Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Matt Damon as Kirk in Star Trek XI?

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the jennifer-garner-as-nurse-chapel-please dept.

GiggidyGiggidy writes "Our friends at IMDB.com are reporting that Matt Damon has been cast to play a young James T. Kirk in the new Star Trek Movie directed by J.J. Abrams. Is this the end of the Star Trek series we fans know and love, or the beginning of something bigger and better for the series?"

8 of 594 comments (clear)

  1. Too Old!!! by Randolpho · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Matt Damon can look young, yes, but he's 35 -- as old as Shatner was when he started playing Kirk originally! If Damon is supposed to be younger Kirk in his Academy days... I dunno, it just doesn't work for me.

    --
    "Times have not become more violent. They have just become more televised."
    -Marilyn Manson
  2. Don't trust IMDB by BenClueless · · Score: 5, Insightful

    IMDB is rarely ever accurate until after a movie is released. They'll put anything up! Some Spider-Man 3 fan even submitted his own synopsis and had it posted to prove this. Aunt May was listed as Carnage for a while too..

  3. Re:Oh, Yes! by Fordiman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you were your age now, and introduced to the original series as an adult with no prior Star Trekkiness, you, like me, would be under the impression that it sucked bad.

    Lousy acting, lame plots, almost no finish. Sorry, but it simply doesn't live up to today's standards.

    I thought DS9 was the gem in the group, but almost no one agrees there; oddly, some geeks just can't handle a coherent plot.

    --
    110100 1101000 1101000 1100110 0 1101111 1101000 1100011 1
  4. I liked DS9. by khasim · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Except for the final couple of seasons. Then it sucked.

    And TOS was damn good when it was released. It doesn't look that as cutting edge now, because the edge has moved on.

    The problem is that the Star Trek franchise has not kept up with the edge. Now they're afraid of the edge. They don't want to make a show that small core will love for years and years and years. They want a show that almost everyone will sort of like and probably watch every week. They want "Friends" ... but in space. With the foam head of the month "alien".

    They want "episodes", not stories.

    They want light, cute actors, not developed characters.

    1. Re:I liked DS9. by SamSim · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What I think this particular story means is that the Star Trek universe wants to stop moving forward. In time, I mean. The creators of Star Trek have - starting with Enterprise and continuing until now - lost the guts to do anything but cash in on past glories and old history. There's no drive to create NEW history. Old Star Trek is popular still - yeah, because it's old. New Old Star Trek will get nowhere. "Rebooting" the Star Trek universe from Kirk and Spock will get nowhere. They need to go forward. REALLY forward. Five hundred years beyond TNG. Build an absolutely perfect Federation and then hurl seriously gigantic threats at it. Go to the limits of current science fiction and use the cream. Transhumanism and stuff!

      --
      qntm.org
    2. Re:I liked DS9. by glindsey · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You just boggled my mind. How can you say you hated the final seasons of DS9, and then immediately below that talk about how the franchise wants episodic television instead of story arcs and developed characters? An ongoing story arc and significant character development was precisely what happened to DS9 toward the end! On the other hand, early DS9 was very similar to TNG: episodic vignettes that can be neatly wrapped up when the hour is through, and everything is the same at the end as it was in the beginning. After seeing the success of Babylon 5, the writers and producers of DS9 started experimenting with the concepts you claim to like, and the result was the very thing you claim to hate.

  5. There's one Problem with that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The only producer that would ever do that is dead.

  6. Re:Oh, Yes! by FlameSnyper · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yeah. It was called Firefly, then Serenity.

    It got cancelled, and the movie did really poorly at the box office.

    As geeks, we should'a been out there supporting Joss and his "new sc-fi series, with new characters and new stories and it is not based on a universe that lasted for 40 years".

    I personally feel bad that I only saw the movie twice at the theatre.

    We bitch about nothing good on, but then don't support it when it shows up.