Slashdot Log In
Shatner Leaks Trek XI Details
Posted by
Zonk
on Sat Jan 13, 2007 01:36 AM
from the shat-man-is-back dept.
from the shat-man-is-back dept.
An anonymous reader writes "The rumors that the next Star Trek movie would revolve around the earliest missions of Kirk and Spock have been confirmed by William Shatner in a Sci Fi Wire interview. J.J. Abrahms (creator of 'Lost') will direct, and has confirmed that a draft script is completed. So, the question is, will Shatner appear as a reminiscing older Kirk in the beginning, setting up the rest of the movie as a flash-back, or will geriatric-Kirk and young-Kirk meet?"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Damon as Kirk? (Score:3, Funny)
(http://www.bookmarkbliss.com/)
I, for one, personaly, don't care. (Score:3, Insightful)
Don't get me wrong, I might see it. Like the crap that is Pirates of the Caribbean 2, I have to see the next one. One of these days I will see Nemesis. I am a fan of Trek so I am stuck with that.
The one slim hope is the guy (forgot his name) that has been running the series for the last 10 years is not going to be writing it.
Re:I, for one, personaly, don't care. (Score:5, Insightful)
Shatner as Boothby (Score:4, Insightful)
I really don't care... (Score:4, Funny)
(http://henry.simon.net.nz/)
I really don't care, as long as it doesn't involve him doing any type of singing [youtube.com].
Luke.. (Score:2, Funny)
But Kirk died in Generations! (Score:3, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Tuesday September 12 2006, @03:31PM)
Against the spirit of Trek (Score:5, Interesting)
If they had any balls at all they would have gone with the idea of having Captain Riker commanding the Titan in a time when the federation is being systematically destroyed in a major war (ie, the feds are losing). To see the federation being destroyed and fighting for it's life by spiting out warships would have been interesting to me. Watching a film about how kirk and spock originally fell in love is not. I'll probably see 11, but only at a friends house where it's on and I don't have a choice.
Re:Against the spirit of Trek (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.intelligentblogger.com/ | Last Journal: Monday August 27, @11:47AM)
It would have also permanently killed the series. The good Star Trek has always been a platform for commentary about everything from the human condition to modern politics. Since I sincerely doubt that anyone today can identify with a "major war" (which would be something along the lines of a WWII scenario IN SPACE!), the commentary aspect of Star Trek would be completely lost. In addition, it would further destroy Roddenberry's vision of a better tomorrow.
The end result is that you'd get Yet Another Action Show(TM) that's all fluff and no substance.
If you really want a good TV show about "major war", get the networks to reboot Space: Above and Beyond.
Re:Against the spirit of Trek (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.intelligentblogger.com/ | Last Journal: Monday August 27, @11:47AM)
See, I always saw the Klingons as metaphors for the Russian/Communist threat, the Romulans as a metaphor for espionage, and the Borg as a metaphor for socialism.
Each fits surprisingly well. In the original series, the Klingons were the major threat, but were held at bay by tenuous treaties like the Organian Peace Treaty. When NextGen came along, it reflected how Russia was no longer a threat to world peace and even suggested cooporation between the peoples. Which was rather earth shattering at a time when Russians were mostly portrayed in movies as arrogant and ultra-competitive. Yet today, it's kind of hard to think of that "mean Russian" image that was so popular during the 80's.
The Romulans go on to show how powerful yet ugly the very idea of espionage is. In the original series, it was portrayed as a battle of wits with the loser losing something very precious indeed. (Be it their new Plasma weapon or the Cloaking Generator.) NextGen expanded on this by adding the Tal'Shiar (sp?) element to the Romulans, making them even sneakier and uglier to work with. It also added the dimension of the "normal" people getting caught up in the problems created by espionage.
The Borg were very simply an overpowering force that sought to equalize and harmonize the universe at the expense of individuality and free expression. I 5hink that describes socialism pretty well, don't you?
Oh, and the Borg are not cyborgs. They are merely "organically challenged".
Re:Against the spirit of Trek (Score:5, Insightful)
And it set the stage for even more interesting story possibilities, although they haven't been explored. As far as we've seen, Starfleet has always been balanced between its military aspect and peaceful exploration. Right up till STVI, the balance was almost dead even: there was a state of cold war with the Klingons, but you also had Kirk and his contemporaries doing their 5-year missions of exploration. During TNG, one can argue that the balance had swung heavily towards the explorers (although there is that Cardassian war immediately pre-TNG that we didn't get to see). DS9 chronicled a sudden and severe shift toward militarism. The warships that the grandparent poster wanted to see being spit out have already been spat out. The Defiant was mass-produced, even though its sole purpose is as an overpowered gunship. TNG told us that the initial run of Galaxy-class ships was limited to 9, and DS9 shows us a whole lot more than that, all of them heavily armed and doubtless assembled on an accelerated total-war production regimen.
So even though the Federation won, how does it go back to the fleet full of peaceful explorers we saw during TNG? There's the essential conflict that sets up the premise of such a story. Add to that the fact that there's a gigantic power vacuum in Romulan space since Picard's vinyl-fetishist clone murdered the Senate, and throw in a few TOS-style devious-bastard Klingons who don't like Martok because he's too buddy-buddy with the Federation, oh, and those Section 31 guys too, and we have a recipe for a very interesting story that is equal parts action and commentary on human nature.
So an entertaining and thoughtful follow-on to TNG-era Trek is certainly possible (although maybe not in the exact fashion the GPP was thinking about), and it could be a solid draw for both nerds and casual fans alike with happy memories of TNG and DS9. But such ideas aren't under consideration because executives would rather find a gimmick that they think would bring in a lot of people all at once. Case in point, a prequel movie which recasts the two most recognized Trek characters out there (and make no mistake, there will be an infinite amount of nerd rage on this point), or the proposed Web-based miniseries which completely overthrows the Trek universe to give us "Star Trek as YOU'VE NEVER SEEN IT BEFORE!"
Re:Against the spirit of Trek (Score:4, Interesting)
Poor guy... you missed the point entirely! What made Star Trek interesting was the exploration of ethical and philosophical issues, and figuring out interesting and novel solutions to the problems the crew encountered. Star Trek has had episodes and movies about the following topics: religion, race relations, euthanasia, conservation, cybernetics, the definition of "life," the definition of "sentient life," love, hate, war, peace, etc. -- way too much stuff to list here. That's what made it great, not the technology. If all you care about are gadgets, you're better off watching a Bond flick instead.
Re:Against the spirit of Trek (Score:4, Funny)
Jonathan Frakes is competent enough as an actor, and his roles are always well-written, but let's face it, the guy isn't that interesting to watch.
On the other hand, this guy [imdb.com] looks strangely like Riker and performs a similar role (albeit without a uniform or official title), but is interesting to watch. Hell, I thought it was Jonathan Frakes with a few years of acting classes under his belt doing something new.
Plot revealed... (Score:4, Funny)
(Last Journal: Saturday January 13 2007, @02:19AM)
if old Kirk and young Kirk meet (Score:5, Funny)
Old Kirk (to young Kirk): James T Kirk!
Young Kirk (to old Kirk): James T Kirk!
Old Kirk (to young Kirk): James T Kirk!
Young Kirk (to old Kirk): James T Kirk!
Old Kirk (to young Kirk): James T Kirk!
Young Kirk (to old Kirk): James T Kirk!
Old Kirk (to young Kirk): James T Kirk!
Young Kirk (to old Kirk): James T Kirk!
Old Kirk (to young Kirk): James T Kirk!
Young Kirk (to old Kirk): James T Kirk!
Old Kirk (to young Kirk): James T Kirk!
Young Kirk (to old Kirk): James T Kirk!
(snip)
Heres a hint (Score:5, Funny)
(http://slashdot.org???? | Last Journal: Saturday August 12 2006, @03:06AM)
Plot element you can count on. (Score:3, Interesting)
(http://www.landoverbaptist.org/)
about clone and eugenics wars that early in "starfleet history". Of course it is pretty
much left up to them what terrorist foe they will present on the screen, but it will
certainly be in tune of current events.
Those working towards a predictable population are just as predictable themselves.
wow (Score:2, Insightful)
Let's make another Star Trek!
Odd/Even (Score:2, Insightful)
(http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/)
To me it sounds like they are trying to keep up the tradition of odd numbered ST-movie = bad, even numbered ST-movie = good...
My concept for a new Trek series or film. (Score:2, Interesting)
1. The Federation is supposedly an alliance of planets where aliens of many different races live in peace and harmony. Then why the hell are virtually everyone on Federation starships human? And the few token non-humans are clearly the more human looking. There are no six tentacled creatures serving on Federation starships... there are no non-physical energy beings. And everyone knows that Spock is far more intelligent, more physically capable, ages slower, and in general vastly superior to Kirk in all ways. It is only bigotry that an officer as talented as Spock has to play second fiddle to Kirk. Clearly there is some sort of racist conspiracy in the Federation!
2. Earth has become an enlightened place, where all races and cultures live in peace and harmony... yet I am supposed to believe that out of the billions of non-european people on the planet earth (who vastly outnumber europeans), that only one black person, and one asian person, qualified to be on the bridge crew, or an engineer, or something important that would make them a main character? In fact, if all races lived in peace and harmony and equality, and transporters allow instantanious teleportation around a planet, shouldn't all people have inter-married to the point where all humans would be a nice light brown color - a combination of all races and cultures?! Clearly, despite Earth and Federation propoganda and lies, White European Males still dominate not only Earth, but the Federation!
3. They have "abandoned money"? Wait a minute... money is nessicary when there is scarcity and a market economy... and they definitly didn't eliminate scarcity (after all, dilithium crystals are still rare and valuable... there is only one holideck on the Enterprise, not one for every crew memeber, definitly meaning it would require some sort of rationing... the Enterprise is always carrying medicine or supplies, implying that the replicators can only produce certain types of objects). Obviously, the Federation has adopted some sort of anti-free-market command economy - perhaps Soviet style Communism, or Nazi style National Socialism. Either way, despite the pleasant lies of abundance that is spread in Trek propoganda, the Federation is most likely stifling, beurocratic, totalitarian-economic nightmare, with shortages and people lining up Soviet style in order to buy the most basic of goods.
4. We are left to assume that the Federation is some sort of Democracy... then why don't starfleet officers ever talk politics? Why isn't Data a member of one political party, while Wharf is a memeber of another political party, and they have heated (though respectful) political discussions? Why isn't Pickard contiplating his civilian political career after his starfleet career? Why is there never any controversy about Federation policy?
It is because the Federation is a military dictatorship, controlled by Starfleet! The military elite of Starfleet control both the military and civilian governments (and clearly, from the series, there is no seperation of the two).
5. The Enterprise is supposedly on a "peaceful mission of exploration"... yet the Enterprise is the military flagship of Starfleet! How often do countries nowadays send a battleship, or aircraft carriers, or other military war machines on "exploration and science missions"? Scientific vessels are usually unarmed, or carrying a few small firearms... they aren't loaded with ICBMs and torpedos! The Enterprise is clearly on a scout mission for imperialist military expansion!
So here is my concept:
In my series or movie, the Federation is really a vast imperialist military dictatorship... and Empire that has been slowly and surely conquering the galaxy. The other Star Trek films and series are propoganda films put out by the Federation... (that explains why the Klingons look different in different series... because as the Federation continued is agressive war ag
Re:My concept for a new Trek series or film. (Score:4, Interesting)
There is still an economy, and therefore there still has to be some method of accounting and exchange. What's more likely is that there is no money in the traditional sense--no cash, no pay checks, no banks for individual persons. Instead, typical Star Trek style soft socialism takes hold. The closest contemporary analogy is the expense account. Rather than paying out of pocket or being limited to a fixed wage, a person could simply use his account to make purchases. If someone got out of hand with their spending, it would pop up a red flag for review. Any people abusing this would be restricted from purchasing "luxury" items of any sort--only housing, utilities, food, etc. would be covered and all other charges would be rejected (like maxing out a credit card). As an added advantage for our future friends, the emergency car repair or unexpected medical expense would be covered. Rather than having to worry about insurance, people could simply enjoy "free" medical care, using just checkups for the healthy and more extensive treatment for the ill. Individuals wouldn't subsidize each other, nor would they suffer the libertarian folly of "paying taxes." Companies would still be taxed to fund the government, and companies would foot the bill directly rather than the three-step cut check/deposit/withdraw process we have today.
In other words, "no money" doesn't actually mean no money, but rather that the individual no longer deals with finances directly and instead can focus on enjoying life. The higher up your position, the looser the limits on your 'expense account'--not everyone would eat caviar and live on 5000 acre estates.
Re:My concept for a new Trek series or film. (Score:4, Interesting)
(http://127.31.33.7/)
Your idea may be a good one, but it isn't Trek, to me.
Also, the idea of a universe being ruled by a european male conspiracy might not sit well with Trek's primarily european male fanbase.
It's life Jim (Score:2)
Shatner recast ? (Score:2, Funny)
It's still there.... (Score:2)
I found that site years ago (late 90's i think). It cracks me up that it still there.
Captain Cook (Score:5, Insightful)
The original Star Trek centered on a ship and a crew on a mission of exploration in uncharted space. James Kirk was an extrapolation of James Cook, on a five-your voyage through space instead of a three-year voyage over the seas. Cook once wrote that he wanted to go "farther than any man has been before me, but as far as I think it is possible for a man to go" and Star Trek's mission statement echoed this.
Like Cook's, Kirk's was a combined military and scientific expedition. Of course what was "out there" turned out to be very much our own problems in another disguise, but that was the core of the genre. The concept, of course, was also an echo of the era in which the series was made, when science and exploration were sources of optimism and space seemed to be a final frontier that was going to be taken on the hop.
Later series diverted from the concept, reflecting changing priorities of societies and growing pessimism about the future. The Next Generation was on a mission to spread political correctness through space, to baldly go where no bald one has gone before, at least not without a toupee. Attempts to satisfy everyone on everything, another unfortunate characteristic of the 90s, included such silliness as a battleship on a mission of peace, a flagship without an admiral, an expedition vessel with children on board, and a shrink on the bridge to make statements of the obvious.
The best hope is for Star Trek to go back to its roots. To send young captain (lieutenant commander?) Kirk on a mission of exploration on a small vessel with a dedicated crew, perhaps on a surveying mission to map space. (Cook's career also started as a surveyor of the coast of Newfoundland.) And then let him deal with some problem of reasonable dimensions -- there is no reason to save the planet again. If he can save his ship and crew that is enough.
Oh please! (Score:1)
(Last Journal: Sunday November 11, @03:52AM)
If "Show Me the Money" is an indication... (Score:2)
(http://www.heroscapers.com/ | Last Journal: Friday December 30 2005, @07:12PM)
Age Bias (Score:1)
I Predict (Score:1)
(http://www.maximumhoyt.com/)
my 5 centses (Score:3, Insightful)
2) TNG, DS9 & Voyager may've had their flaws, but they all had long runs and significant numbers of loyal fans, and should not be ignored.
3) Battlestar Galactica & Firefly should indeed be required watching for anyone involved in the production of any serious sci-fi from here on out.
4) The canon should be shored up (and better treated)-- as one example, I think it's imperative to be in harmony with the design style of TOS when capturing any 'new footage' of that era (or before). It should be possible to do this while still having freedom to add new embellishments, and a few subtle alterations could soften the cheesiness considerably while maintaining the core elements which visually define that time period.
5) Finally, any reasonably intelligent writing/designing/directing team with half a heart between them ought to be able to produce something decent with just a quick-yet-comprehensive review of the past work, providing they simply listen to fan feedback along the way. Based on that belief, I won't judge any film that hasn't even been filmed yet - including the above one - based on a blurb.
So, here's to hoping for the best and preparing for the worst, as usual...
Not only will they meet - they'll fight! (Score:2)
(http://www.doubleu.com/)
The idea originated here on Slash. Theft! (Score:2)
It was mentioned here and stolen from here. Nice theft, writers.
Why Shatner will do this: (Score:2)
(http://www.pobox.com/~chip/)
This Is Months-Old News (Score:1)
(http://vrrrm.com/)
See the video clip from that interview...
http://vrrrm.com/tv/LateLate/06/ShatnerLateLate611 27.php [vrrrm.com]
imdb.com page (Score:1)
Like to the forum: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0462023/board/flat/35
What about exploration of space? (Score:3)
What I would like to see for Star Trek is a new series that combines exploration with story arcs, something that it has not been done previously. We had episodic series like TOS, TNG and VOY which centered on exploration, story arcs in DS9 and ENT which centered on conflict, but we never had a series with story arcs based on exploration.
Re:Will they meet? (Score:2, Funny)
(http://www.metlin.org/ | Last Journal: Friday July 20, @01:58PM)
Spock will stand their with his ears all pointy.
Re:huh? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:huh? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:huh? (Score:5, Funny)
(http://slashdot.org/stupidinternet.proboards7.com | Last Journal: Friday June 13 2003, @01:57AM)
Re:huh? (Score:5, Informative)
(http://www.deadonque.com/)
Here's a site with side-by-side pictures from x3: http://www.fxguide.com/article357.html [fxguide.com]
Re:huh? (Score:5, Funny)
(http://www.underachievement.org/ | Last Journal: Sunday January 21 2007, @10:58PM)
THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE! [ytmnd.com]
(I love the shattering glass sound effect. Quality stuff
Re:huh? (Score:2)
(Last Journal: Saturday January 13 2007, @02:19AM)
Re:huh? (Score:2, Funny)
(http://shortcircuit.us/ | Last Journal: Sunday October 14, @02:01AM)
Re:Kirk died... (Score:2)
Re:Will they meet? (Score:1)
|Only as|opposit|
|long as|e sides|
|they |of a |
|meet on|splice |
|O O O O|O O O O|
But if not, what I take home from the theatre can make that happen
Re:Will they meet? (Score:2)
(http://www.bsharitt.com/ | Last Journal: Wednesday March 14 2007, @09:28PM)
Re:Kirk died... (Score:1)
My god it's brilliant. That gives us a new infinite supply of movies based solely around Kirk's memories just before death!
???
Profit!
Re:Kirk died... (Score:2)
When all said and done, I'm far too old to be geeky about Star Trek accuracy now anyhow and they're not a bad light-hearted read - just about every character and villain appears across the books - Janeway, Picard, Worf, Data, "Mirror Universe" Kirk, etc. etc.