Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Sci-Fi Media Movies

Nimoy May Be the Star of the Next Trek Film? 248

ajs writes "Moriarty, over on Ain't It Cool News is running a column about the upcoming J.J. Abrams Star Trek movie. In it, he discusses some theories about where the movie is going, but doesn't reveal his sources. He claims that Nimoy's Spock, not the younger versions of the original Trek trio, will be the primary star of the film; and that the movie will make some very substantial changes to the Trek lore in a way that is internally consistent with what went before, but opens up many more options for future franchise films or series. If he's right, there are some pretty substantial spoilers in the column." Obviously, as unverifiable speculation this should be taken with a grain of salt. Live long and prosper.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Nimoy May Be the Star of the Next Trek Film?

Comments Filter:
  • Hmm. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by PetraData ( 1135825 ) on Friday August 31, 2007 @08:11PM (#20430521)
    He's 76 years old. Kind of hard to do action scenes, ain't it? What will he be doing the whole movie? Debating Vulcan philosophy?
    • Re:Hmm. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by UserGoogol ( 623581 ) on Friday August 31, 2007 @08:17PM (#20430555)
      I'd watch that.
    • Re:Hmm. (Score:5, Funny)

      by WombatDeath ( 681651 ) on Friday August 31, 2007 @08:30PM (#20430621)
      I once read that Nimoy invented the Vulcan neck pinch early on in ToS because he couldn't be bothered filming all the running around and fighting. Perhaps the older Nimoy will come up with a bone-snapping Eyebrow Raise of Doom.
      • Re:Hmm. (Score:4, Informative)

        by YogSothoth ( 3357 ) on Friday August 31, 2007 @09:36PM (#20430893) Homepage
        Hey Wombat,

              As far as I know, this is the scoop on the neck pinch ...

              It was invented for the episode "The Enemy Within" by Leonard Nimoy, who felt that Spock was too dignified to render someone unconscious by striking them over the head with the butt of a phaser.

        This comes from Memory Alpha [memory-alpha.org] but I recall reading the same explanation 20+ years ago so I think it's likely the correct one.
        • by steveha ( 103154 )
          I read the book The Making of Star Trek in the 70's and I remember reading about that. Nimoy wanted to invent something to make the Vulcans different, and he started working on hand gestures. The "live long and prosper" gesture came from this, as did the Vulcan habit of "kissing" by tapping fingers together (Spock's parents did this). And some script (I don't remember which one) called for Spock to knock someone out, and he came up with the neck pinch.

          I should re-read that book; I haven't read it in deca
      • by Khaed ( 544779 )
        Actually, he thought it seemed kind of silly that a Vulcan would punch someone, given their calm demeanor. At least, that's what I recall him saying in I am Spock.
      • If you smmmeeelllllll what the Spock is cooking!
    • He's 76 years old. Kind of hard to do action scenes, ain't it? What will he be doing the whole movie? Debating Vulcan philosophy?
      I imagine Zachary Quinto will be doing the heavy lifting... or is that neck pinching?
    • He's 76 years old. Kind of hard to do action scenes, ain't it? What will he be doing the whole movie? Debating Vulcan philosophy?

      Well, just last year they came up with something new in the motion picture industry... what was it they called it? Oh yeah... a Stunt Double!

      My silliness aside... Shatner and Nimoy (and Kelley) had stunt doubles for TOS... so no big deal.

      On top of that, it was always quite rare for Spock to exert himself physically - and most of the time that he did, it was usually very understated moves because of his character's far greater than human strength. Mark Lenard played Sarek's "fight" scene in a similar w

    • Yeah, because the Spock character was always about the awesome kung fu. To do him any other way would be a total betrayal...

  • by Anonymous Coward
    "very substantial changes to the Trek lore in a way that is internally consistent with what went before, but opens up many more options for future franchise films or series"

    There will be a tachyon anomaly that will give all the old characters characteristics of the new actors that play them.
  • by Scholasticus ( 567646 ) on Friday August 31, 2007 @08:15PM (#20430543) Journal
    This is just baseless speculation. It sounds like this guy just pulled the whole thing out of his bunghole. Then again I have to admit I've always hated AICN.
    • by ajs ( 35943 )

      This is just baseless speculation. It sounds like this guy just pulled the whole thing out of his bunghole.
      They're right as often as they're wrong (that's the risk of trying to thread together rumors about an industry that specializes in misdirection), but if anyone knows this for sure, it's Moriarty. We'll see, I suppose. I'll be sure to submit a review to Slashdot when it comes out.

  • Finally! (Score:5, Funny)

    by ScrewMaster ( 602015 ) on Friday August 31, 2007 @08:17PM (#20430557)
    An article that is definitely News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters.

    Cool.
  • by NotQuiteReal ( 608241 ) on Friday August 31, 2007 @08:26PM (#20430591) Journal
    I imagine it opens with Spock living a hermit life in a rude hut on a swamp planet... he will pass on his wisdom to some young padowan. (Maybe I am confusing franchises... let's go for the trifecta in the next sentence.)

    Hopefully it will not be a musical Aaaahhh [youtube.com]!

    Although if Captain Kirk shows up, even properly aged, he can sing amusing songs [youtube.com], now and then.

    • Forget Alien vs. Predator, here comes Spock vs. Yoda.
      Get ready to rumble!!!!

      I hear Joe Pesci will play Yoda.

  • by owlnation ( 858981 ) on Friday August 31, 2007 @08:32PM (#20430625)
    I'm fine with JJ blowing the canon open. Caveat: I'm not a Trek fan.

    I appreciate that die hard fans will be upset by that, however my feeling is that Star Trek has basically had about 12 plot lines that have essentially been recycled in various guises throughout all the seasons. They've finally flogged that deceased horse one too many times.

    The fundamental issues I see is the utopian nature of the universe Roddenberry created. Ignoring the probability or possibility of human nature being so utterly warped into an utopia (I personally can't suspend my disbelief that far), as a basis for a TV or movie it's all very nice and all, but it makes for dull writing and little drama.

    You're left with creating drama by have characters behave out of character by alien possession or secret starfleet order etc etc etc. Or time travel (which is a clichéd story, almost always in any medium - paradox, protect timeline, yawn blah blah, seen it a thousand times)

    No, Star Trek needs its ass kicked. I'm not entirely sure that JJ Abrams is the best guy to do that, but he's probably better than anyone who's been in charge of that franchise for the past 20 years.
    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Star Treck needs to spice things up. A lesbian affair of some sort with full sidal nudity, some tentacle monster having its way with a few crewmen, a gay marriage to a robot, perhaps?

      Are you people writing this down? It's gold I tells you.
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Except if you're going to do a Star Trek movie that's not cannon, why not go all out and I don't know... maybe make something original? Maybe instead of beating the dead Star Trek horse, make up your own cannon?

      Yeah, I know it's Hollywood and originality is too much to expect. :/
    • ATTN: Moderators (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Cid Highwind ( 9258 ) on Friday August 31, 2007 @09:21PM (#20430835) Homepage
      PP is not a troll, he's right.

      Star Trek has been out of new plot ideas since about season 4 of TNG. It was apparent when they made DS9 into a Babylon-5 ripoff, it was obvious all throughout Voyager and and it should have been apparent to even to a retarded 3-hour-old tribble after the Nazi episode of Enterprise. Departure from canon = good.

      Sincerely, a former Trek fan.
      • by Phroggy ( 441 )
        The Nazi thing was a huge mistake, and probably was a significant factor in killing the series. Other than that, Enterprise was really surprisingly good, most of the time. Their best stuff was when they expanded on ideas that had been introduced in previous episodes of Star Trek, and managed to do it without breaking anything (for example, they encounter the Ferengi, but since the crew was unconscious when the Ferengi boarded Enterprise, the ship's log never mentioned them by name, which is why Picard had
    • I'm fine with JJ blowing the canon open. Caveat: I'm not a Trek fan.

      I appreciate that die hard fans will be upset by that, however my feeling is that Star Trek has basically had about 12 plot lines that have essentially been recycled in various guises throughout all the seasons. They've finally flogged that deceased horse one too many times.


      If you are not a fan, why did you watch so much of it that you were able to discern the 12 typical plotlines? I don't watch shows that I don't enjoy, at least no
  • This has to mean there's more time travel. They should have renamed the franchise "Time Trek". Let me guess, old Spock travels the to past, ie the era in which the film is set, and does something that (supposedly) ties up assorted loose plot ends. Sigh.

    (Mind, I've got nothing against a good time travel yarn. Operative word being "good".)
    • This has to mean there's more time travel. They should have renamed the franchise "Time Trek". Let me guess, old Spock travels the to past, ie the era in which the film is set, and does something that (supposedly) ties up assorted loose plot ends. Sigh. (Mind, I've got nothing against a good time travel yarn. Operative word being "good".)

      Yes, it has to mean more time travel, in the same sense that it has to mean that this is finally the Trek where Spock will pull out his pointy Vulcan member and make te
  • ...wasn't he always?
  • by WombatControl ( 74685 ) on Friday August 31, 2007 @08:35PM (#20430645)

    Frankly, the biggest problem the Star Trek franchise has is its own fans.

    There's a big difference between being respectful of a story and hamstringing yourself to meet some fanboy's idea of "canon." There are long and drawn-out discussions all the time in Trek fandom about how this one inconsequential element of some story doesn't mesh with years of backstory which is itself internally inconsistent. They can't seem to let go of these whiny nitpicks.

    Look at the new Battlestar Galactica -- Ronald D. Moore took the old BSG "canon" and completely ignored it. He realized that from a storytelling standpoint it would be too limiting to bother sticking with the old story -- after the destruction of nearly every human being, going to a "casino planet" is a betrayal of what could be an incredible storyline. RDM took the essence of what BSG was -- humanity is on the run against an insidious and implacable enemy and reduced it to its essentials. The result is infinitely better than what came before.

    I hope J.J. Abrams has the pure chutzpah to do just that with Star Trek. Reinvent the franchise. Give it new life. Change things around and craft a story that can attract a new generation of fans rather than appealing to the people who spend all their life studying the minutiae of the shows.

    At its core, Star Trek is Horatio Hornblower in space -- a valiant young captain and his intrepid crew going out an exploring a new frontier. The new film should be true to that spirit, but if J.J. Abrams just sticks to what comes before, he's passing up on an artistic opportunity.

    I've been a fan of Star Trek all my life, but the franchise grew stale and repetitive. This is the chance to give it new life, and in order to do that J.J. Abrams will have to royally piss off a lot of Star Trek fans who indignantly demand that the series match their vision of what Star Trek should be. If he does it right, a whole lot of Trekkers will be calling for his head, but the franchise will (dare I say it), live long and prosper after years of neglect.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by localman ( 111171 )
      I was never a huge Star Trek fan, so perhaps my opinion is worthless, but I really liked the proposed reboot [typepad.com] of the Star Trek universe that Straczynski and Zabel envisioned, and wrote a treatment for. I think it's worth a read and consideration.

      Cheers.
      • Back then, I was executive producing the TV series, "The Crow: Stairway to Heaven" and...

        Have you seen any of that? They have him getting a JOB. That is beyond stupid. He shouldn't be allowed anywhere near a script or camera or editing room.
      • Eh, I think that's still just a rehash of the series. They have some valid points, but fail to address the serious issue with the Trek universe.

        And that issue is this; We geeks like our stories. Love them, actually. The longer and deeper it is, the more we eat it up. Which is why a story like DS9 took off, and why a shallow plot like Voyager failed ( well, characters help tank that one too ). I've actually thought a lot about this, and yes I realize that classifies me as GEEEK. I'm ok with that. Tre
        • Funny thing is, I think all of that actually happened. Or perhaps you knew that and were directly referencing the TNG episode "Parallels." (God, I sound like a geek. Wait a minute. . .)

          Remember the evil, hairy Riker who tries to blow up Worf's shuttle before he can pass through the temporal anomaly? What you described sounds exactly like what he went through. Would have been cool to actually see the events that drove him to that end.
          • Funny thing is, I think all of that actually happened. Or perhaps you knew that and were directly referencing the TNG episode "Parallels." (God, I sound like a geek. Wait a minute. . .)

            Remember the evil, hairy Riker who tries to blow up Worf's shuttle before he can pass through the temporal anomaly? What you described sounds exactly like what he went through. Would have been cool to actually see the events that drove him to that end.


            Which is exactly what got me started thinking. Deep down, I am an optimist
        • ...if that means Troi has to bite it, so be it. Possibly in the first episode

          "I'm sensing... great hostility!"

        • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

          From what I understand, Roddenberry had an idea for a Star Trek series that involved blowing up the Federation, and an attempt to rebuild it. It was nixed, as executives didn't want to blow up the Star Trek franchise. So about 7 years ago, somebody took the idea, crossed out "Federation" and wrote "Commonwealth" instead, and called it Andromeda. Except for the last season, I thought it was pretty good.
        • The idea that Straczynski's pitch goes off of, searching for the "progenitor race" or what have you, is ripped straight from the TNG episode "The Chase" anyway. I think that idea has a lot of potential, but there'd be no reason to shoehorn it into a TOS reboot other than the writers having an irrational hard-on for the TOS characters or being too lazy to come up with new characters.
      • by The One and Only ( 691315 ) * <[ten.hclewlihp] [ta] [lihp]> on Friday August 31, 2007 @11:32PM (#20431369) Homepage
        Having read that pitch, it seems that Straczynski returned the favor (from Ron Moore and the DS9 staff stealing the Babylon 5 premise) and ripped off Ron Moore's BSG reimagining. The document is dated 2004, one year after the BSG miniseries and the same year BSG started running on Sky in the UK, and among other things, it suggests making Scotty a woman!
    • by bky1701 ( 979071 )

      Frankly, the biggest problem the Star Trek franchise has is its own fans. There's a big difference between being respectful of a story and hamstringing yourself to meet some fanboy's idea of "canon." There are long and drawn-out discussions all the time in Trek fandom about how this one inconsequential element of some story doesn't mesh with years of backstory which is itself internally inconsistent. They can't seem to let go of these whiny nitpicks."

      May be a troll, but I'll bite.

      Star Trek isn't BSG.

    • I basically agree with you. I'd rather that they just "reboot" the thing, and then we won't have to concern ourselves with what went before. It worked well for Batman and James Bond, and Kirk is essentially just such a character.

      The problem here is that Nimoy is in it, and maybe the Shat too. I want them both to be in it. The idea appeals to me. So how to do we both reboot, and also have them in it?

      It's not impossible. They could still portray elderly versions of the two main characters, but simpl
    • The result is infinitely better than what came before

      The result is infinitely more stupid than what came before. Human descendants wearing ties and suits, having a president, worrying about terrorism, using hand guns, pistols and rifles, etc? yeah, right. Humans made advanced cyborgs, the Cylons, but they couldn't get a descent ray gun even if their life depended on it...infinitely better my a$$...at least the original Starbuck was THE character.

      Reinvent the franchise. Give it new life. Change things a

  • by CharonX ( 522492 ) on Friday August 31, 2007 @08:53PM (#20430719) Journal
    Startrek has a problem. Wait, before you gather your torches and pitchforks hear me out.
    The problem is: Startrek is really old. That is not said that it is bad - I quite enjoyed TOS when it ran on TV, and I rather liked most of the "sequels" (like TNG, DS9, Voyager, etc.) to a certain degree. I loved the movies. But Startrek, or rather the Startrek universe has become the equivalent of really old code. The kind of code that was written when C was at it's peak and because the application was good and functional it just has been extended and rewritten over the time. And now you are standing in from of 50k lines of code, some in C, some in C++, some ported from C to C++, all written by several dozens of different editors (with different styles and paradigms) with over the last two decades. And someone had the bright idea to use assembler to squeeze some out some MS from an inner loop. Short, a demonic cross between a patchwork quilt made from used yarn and spaghetti-code. And now you are supposed to implement that new shining feature - without breaking anything.
    The Startrek universe is riddled with minor and major plotholes and inconsistencies. Of course, many of the got patched and re-patched when the popped up, but every time a new story is added to the canon some more or less obscure fact will exist to prove the inverse. Of course, the tools to patch them up exist - including the dreaded RETCON - but still there is too much too contradictory information.
    So what would you, the programmer do, if faced with the demonic code mentioned earlier and the prospect of managing it for the next forseeable future. Use the well-know way and write on or be bold and pull the plug and start from (almost) scratch?
    • by Chairboy ( 88841 ) on Friday August 31, 2007 @09:01PM (#20430759) Homepage
      After navigating your somewhat tortuous text, much of which involves a series of unconnected programming metaphors, I'm left to ask the following:

      Are you, perchance, a Perl programmer?
      • by CharonX ( 522492 )
        Hehe, well, a good author uses every means necessary to convey his message. I feel packing my message about patchwork and spaghetti-code like this really created the right atmosphere ;)
        (hmmm... I guess this is the equivalent of "let's try this... *boom*... I meant to do that")
    • by Tablizer ( 95088 )
      the Startrek universe has become the equivalent of really old code.... all written by several dozens of different editors (with different styles and paradigms) with over the last two decades.... demonic cross between a patchwork quilt made from used yarn and spaghetti-code.

      Yes, but there is something bold and timeless about Klingon COBOL


      INCREMENT DEATHS BY ONE.
      RESTORE HONOR TO BROTHER.
      INCREMENT DEATHS BY TWO.
      RESTORE HONOR TO FATHER.
  • Better than that Gandalf guy, though he wasn't bad.

    Also, I'm not a big trekkie, but I thought Nimoy had a literally emmy-level performance in that episode of STTNG, where he played an aged Spock on the planet of the Romulans. I suppose he probably never even got considered though.

        - Alaska Jack
  • who had trouble parsing this sentence?

    "Moriarty, over on Ain't It Cool News is running a column about the upcoming J.J. Abrams Star Trek movie
    It took me three times to get it.
    • *especially* since Star Trek has actually HAD a character named Moriarty.

      Incidentally, I've always thought that a spinoff based on the adventures of HoloMoriarty would be fun :)
    • So all it takes is ONE COMMA to render you dyslexic?

      Whoa.
  • by davmoo ( 63521 ) on Friday August 31, 2007 @09:36PM (#20430899)
    They've already done a Trek where they used the "but its not the same timeline" excuse to muck up the history. It was called "Enterprise", and it tanked. I saw nothing in TFA that would indicate this idea would do any better. Yes, Paramount needs to attract new fans. But they need to do so without pissing off the old ones.

    Instead of trying to redo the same old story with whats left of a aging and thinning available cast, they should take a hint from "The Next Generation" and move further in to the future with a new series and new characters.

    Or give us a movie based on DS9 ;-)
    • Maybe they should do a movie set in the evil goatee universe. Those were consistently among the best episodes of every series they graced - in fact, the Enterprise evil goatee episode was hands down the best episode of that entire run, even if it was 90% fan service.

      Helluva lot better than the stupid Temporal Space Nazis, anyway.

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        Damn... there must've been a speck of dirt on my monitor or something, because I read, at first, "...a movie set in the evil goatse universe...". Horrifying thought, let me tell you.
    • The trouble is, going father into the future, especially using most of the pre-existing material, means the new ship is likely a timeship, and the plot becomes a time travel plot by default. Since the best film in the series so far is also a time travel film (yes , I liked Wrath of Whale Buddies), I don't see how Paramount resists the temptation to try for success that way. That actually stacks the odds against a good picture.
      Star Trek got very lucky and pulled off really good time tra
    • Instead of trying to redo the same old story with whats left of a aging and thinning available cast, they should take a hint from "The Next Generation" and move further in to the future with a new series and new characters.
      I thought that was what Andromeda was slated to be, trek in the far future after the Federation fell.

  • On these boards. Abrams or writers are reading here.
  • I fear that we'll soon have a market for "Kirk shot first!" T-shirts.
  • by dircha ( 893383 ) on Friday August 31, 2007 @10:41PM (#20431177)
    I'm sick and tired of the maintainers of the Star Trek franchise trying to recapture the Original Series style and universe. That series failed for a reason. It had such a good movie run due to Shatner, Nimoy, and DeForest Kelly, as well as the epic nature of the stories. In the latter respect, the movies were successful because in style and substance they were the opposite of the failed series.

    Star Trek: TNG was by far the most expansive and interesting universe, and has always been far and away the fan favorite. I don't mean by self-styled critics who ramble on about emotional dynamics and relationships. Star Trek: TNG was popular because first and foremost because of Patrick Stewart, but second because it, like the Original Series movies, cast the ordinary in the extraordinary.

    Teenage boys and middle aged men and women did not watch Star Trek: TNG for character development and intricate relationships. They watched it because it rose above the trash on the rest of television, because it had ethics and virtue and told us what was right and what was wrong, and set things right by the end of every hour. Star Trek: TNG was a Greek morality play in a fantastically imaginative, yet intimately believable universe.

    It was NOT Dawson's Creek or Buffy the Vampire Slayer in space. It NOT not a campy western in space.

    Until the caretakers of the franchise look back and understand this, they will continue to fail to recapture that success.

    • It NOT not a campy western in space.
      Hey screw you, Firefly was bitchin cool.
      Can I get a second?

      but I agree with everything else you said.
    • by PCM2 ( 4486 ) on Saturday September 01, 2007 @12:27AM (#20431533) Homepage

      I'm sick and tired of the maintainers of the Star Trek franchise trying to recapture the Original Series style and universe. That series failed for a reason. It had such a good movie run due to Shatner, Nimoy, and DeForest Kelly, as well as the epic nature of the stories. In the latter respect, the movies were successful because in style and substance they were the opposite of the failed series.

      That's a pretty distorted view of history. Star Trek failed for the same reasons many TV shows fail. Some of them air in the wrong time slot, some of them fail to find sponsors, some of them are gutted by shortsighted producers ... Star Trek arguably experienced all of the above. The difference is that most canceled shows don't continue to maintain and grow a fan base for years after the show stops airing. The phenomenal success of Star Trek happened long before TNG -- and I daresay long before you were born, judging by the assumptions you make. People were paying good money to go to Star Trek conventions throughout the 1970s. They put a cartoon on Saturday mornings. I knew more than one kid who would watch the reruns religiously, trying to write down a copy of every Captain's Log that came out of Kirk's mouth. "Star Trek: The Motion Picture" only happened because Paramount had a brand-new Star Trek TV show featuring the original cast in the works, when somebody realized they stood to make a lot more money by releasing it to theaters instead. People lined up around the block to see "Star Trek: TMP" -- a movie based on a show that hadn't aired in 10 years.

      That said, TNG may have been a decent show, but like you say yourself -- it was mainly popular because it rose above the level of most of the crap on TV. That doesn't make it good Trek. The original Enterprise didn't need no damn social worker ... one drunken country doctor was good enough for them, 'nuff said.

      • by steveha ( 103154 )
        Star Trek failed for the same reasons many TV shows fail. Some of them air in the wrong time slot, some of them fail to find sponsors, some of them are gutted by shortsighted producers ... Star Trek arguably experienced all of the above.

        I read Shatner's book about his years with the Star Trek TV show. He said that the reason the show was canceled was ratings... more specifically, the way they used to do ratings at the time.

        In the days of the original series, ratings were simple: what show has the most peop
  • I don't even watch Trek anymore but I swear to God, if they make this movie all Kirk/Spock I'm going to beat Abrams to death with his own severed limbs.
  • darn (Score:5, Funny)

    i was hoping for "the rock" dwayne johnson to play spock

    they both got that eyebrow raise

    "DO YOU SMELL WHAT THE SPOCK IS COOKING?"

    the vulcan nerve pinch could segue into a chokeslam and a powerbomb followed by a pummeling by a folding chair
  • Bah. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by mshiltonj ( 220311 ) <mshiltonj&gmail,com> on Saturday September 01, 2007 @07:05AM (#20432791) Homepage Journal
    After Firefly, Serenity several seasons of BSG, Star Trek just seems a bit 'quaint.'

Ummm, well, OK. The network's the network, the computer's the computer. Sorry for the confusion. -- Sun Microsystems

Working...