You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
-Short Attention Span Theater-
Shatner: How come I'm not in new 'Star Trek'?
2007-10-27
LOS ANGELES, California (AP) -- The original Capt. Kirk is disheartened he won't get to boldly go anywhere with his old pal Spock in the new "Star Trek" movie.

William Shatner is disappointed there's no place for him in the new "Star Trek" movie. While Leonard Nimoy is reprising his role as the pointy-eared Vulcan in next year's science-fiction flick, William Shatner is not on board as Kirk.

"I couldn't believe it. I'm not in the movie at all. Leonard, God bless his heart, is in, but not me," Shatner, 76, told The Associated Press on Thursday. "I thought, what a decision to make, since it obviously is a decision not to make use of the popularity I have to ensure the movie has good box office. It didn't seem to be a wise business decision."

Director J.J. Abrams announced last summer that Nimoy would reprise the role he originated opposite Shatner in the 1960s television show and played again in six big-screen adventures. Abrams said Shatner probably would have a part in the film, which is due in theaters in December 2008. But while Shatner said he had a couple of meetings with Abrams, nothing came of it.

Abrams' "Trek" film, whose plot is being kept under wraps by distributor Paramount, recounts an early adventure for the crew of the starship Enterprise, with Chris Pines as the young Kirk and Zachary Quinto as the young Spock.

The cast includes Karl Urban as Dr. McCoy, Simon Pegg as engineer Scott, John Cho as helmsman Sulu, Zoe Saldana as communications officer Uhura and Anton Yelchin as navigator Chekov, roles respectively originated by DeForest Kelley, James Doohan, George Takei, Nichelle Nichols and Walter Koenig.

Past "Trek" films presented an obstacle to the revival of Shatner's Kirk, who died at the end of 1994's "Star Trek: Generations." But in science fiction, you can never truly say die. Spock was killed off in 1982's "Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan" then resurrected in 1984's "Star Trek: The Search for Spock," with Nimoy's Vulcan living on to co-star in three more films, two episodes of "Star Trek: The Next Generation" and now Abrams' new movie.

"I've got a lot to do," said Shatner, whose current work includes the TV show "Boston Legal," narration for the Christmas spoof "Stalking Santa" due on DVD on November 6, and the prequel "Star Trek: Academy -- Collision Course," a novel chronicling Kirk and Spock's first meeting.

Shatner says of "Star Trek": "Having been in on the creation of it, I was hoping to be in on the re-creation."
Posted by:anonymous5089

#19  They Misquoted me, it was...

Whyyyyyyyyy... am I... Not.. in the New... startrekmovie?


Posted by: Bill Shatner   2007-10-27 20:31  

#18  I think so...
Posted by: Frank G   2007-10-27 20:05  

#17  "Old Man's War" would make a great movie!
Posted by: Deacon Blues   2007-10-27 19:51  

#16  there have been some inventive films, they just don't come from the major studios, who push low, but steady profits from sequels, prequels, spinoffs. They seem about to run the comic book conversions into the ground. I've loved the Spiderman movies, but as a kid, I was a Fantastic 4 fan and the movies have SUCKED, imho. Mel Gibson has been taunting the majors and making big bucks doing so. I thought Apocalypto was excellent, and The Passion was even better. There are still good flicks being made (Cinderella Man, Last Samurai, Open Range?)- check out 3:10 to Yuma (albeit, a remake), and I have high hopes for American Gangster... too many execs want to do little, risk little, and others are determined to ram their anti-american, anti-military (helllooo Robt Redford?) shit down our throats. Vote with your pocketbooks!!
Posted by: Frank G   2007-10-27 19:36  

#15  Anyone suprised?

Hollywood hasn't had very many 'fresh' ideas in decades. Any wonder why most of the blockbusters during the last few decades have been, in essence, remakes or from other media (books, plays, even saturday morning cartoons....)
Posted by: CrazyFool   2007-10-27 19:20  

#14  re: post #7

That would be a great cast for a mashup titled, "Sylar and Julius Caesar go to White Castle"

For Star Trek, not so much

Posted by: Grumenk Philalzabod0723   2007-10-27 19:06  

#13  It just seems desperate to drag out the same characters, but the young versions?

This strategy worked so very well for Warner Brothers' with their Tiny Toons. Hollywood is so creatively bankrupt that all they can do is recycle old ideas. This, despite the existence of incredible new work like Peter Hamilton's "Reality Dysfunction", part I of his Night's Dawn six book trilogy. It is some of the finest modern Sci-Fi written and yet Hollywood resuscitates stale 1960s television shows and comic books for their plot lines.




























Paramount clearly does not understand the franchise and why it was successful and they've been milking it for far too long.

Like the last cow on the farm.
Posted by: Zenster   2007-10-27 19:05  

#12  Video here.
Posted by: Mike   2007-10-27 17:36  

#11  The original casting for this pic would have been pretty awesome - Matt Damon as Kirk, Adrien Brody as Spock, and Gary Sinise as McCoy - but apparently the studio has been itching to try a version of Trek than can most politely be called 'Star Trek 90210'....and they're gonna get their wish.

Paramount and Trek's producers, of all people, should remember the old saw about being careful what you wish for.

Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski   2007-10-27 15:09  

#10  It just seems desperate to drag out the same characters, but the young versions?. Paramount clearly does not understand the franchise...

The very first rumors of a Star Trek revival, way back in the late Seventies, had this very premise. I thought it was a bad idea at the time, and still think so. I want THE FUTURE! not the future's past.
Posted by: Angie Schultz   2007-10-27 15:07  

#9  A 76 year old man with a bad toupe doesn't exactly make leading man material.
Posted by: McZoid   2007-10-27 14:47  

#8  I have a bad feeling about this new movie. It just seems desperate to drag out the same characters, but the young versions?. Paramount clearly does not understand the franchise and why it was successful and they've been milking it for far too long.

If they wanted to revive the series they should do a WINDS OF WAR style mini-series. The conflict should be against the Klingons because they are a favorite.

The first episode in the mini-series should take place during the Captain Sulu time frame and use the slightly old Enterprise cast as well as Captain Sulu and crew to set up the situation. A planet along the Klingon border wants to join the Federation. The Federation tries but eventually backs down and the Klingon's crush the planet.

The next episodes takes place during the Next Gen/DS9/Voyager time frame when that planet wants independence again and the Federation tries to support it but the Klingon's declare war. The war is nasty, brutal, and lasts a couple two-hour movies worth. During the war we find that Klingon's looked different during the old series because Logistical problems prevented them from getting the right nutrition and they got Klingon Scurvy, which for warriors is a real embarrassment (and which meant the Feds could have beaten them if they hadn't backed down).

At the end of the last of the mini-series the Romulans side with the Federation (thanks to Spocks work behind their lines) and the Klingon's back off huffing and puffing but unwilling to fight a two front war.

Paramount, I'll write it, it'll rock, give me a call.
Posted by: rjschwarz   2007-10-27 13:17  

#7  pics of the cast
Posted by: Frank G   2007-10-27 10:47  

#6  Shatner very craftily tied his boat to Nimoy's many years ago. That is, by contract, if Nimoy got *anything*, then Shatner had to get it too. This even went so far as with Nimoy directing ST-IV, they had to let Shatner direct (the funky) ST-V (aka "Cap'n Kirk meets God").

But if that particular clause has lapsed, then Paramount would probably tell Shatner to take a flying leap at a rolling doughnut.
Posted by: Anonymoose   2007-10-27 10:46  

#5  I can see him in a background shot on a telescreen hawking low price fares on Enterprise.

Posted by: BrerRabbit   2007-10-27 10:34  

#4  It's a trick. He's doing a cameo as The Great Big Head.
Posted by: Thomas Woof   2007-10-27 10:15  

#3  He should be asking "how come they're recycling that old series?" How 'bout something new?
Posted by: M. Murcek   2007-10-27 09:42  

#2  Willam Shatner HAS BEEN.

I blame number 9 Jim.
Posted by: Besoeker   2007-10-27 08:41  

#1  You're dead Jim
Posted by: john frum   2007-10-27 08:33  

00:00