Shatner Reveals Some New Trek Details

Gandalf · Post by **Gandalf** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 8:12 pm

Shatner Leaks Trek XI Details

William Shatner revealed to SCI FI Wire that the upcoming 11th Star Trek movie will indeed, as rumored, deal with the early years of Capt. James T. Kirk and Spock—and that he will definitely appear in the movie if director J.J. Abrams can find a place to use him. Shatner, who originated the role of Kirk in the original Trek series and several subsequent films, said in an interview that he was invited to meet with Abrams (Mission: Impossible III), who is also co-writing the movie.

"I met with J.J., and they told me they would like me to be part of their film, but they have to write the role," Shatner said in an interview.

As for the many rumors concerning the sequel's story, Shatner said that Abrams will explore Kirk and Spock during their Starfleet Academy years. "Yes, we know the story is based on young Kirk," Shatner said. Up until now, everyone connected with the film has maintained strict silence about the storyline, though rumors have run rampant that they concern Kirk and Spock's first missions.

As for Shatner's place in that storyline? "They need to figure out how to put the dead captain in with the young captain," he said. "It's a very complex, technical problem of how to write the character in, and I'm not sure how they will solve it." It sounds as if Shatner may play an older version of Kirk.

Coincidentally, the Starfleet storyline is one Shatner is already working on for his latest Trek-based novels. "I'm writing with Gar and Judy Reeves-Stevens two books on the academy, with the young Kirk and the young Spock," Shatner revealed. "We've submitted the first book to the publishers, and I think it will be out in the beginning of 2008. It's got a working title of The Academy, but I don't think that will stick."

Meanwhile, Abrams told Entertainment Weekly that a draft of the Trek XI script is done and will be trimmed sometime soon. The sequel will be targeted, "on the one hand, for people who love Star Trek, the fix that they will get will be really satisfying," Abrams told the magazine. "For people who've never seen it or know it vaguely, I think they will enjoy it equally, because the movie does not require you to know anything about Star Trek. I would actually prefer [that] people don't know the series, because I feel like they will come to it with an open mind." —Tara DiLullo Bennett

Sounds like their about to take another dump on continuity.

Socar · Post by **Socar** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 8:27 pm

I'm seriously trying to remain optimistic (for all the good it will do me), but I tend to get a little worried when people say stuff like "I would actually prefer [that] people don't know the series, because I feel like they will come to it with an open mind."

Nonamer · Post by **Nonamer** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 8:53 pm

Hopefully it won't be as big as a dump as Enterprise.

Gandalf · Post by **Gandalf** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 9:03 pm

Nonamer wrote:Hopefully it won't be as big as a dump as Enterprise.

Or Nemesis.

Post by **Mike DiCenso** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 9:42 pm

Gandalf wrote:
Nonamer wrote:Hopefully it won't be as big as a dump as Enterprise.
Or Nemesis.

No, no... Voyager is far, far worse overall than either of those.
-Mike

Gandalf · Post by **Gandalf** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 9:48 pm

Mike DiCenso wrote:
No, no... Voyager is far, far worse overall than either of those.
-Mike

True, dare we mention the episode that shall not be named?

Post by **Mike DiCenso** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 9:53 pm

You mean the name that is also shared with a Braga produced, post-Trek TV series? ;-)
-Mike

Gandalf · Post by **Gandalf** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 9:57 pm

Mike DiCenso wrote:You mean the name that is also shared with a Braga produced, post-Trek TV series? ;-)
-Mike

That's the one.

Socar · Post by **Socar** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 10:18 pm

Thanks for depressing me guys. :(

GStone · Post by **GStone** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 10:21 pm

I've always thought of TOS as the worst one.

Gandalf · Post by **Gandalf** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 10:26 pm

GStone wrote:I've always thought of TOS as the worst one.

TOS was gold compared to the drivel that followed. At least they had balls.

GStone · Post by **GStone** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 11:15 pm

It was always convenient completely separate things wound up being connected, just like on TNG. Shatner's acting and showing humanity as ultra hippies and always wonderful. That's what I hated.

Gandalf · Post by **Gandalf** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 11:29 pm

GStone wrote:It was always convenient completely separate things wound up being connected, just like on TNG.

Such as?

Shatner's acting and showing humanity as ultra hippies and always wonderful. That's what I hated.

Shatners acting wasn't any worse than the drivel that followed in later shows. In fact I prefer Shatner to the other actors who played the captains. Especially Scott Bakula who portrayed Archer as a pyschopath. And I think your confusing TOS with TNG, space hippies? The TOS era Federation was a capatilistic society while the TNG Federation was obviously communist. In fact the TOS episode with the space hippies showed that Kirk obviously didn't understand the space hippies at all. Spock understood them but he did not share their approach to acheiving their goals.

TOS at least had the benefit of being first and was making the universe up as it went along. What was TNG, DS9, VOY, Ent excuse? Other than the fact that B&B refused to take chances with the franchise. DS9 was the only one that showed any promise and it was shunned by the mainstream Trek leadership. Perhaps thats why it was slightly better than the rest. Of course none of them holds a candle to TOS.

GStone · Post by **GStone** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 11:57 pm

Gandalf wrote:Such as?

I forget examples off the top of my head because it's been so long since I've seen either series. I remember watching both TOS and TNG and thinking 'okay, how is this gonna be connected to what's going on here' and you could predict the plot. Plus, I think it was DC Fontana that said in an interview that different things in each ep, especially of TOS, were designed to be connected by the end of the ep deliberately. I think the interview is at startrek.com.

Shatners acting wasn't any worse than the drivel that followed in later shows.

The only ones that were as bad as Shatner were Sisko and Odo.

In fact I prefer Shatner to the other actors who played the captains.

I prefered Archer.

And I think your confusing TOS with TNG, space hippies? The TOS era Federation was a capatilistic society while the TNG Federation was obviously communist. In fact the TOS episode with the space hippies showed that Kirk obviously didn't understand the space hippies at all.

They were both infested with hippies.

TOS at least had the benefit of being first and was making the universe up as it went along.

Showing humanity to be ultra perfect sucks. Being first doesn't make it better.

What was TNG, DS9, VOY, Ent excuse? Other than the fact that B&B refused to take chances with the franchise.

There was more to the decline than B&B.

DS9 was the only one that showed any promise and it was shunned by the mainstream Trek leadership.

Far from the only one. I gotta give it up for VOY, not counting some things.

Gandalf · Post by **Gandalf** » Sun Feb 04, 2007 12:19 am

GStone wrote:
I forget examples off the top of my head because it's been so long since I've seen either series. I remember watching both TOS and TNG and thinking 'okay, how is this gonna be connected to what's going on here' and you could predict the plot. Plus, I think it was DC Fontana that said in an interview that different things in each ep, especially of TOS, were designed to be connected by the end of the ep deliberately. I think the interview is at startrek.com.

You've just described 90% of television.

The only ones that were as bad as Shatner were Sisko and Odo.

And Native cliche man, Paris, Kim, Riker, Worf, Kira, the list goes on and on.

I prefered Archer.

Oh yes the man made of wood.

They were both infested with hippies.

Frankly I'm not inclined to take you at your word as you have admitted that you haven't seen TOS in years. TNG is well known to be full of communist BS while TOS, which by the way I am watching on DVD right now and am halfway through season 1 is much more capitalistic.

Showing humanity to be ultra perfect sucks. Being first doesn't make it better.

Your confusing TOS and TNG again. TOS message was "we're flawed but we're trying" were as Picard frequently boasted that humanity was ready for anything the universe could throw at them. Kirk frequently admitted that humans were savages but could overcome those urges with effort. See Arena and A Taste of Armageddon.

There was more to the decline than B&B.

Of course there was, the lousy writing of the later series (Voyager especially) bears a large amount of the blame and Roddenberry himself virtually steered TNG into the ground in seasons 1-2 with his BS. But by and large B&B bear the largest part of the cross for helming the ship and when your in charge the fault lies with you for not shaking things up when you can. Now the fans have largely abandoned Trek.

Far from the only one. I gotta give it up for VOY, not counting some things.

You've got to be kidding, Voyager is widely condemned as the worst Trek series to ever grace the screen. Even Enterprise was better than that crap. I watched most of it and I'm convinced the headcase of a Captain was bipolar.