Abrams On Shatner and Nimoy in the Next 'Trek'
Filed under: Casting, Paramount, Fandom
At the press day for the DVD and Blu-ray release of the 2009 Star Trek, director J.J. Abrams talked briefly about the possibility of putting the series' original Kirk, William Shatner, in the forthcoming sequel. "The Shatner thing comes up quite a bit," Abrams said in a news conference Thursday morning. "Would it have been fun to have him in the movie? Of course. Would it be great to work with him? No doubt."
Abrams spoke to reporters about the DVD and Blu-ray release of Star Trek, which is due on November 17, 2009, but fielded a few questions about the next Trek film, including how and why Shatner didn't fit into the design of the previous one.
"As someone who was a William Shatner fan... it was a foregone conclusion that we wanted Shatner in the movie," Abrams explained. "The problem was that his character died, on screen, in one of the Trek films, and because we decided, very early on, that we wanted to adhere to Trek canon as best we could. [That] was a huge challenge, because even the original series, in many ways, didn't always adhere to Trek canon, [so] the required machinations to get Shatner into the movie would have been very difficult to do, given the story we wanted to tell, and also to give him the kind of part that he would be happy with."
"It was this thing where it would have felt like a gimmick in order to get Shatner in the movie," Abrams continued, "which would have honestly, to me, been distracting. [But] how do you put him in the movie when you want him in it so badly, and yet the story actually seems in counter purposes with the story you want to tell?"
Abrams indicated that he's already opened a dialog with Shatner about acting in the next installment, but clarified that he and screenwriters Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci are still developing ideas for its final plot. "In terms of moving forward, I am open to anything," Abrams said. "I would love to figure out something, given the challenge of introducing these new characters and given the burden of having to cast these people. I feel like the first movie did some of the heavy lifting that needed to be done, in order to free us to continue, going forward. Maybe there's less of a burden and there's going to be more opportunity to work with him again. I would love to work with him."Meanwhile, Abrams observed that Leonard Nimoy's participation in the first film was essential to its success, but neither he nor Nimoy are certain what the future holds for Spock Prime in this new Trek timeline. "I can't imagine a Star Trek movie not needing him," Abrams said in response to Nimoy's claims that he would be an unnecessary component in future films. "I'm sure that what he's saying is a combination of modesty and honesty. He may actually feel that way. But, the truth is, we could never have made this movie without him, and working with him again would be a joy. It is clearly too early, given that we are just now talking story, to conclude whether or not Spock Prime is in the film or not."
"Do I want to work with him again?" Abrams asked rhetorically. "Of course, 100 percent. I'd love to."
Tom Cruise and J.J. Abrams Reunite for 'Mission Impossible 4'
'Big Top Pee-Wee': The Original Benicio Del Toro Wolfman
Spin-ematical: New on DVD and Blu-ray for 2/9
Watch This: Brilliant Oscar-Nominated Short 'Logorama'
Chris Nolan to Lead 'Superman' Reboot!?
_thumbnail.jpg)
_thumbnail.jpg)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
10-14-2009 @ 12:38PM
Booby Jones said...
Well, old Kirk is actually still around in Star Trek. When Kirk left the Nexus with Picard in the first Next Generation movie, a part of him stayed behind inside of the Nexus. Remember Guinan said that when you leave the Nexus an Echo of you still remains inside. So I guess if they work the Nexus into the movie, then they can work old Kirk into the movie that way, though I think that would be pushing it.
Reply
10-14-2009 @ 11:13AM
realist said...
Booby Jones, do not look for any hard core continuity between JJ Abrams' efforts and previous Star Trek projects. You should consider everything before the 2009 movie as material that will never be visited ever again. This new film was a complete restart in every sense of the word, and the only continuity with 'canon' you can expect will be whatever 'canon' they create for this new series of movies. To expect anything else is pointless.
10-14-2009 @ 12:37PM
Astin said...
Spoke "Prime" could easily be left out of any sequels. He's served his purpose and is now helping rebuild Vulcan civilization. It's not like he'd NEED to beam on board Enterprise to join in a future mission. Granted, a story could just as easily be written that does require him to some degree.
As for Kirk, well, that was before the change in the timeline. Perhaps the destruction of Vulcan alters the path of the Nexus in the future, which prevents Kirk's death, or even the events that lead to Generations. Or you could start in Kirk's future, where Chris Pine naturally becomes William Shatner, or have future Kirk from this timeline travel back for some reason (although back-to-back time travel plots would be tiresome). Plenty of ways to work it in. Heck, Spock can have a recording of his old friend.
Reply
10-14-2009 @ 11:01AM
martisco said...
Um, do we have to have Shatner or Nimoy at all? How is this really adding to getting this franchise off the ground?
Reply
10-14-2009 @ 4:01PM
MarkH said...
Good question. I've never understood this need to have "continuity" with the original cast of some old TV show or movie. Most of the time it just takes you out of the plot anyway, since instead of watching along you get poked with this irrelevant "Hey, it's whatsizname there from the original show!" moment.
10-14-2009 @ 12:36PM
BarkingGhost said...
Well, they think it might be needed if they perceived a weakness in the sale of this sequel based on the mediocre response of its predecessor.
Reply
10-14-2009 @ 12:36PM
ML said...
My problem with continuing to carry on with the old characters whilst you're rebooting: If you're going to reboot, reboot already. I thought rebooting was about freeing yourself from the past. Every minute you spend with an old character is a minute you don't get to spend discovering a new character, which is what I want to do. In my opinion, finding ways to wedge in the previous actors is a "burden" and requires a gimmick to make it work (and - gag - it means yet more time travel!!!!). And, yes, it always feels like a gimmick, even when you dress it up as well as they did with the Star Trek reboot (and I'm still not completely comfortable with the whole Vulcan thing). I really don't mind if they re-write "history" whether they fiddle with the time-stream or not - isn't that what a re-boot is about? Otherwise it's a remake. Now we have to drag along Star Trek v1 as we get into Star Trek v2? For me it's just that: a drag. Every time I hear about Shatner or more Spock prime (and don't get me wrong, I like Spock) I just sigh.
Reply
10-14-2009 @ 12:35PM
ML said...
Excuse me, obviously I'm referring to old and new versions of the same characters. Confusing, huh?
10-14-2009 @ 1:57PM
Wexler said...
I definitely agree. I was not impressed by the new Star Trek. Honestly, the whole thing felt like a gimmick to me. I'd much rather see them move ahead with the new versions of the characters, and maybe work a little more on plot and character development rather than finding ways to give big parts to old cast members. I really hope they nail down a good story for the sequel before they decide to put Shatner in it. If they want him in it that badly, why not just give him a fun cameo. Dress him up as a Klingon or something.
10-14-2009 @ 6:41PM
Booby Jones said...
@realist...
I know that they are changing everything and the timeline is different now and continuity is gone, however with Kirk I think they need to be careful about how they bring him back because just saying "we can do it this way" because the timeline is new won't cut it with fans. They still have to respect what he did before or the fans will revolt.
Also even though the timeline is changed, it did not change for Spock because everything that happened to him before he still remembers, so why would it be that different with Kirk if you think about it? The impression I got from the movie was that even though the timeline has changed, everything that happened before still happened.
I mean, I'm a Picard/Riker guy, so it doesn't make much of a difference to me anyway.
Reply
10-15-2009 @ 1:32AM
Edward said...
Please bring back Ron Moore to save Star Trek. I think everyone has come to their senses to finally say that JJ Abrams Star Trek is mediocre at best. The majority of Star Trek fans have thrown Abrams' Trek as a bad parallel universe version.
The only way Abrams and crew can impress me is by creating a good film without relying on the gimmicks and "respecting canon" he used. His "respecting canon" was just lazy film making on his part.
Reply
10-15-2009 @ 6:47AM
Edward Darlow said...
Honestly, I don't understand all these people who want to hate this movie. Let's just see how the DVD sales go and then we can talk about how bad the movie was. I'm a VERY old fan of the original Star Trek and I realize that the show HAD to change in order to remain viable in the current day...before J.J. Abrams, Star Trek was DEAD, now it has a new life and we have many more years to look forward to further adventures! I think most of you 'haters' need to calm down and enjoy the ride! (but then again, even if you don't, do you actually think anyone cares?)
11-17-2009 @ 3:27AM
bbmcrae said...
I just found this comment and was wondering...when did "everyone" come to their senses about the new TREK? After it made a ton of money, got rave reviews, and got lots of people excited about a stale old franchise?
The negative, whiny, narrowminded complaints of Trekkers kvetching in their little treehouses never ceases to amaze me.
10-15-2009 @ 12:08PM
Jim Stephanek said...
To stave off the thought of yet another time travel issue, what if the young Kirk intercepted subspace transmissions from Captain Kirk's logs from the future which somehow help him in solving whatever crisis is at hand in the current reboot universe. Those logs could consist of audio and video, hence having Shatner in the movie without time travel. They could pertain to Khan where in the new universe Khan is killed instead of marooned, thus not having Spock die in the future and sparing Chekov the pain of having that thing crawl in his head. Maybe David doesn't die either! Geez there are so many possibilities to combine the old and new Trek. but something also tells me they should just go at it alone without the old actors interference.
Reply
10-15-2009 @ 8:08PM
DaveF said...
I don't see this as being all that complicated.
Why not write a huge storyline that somehow involves ALL the captains (alive or dead). Simply have some the greatest calamity imaginable and thus the need for all the captains to collaborate to solve this problem.
Oh yeah, how do you bring them back? It's simple...have the charachter "Q" bring them all together.
Reply
11-07-2009 @ 7:01PM
dooieaardkloot said...
Excellent! I'd love to see Archer in a full length flick.
He's the best captain anyway, not bothered by the Prime Directive. No worries about BORGs or goa'ulds, errr... wrong show.