No Shatner in Trek XI

[Wishfire 2]

Shatner: How come I'm not in new 'Star Trek'?

updated 2:55 p.m. EDT, Fri October 26, 2007

 

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."

 

Source.

 

You know, I really wish they'd make up their minds once and for all. I mean, how many articles have there been saying that Shatner will be in the movie? And how many more saying he won't? In both cases, more than I'd care to count. Watch, next Monday we'll find another article saying he will be in it, followed by another one saying the same thing as this one.

 

Though to be honest, I really don't think Shatner should be in it. Nor should Nimoy. If they must do a remake, featuring original characters with new actors playing them, then they shouldn't have both versions of any character.

[BakulaBabe 2]

OMG I'm sooooo tired of all the articles about "will Shatner be in it or not". Shatner needs to get over it and move on already. I don't remember Leonard Nimoy complaining about not being in Star Trek: Generations. There's a "Generations" spoiler below, if you haven't seen it yet.

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

They can't have an "old Kirk" with the "old Spock", because Kirk died - twice - in "Generations".

Edited November 4, 2007 by BakulaBabe

[Kor37 9]

I don't remember Leonard Nimoy complaining about not being in Star Trek: Generations

 

Actually, they DID want Nimoy in Generations but he turned them down because the role wasn't big enough.

[A l t e r E g o 9]

I don't remember Leonard Nimoy complaining about not being in Star Trek: Generations

 

Actually, they DID want Nimoy in Generations but he turned them down because the role wasn't big enough.

 

Actually, to paraphrase Nimoy, he said it wasn't substantive enough; that anyone could have said his lines. We get a glimpse of one of those lines when Kirk says to Picard; You know, if Spock were here he'd say going on this mission was illogical (or something like that.)

Nimoy was correct.

 

 

Shat needs to get it through his head, he cannot logically be in it because he's DEAD. That bit about Spock coming back to life doesn't work with Kirk, he's not a Vulcan.

Ok here's an idea how he can be in it, as a ghost. <_<

 

 

From the spoilers I've read, this film is about Spock reminiscing a past mission after the fact of Kirks death, having Kirk in it, (except in the flashback) shatters its intended emotional impact.

 

[Kor37 9]

Actually, there is no reason why the part where Nimoy recollects the past cannot take place before Generations. Since this movie takes place before TOS, Spock's role in it could be played at any time period.I'm pretty sure the only reason Shatner's not in the movie is because he wants too much money.

[A l t e r E g o 9]

There is so a reason; it starts after NEM.

 

You're so obsessed with having Kirk in it that you're not seeing how changing the story to a pre GEN time w/could totally ruin it, how can Spock morn Kirk if he's still alive?!?

 

Yes I am speculating that story point but I feel it's logical to assume it begins with Spock dealing with Kirks loss.

 

Remember: You know, if Spock were here he'd say going on this mission was illogical.

 

Based on what spoilers have lead me to believe what part of this film is about, I'd still be opposed to it being altered just to please he and his fans even if he agreed to do it for free.

[Kor37 9]

Spock is mourning Kirk in this new movie? I haven't read that anywhere, but if that is correct, then of course it cannot take place before Generations. I try not to read the spoilers before a movie comes out. If the spoiler you mention is true, then Shatner cannot appear as Kirk. However, I do hope that there are cameo roles for all of the surviving TOS cast members. Many movies based on TV shows do this. Lost In Space, for example, had almost the entire surviving cast at some point or another in the movie.

[Jack_Bauer 1]

We have on real indication on plot other than it will involve the TOS crew, an older Spock, and a villian named Nero. There's been talk of a straight prequel or a prequel that results in the creation of an alternate timeline (which hasn't been substantied beyond the AICN article which is a suspect source from what I've heard).

 

However, at this point, it is essentially impossible for any TOS cast beyond Nimoy to appear due to the Writer's Strike. Unless they appeared in an earlier draft of the script, they can't be written in.

[oldfan1 0]

Somebody should give Shatner some cheese to go with his constant whine, as he gets older he whines more and more. Shatner follow your own advice from Saturday Night Live............. GET A LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Kor37 9]

I agree. The writer's strike is going to create havoc with the shows we like to watch as well as movies in production. I heard on the news today that the late night talk shows will be affected first, followed by the soap operas and then the prime time shows. They said that most of the prime time shows have scripts already written that will take them through January.

[Jack_Bauer 1]

I agree. The writer's strike is going to create havoc with the shows we like to watch as well as movies in production. I heard on the news today that the late night talk shows will be affected first, followed by the soap operas and then the prime time shows. They said that most of the prime time shows have scripts already written that will take them through January.

Luckily, from what I've read, Star Trek will be fairly insulated from the strike.

[prometheus 0]

:P :(

[Dabo Queen 0]

I felt like Spock's resurrection made sense; they put his genetic material on the Genesis planet, where anything was possible from a rebirth standpoint.

 

Kirk's resurrection for this movie would not make sense (especially if Nimoy's Spock is supposed to be in mourning for Kirk)...but then, bringing him back in Generations didn't make any sense to start with, to say nothing of that LAME death!

 

I don't see why a lot of people are blaming Abrams for Shatner not being in the movie...it's not his fault they killed Kirk in Generations.

[prometheus 0]

Shatner is ok, as long as it isn't "Captain Kirk Shatner".

[wriker 0]

I won't be seeing the movie as I don't support the whole reboot scheme. It's bound to be a bomb, many hard core Trek fans want nothing to do with it, and non Trek fans sure won't be standing in line for tickets. I would however have liked to have seen Shatner in some kind of small role, they affored Nimoy a spot they could done the same for Shatner, he is after all the heart and soul of Trek as Kirk (regardless how anyone feels about him *personally*). Abrams could have made a smart move by putting Shatner in as he is a money maker and good for PR.

Edited February 11, 2008 by wriker

[Captain Armstrong 0]

I won't be seeing the movie as I don't support the whole reboot scheme.

 

That makes two of us. If nothing else, Enterprise showed me (at least) that going backward in Star Trek is a monumentally bad idea. I have a theory that someone that really hates Star Trek is making these decisions at Paramount.

[VaBeachGuy 12]

 

I hadn't seen that before, it looks great.

 

I do wish there had been some way to get Shatner in the movie though.

[Jack_Bauer 1]

I won't be seeing the movie as I don't support the whole reboot scheme. It's bound to be a bomb, many hard core Trek fans want nothing to do with it, and non Trek fans sure won't be standing in line for tickets. I would however have liked to have seen Shatner in some kind of small role, they affored Nimoy a spot they could done the same for Shatner, he is after all the heart and soul of Trek as Kirk (regardless how anyone feels about him *personally*). Abrams could have made a smart move by putting Shatner in as he is a money maker and good for PR.

 

The fact that Shatner is not in the movie proves that this is not a reboot (you know, other than the repeated statements by the writers and Abrams). The writers have repeatedly said that the couldn't work Shatner in as Kirk because the Kirk is dead. The can't work around his death, ergo no Shatner.

Spock is not dead, therefore Nimoy can be in it.

Honestly, I don't know what you're seeing because I think the reaction to the movie has been generally positive among hard core fans (Abrams has even managed to win over James Cawley of Star Trek new Voayges, who is a very hard core fan and also initially had problems with the concept), aside from a few extremists.

 

I won't be seeing the movie as I don't support the whole reboot scheme.

 

That makes two of us. If nothing else, Enterprise showed me (at least) that going backward in Star Trek is a monumentally bad idea. I have a theory that someone that really hates Star Trek is making these decisions at Paramount.

 

I liked Enterprise and I will admit it has its flaws but overall, it was not the prequel concept alone that did Enterprise in. I disagree about the person not liking Trek making these decisions. If that was the case how the heck do you explain a $130 million budget and the move back to summer 2009 after being impressed by what has been shot thus far.

 

Honestly, would going back to TOS have been my first choice? Probably not, but I'm liking what I'm seeing. The fact of the matter is after being saddled with a crappy network and a burnt out writing staff, Star Trek was one nail in the coffin away from being dead for quite some time. Now, we've got a new movie with new blood behind it, re-establishing the franchise by returning to its roots which is the only commercially viable strategy before moving forward with anything else.

 

But, hey everybody's entitled to their own opinions.