Paramount Casts New James T. Kirk

Tycoon Guy writes "TrekToday reports that Paramount is in talks with 27-year old actor Chris Pine to play the role of Captain Kirk in the new 'Star Trek' film. Pine is almost completely unknown, but he's also being courted to star opposite George Clooney in 'White Jazz,' so he's being called "the hottest new actor in town." In addition, 'Hulk' actor Eric Bana was cast today as Nero, the main villain of Trek XI."

Shatner is out?

[Zymergy (803632)]

Chris Pine: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1517976/ [imdb.com]

Eric Bana: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0051509/ [imdb.com]
There is one true James TIBERIUS Kirk! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_T._Kirk [wikipedia.org]
Is Paramount trying to do with Kirk what has been done with the various flavors of "007" or "Batman"?

Re:Shatner is out?

[damn_registrars (1103043)]

Ummm, didn't they say they wanted a 27 year old Kirk? Come on, I think Shatner is closer to 127... His youth has already boldly gone!

Re:Shatner is out?

[rubycodez (864176)]

not to mention expensive wide-angle optics needed to get all his potbelly in the frame

Re:Shatner is out?

[Farmer Tim (530755)]

His youth has already baldly gone!

Fixed that for you...

Re:

[Marxist Hacker 42 (638312)]

Uh, that's the entire point of Trek XI- like http://www.startreknewvoyages.com/ [startreknewvoyages.com]'s fan fiction, this movie fits into the continuity between the original series and the movie- therefore they need YOUNGER actors!

I just hope that they learn something else from New Voyages and we get Newtonian-physics-accurate battle scenes in normal space.

Re:

[hawaiian717 (559933)]

From everything I'm hearing, the consensus seems to be that the movie will actually be before the original series, not after it. You're correct about New Voyages though, it's essentially "Season 4".

Re:

[dougmc (70836)]

and we get Newtonian-physics-accurate battle scenes in normal space.

Considering that their impulse drives can get them to significant percentages of c, and warp drive is much faster -- and people don't get splattered across the bridge every time they make a course change, I'd say probably not.

Babylon 5 is over there ...

IDF

[Radon360 (951529)]

FWIW, Google: Inertial Dampening Field [google.com]

This sci-fi device is supposed to counteract such fatal changes in motion. Gene Roddenberry and his gang tried to come up with scientific explanations for a lot of things portrayed in Star Trek.

Re:IDF

[dissy (172727)]

Gene Roddenberry and his gang tried to come up with scientific explanations for a lot of things portrayed in Star Trek.

Did he ever explain why a starship would be equiped with 1970's-era computers that clattered and lit up every time they spoke?

Yea, the budget. :P

Re:Shatner is out?

[halcyon1234 (834388)]

I think we can all agree on a response:

Piiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiine!

Re:Shatner is out?

[flyingsquid (813711)]

All I can say is, after his performance in 'Hulk', hearing about Eric Bana being cast in anything makes me cringe. Unless he's being cast in to a pit of boiling lava.

Re:

[Rallion (711805)]

I really don't think that's fair. Might want to check him out when he's playing a part that wasn't written by a very very stupid monkey. Munich's pretty good. After all, I can't really think of any actors or actresses that haven't been bad in something. (Look to the Star Wars prequels for examples.)

Re:

[Elemenope (905108)]

He was decent as Hector. Also, there was that one where he was a Mossad agent...that one was good too.

Point being, even Al Pacino had his Gigli. One poor performance does not an actor break.

Re:

[somersault (912633)]

Try watching Chopper instead then, I think that's the film that got him noticed. He's a pretty good actor.

Re:

[G-funk (22712)]

Everything about that movie was awful. I don't know if it's available in the US, but if not bittorrent is your friend, and watch Chopper. You'd barely know it was Bana. Besides, the guy *is* Mad Max. He's well known for driving his badass XB Falcon around the post-apocalyptic wasteland that is Tasmania :D

Re:

[Seumas (6865)]

Really, who even cares? The only dead horse that has been beat more than Star Wars is Star Trek. Let it die already. Good grief.

Re:

[HaloZero (610207)]

I always treated the character 007 more as a title than an actual person. The line of work is hazardous, and surely there was more than one, because the last guy took a bullet or forgot that the pen was poison and not antidote.

That's Christopher PIKE

[Jeremiah Cornelius (137)]

...you insensitive clod!

Good Job, but

[ackthpt (218170)]

Now. He has to learn. To talk. Like this.

Chris Pine? That's one letter away from Chris Pike! [memory-alpha.org] Coincidence? I don't think so!

Re:

[AdmiralWeirdbeard (832807)]

I still think that Ryan Reynolds would be perfect for a young kirk. Same handsome yet roundish face, aptitude for. silly. line. delivery.

Re:

[polyomninym (648843)]

Somewhere between Pike and Pine lies the Seattle Convention Center.

The real question is...

[Tetsujin (103070)]

Now. He has to learn. To talk. Like this.

Well... Sure! HE - can - ACT...

BUT!

The REAL question IS...

can he SING?

Picture yourself. In a boat. On a river.
With Tan-gerine dreams, and MARMALADE skies!
Somebody -- calls you... you anssswerrr quuuiiitee sllllowwwwllllyyyy,
A GIRL! with kalEIIIIDOscope eyes...

Actually, the actor is named Chris Pike

[by Anonymous Coward]

The guy is so good at acting, he only needs a blinking light to convey his emotions.

Make up your mind

[Snowgen (586732)]

The headline said the role was cast, and the summary said "in talks". Make up your mind, and don't get back to me until you have an answer.

Chris Pine... is there nothing he can't do?

[farker haiku (883529)]

I mean, Captain Kirk, ruby programmer, author [pine.fm].

What a stud.

Today's rumor is tomorrow's career obituary

[xPsi (851544)]

Condolances went out today to Chis Pine, his family, and his career after he formally accepted the offer by Paramount to play James T. Kirk in the upcoming Star Trek movies.

Pike & Pine...

[gbulmash (688770)]

Two streets that run parallel to each other in downtown Seattle. Coincidence???

Re:

[gstoddart (321705)]

Two streets that run parallel to each other in downtown Seattle. Coincidence???

Probably, yeah. :-P

Re:

[Orange Crush (934731)]

They also both intersect 5th avenue--the very same road as the Scifi Museum!!

Re:Pike & Pine...Enterprise

[goombah99 (560566)]

There's an ENTERPRISE rent-a-car on Pike Street.

Hay Bill

[drewzhrodague (606182)]

Hay Bill Shatner. Hope you're, reading *this* thread. Lots of us, miss you, except on reruns.

I sure hope the new actor does a service to Star Trek, and to the history. Lots of us rabid ST fans will be waiting and watching. You have to remember that Star Trek has been around for *40 years*, and has been watched by generations of people. I also expect Star Trek to be around for another 40 years, with all of the styrofoam rocks, clitorus-foreheaded space-aliens, and freeze-frame phaser attacks. Oh, and hot m

"clitorus" ?

[Namlak (850746)]

...clitorus-foreheaded space-aliens...

Geez, some guys can't even find it in the dictionary!

(But I'll give you credit, that's a funny term!)

Other cast options....

[russ1337 (938915)]

They were going to cast Keano Reeves as Spock, but found during auditions that he doesn't have the range of emotions required for the role.

Re:Other cast options....

[laffer1 (701823)]

How would the lines for that go?

Kirk: Spock what do you think?
Spock: I know kung fu!

So. . . Many. . . Pictures.

[Fantastic Lad (198284)]

The IMDB has a tidy little slide show [google.ca] of Hollywood's new It Boy.

I'm glad they didn't go for a look-a-like. There's a couple of shots which suggest this actor might have enough screen presence and charisma to pull off the arrogant super-leader several-times savior of the galaxy.

Good luck to you, Mr. Pine! Them's big shoes. --It's a case of creating a character who is, (on and off the screen) ultra arrogant, skilled enough to deserve acting that way, and charming enough not to piss everybody off while doing it. If you follow Shatner's lead, then you will also be a really kind, light-hearted and giving soul, but that usually comes with age. If you don't get blasted by photon disrupters first. Is this Pine kid also a Canadian like old Bill? I'm not sure it's possible to achieve all of those goals otherwise. We'll have to see. Like I said, good luck to you, man!

And I have gotta say, this is the first time in forever, (with the exception of the recent and sadly disappointing Superman film), that I've been excited about an upcoming movie. With a good writer and good direction, this could be a really awesome film.

When, oh, when will I accumulate enough jaded cynicism to not let my hopes get the better of me?

I am SUCH a sci-fi geek!

-FL

Bugger Kirk, I want Pirk!

[Nim82 (838705)]

They should replace Kirk with Pirk and get Samuli Torssonen and his crew on-board.

Star Wreck was better in every way that matters: Better Battles, Better Humour, Better Plot and most importantly prettier girls. The acting was about equal as well.

Imagine what they could do with a budget?

McCoy?

[FranTaylor (164577)]

Is there any truth to the rumor that Gary Sinise is going to play Dr. McCoy? I mean, how could they possibly give it to anyone else?

Re:

[garett_spencley (193892)]

I agree that Sinise would make an excellent McCoy ... but they're casting for the roles the crew in their mid 20's. Sinise is 52.

Eric Bana?

[rk (6314)]

I thought the Hulk's alter ego was Bruce Bana.

James Cawley

[rpillala (583965)]

If they had any guts at all they'd cast James Cawley as Kirk. His performance on Star Trek: New Voyages evokes Shatner's hamminess occasionally, but more often you forget it's someone else playing Kirk and you're just watching Star Trek again. If you've soured on the franchise like some posters have I encourage you to watch some episodes:

http://www.startreknewvoyages.com/ [startreknewvoyages.com]

Re:

[by Anonymous Coward]

The first captain of the Enterprise [wikipedia.org] was Capt. Paul.

Archer was the first recorded to captain

[DigitalReverend (901909)]

If you go by Star Trek Canon,

Archer was the first recorded Federation captain of a ship named Enterprise (NX-01)

Capt April was the first captain of the USS Enterprise (NCC-1701) followed by Christopher Pike, James T. Kirk and then Willard Decker. Spock was captain occasionally.

Then on the Enterprise B (NCC 1701-B) John Harriman, and later Demora Sulu who was the daughter of Sulu from the original series.

Enterprise C was captained by Rachel Garrett.

And the Enterprise D was captained by Picard, although Riker, and Edward Jellico captained the ship at least once during it's commission.

There was one other Enterprise, the USS Enterprise (XCV 330) but little is known about it and there is no record of who it's captain was.

Hows that for a geek trekker side.

Re:

[hawaiian717 (559933)]

Demora Sulu as captain of the Enterprise-B isn't canon.

NX-01 was a pre-Federation Starfleet vessel. In "These Are the Voyages..." the ship was heading to Earth for both the retirement of the vessel as well as the founding of the Federation. As such, XCV 330 would also be pre-Federation.

Re:

[Shakrai (717556)]

If you go by Star Trek Canon,

And if you go by all things holy then Enterprise, like Voyager and Star Trek V, never really happened.... at best it was a Holodeck malfunction.

In fact, come to recall, the lame ass series finale of Enterprise was literally a holodeck program on the Enterprise-D! I find it very easy to think that Voyager, Enterprise, and every TNG movie were just horrible holonovels written by somebody with a sick and twisted mind. It's the only thing keeping me from losing ALL faith in Star Trek....

Hey, Wars fans, i

Re:Let it die

[The Good Reverend (84440)]

Just don't go. Problem solved. Let the rest of us enjoy it. The end, everyone wins.

I've never understood why some people think their memories of some sort of media will be ruined if a new product, one they don't have to go see or experience, is released.

Re:Let it die

[Shakrai (717556)]

I've never understood why some people think their memories of some sort of media will be ruined if a new product, one they don't have to go see or experience, is released.

Well, for starters, this guy [slashdot.org] had a very good point [slashdot.org].

Beyond that though, I'm just disgusted at low Star Trek has gone. Seriously. We've gone from the golden age of TV Sci-Fi, with shows like TNG, DS9, Babylon 5 and SeaQuest all airing new episodes, to Paramount milking the cash cow that is Star Trek, putting out one crap release after another, banking on the "Star Trek" name to sell it.

You realize that Stephen Hawking of all people took TNG seriously enough that he made a tour of the set, asked to sit in Picard's chair and even did a cameo? You find me something on TV today that even comes close to what TNG was it's hayday. Or Babylon 5 for that matter. Yes, both had their downpoints (TNG Seasons 1-2 and 7, Babylon 5's last season and parts of the first), but I don't think you can find something on TV today that's anywhere near as good as either of them on a bad day.

And don't come back with Firefly, the standard /. answer. It's not in production anymore, who knows how good or bad it would have been if it had remained, and I don't consider it Sci-Fi like Bab 5 or TNG. It's more like a western in space. And before the Firefly fans all rush to click "reply" and flame me, I liked Serenity and the back story to Firefly. I just don't think you can point at a show that didn't even make one season as justification for why modern Sci-Fi doesn't suck.

And Battlestar Galactica, while an awesome show, is no where near as mainstream as TNG or even Bab 5. And while that's not entirely a bad thing, it doesn't exactly help make the case for Sci-Fi on TV either.

Re:

[The Good Reverend (84440)]

None of this makes any difference if you don't watch the new stuff, and just keep your memories of the old stuff you like.

Speaking of memories, my friends who watched Star Trek the first time around (or early in reruns in the 70s) generally prefer it to any of the new shows. I grew up on TNG, DS9 and VOY. My friend's son likes Star Wars Episode 1 better than the first 3, because he saw it first. We all view the world with rose tinted glasses, and think the things we like are necessarily the best. That's fin

Re:Let it die

[The Good Reverend (84440)]

What if in 2050 every Star Trek movie ever made with Kirk now stars Chris Pine, through the magic of editing?

Well, that's really Paramount's decision - they own Star Trek, not us. Second, fan outrage brought the original versions back for Star Wars (mostly because Lucus saw more money there, I'm sure). Every episode of Star Trek currently exists on DVD as it originally aired. Through the magic of the internet, now they'll never go away, regardless of what products new are released. And you'll still be able to avoid/ignore any new franchise efforts, just as you can today.

Re:

[MightyMartian (840721)]

Actually I think this has a reasonably good chance of working, and is precisely what they should have been doing all along. Rather than the Next-Next-Generation or the Previous-Previous-Generation, they should have gone back to ToS to begin with. The actors would be different, but the characters familiar. The writers, like the rest of us, would have known them for forty years.

If anything has a chance of reinvigorating Trek, it's this.

Re:

[MightyMartian (840721)]

Foundation is pretty straightforward narrative, I don't see the problem. Niven's Known Space is much the same. I admit Zelazny's is a stretch, but playing around with narrative order is now old hat thanks to guys like Tarantino.

If they can a truly huge novel like Lord of the Rings into movies, why the heck couldn't they turn the first three Foundation books into movies?