lol that's funny!!!!

Well, at least he still as Priceline. Right? That's still up right?

BRB I'll go check.

Ah, the eternal struggle between the cool Shatner and the mess Shattner. It's like the yin and yang of the universe. They guy can act (somewhat) and has been in some solid projects, but he's insecure and like a poor marksman he keeps missing the target.

Perhaps he no longer needs to try. He's done far worse than kill us. He's hurt us. And he wishes to go on.... hurting us.

At the end of the day Bill Shatner is Bill Shatner. If he doesn't want to be in the new Trek reboot then he'll still be Bill Shatner... The travelling man... The legend.

Don't ever forget that maggots. :D

he's still tricking you?

What a douche.

Bummeriffic

Shatner doesn't need to waste his time on that hack JJ Abrams, the man responsible for the worst movie I've ever seen. Yes, Cloverfield is worse than Failure to Launch. Shatner has The Wrath of Khan. Good for Shatner.

This actually doesn't sound like bad news to me, necessarily. If this version of Star Trek is going to be a "reboot," as some keep calling it, then that would suggest a certain break with the past "canon," such as it is.

I have yet to hear an operational definition of "reboot" in the context of film. But what I have seen suggests that a reboot is structured around the idea of a new storyline branch, based on the same source material from previous storylines. (Whereas a "re-imagining" basically takes the same storyline but deviates it to varying degrees. ("Re-imagining" thus seems to be closer to "remake" in concept.)

Anyway, with this logic and assuming this film is a "reboot" then I think it's better that the main characters from any of the other series are not in the film. I would probably even keep too many direct references out. I think a "reboot" really has to survive and thrive on its own merits and, as such, relying on past successes or familiarity is not a good sign. So, again, I think this might be a good move overall.

I hate how everybody assumes there should be a Shatner cameo in this movie. If they truly want to move on with a fresh start, forget the geezers.

i still say he has a cameo as another character

Shatner should not be in it because he agreed to kill Kirk. Unfortuately this movie is not about....His Kirk.
He has that Lawyer show for money now.

Cant JJ put Bill's picture somewhere on the starship?

You'd think after all those years of space travel, Shatner would finally realize the universe does not revolve around him.

Actually, by his own admission if you read the quoate correctly, JJ Abrams' lack of smarts was the reason.

Just cause he was too lazy to think up a way. Poor Shatner. :(

This will come as a shock but Shatner cameos in the move... he travels back in time and comes out nude!

If the new movie does indeed involve time travel, it could be fixed in one line. Old Spock to young Kirk: "There's something you should know about Veridian III..."

"Maybe a smarter group of filmmakers could have figured out how to resolve that."

That's just his way of saying "I didn't wanna."

Surprise, surprise. Shatner is a dick.

You kidding? Shatner's awesome. "JJ" (rolls eyes) is the new kid on the block who has yet to prove that he can last a single decade.

HA HA. Billy Shats on Star Trek. Love it. I think he'll regret that. Chris Pine is a damn fine actor and this will probably be a break through role. If I was Bill I would have at at least tried to attach my legacy to it.

Gerry - Felicity premiered ten years ago.

@Arch: Cloverfield was a horrible movie, but a god-awesome experience and thrill ride.

We were inspired to assemble a list of Bill Shatner's Most Glorious moments, for your viewing enjoyment. Kudos, Bill!

http://www.screenjunkies.com/general/13-crazies...

@Fex: Shatner's legacy is assured regardless of what happens now. He has been, and ever shall be, the original Captain Kirk. No amount of boorish behavior now is going to change that.