes you sound petty and juvenile.

Shatner and Nimoy helped define Kirk and Spock. Kelly and to a lesser extend Doohan did the same for McCoy and Scott. In the hands of other actors they would have gone along a different path. Possibly a less memorable one. The rest of the cast were pretty replaceable and were replaced in several episodes with out the show skipping a beat.

The real key was chemistry. Shatner, Nimoy and Kelly had that. And I think Pine, Quinto and Urban have it too. Outside of nostalgic considerations, the folks in the movie playing Scott, Uhura, Chekov and Sulu are probably better than the originals.


IIRC, Lloyd Bridges was also considered for Kirk. Mark Lenard was a possible Spock. McCoy was written with Kelly in mind.
Landau was busy with Mission Impossible and I doubt he would consider Stonn a meaty enough role. Mostly Stonn stood there looking like a wounded puppy.

Not sure what YOU are getting at. Why is it I so often read stuff like this on Star Trek BBS? People make points or give opinions and the next thing somebody is there criticizing, poking holes or acting "the cop". Please tell me you weren't offended by the colorful remark of the OP.

Let's just have some fun and kick it on these boards. There's simply too much critical masturbation posted at times.

My two cents.

It was a dig at the movie and Abrams. It really didn't need to be said. The topic was interesting without the addition of name calling/bashing that wasn't actually related to it.

I wasn't offended, just annoyed. Its the sort of thing I often read on Star Trek BBS and its petty and juvenile. As I said it makes an interesting topic some what unappealing to participate in.

Now this is a discussion ( and debate) board. Discussion can include countering opinions that you disagree with and criticizing them. Poking holes is discussion too. Playing cop, well I don't think I did that. Bottom line is this place would be pretty boring if it was nothing but people who agree 100% or were afraid to express an opposite opinion to an OP. The board should be fun and informative. Discussion and disagreement can be both.

This!

 

[A.V.I.A.F.]

Not sure what YOU are getting at. Why is it I so often read stuff like this on Star Trek BBS? People make points or give opinions and the next thing somebody is there criticizing, poking holes or acting "the cop". Please tell me you weren't offended by the colorful remark of the OP.

Let's just have some fun and kick it on these boards. There's simply too much critical masturbation posted at times.

My two cents.

It was a dig at the movie and Abrams. It really didn't need to be said. The topic was interesting without the addition of name calling/bashing that wasn't actually related to it.

I wasn't offended, just annoyed. Its the sort of thing I often read on Star Trek BBS and its petty and juvenile. As I said it makes an interesting topic some what unappealing to participate in.

Now this is a discussion ( and debate) board. Discussion can include countering opinions that you disagree with and criticizing them. Poking holes is discussion too. Playing cop, well I don't think I did that. Bottom line is this place would be pretty boring if it was nothing but people who agree 100% or were afraid to express an opposite opinion to an OP. The board should be fun and informative. Discussion and disagreement can be both.

This!

What does it mean when people write "This!" on here. I hate to go off topic but I keep seeing it anywhere and I don't get it. Could someone please tell me? Thanks (I hate not knowing).

 

[Timewalker]

This!

What does it mean when people write "This!" on here. I hate to go off topic but I keep seeing it anywhere and I don't get it. Could someone please tell me? Thanks (I hate not knowing).

It means "I completely, totally agree with everything quoted at least 100% if not more, but I'm too lazy to say so in my own words."

Personally, I find it annoying even when I'm the one being agreed with.

 

[A.V.I.A.F.]

Thanks Timewalker. I had a feeling it either meant that (or the complete opposite) but wasn't sure!

 

[Capt Bob April]

IIRC, James Coburn was briefly considered to play the lead, but eventually the idea was dropped, for whatever reason. That would have been an interesting choice, and a bit different than Shatner or Hunter's version of the Captain.

Colburn was Majel's suggestion; it was shot down because they didn't consider him sexy enough (to which Majel responded, "Speak for yourself!").

 

[Nerys Myk]

This!

What does it mean when people write "This!" on here. I hate to go off topic but I keep seeing it anywhere and I don't get it. Could someone please tell me? Thanks (I hate not knowing).

It means "I completely, totally agree with everything quoted at least 100% if not more, but I'm too lazy to say so in my own words."

Personally, I find it annoying even when I'm the one being agreed with.

This!

 

[Christopher]

That!

And the other thing!

 

[A.V.I.A.F.]

Just to be clear, are we talking about actors who we know might have been cast (they were considered and then the producers changed their minds, or the actors refused, etc...), or who we think might have made good cast members, or both?

Okay, I don't know if any of these actors/performers were ever approached, but I think they would have been great in TOS (not that the actual cast wasn't great in its own right):

Kirk: Lee Marvin
Spock: Anthony Perkins
McCoy: Rod Steiger

 

[Patrickivan]

Kirk: Robert Redford (Just about the coolest actor back then! Let him make Kirk into his own- He'd need some better writers).

Spock: Sorry- I can't picture anyone in this role but Nimoy. He made it what it was. (The new spock is a joke- his voice and mannerisms, and that stupid little perpetual smirk he has, just isn't Spock. He may as well be T'Pol)...

Dr. McCoy: I really like Kelly in this role, and Urban has done a fantastic homage to him, while making him contemporary. I really don't know...

Scotty: George Lazenby (A little young, but a super cool actor and Bond and he wasn't afraid to wear a kilt).

Chekov: No idea- a young actor of that time. Not a clue.

Uhura: ?

Sulu: Why Bruce Lee of course... D'uh.

Doctor Chapel: Audrey Hepburn (I say doctor because of her age- but she was smokin' hot!!!!)

 

[Anji]

Colburn was Majel's suggestion; it was shot down because they didn't consider him sexy enough (to which Majel responded, "Speak for yourself!").

That's my girl! She knew good looking man when she saw one!
And given the fact she liked him, I don't think Gene would've approved...what I mean is to have a man Maj liked better than him on the set.

I would've loved Lloyd Bridges as Kirk. Landau would've been an excellent Spock.

Jack Lord is just TOO good looking for the part. Hunter would've worked just fine.

 

[trevanian]

I think you could have made your point without this. Makes you sound petty and juvenile.

Shatner and Nimoy helped define Kirk and Spock. Kelly and to a lesser extend Doohan did the same for McCoy and Scott. In the hands of other actors they would have gone along a different path. Possibly a less memorable one. The rest of the cast were pretty replaceable and were replaced in several episodes with out the show skipping a beat.

The real key was chemistry. Shatner, Nimoy and Kelly had that. And I think Pine, Quinto and Urban have it too. Outside of nostalgic considerations, the folks in the movie playing Scott, Uhura, Chekov and Sulu are probably better than the originals.


IIRC, Lloyd Bridges was also considered for Kirk. Mark Lenard was a possible Spock. McCoy was written with Kelly in mind.
Landau was busy with Mission Impossible and I doubt he would consider Stonn a meaty enough role. Mostly Stonn stood there looking like a wounded puppy.

Not sure what YOU are getting at. Why is it I so often read stuff like this on Star Trek BBS? People make points or give opinions and the next thing somebody is there criticizing, poking holes or acting "the cop". Please tell me you weren't offended by the colorful remark of the OP.

Let's just have some fun and kick it on these boards. There's simply too much critical masturbation posted at times.

My two cents.

It was a dig at the movie and Abrams. It really didn't need to be said. The topic was interesting without the addition of name calling/bashing that wasn't actually related to it.

In the context of this particular thread, it absolutely needed to be said, because it clarified the OP's position relative to the original casting that was so perfect. YOUR response, on the other hand, sums up exactly why I don't post here anymore.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Explain to me how this

The cast of Jar Jar's, I mean J.J.'s Trek

clarified the OP's position and how pointing it out would cause someone to stop posting.

If he had an actual problem with the casting, surely he could do better than a swipe at the director's name.

 

[T'Girl]

Chekov: No idea- a young actor of that time. Not a clue.

Just cast Davy Jones from the Monkees, and get it over with.