In the wake of the new "Star Trek" film release this past summer, there was so much grumbling coming from William Shatner, who was dissatisfied with his omission from J.J. Abrams's franchise reboot, that Trekkies termed the fallout Shatnergate. Abrams was noticeably unresponsive in the face of Shatner's criticism, and for good reason: Love him or hate him, Shatner is, arguably, the most iconic figure in the "Star Trek" universe, so it's better to evade the issue than fan the flames of controversy. The official version is that Shatner was offered a cameo in the film. Shatner denied that there was ever any offer but said, either way, he wouldn't have accepted a cameo. If they could work an old Spock into the plot, why not an old Kirk?

In a recent interview with Australian media, J.J. Abrams explains, "The problem was his character died on screen in one of his 'Trek' films, and because we decided, very early on, that we wanted to adhere to 'Trek' canon as best we could...the required machinations to get Shatner into the movie would have been very difficult to do given the story we wanted to tell and also to give him the kind of part that he would be happy with...It was this thing where it would have felt like a gimmick in order to get Shatner in the movie, which would have honestly, to me, been distracting."

It's nice to have Abrams's take on the situation now, and it makes sense; Abrams prides himself as a logic-driven filmmaker who, though he was not a fan of "Star Trek" before helming the prequel, has attempted to honor the Trek mythology -- as he describes in his own words, in the video above. Asked about the possibility of Shatner appearing in the next movie, Abrams is vague, but seemingly open to the idea: "In terms of moving forward, I am open to anything...I feel like the first movie did some of the heavy lifting that needed to be done in order to free us to continue going forward. Maybe there's less of a burden and there's going to be more opportunity to work with [Shatner]." Well, that's a whole lot of maybe, but at least he's responding to the issue. Abrams also went on to say that he and Shatner are scheduled to have lunch....

Most curious of all is the inclusion, in the "Star Trek" DVD, of a bonus feature segment, "The Shatner Conundrum," breaking down the "Trek" mythology issues that prevented, in Abrams's mind, the old Kirk from appearing in the lastest film. Will lunch and a bonus feature be enough to placate the roaring beast that is Bill Shatner? Don't bet on it.

Above: a pleasantly low-key and intelligent "Access Hollywood" interview with Leonard Nimoy.

"Star Trek" enjoyed the proverbial boffo box office this weekend, earning $79.2 million -- and getting a nice little boost from all those happy families celebrating Mother's Day together. The movie entertained both casual fans and hardcore Trekkers alike. All in all, a worthy continuation of the Roddenberry legacy, right?

EXCEPT: the nefarious IMAX corporation has been taking advantage of some unsuspecting "Trek" fans by offering them a "Star Trek: The IMAX Experience" on what turns out to be a regular-sized screen.

"Parks and Recreation" star Aziz Ansari has the story on his blog:

"I went with a friend of mine to see Star Trek: The IMAX Experience at the AMC Theatre in Burbank today. I drove out of my way to see the film on the large IMAX screen and paid an extra $5 for the ticket, which felt worth it at the time.

HOWEVER, we get in the theatre and its [sic] just a slightly bigger than normal screen and NOT the usual standard huge 72 ft IMAX screen. I was very upset and apparently this problem is happening all over at Regal and AMC theatres. Here's a graphic representation of what’s happening at these "FAKE IMAX" screens:

The diagram posted by Ansari comes from an October 2008 article in industry trade journal LF Examiner, which criticized IMAX's decision to put its name on digitally-projected, regular-sized screenings. LF Examiner's example of a film possibly harmed by fake-IMAX projection was "Eagle Eye," a movie that somehow never attracted the kind of devoted fans currently flocking to "Trek."

Could the backlash from disappointed viewers like Ansari (and his 25,000 Twitter followers) cause IMAX to stop this charade?

Poet, recording artist, memiorist, and photographer Leonard Nimoy is in "Star Trek," opening today. By most accounts it's a triumphant return to the role he never quite escaped. It's also the begining of what we hope is a bit of a Leonard Nimoy Resurgence.

This Tuesday, Nimoy will play pivotal-but-as-yet-unseen Massive Dynamic founder William Bell in the "Fringe" season finale. Nimoy is expected to return next season for a few episodes as well.

Since J.J. Abrams is responsible for both of these opportunities, would it be presumptious to ask him to get behind an "In Search Of..." remake?

After the jump, the trailer for 1978's "Invasion of the Body Snatchers," which contains what is perhaps Nimoy's finest non-Vulcan role:

Sure, stars Chris Pine and Zachary Quinto weren't overwhelmingly qualified to carry the new "Star Trek" movie. But Chris Pine did rock my world in "The Princess Diaries 2," and Zachary Quinto's eyebrows are truly impressive, so I'm willing to throw them both a bone. A weird-looking alien bone, but a bone nonetheless.

This interviewer seems less forgiving. He asks Chris, "You're not really mimicking William Shatner [the original Captain Kirk]. That's intentional, right?" Oh, SNAP.

Chris gets points for throwing some outer space jargon into his rebuttal, though: "If you saw me doing a bad impersonation, I think I would have just, like a black hole, sucked all energy into people watching my bad impersonation."

Translation: "WHO GETS TO CARRY THE LASER GUN, HUH A**HOLE? I'LL SHOW YOU INTENTIONAL, B*TCH."

Did Spock’s dad really lock himself in the bathroom with a copy of Pointy Ears and Shapely Rears?