Slashdot Mirror
Paramount Casts New James T. Kirk
Tycoon Guy writes "TrekToday reports that Paramount is in talks with 27-year old actor Chris Pine to play the role of Captain Kirk in the new 'Star Trek' film. Pine is almost completely unknown, but he's also being courted to star opposite George Clooney in 'White Jazz,' so he's being called "the hottest new actor in town." In addition, 'Hulk' actor Eric Bana was cast today as Nero, the main villain of Trek XI."
Condolances went out today to Chis Pine, his family, and his career after he formally accepted the offer by Paramount to play James T. Kirk in the upcoming Star Trek movies.
i\hbar\dot{\psi}=\hat{H}\psi
Actually I think this has a reasonably good chance of working, and is precisely what they should have been doing all along. Rather than the Next-Next-Generation or the Previous-Previous-Generation, they should have gone back to ToS to begin with. The actors would be different, but the characters familiar. The writers, like the rest of us, would have known them for forty years.
If anything has a chance of reinvigorating Trek, it's this.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Try watching Chopper instead then, I think that's the film that got him noticed. He's a pretty good actor.
which is totally what she said
I'm glad they didn't go for a look-a-like. There's a couple of shots which suggest this actor might have enough screen presence and charisma to pull off the arrogant super-leader several-times savior of the galaxy.
Good luck to you, Mr. Pine! Them's big shoes. --It's a case of creating a character who is, (on and off the screen) ultra arrogant, skilled enough to deserve acting that way, and charming enough not to piss everybody off while doing it. If you follow Shatner's lead, then you will also be a really kind, light-hearted and giving soul, but that usually comes with age. If you don't get blasted by photon disrupters first. Is this Pine kid also a Canadian like old Bill? I'm not sure it's possible to achieve all of those goals otherwise. We'll have to see. Like I said, good luck to you, man!
And I have gotta say, this is the first time in forever, (with the exception of the recent and sadly disappointing Superman film), that I've been excited about an upcoming movie. With a good writer and good direction, this could be a really awesome film.
When, oh, when will I accumulate enough jaded cynicism to not let my hopes get the better of me?
I am SUCH a sci-fi geek!
-FL
FWIW, Google: Inertial Dampening Field
This sci-fi device is supposed to counteract such fatal changes in motion. Gene Roddenberry and his gang tried to come up with scientific explanations for a lot of things portrayed in Star Trek.
They should replace Kirk with Pirk and get Samuli Torssonen and his crew on-board.
Star Wreck was better in every way that matters: Better Battles, Better Humour, Better Plot and most importantly prettier girls. The acting was about equal as well.
Imagine what they could do with a budget?
Is there any truth to the rumor that Gary Sinise is going to play Dr. McCoy? I mean, how could they possibly give it to anyone else?
I always treated the character 007 more as a title than an actual person. The line of work is hazardous, and surely there was more than one, because the last guy took a bullet or forgot that the pen was poison and not antidote.
Informatus Technologicus
None of this makes any difference if you don't watch the new stuff, and just keep your memories of the old stuff you like.
Speaking of memories, my friends who watched Star Trek the first time around (or early in reruns in the 70s) generally prefer it to any of the new shows. I grew up on TNG, DS9 and VOY. My friend's son likes Star Wars Episode 1 better than the first 3, because he saw it first. We all view the world with rose tinted glasses, and think the things we like are necessarily the best. That's fine - but let people enjoy the new stuff if they want - if we let the fans of old stuff decide, we wouldn't have ever had a TNG at all, and it's generally considered the best of the 5 series.
If they had any guts at all they'd cast James Cawley as Kirk. His performance on Star Trek: New Voyages evokes Shatner's hamminess occasionally, but more often you forget it's someone else playing Kirk and you're just watching Star Trek again. If you've soured on the franchise like some posters have I encourage you to watch some episodes:
http://www.startreknewvoyages.com/When the axe came to the forest, the trees said, "Look out - the handle was once one of us."
Everything about that movie was awful. I don't know if it's available in the US, but if not bittorrent is your friend, and watch Chopper. You'd barely know it was Bana. Besides, the guy *is* Mad Max. He's well known for driving his badass XB Falcon around the post-apocalyptic wasteland that is Tasmania :D
Send lawyers, guns, and money!
Foundation is pretty straightforward narrative, I don't see the problem. Niven's Known Space is much the same. I admit Zelazny's is a stretch, but playing around with narrative order is now old hat thanks to guys like Tarantino.
If they can a truly huge novel like Lord of the Rings into movies, why the heck couldn't they turn the first three Foundation books into movies?
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
I had that thought... until I read the books.
As far as going up in rank, you do realize he's a Commander before he's a spy right? There is backstory, even in the movies it's presented, albeit in small bits strewn about randomly.
And besides, Bond is portrayed as essentially the coolest man alive. How could you rank higher than that?
I read the script, and I think it would help my character's motivation if he was on fire. -Bender