The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum > Star Trek > Star Trek XI: The Movie > To The older fans of Star Trek
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old 01-15-2009, 08:13 AM
mmoore's Avatar
mmoore mmoore is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: OKUSA
Posts: 1,973
Default

Quote:
Zefram Cochrane was recast for unknown reasons, as Glenn Corbett was still alive.
Yeah, not so much. He died January 16, 1993, 16 years ago tomorrow. First Contact was released in 1996.
__________________
"Are you out of your Vulcan mind?"
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 01-16-2009, 04:02 AM
Red Tsar's Avatar
Red Tsar Red Tsar is offline
Ensign
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 33
Default

If they are going to do a TOS film they have to recast. Simple as that.
Two of the main cast have passed and there is no guarantee all the the remaining actors will be willing to reprise their roles. And to be honest I'm not sure I want to see them approaching the nursing home at warp speed. I'd rather remember them as young, virile and vibrant (except for the ageless Nimoy). To me that 30ish rake was Kirk. He was always a very physical character. I've seen Bostol Legal and I have to say that I don't want to see that Shat as Kirk. Even if he was in it it would likely be as a desk-bound Admiral. Of course, he could always do a runner, rejoin his chrew who would be scattered all over the galaxy anyway. That would be in character (though I doubt he could still run.)
But I just don't want to see the crew looking like they are on a day trip to bingo. Plus they would have to come up with something very contrived to have them all team up again. Sadly it would look something like the epilogue to A league of their own but they could do it. If they really had to...

I love TOS and have since I was a tot but it is better to burn out then to fade away.
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 01-16-2009, 04:15 AM
starbase63's Avatar
starbase63 starbase63 is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Connecticut, USA
Posts: 1,727
Default

Well sunuvagun...

I remember reading an interview reportedly with Corbett, and asked about why he wasn't chosen to reprise Cochrane he supposedly said "They didn't ask me."

Someone must have been pulling a prank. I wasn't even aware he had died.

__________________
Never keep a Vulcan waiting...
Admin, sb63's Star Trek Logs, member of the Trek Webmaster Program
STL is now also on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/StarTrekLogs
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 01-16-2009, 04:28 AM
starbase63's Avatar
starbase63 starbase63 is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Connecticut, USA
Posts: 1,727
Cool

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Tsar View Post
If they are going to do a TOS film they have to recast. Simple as that.
Two of the main cast have passed and there is no guarantee all the the remaining actors will be willing to reprise their roles. And to be honest I'm not sure I want to see them approaching the nursing home at warp speed. I'd rather remember them as young, virile and vibrant (except for the ageless Nimoy). To me that 30ish rake was Kirk. He was always a very physical character. I've seen Bostol Legal and I have to say that I don't want to see that Shat as Kirk. Even if he was in it it would likely be as a desk-bound Admiral. Of course, he could always do a runner, rejoin his chrew who would be scattered all over the galaxy anyway. That would be in character (though I doubt he could still run.)
But I just don't want to see the crew looking like they are on a day trip to bingo. Plus they would have to come up with something very contrived to have them all team up again. Sadly it would look something like the epilogue to A league of their own but they could do it. If they really had to...

I love TOS and have since I was a tot but it is better to burn out then to fade away.
The main thing is, JJ and Co. are supposed to be these creative geniuses...

I mean, aside from Felicity and Lost, what has he done?

He took the character of Rollin Hand from the original Mission Impossible, made him a hot chick and called it "Alias"...

He took on the third installment of the established Mission Impossible movie franchise...

He took Godzilla and crossed it with "The Blair Witch Project" and called it "Cloverfield"...

He took the X-Files, changed the tack from the supernatural and the paranormal to the scientific and called it "Fringe"...

He took a job as one of the co-writers of "Armageddon"...

With all that "creative genius" they couldn't have come up with a truly new Trek, instead of going back to the TOS era and calling it "new"? Yes, I know the reasoning that the general public is most familiar with Kirk and Spock and therefore potentially more bankable, I get it, especially since this movie is admittedly made more with Johnny-on-the-street in mind than us Trekfen...

But they couldn't put that creativity to work for more than just another reboot?

Yes, the time of the original cast members has passed...just as we've seen their characters' lives, promotions, retirements, even deaths...why can't it be left that way and do something new? Are remakes and reboots all Hollywood knows anymore?
__________________
Never keep a Vulcan waiting...
Admin, sb63's Star Trek Logs, member of the Trek Webmaster Program
STL is now also on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/StarTrekLogs
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 01-16-2009, 06:08 AM
mmoore's Avatar
mmoore mmoore is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: OKUSA
Posts: 1,973
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by starbase63 View Post
Well sunuvagun...

I remember reading an interview reportedly with Corbett, and asked about why he wasn't chosen to reprise Cochrane he supposedly said "They didn't ask me."

Someone must have been pulling a prank. I wasn't even aware he had died.

Google is your friend.
__________________
"Are you out of your Vulcan mind?"
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 01-16-2009, 07:38 AM
Lady Vaako's Avatar
Lady Vaako Lady Vaako is offline
Lieutenant Commander
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: William Shatner's birthplace (seriously)
Posts: 878
Default

As a 40-year-old woman who grew up with some of the early syndicated reruns, I can tell you that I'm fully embracing this new take on the original series. In fact, I'm very anxious to see how the new actors will portray our beloved characters, especially Kirk/Spock/McCoy. And the fact that my favourite actor will be playing Bones makes it even more exciting and thrilling. Even after all this time, it's still hard for me to believe that this is really happening.

When TNG came out 20 years ago, I made the mistake of rejecting it for two whole seasons simply because I could not wrap my head around the idea that Star Trek could exist without Kirk, Spock and McCoy. When I look back on this, I realize how close-minded it was (which is so not what I'm about usually), especially since TNG eventually became my favourite series. Then when Enterprise came out, I found it hard to buy into the concept that the NX-01 had a design and a technology that looked so much more modern than the NCC-1701. But by then I had learned my lesson and I didn't let that deter me from watching the show.

So the bottom line is: we should all keep an open-mind. And as someone else mentioned, please keep in mind that these characters are younger versions of the original ones.
__________________
Uhura - "And here I thought you were just some dumb hick who only had sex with farm animals."
Kirk -
"Well... not only..."

Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 01-16-2009, 08:58 AM
CAPTAIN MOUSE's Avatar
CAPTAIN MOUSE CAPTAIN MOUSE is offline
Rear Admiral
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Placerville,CA
Posts: 2,564
Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady Vaako View Post
As a 40-year-old woman who grew up with some of the early syndicated reruns, I can tell you that I'm fully embracing this new take on the original series. In fact, I'm very anxious to see how the new actors will portray our beloved characters, especially Kirk/Spock/McCoy. And the fact that my favourite actor will be playing Bones makes it even more exciting and thrilling. Even after all this time, it's still hard for me to believe that this is really happening.

When TNG came out 20 years ago, I made the mistake of rejecting it for two whole seasons simply because I could not wrap my head around the idea that Star Trek could exist without Kirk, Spock and McCoy. When I look back on this, I realize how close-minded it was (which is so not what I'm about usually), especially since TNG eventually became my favourite series. Then when Enterprise came out, I found it hard to buy into the concept that the NX-01 had a design and a technology that looked so much more modern than the NCC-1701. But by then I had learned my lesson and I didn't let that deter me from watching the show.

So the bottom line is: we should all keep an open-mind. And as someone else mentioned, please keep in mind that these characters are younger versions of the original ones.
Yer my kinda lady. And cute too! Like you I am just so excited to see a new cast play and further develope the original series. Being such a avid Trek fan ...I was wondering when the powers to be were going to do something new to spice up the franchise.
__________________
CAN YOU CATCH SECOND HAND STUPIDITY? OR SHOULD I BE CONCERNED ABOUT THE WATER HERE? - JEFF DUNHAM

Last edited by CAPTAIN MOUSE : 01-16-2009 at 11:39 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 01-17-2009, 03:40 PM
baron baron is offline
Midshipman
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1
Post The New Crew

I am more than willing to give the new actors a fair chance, but they had better be MORE than just good to fill those shoes.

I DO NOT want to this become Star Trek 90210. Star Trek has a charm that Roddenberry infused into it, and changing it just to make it "now" is to destroy a masterpiece.

And, from what I've seen on the trailers showing a child James Kirk almost plunging off a cliff in a hot rod, I am not hopeful.
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 01-18-2009, 11:07 AM
MissionTrek08's Avatar
MissionTrek08 MissionTrek08 is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Southern California
Posts: 5,562
Default

Fair enough, Baron, and welcome. Just remember that the young James Kirk is only going to be a very small part of this film, which will deal largely with the adult crew -- that's where the characters we know will intermix. Time will tell on those results.
__________________

MISSION:TREK's in-depth review of STAR TREK


Proud member of the Friends of Zardoz Association. Avatar courtesy of Eliza's House of Avatars with three convenient locations near you. Free balloons for the kids!
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 01-18-2009, 03:59 PM
Red Tsar's Avatar
Red Tsar Red Tsar is offline
Ensign
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 33
Default

III
Quote:
Originally Posted by starbase63 View Post
The main thing is, JJ and Co. are supposed to be these creative geniuses...

I mean, aside from Felicity and Lost, what has he done?

He took the character of Rollin Hand from the original Mission Impossible, made him a hot chick and called it "Alias"...

He took on the third installment of the established Mission Impossible movie franchise...

He took Godzilla and crossed it with "The Blair Witch Project" and called it "Cloverfield"...

He took the X-Files, changed the tack from the supernatural and the paranormal to the scientific and called it "Fringe"...

He took a job as one of the co-writers of "Armageddon"...

With all that "creative genius" they couldn't have come up with a truly new Trek, instead of going back to the TOS era and calling it "new"? Yes, I know the reasoning that the general public is most familiar with Kirk and Spock and therefore potentially more bankable, I get it, especially since this movie is admittedly made more with Johnny-on-the-street in mind than us Trekfen...

But they couldn't put that creativity to work for more than just another reboot?

Yes, the time of the original cast members has passed...just as we've seen their characters' lives, promotions, retirements, even deaths...why can't it be left that way and do something new? Are remakes and reboots all Hollywood knows anymore?
I have to say, apart from the first half of Lost (it just got too much for my patience after a while) I have not been impressed by his work either (well, I couldn't watch more that 10 minutes of Cloverfield without feeling sick so I don't know how I feel about that) but the fact he is a fan of Trek does reassure me because I know he has respect for the franchise another director may not have.

I think they went back to the original series because they may have felt they didn't have anywhere else to go. The last few Next Gen pics didn't do so well. Voyager and DS9, well, I don't think they have a film in them.
Maybe they just felt starting a new Trek offshoot on the big screen was too big a risk? Especially after the ratings failure that was Enterprise. The original crew have a guaranteed appeal. I think it was just a safe move.
In the current issue of Empire (Aussie film mag.) David Fincher says in an interview "Movies are fashion. They are designed to take your money. I mean, let's not kid ourselves: they have way more to do with shoes and coats than they do with art." That sounds rather cynical and I don't like cynicism but it has the ring of truth about it.
The same issue also features an interview with Abrams who explains his reasoning (while also being vague about the plot) and chats with Chris Pine and Zachary Quinto which do spark my interest. According to the article Adrams wanted to do original series because he feels the only way to truly revive the franchise was to go back to the start and take Trek back to what it used to mean.

A well respected director meets a once popular franchise in need of a boost. I can't imagine the success of the Dark Knight and Iron Man had nothing to do with it either. That sounds rather cynical. It could be that that was the film Adrams wanted to do because he feels the only way to truly revive the franchise was to go back to the start and take Trek back to what it used to mean.

If there were going to chose something different the one I would like to see is New Frontier. I love the books and there is a wonderful quirkiness to the characters. Plus Peter David would likely be writing the script in that case. But no one seems interested despite the popularity of the books.

Last edited by Red Tsar : 01-18-2009 at 04:23 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:48 PM.


Forum theme courtesy of Mark Lambert
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2009 by Paramount Pictures. STAR TREK and all related
marks and logos are trademarks of CBS Studios Inc. All Rights Reserved.