Cerebus
Knackwurst
   
   
      
 
Since: 17.11.02
Since last post: 23 hours
Last activity: 2 hours
|  #1 Posted on 14.7.07 2033.20 | Instant Rating: 1.48 | http://www.livevideo.com/shatnervision
William Shatner says that Leonard Nimoy will be in JJ Abrams STAR TREK film.
This makes me happy.
It confirms (sort of...) that the film won't be a 'prequel', unless Spock is doing some strange going back in time shit, which might suck all together.
Fuck, I don't know.| Promote this thread! |           | Jim Smith
Goetta
Since: 17.10.04
From: Bloomington, IL
Since last post: 1807 days
Last activity: 1238 days
| #2 Posted on 14.7.07 2221.24 | Instant Rating: 6.54 | Originally posted by Cerebus
It confirms (sort of...) that the film won't be a 'prequel', unless Spock is doing some strange going back in time shit, which might suck all together.
Fuck, I don't know.
Michael Dorn was in Star Trek VI, but that didn't mean it was set in 2367. Odds are Nimoy is being given a cameo as the grandfather of "young Spock." | Venom
Boudin rouge
Since: 15.1.03
Since last post: 2113 days
Last activity: 2083 days
| #3 Posted on 15.7.07 0711.42 | Instant Rating: 4.66 | But what about Cthuhlu?
I'm sorry, but am I the only person who thinks J.J. Abrams is an over-rated hack who can hype fanboys into a frenzy but never deliver when the time comes?
They've got a billion different ways they can go with the future of the franchise, and they chose slash, burn and reboot.
WoW Wisdom:
"And then there's aggro to worry about."
"What's 'aggro'?"
"Well, it's complicated. But loosely translated, it means 'the priest dies.'" | oldschoolhero
Knackwurst
Since: 2.1.02
From: nWo Country
Since last post: 1494 days
Last activity: 1428 days
|  #4 Posted on 15.7.07 0811.43 | Instant Rating: 9.00 | It's definitely a prequel, they've been courting everyone from Matt Damon to Sam Rockwell to play Kirk. Nimoy's cameoing as either Old Spock in a pre-credits sequence, of Sarek.
To those who say people wouldn't look; they wouldn't be interested; they're too complacent, indifferent and insulated, I can only reply: There is, in one reporter's opinion, considerable evidence against that contention. But even if they are right, what have they got to lose? Because if they are right, and this instrument is good for nothing but to entertain, amuse and insulate, then the tube is flickering now and we will soon see that the whole struggle is lost. This instrument can teach, it can illuminate; yes, and it can even inspire. But it can do so only to the extent that humans are determined to use it to those ends. Otherwise it is merely wires, and lights, in a box.-Edward R. Murrow
|
| | | | |
Thread rated: 4.40