emotionalvampire Posted January 28, 2004 Share Posted January 28, 2004 In a recent interview, Patrick Stewart has admited to not want to be in a new film, "The last one didn't do too well," Stewart said of the film. "That was one of the best two movies we made, and it didn't do well. When we finished filming that movie, I realized that up until then, I've done 15 years of Jean-Luc Picard. And I'm very proud of 'The Next Generation.' But now that is past, and it is an excellent time to hang up my space suit." He did however admit to there being an X-Men 3! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam's Girl Posted January 28, 2004 Share Posted January 28, 2004 well i for one will be very sorry to see the end of Jean- Luc....he played an excellent role in the movies and TNG. But maybe he wants to go out on a high and thats understandable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stanmarsh Posted January 28, 2004 Share Posted January 28, 2004 yea, u dont want to keep going on and on until he becomes a self-parody. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam's Girl Posted January 28, 2004 Share Posted January 28, 2004 like William Shatner hey? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stanmarsh Posted January 28, 2004 Share Posted January 28, 2004 yea, i was kinda thinking of him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam's Girl Posted January 28, 2004 Share Posted January 28, 2004 yeah he hung around to long didn't he? was a shame cos it detracted from the movies i think Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emotionalvampire Posted January 28, 2004 Author Share Posted January 28, 2004 And screwed up his career! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam's Girl Posted January 28, 2004 Share Posted January 28, 2004 yeah guess it did- but i never really thought he was the actor patrick stewart is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stanmarsh Posted January 28, 2004 Share Posted January 28, 2004 i think stewart is a better actor than shatner, i thought the episode during and after he was assimilated by the borg was acted superbly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam's Girl Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 yes and the films he was in were also much better as well, esp. nemesis which i liked enormously, despite the criticism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emotionalvampire Posted January 29, 2004 Author Share Posted January 29, 2004 i think stewart is a better actor than shatner, i thought the episode during and after he was assimilated by the borg was acted superbly. What you have got to remember is that Patrick Stewart is a clasically trained actor. William Shatner is, well, an untrained actor! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam's Girl Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 i think stewart is a better actor than shatner, i thought the episode during and after he was assimilated by the borg was acted superbly. What you have got to remember is that Patrick Stewart is a clasically trained actor. William Shatner is, well, an untrained actor! yes true...shakespearean isnt he? but it was still great getting him for TNG and the films Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emotionalvampire Posted January 29, 2004 Author Share Posted January 29, 2004 He sure is. What I dont understand is why is a British actor playing a French man? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam's Girl Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 hmmm...thats a conundrum! but wot french actor could have played a star trek captain...gerard depardieu? i think not!!!why did they decide he had to be french rather than english i wonder? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stanmarsh Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 hmmm, thats a good question sam. prehaps because the americans couldnt see a starship captained by a englishman or prehaps because he had such a cool name! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
morpheus Posted February 3, 2004 Share Posted February 3, 2004 Wait until you've ever seen Stewart on stage! He's really got some serious presence! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legalblonde Posted February 3, 2004 Share Posted February 3, 2004 (edited) I saw him in Moby d***. And that was fantastic! Hey it won't let me post that word! But you know what I meant I hope! Edited February 3, 2004 by Legalblonde Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral_Bear Posted February 8, 2004 Share Posted February 8, 2004 I remember a while back, the head of Paramount (Sherry Lansing or some such woman) apparantly shrieking in front of a load of reporters that "there is no Star Trek without Patrick Stewart". What a load of cobblers! There was Star Trek for 20 years before Patrick Stewart! He didn't even star in the best Star Trek series ie DS9 (apart from the pilot episode). The logical conclusion of this thread is, "Will there ever be another Star Trek movie starring anyone at all?" Patrick Stewart doesn't figure in to the equation. I'd much rather see a Captain Riker movie with a new crew instead of watching Stewart and Spiner sleepwalk through Trek XI. But I doubt that Paramount will pour $70-80m in to a movie that will fail, regardless of who stars in it, or who writes the script. Nemesis failed because Beavis & Butthead, along with Spiner, wrote the script and story. It was contrived, boring, not to mention infinitely ridiculous. Star Trek will only thrive after a long break, and when Paramount have sacked Berman & Braga. The fans have given up on Star Trek being any good while those two are in charge, the result of which is that they (the fans) are abandoning Trek in droves. The viewing figures for Enterprise are proof of that. There is a deep malaise at Paramount regarding Star Trek. The "Suits" neither know or care about how to make Trek successful again. When it stops making money, and I think it's nearly at that point now, Paramount will quietly bury it on the back lot, and hope we all go away quietly in to the night. And we may all hate Shatner, but don't say for one moment that he detracted from the movies. That's rubbish. The were always ensemble films, as opposed to the "Stewart and Spiner show" that the TNG movies became. The best Star Trek films are TWOK, Voyage Home, and The Undiscovered Country. Nothing that Stewart et al have done since has managed to hold a candle anywhere near to the best that Shatner, Nimoy, Kelley and Doohan achieved at their best. People say Shatner can't act. But Shatner WAS Kirk. He made the character what it was. . and everyone loves Kirk. It's why millions of people got in to Star Trek. But can you say the same for Stewart and Picard? Maybe. . .But in thirty years, people will still talk about James T Kirk as being part of popular culture, as if he actually existed. I'm sorry, but Stewart's got sod all chance of being talked about in 30 years time, as being part of popular culture. Respect Admiral Bear Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Count Fooku Posted February 11, 2004 Share Posted February 11, 2004 I dont think thats entirely fair, First Contact was a great film and easily holds up against any of the original cast films. I think Shatner whilst never being a great classical actor he does have a huge amount of charisma which does account for an awful lot especially in the time the original series was made. Maybe a lot of emphasis is put on Picard in the Next Generation but that is only because he is a great actor and was able to develop the character of Picard a lot more. I have to say though I cant see another Star Trek film of any sort being made now. Although I liked DS9 its not nearly well known enough in its own right for Paramount to spend the cash on making and promoting a film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral_Bear Posted February 12, 2004 Share Posted February 12, 2004 Count, I'll just about go along with you about First Contact, altough it's not as good as TWOK or Undiscovered. The original series cast movies had charm and a certain panache that the TNG cast just couldn't replicate. I think one of the main reasons why the TNG movies ran in to difficulty, was because none of the main characters had ever undergone much development during the 7 years of TNG. TNG was always sience and story driven, with character development put at the bottom of the "to do" list. I think the only characters to end up with a "character" after seven years, were Data and Worf. That might be harsh, but that's I how I see it. When Beavis and Butthead suddenly found themselves having to take these characters in to a 2 hour environment as opposed to 45 min episodes, they didn't know who they were writing for. Also, you can't make a 2 hour long science based movie if you're to appeal to the public. B & B just can't write anything containing the classic ingredients of a good story. That's not entirely their fault. I don't think any of the TNG characters lent themselves to those ingredients TOS was all about the main characters. It had to be. Back in the 60's, CGI didn't exist, and even the most basic of special effects cost a fortune. When the movie series came along, the writers had a firm base on which to start writing. TNG didn't have that base. But I think I have to be fair to the TNG movie series. Only Nemesis really stank. Generations was cheap but quite watchable as long as you can stomach the butchering of Kirk's character. First Contact was very good, and Insurrection, while being too short, grew on me over time. I now find Insurrection quite enjoyable. It was the only TNG movie that came close to reminding me of what Trek was always about. Also it came the closest to being really good at what it wanted to be. First Contact was a good film for the neutral watcher, but what I couldn't take about it was that the whole idea of what the Borg were was destroyed for the sake of having a villain. I guess the comparative failure of the TNG movie franchise can be linked to your very astute point about Shatner's charisma. . .He has it spades. The same could be said for Nimoy, who as Spock, always had great screen presence. But Patrick Stewart, good stage actor that he may be, just doesn't have charisma or presence. And neither do any of the other TNG cast except possibly for Jonathan Frakes. Respect Admiral Bear Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Count Fooku Posted March 1, 2004 Share Posted March 1, 2004 One thing though, at least Stewart hasn't done too much singing. You must admit Shatner did dirty himself slightly with some of his "unique interpretations" of certain songs!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now