This clip from Funny or Die had me laughing out loud several times. It's called Hostage: A Love Story, and stars Heroes' Zachary Quinto as a guy trying to rob a restaurant. It really throws the whole "crazed gunman takes a hostage" story for a loop. You'll see the ending coming, but it's still a very effective short film.

By the way, the police were called twice during the filming of this because they thought Quinto was a real crook.

This is becoming Leonard Nimoy Squad after yesterday's post from The Today Show, but here's another one, in honor of the new Star Trek film opening today. It's Nimoy on The Late Show with David Letterman giving the "Top Ten Lines Never Before Said In A Star Trek Film."

Like a lot of Star Trek and classic TV fans, I'll be in line for the new movie when it opens tomorrow (actually, tonight in many cities - check your local listings, as they say). Leonard Nimoy is in it (no, that's not a spoiler), and this morning he sat down to talk with Al Roker on Today (video also here). Roker says that Nimoy put the ears on for the first time in 18 years. Wait, 18 years? That can't be right. I feel old.

I went to see Quantum of Solace over the weekend anxious to see the second Daniel Craig iteration as James Bond, and had the chance to see the big screen full trailer for J.J. Abrams' re-imagining of Star Trek. Of the latter, I'd be very skeptical. After reading many of Abrams comments --like "I've never been a fan of Star Trek" -- my Trekkie (not Trekker) heart fears that the Lost/Alias creator had bungled the ST that I know so well.

So, now that I've seen the trailer, I'm even more concerned. Oy vey, what has Abrams done to the Trek universe? The trailer looked more generic sci-fi that ST to me. And where was the iconic music? Why was Kirk using his middle name; I don't think he ever did that on the TV series!

J.J. addressed the media and shared some clips and information -- but no photos -- of the feature which won't be hitting theaters till May 8, 2009. I'm a little more relieved by the description of the scenes. Here's the gist of what they're about:

Don't you just love the web? News traveling so fast, ideas extrapolated and speculated upon based on the simplest of facts. That said, here's a sweet little tidbit that I found amusing. Tom Cruise was spotted on the Los Angeles set of the new Star Trek feature film. He reportedly was visiting writer/director JJ Abrams. The two men, you'll recall, collaborated on Mission Impossible 3.

This exclusive, courtesy of JFXOnline, revealed that Tom stuck around the set for a couple of hours. Prior to this sighting, there had also been talk last fall that Abrams had wanted to enlist the superstar to make a brief cameo appearance in the revamped Star Trek opus, telling the story of how creator Gene Roddenberry's original characters came to be. How Captain Kirk made it out of the Star Fleet Academy (in The Wrath of Khan he said he cheated on his Kobyashi Maru simulation test), as well as the first time Kirk met the half-Vulcan, half-human Mr. Spock.

Recently, TV Squad reported that NBC has added all kinds of classic TV shows to their online outlets. Now comes the announcement that CBS is also bringing a variety of well-loved TV dramas to the web. CBS Interactive is raiding the CBS Library, which is "one of the largest television programming libraries in the entertainment business," to present TV series online across the CBS Audience Network.

Like the NBC fodder, the CBS offering is gangbusters: full-length episodes of classic Star Trek, Rod Serling's The Twilight Zone, MacGyver, Hawaii Five-O and Melrose Place. CBS plans to add more programs and clips in the coming months, including sports and other kinds of entertainment.

Lost is perhaps the ultimate in TV fiction. The storytelling is the stuff of vivid imaginations and it's gotten millions watching and wondering and tuning in for more. Of course, in the midst of all that fantasy, some things we've taken as fact, like most of the technology. For instance, I don't know about you, but I believed those satellite phones they've been using since Naomi parachuted onto the island last season were the real thing. Well, guess what, it's no more of a reality than Mr. Spock's tricorder on Star Trek!

Fun Q and A with Captain Kirk himself over at Wired magazine. It's mostly about his new video game Legacy, where he plays Captain Kirk for the first time in ten years. Among the tidbits you'll discover from the interview:

• He still has no idea how to use a computer.
• He doesn't care who plays Kirk in the new movie, as long as they're thin and rich.
• There's no way he's going to do any appearance as Kirk on those fan-made web Trek episodes.

[via Pop Candy]

We've heard the stories this week that director/producer J.J. Abrams is interested in having Matt Damon play Captain Kirk in an upcoming movie about Kirk and Spock. But something troubles me. All of the articles are saying that Damon will play a "young" Captain Kirk. Huh? Damon is going to be 36 in a few months, and will probably be 37 or 38 when the movie comes out.

Shatner was 35 when he did the original Star Trek.

Now, sure, they could mean (like Keith says) that they mean younger than Shatner now, but they can't mean that or we could get someone 60 and compared to Shatner that would be "young." I think this is really a matter of everyone who's writing about it misunderstanding what exactly the plot will be and just repeating the same line about a young Kirk, as if it means young = before the original.

Oh, Trekkies Trekkers are going to have a lot to say about this, I'm sure.

J.J. Abrams says that's he wants to cast Damon as the captain of the U.S.S. Enterprise in the new Star Trek movie he is putting together. And he even has the blessing of the original Captain James. T. Kirk, William Shatner.

I think this is a good idea, actually. Damon looks the part, and as the Bourne movies showed, he can do action. But please, please, please don't cast Ben Affleck as Spock. Nothing against Affleck, I just think that would be too much to take, like it's Space Will Hunting or something.

Everyone was excited the other day when Variety reported that Lost/Alias creator and Mission: Impossible 3 director J.J. Abrams was going to direct the next Star Trek flick in 2008, making a prequel to the original Kirk/Spock show. But it wasn't exactly as the paper reported ...or was it? Empire has a quick interview with Abrams:

"The whole thing was reported entirely without our cooperation. People learned that I was producing a Star Trek film, that I had an option to direct it, they hear rumors of what the thing was going to be and ran with a story that is not entirely accurate."

But here's where the confusion starts. The headline of this article is "It Won't Be Kirk and Spock." But then the article goes on to say that Abrams is a fan of the original series, he thinks the characters are "spectacular," that the characters "could live again," and that he isn't releasing any details of the plot. So why is the article titled and slanted like that? There's really nothing here that contradicts the news from the other day, except that Abrams hasn't officially signed on as director yet.