Matt Damon will be older than William Shatner was when he originally sat in the captain's chair. Shatner was 35, Damon will be 37 by the time they get around to shooting it.
Not that Damon can't play "young", but this is supposed to be a prequel, right?
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
I'm right there with you oldschool. Damon is a fine actor with his own franchise going (another Bourne sequal is due in 2007). Why he would want to get mixed up in this is beyond me.
Rusty Shackleford is just the name he uses to order Pizza with.
The fact is, even an iconic role like James Bond isn't as closely identified with a single actor's unique interpretation as James T. Kirk is with Shatner's. Taking that comparison a step further, it was only about seven years between Connery and the first new actor to play the 007 role, and though that particular changeover didn't take, Moore pulled it off in '73, making it eleven years after Connery. Contrast that with Shatner who has been the only Kirk for going on forty years, and you can imagine why this cannot possibly work.
Originally posted by Hogan's My DadThe fact is, even an iconic role like James Bond isn't as closely identified with a single actor's unique interpretation as James T. Kirk is with Shatner's. Taking that comparison a step further, it was only about seven years between Connery and the first new actor to play the 007 role, and though that particular changeover didn't take, Moore pulled it off in '73, making it eleven years after Connery. Contrast that with Shatner who has been the only Kirk for going on forty years, and you can imagine why this cannot possibly work.
Though, I could be wrong and hope I am.
Also, I hate Star Trek and want it to stop.
I loved Star Trek (watched it when it was new), STNG, and Deep Space Nine and I wouldn't mind a NEW series. But let the original die. Damon can actually act and it will ruin the character. Shatner was perfect, precisely because he was an egotistical ham. Let this RIP. I beg them.
Make this a comedy like THE VOYAGE HOME, and I'll be happy. Outside of that, I'm not sure I want to see another Star Trek movie or series for quite a while. Insurrection's stink still haunts me.
-O
Here, look at the monkey! Look at the silly monkey!
Insurrection felt a little too much like an extended episode of the series, especially after the trailer made it look like a giant universe-shattering civil war flick. Now that would've been interesting.
Gary Senise would be an absolutely perfect piece of casting. I'm not so sure about the other characters, however. Matt Damon could work as Kirk depending on the exact time period (unknown so far and probably will remain so until a script comes to the surface.) Ben Affleck wouldn't be a terribly wise choice for the main cast, but I can almost see him playing a Charlie X or Gary Mitchell.
Whatever. So long as we don't get Beyonce as Uhura, I'm good.
That joke and the Muhammad Ali/Pam Anderson/spilled seed joke had my jaw on the floor. Goodness gracious, Greg Giraldo! Even Seth MacFarlane had a look on his face like, "How tacky!" - StingArmy
Thread rated: 5.79
#
#
#
