XPost: alt.startrek, alt.tv.star-trek, alt.tv.star-trek.enterprise   
   XPost: rec.arts.startrek.current   
   From: datacipher@hotmail.com   
      
   "The Merry Piper"  wrote in message   
   news:m0veq2h40ra7noj0d50gtee1h13tmbtflj@4ax.com...   
   > On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 07:53:46 GMT, "RuPEDski"    
   > wrote:   
      
   >>created in large part by Shatner and Nimoy's portrayal of them. After 30+   
   >>years, they are for Star Trek fans indelibly linked. When you see a   
   >>drawing   
   >   
   > In your mind, they may be.  Nothing wrong with that but it doesn't   
   > mean the general public shares your views.   
      
   If you are truly this deluded or dishonest then indeed there is no point to   
   continuing discussion. I'll be quite blunt: if you are actually claiming   
   that when you visualize "Kirk" or "Spock" you don't think of Shatner and   
   Nimoy then you are a liar.   
      
   > Each recreation of the franchise has done the same, with both good and   
   > poor results.  I further question your categorizing the recasting of a   
   > familiar role as a "radical" change.   
      
   Which recreations of the franchise recast new actors to play central roles?   
   Many people haven't liked it when they recast small guest roles, Zephram   
   Cochrane, Saavik etc. GEE, I'd say RECASTING KIRK AND SPOCK represents a   
   radical change in Star Trek modus operandi.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)