JCEFalconi
Posts: 3016
q tal
|
 |
« Reply #15 on: April 17, 2008, 06:11:02 PM » |
|
if say Takei wanted more screen time he should have found another show,
He should've gone over the plethora of roles for asian men on tv and movies at that time  . I understand Tipton's point about the show being done mainly around Shtatner, Nimoy and kelley, but then again, Takei wasn't complaining about Rodenberry not writing him in more episodes, he was complaining that once the episodes where written and planned, Shatner took efforts to take screen time away from him and the other players, even Nimoy. Also,if he is bitter, it's more in a way that acknowledges how petty it is for comedy's sake. He's just giving people what they want.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
sean
Posts: 7382
|
 |
« Reply #16 on: April 17, 2008, 07:07:30 PM » |
|
But Chekov had a bit more spotlight than the other three, because he was added to up the sex appeal with young kids who liked The Monkees. Scotty was in 66 episodes, whereas Chekov was in 37. For reference Shatner was in 80. Well, 79, but fair enough. That sounds disproportionately high if you don't acknowledge that Chekov was only in two seasons, where Scotty was in all three, but that is interesting. I would still think it's safe to say that, regardless of number of appearance, Chekov was at least more prominent than either Sulu or Uhura, because those two rarely went on actual missions. EDIT: I'd bet that Chekov was given more romantic plotlines than Scotty, too.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
sean
Posts: 7382
|
 |
« Reply #17 on: April 17, 2008, 07:13:01 PM » |
|
You can be the head of an ensemble and not be a dick to people. I am a Shatner fan, but the Star Trek cast aren't the only folks who have said this about him. Agreed. If you compare it to, say, James Gandolfini, not accepting a payraise until the whole ensemble got one too... Anyway, I love Shatner's performances, and his CD, and the fact that he uses Myspace more often than any three people I know, but I have a feeling I wouldn't like Shatner the person very much. And I think that this upcoming prequel might just show that Kirk without Shatner is missing the magical ingredient.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Steve Lilley
Posts: 3780
|
 |
« Reply #18 on: April 17, 2008, 09:13:56 PM » |
|
And I think that this upcoming prequel might just show that Kirk without Shatner is missing the magical ingredient. I've been thinking about this, too. I'm not a massive STAR TREK fan, but I *love* THE WRATH OF KHAN. Kirk isn't a Batman or a James Bond-y character where different people can bring different interpretations. There's a very basic quality to what makes Kirk so awesome and I think it's William Shatner. But who knows. I'd love to be proven wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Keith
Guest
|
 |
« Reply #19 on: April 18, 2008, 12:23:19 AM » |
|
And I think that this upcoming prequel might just show that Kirk without Shatner is missing the magical ingredient. I'm thinking that you are right. Although a reboot might be what the franchise needed. Well, it needed something. Who knows if they made the right choice.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Keith
Guest
|
 |
« Reply #20 on: April 18, 2008, 12:27:09 AM » |
|
You can be the head of an ensemble and not be a dick to people. I am a Shatner fan, but the Star Trek cast aren't the only folks who have said this about him. I guess I usually assume that all actors are egotistical. I guess I'm like the others here and think that while I love Shatner the actor, I probably wouldn't like him as a person.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
nate.3.0
|
 |
« Reply #21 on: April 18, 2008, 01:56:01 AM » |
|
I would set up a web profile to be Shatner's new best friend....
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"Nobody ever lends money to a man with a sense of humor."
|
|
|
BrianLynch
Administrator
Posts: 9389
|
 |
« Reply #22 on: April 18, 2008, 01:56:44 AM » |
|
Nate that might be the most amazing show idea ever.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Rev. Danny
Guest
|
 |
« Reply #23 on: April 18, 2008, 02:30:05 AM » |
|
I'd definitely try to be his best friend.
Also, in regard to the possible success of Star Trek without the Shat...
I have no doubt it would have been as, if not more, successful with a different actor in the role who was at least equally handsome as William Shatner.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Dobbin
Posts: 6112
|
 |
« Reply #24 on: April 18, 2008, 06:07:28 AM » |
|
You can be the head of an ensemble and not be a dick to people. I am a Shatner fan, but the Star Trek cast aren't the only folks who have said this about him. Agreed. If you compare it to, say, James Gandolfini, not accepting a payraise until the whole ensemble got one too... Anyway, I love Shatner's performances, and his CD, and the fact that he uses Myspace more often than any three people I know, but I have a feeling I wouldn't like Shatner the person very much. And I think that this upcoming prequel might just show that Kirk without Shatner is missing the magical ingredient. sean-- whenever we disagree angrily, we should quickly talk about STAR TREK, because I totally agree with everything you've said so far. It is actually kinda spooky.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Neri
Posts: 2280
|
 |
« Reply #25 on: April 18, 2008, 07:31:33 AM » |
|
Speaking of Shatner do you guys remember INVASION IOWA?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
@ChrisNeri
|
|
|
|
nate.3.0
|
 |
« Reply #26 on: April 18, 2008, 08:24:51 AM » |
|
Nate that might be the most amazing show idea ever. Pitch it. You can have the rights. I ask for no money or credit... just a small place in your heart.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"Nobody ever lends money to a man with a sense of humor."
|
|
|
|