Leonard Nimoy to Play Spock in Next Star Trek Movie

mcgrew writes "The AP is reporting that Leonard Nimoy will 'don his famous pointy ears again' in the next Star Trek movie, due out Christmas of next year. From the article: 'He greeted the crowd with a Vulcan salute. Nimoy was joined by the newly named young Spock, "Heroes" star Zachary Quinto [Sylar], who bears an uncanny resemblance to Nimoy. Both Spocks were introduced by the film's director and co-producer, J.J. Abrams.'"

Comments

Bringing out my inner nerd...

[lantastik]

I am really looking forward to this flick. J.J. Abrams pretty much has the midas touch when it comes to producing and directing on television. Love it or hate it, Lost and Alias is/was huge successes. Let's see if he can carry that over to this film.

Re:The need for money outweighs the need for digni

[MightyMartian]

The utopian notions of Star Trek were dumped after ST:NG. There may have been a bit of lip-service paid to it, but by the time of Star Trek: Insurrection, the Federation as the goody-goody government had been ripped out of the plot line. In fact, I view that entire film as something of a requiem to the last vestiges of Gene Roddenberry's vision.

Still, that might very well have been something that a new batch of writers could have worked with. The sketchy idea of Riker commanding a starship that has mutined against Star Fleet as the Federation plunges into some sort of vague, self-serving dictatorship or even civil war might have been very interesting. You could have kept the Roddenberry-esque ideals alive, kept a good chunk of the longest-running and arguably most popular Star Trek cast (I'm a huge TOS fan, but still, the fact is that more people probably identify with the NG cast now), had plenty of opportunities for battles, espionage, idealism and even exploration. I know we would have had to do without Spiner's Data, but I really do think the character had totally run out of steam anyways.

Hell, barring that, I think there was a damn good argument for going with a movie with Captain Sulu. His all-too-brief glimpses in the Undiscovered Country make me think that at least a good action movie could have been found in there.

So many missed opportunities while Berman was permitted to rotate tired time travel and Borg storylines until even many diehard fans just said "fuck it" and turned to more interest fare. The movies became repetitive and dull (just look at the last couple of movies to see how even the actors had clearly lost any enthusiasm, it was clearly "we're doing it for the money" situation). I think everyone knew the franchise was going down the tubes, and wanted to milk it for whatever was left.

I dunno, maybe the movie will be really great, and won't be some sort of Animal House in Space like so many of us think it's going to be. It's difficult to judge something that isn't even in any kind of meaningful production yet. Still, there's many reasons to figure it will be a disaster, and damn few reasons to think it will revitalize what was once the most successful franchise out there.

Re:The need for money outweighs the need for digni

[MightyMartian]

Personally, I think Moore's gritty style makes for good stories, but ones that aren't necessarily appropriate for the utopian vision of Star Trek. This is particularly evident in DS9's Dominion War arc, with episodes like The Siege of AR-558. OTOH, the same style works really well for BSG.

I honestly thought the Dominion War arc made the Federation seem much more real. It was such a vague and idealized entity in TOS and NG that I can well appreciate the view that those series could have been propaganda meant to show the Federation as an enlightened state, while DS9 was how the Federation really was (in short, a reasonably well-intentioned but hardly angelic government that didn't just have phasers to attack giant space amoeabas).

I know Roddenberry really hated the direction that Star Trek took once he had lost all meaningful control, but if you look at what he did have involvement in; ST:TOS in particular, you see that he had no problem displaying wars and violence, he simply made the Klingons, Romulans and other baddies the proxies, and always showed the Federation as *reacting* to them, or at least pre-emptively trying to get in their way.

Roddenberry's ideas were noble, but hardly realistic. I think any government with a technologically advanced and well equipped military will always take part in adventurism. They were sending out diplomats on the Five Year Mission, they were sending out a heavily-armed interstellar vessel crewed and commanded by the military. This seems more like the "peaceful" exploration of guys like Admiral Perry.

Prequel Book: Kobayashi Maru

[sampson7]

I actually think this could be quite good. All the original Trek characters had really interesting back-stories that have not been thoroughly explored. There's Mr. Spock and Captain Pike. Kirk as the youngest captain ever in Starfleet. Scotty's being drummed out of the command corps.

In fact, one of my favorite Star Trek books growing up was one entitled Kobayashi Maru, where each of the senior staff takes turns recalling their experiences in Star Fleet academy. It primarily focuses on each of their experiences with the Kobayashi Maru simulation at the academy, but also delves into some personal stories about these folks as young officers about to become Starfleet officers. Sulu's story was extremely moving (at least from my teenage recollections) and well-written. Scotty's was hilarious, and Chekov's was quite good too.

Anyway, if you're looking for a blast-from-the ... er, future, check it out:

http://www.amazon.com/Kobayashi-Maru-Star-Trek-Boo k/dp/0671658174/ref=sr_1_2/103-9039922-7888637?ie= UTF8&s=books&qid=1185566723&sr=8-2

Then again, I also remember Wesley's time at the academy. Ug, those were horrible TNG episodes! Yes, I know, I have the never-ending human capacity for self-delusion. What is it they say about second marriages? The triumph of hope over experience?