Help! Can someone explain to me the whole wesley crusher/star trek thing.
#1
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: A little bit here and a little bit there.
Posts: 2,644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Help! Can someone explain to me the whole wesley crusher/star trek thing.
I enjoy the star trek films, I watched a few episodes of the next generation show, I just got back from Nemesis.
I am confused to why the character of wesley crusher played by will wheaton was not on display in the other films and this one.
He has a cameo in nemesis, but doesn't even say a word.
Was there bad blood between will and the producers of the show? What were the circumstances? And why isn't he in the other films?
Any answers are much appreciated, thanks!
I am confused to why the character of wesley crusher played by will wheaton was not on display in the other films and this one.
He has a cameo in nemesis, but doesn't even say a word.
Was there bad blood between will and the producers of the show? What were the circumstances? And why isn't he in the other films?
Any answers are much appreciated, thanks!
#3
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: A little bit here and a little bit there.
Posts: 2,644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by LBPound
I don't know anything about Star Trek at all, but I believe he discusses his conflicts with the show producers on his website, WilWheaton.com i think.
I don't know anything about Star Trek at all, but I believe he discusses his conflicts with the show producers on his website, WilWheaton.com i think.
I checked his site out.
It looks like his scene was cut from the film and that the producers of the show are, lets say, a little less than supporting of him. They didn't even invite him to the premiere. Not nice!
His site is actually pretty cool for a self run celebrity site.
I will be checking it out further.
#4
DVD Talk Hero
Wil Wheaton seems like a pretty cool, down-to-Earth guy.
He's gotten a lot of flack from Trekkies over the years who HATED Wesley with a passion, which is really petty and unfair.
He's gotten a lot of flack from Trekkies over the years who HATED Wesley with a passion, which is really petty and unfair.
#6
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Posts: 1,831
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sure that Wil Wheaton's lines were cut out because of pacing and time. I doubt that the producers would cut him out of the movie on a grudge.
Actually, I don't think Wesley Crusher shouldn't have been in the movie at all. In the series, he left with The Traveler to become another being, or something like that. Perhaps the Traveler left his phone number with Beverly Crusher?
I think Wil Wheaton is taking it all too personally if he's complaining that he was left on the cutting room floor.
Actually, I don't think Wesley Crusher shouldn't have been in the movie at all. In the series, he left with The Traveler to become another being, or something like that. Perhaps the Traveler left his phone number with Beverly Crusher?
I think Wil Wheaton is taking it all too personally if he's complaining that he was left on the cutting room floor.
#9
DVD Talk Legend
I'm certain that his scenes were cut for pacing... we'll probably see them on the DVD.
Seriously, as much as I like the guy and never had too much of a problem with the Wesley character, the last thing that movie needed was to put on the breaks on for few minutes so we could "catch up" with the character. He isn't important to the rest of the story, so it wasn't important to know anything about him. Putting him in the scene makes sense... having him talk really doesn't. That's what the novelization is for.
Seriously, as much as I like the guy and never had too much of a problem with the Wesley character, the last thing that movie needed was to put on the breaks on for few minutes so we could "catch up" with the character. He isn't important to the rest of the story, so it wasn't important to know anything about him. Putting him in the scene makes sense... having him talk really doesn't. That's what the novelization is for.
#10
DVD Talk Legend
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: NYC
Posts: 17,015
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Heat
What does he look like now? I keep imagining him as a 14 or 15 year old.
What does he look like now? I keep imagining him as a 14 or 15 year old.
And yeah, he wasn't invited to the cast premiere, only to the Paramount employee premiere, which is a pretty clear "**** you." Apparently he passed and just went with some friends.
#11
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: San Leandro , CA
Posts: 1,636
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They cut him out and reportedly cut out about 40 minutes of good character stuff so they could bring in the more Action crowd. In the process they pissed fans off and didnt get the action fans in. The movie made only 18 million. Nuff said.
Wheatons scene(s) couldnt have slowed the pacing down by much. I just dont believe that.
Wheatons scene(s) couldnt have slowed the pacing down by much. I just dont believe that.
#13
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Originally posted by jarofclay73
I think Wil Wheaton is taking it all too personally if he's complaining that he was left on the cutting room floor.
I think Wil Wheaton is taking it all too personally if he's complaining that he was left on the cutting room floor.
What he did take personally was not even being invited to the premiere. Like they couldn't spare two feakin tickets.
#16
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Earth
Posts: 2,693
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ok, i hated his character on the show... followed by that psychic woman ("i sense anger..." do you think???)
isn't he hosting the G4TV Arena show? this thread reminded me of that guy... he looked familiar but i couldn't place him.
isn't he hosting the G4TV Arena show? this thread reminded me of that guy... he looked familiar but i couldn't place him.
#17
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Looking at his site, though, he has something that's total nonsense on it ( http://www.wilwheaton.net/faq.php#trek ), in which he says that he wasn't able to be in the movie Valmont because Roddenberry had died and whomever replaced him wouldn't let Wheaton miss a single episode to appear in the film.
Well, given that Milos Forman's Valmont was released in 1989 ( http://us.imdb.com/Details?0098575 ) and Roddenberry didn't die until two years later in 1991, his argument doesn't hold water. He either has a faulty memory on this subject or he doesn't want to make Roddenberry look bad for not allowing him to be in this movie (in which I'd imagine he would've had Henry "Elliott from E.T." Thomas' role). I have no trouble believing he was considered for this movie, though, because this would've been soon after his generally well-regarded performance in Stand By Me
Well, given that Milos Forman's Valmont was released in 1989 ( http://us.imdb.com/Details?0098575 ) and Roddenberry didn't die until two years later in 1991, his argument doesn't hold water. He either has a faulty memory on this subject or he doesn't want to make Roddenberry look bad for not allowing him to be in this movie (in which I'd imagine he would've had Henry "Elliott from E.T." Thomas' role). I have no trouble believing he was considered for this movie, though, because this would've been soon after his generally well-regarded performance in Stand By Me
#18
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Originally posted by dhmac
Looking at his site, though, he has something that's total nonsense on it ( http://www.wilwheaton.net/faq.php#trek ), in which he says that he wasn't able to be in the movie Valmont because Roddenberry had died and whomever replaced him wouldn't let Wheaton miss a single episode to appear in the film.
Well, given that Milos Forman's Valmont was released in 1989 ( http://us.imdb.com/Details?0098575 ) and Roddenberry didn't die until two years later in 1991, his argument doesn't hold water. He either has a faulty memory on this subject or he doesn't want to make Roddenberry look bad for not allowing him to be in this movie (in which I'd imagine he would've had Henry "Elliott from E.T." Thomas' role). I have no trouble believing he was considered for this movie, though, because this would've been soon after his generally well-regarded performance in Stand By Me
Looking at his site, though, he has something that's total nonsense on it ( http://www.wilwheaton.net/faq.php#trek ), in which he says that he wasn't able to be in the movie Valmont because Roddenberry had died and whomever replaced him wouldn't let Wheaton miss a single episode to appear in the film.
Well, given that Milos Forman's Valmont was released in 1989 ( http://us.imdb.com/Details?0098575 ) and Roddenberry didn't die until two years later in 1991, his argument doesn't hold water. He either has a faulty memory on this subject or he doesn't want to make Roddenberry look bad for not allowing him to be in this movie (in which I'd imagine he would've had Henry "Elliott from E.T." Thomas' role). I have no trouble believing he was considered for this movie, though, because this would've been soon after his generally well-regarded performance in Stand By Me
#20
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Originally posted by mikehunt
plus he was in uniform
that made no sense since he left the academy to go with the traveler
plus he was in uniform
that made no sense since he left the academy to go with the traveler
(B) When ex-military people go out at a formal event in public, many times they do slip back into their military dress uniform for the occasion. Why couldn't Wesley have been doing that?
Why must every last second of the lives of every character in the Trek franchise be minutely detailed on screen? Can't the details be filled in using one's imagination?
#21
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: D/FW, Texas
Posts: 961
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wesley is wearing a Starfleet Lieutenant's uniform in the film, and J.M. Dillard's novelization of John Logan's script places Lieutenant Crusher as serving in engineering on the Titan, Captain Riker's new command. No explanation of him leaving his studies with the Traveler is given, however.
#22
Member
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wesley is wearing a Starfleet Lieutenant's uniform in the film, and J.M. Dillard's novelization of John Logan's script places Lieutenant Crusher as serving in engineering on the Titan, Captain Riker's new command. No explanation of him leaving his studies with the Traveler is given, however.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Which just goes to show how little the current creative regime knows about the show. It's one thing to forget a monor detail like the name of a planet some character mentioned 20 years ago, but to forget/ignore the details of a main character's farewell is pretty sloppy.
Wesley in uniform didn't bother, me, because as mentioned before, he WAS an ensign before he left with the Traveller. Why he was there at all was what bothered me. One measley line to explain that his journey with the Traveller had brought him back to known space or something like that would have taken 30 seconds at the most, not slowed the movie down appreciably and answered a lot of questions.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wesley is wearing a Starfleet Lieutenant's uniform in the film, and J.M. Dillard's novelization of John Logan's script places Lieutenant Crusher as serving in engineering on the Titan, Captain Riker's new command. No explanation of him leaving his studies with the Traveler is given, however.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Which just goes to show how little the current creative regime knows about the show. It's one thing to forget a monor detail like the name of a planet some character mentioned 20 years ago, but to forget/ignore the details of a main character's farewell is pretty sloppy.
Wesley in uniform didn't bother, me, because as mentioned before, he WAS an ensign before he left with the Traveller. Why he was there at all was what bothered me. One measley line to explain that his journey with the Traveller had brought him back to known space or something like that would have taken 30 seconds at the most, not slowed the movie down appreciably and answered a lot of questions.
#23
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Canada, BC
Posts: 6,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They shouldn't of bought him back. His character didn't serve any purpose in Star Trek in the first place, just some smart wonder boy. I'd rather have them focus on the main characters instead, that what's I'm interested in.