[LEFT]For sometime now I’ve been planning a website and I’m presently in the early stages of building it. As such I’m looking for some input.[/LEFT] At this point the site will be called Warped9: Frontier and it will focus primarily on Star Trek from TOS through to the TMP era. It will offer a retrospective on Star Trek’s evolution as a franchise, a look at the spin-off films and series, a guide and synopsis of series’ episodes and films as well as the Star Trek universe, chronology, characters, ideas, aliens, ships, science and technology. Also including will be schematics I’ve drawn and will draw as well as examples of Photoshop image manipulations to create my Never seen TOS scenes that many of you may be familiar with as sort of a speculative window into aspects and events we never got to see. Of course it goes without saying that my perspective will be evident in parts of this site. [LEFT]Presently my idea is to offer a clean yet colourful looking site that’s easy to navigate and uses a minimum of flash and animation (if any) to be more friendly to those with a slower internet connection. I’m also planning that part of the site that will be concerned with non Trek science fiction film, television and literature as well as my own original ideas and creative work. Another thing I’d like to include are links to other websites (some of which I’ve seen here on the TBBS) regarding other aspects I’m not delving into more deeply myself such as: early script drafts, proposed yet unfilmed stories, Phase II story ideas, and even related real world science and technology. There could also be a section on recommended reading and viewing.[/LEFT] Basically I'm interested to know the sort of things folks like to see as well as dislike seeing. Below is the site banner I have in mind. And the link below allows you download a PDF file of a rough draft WIP retrospective on Star Trek. I'm interested in your feedback, particularly TOS fans yet others are welcome as well. http://freepdfhosting.com/282a0bac47.pdf
I've had this idea in the back of my for about five or six years. I finally told myself, "What is it you're waiting for? Just go ahead and get started." For those who suspect I may use the site to slag the things I don't like I'd like to say that I will endeavour to express my criticisms in an articulate manner. In counterpoint even if I don't like something overall I will try to acknowledge the things I do feel they get right as well as those things others may like about what I'm critiquing. And as I've stated above since this will focus primarily on TOS-TMP then it won't leave much room for me to have indegestion about other works I'm not fond of.
If anyone has concerns about my slant on things then at least download the PDF file and read my retrospective rough draft to see my approach and then judge it. I have no illusions that this site will appeal to everyone. I also don't feel I have to make an apology in regards to what I want this website to be about. There are sites all over the net devoted to specific interests. At this point I'm interested in input on what folks may think of the idea and any suggestions particularly in regards to things they like to see on other sites as well as things they don't like seeing.
I love the idea. TOS-TMP is my favorite era of Trek. It will be nice to get a site devoted to that era without constant references to the later Treks. I enjoyed your retrospective of Trek's history. Comments... - More attention could be paid to 60's/70's fandom and the development of fanzines, conventions, letter writing campaigns, etc. That sort of thing is fascinating to someone like me who only knows Trek fandom of the internet era. - No mention of Planet of the Titans? - I'd love more info on the early Trek media tie-ins (gold key, bantam, etc.) as well as merchandise (mego, AMT, etc.). - If you're focusing on TOS-TMP, you might be better off stopping when you get to TMP. The post-TMP part of the retrospective felt hastily assembled and a bit anti-climactic. - Also, when you got to TMP the retrospective turned into more of a review. I hope some of that is helpful. Feel free to take or leave my comments at your leisure. Good luck!
I agree with Kelso, Warped. I'd cut it off at TMP. Or at least move the other films into a "post-Roddenberry" section. You could conceivably treat Roddenberry Trek as the main focus, and then merely mention Bennett, Berman and Abrams Trek as later versions attempted by Paramount with an intention to broaden the appeal of the franchise. That way, the change in tenor can be given a different slant than merely having it described as adapting older material to newer audiences. I'm anxious to see where you go with this.
Your prose is "flabby" and hard to read (I'm a scientific/technical writing editor, so I'm speaking professionally here.) You have too many modifiers, for example: "rather quaint," and "perhaps even crude," "reasonable appreciation," "mostly narrow and unfair," "supposedly trying," and "largely unfair." (And that's just the first 2 paragraphs!) Every noun is modified by an adjective, and every adjective and verb is modified by an adverb. The nouns and verbs should be doing the heavy lifting, not the adjectives and adverbs.
I appreciate the input. This is in early stages of planning. I'm trying to get my thoughts down and then go back to fill in and clean up where necessary. Yes, it will focus on the TOS-TMP period, but I'm looking at remarking on what came later as a way of putting my views in perspective. I certainly don't intend to delve deep into the later Treks. I'm very familiar with Trek TOS-TNG. I've seen about 90% of DS9 and about 20-25% of both VOY and ENT. I've see GEN, FC and INS in their entirety, but only parts of NEM. I have a thought about individual episodes and films. Remarking on them in terms of the Trek universe and where/how they fit in and then in terms of story and from viewer perspective as well as some background. That's why I'm receptive to input. Like my TOS shuttlecraft plans this will work best when I can get insights from others that I might ooverlook. Looking back I find 1991 an interesting period. GR passes away, we get the last of the TOS connected films and TNG enters its fourth season. And around that time I started getting more disenchanted with the films, and just as TNG gets more polished it's also starts to get more stiff and formulaic (in my view) in its fourth season. And except for a spike of interest (on my part) with the early seasons of DS9 it's all downhill from there. The early seasons of TNG were rough and uneven, but I still see something there. The 3rd season is as good as it gets in my book for contemporary Trek. Ironically two of my favourite TNG episodes are in 2nd season, "Measure Of A Man" and "Q, Who?"
Agreed - the earliest episodes of Next Gen now seem far more interesting. Maybe because they are the most TOS like? Next Gen's best year was 3, but 90% of what follows is just so dull I really regret buying the DVD sets. I loved Next Gen while growing up, but I just can't sit through those latter episodes anymore. Like others have suggested, I'd keep your site confined to TOS/Roddenberry material. I like the idea of having more online resources for early draft scripts, behind the scenes info etc...I know you're not a big fan of the new film, but visitors to your site will be people attracted to Trek because of Kirk and Spock - they will want to know about TOS rather than anything else. Anyway, keep the project going - looking forward to reading more - especially about the '66-'79 period which was before my time, but must have been an incredible time to be a fan
I will remark about the new film. Not to trash it in a fit of nerd rage () but I will articulate why it appeals to some as well as why others criticize it, including myself. I may also critique it from a production design standpoint as well as story and logic flaws. But that's as far as I'll go. Someone this morning asked me if I even liked any of the contemporary Trek characters from TNG onward, and I actually I like many of them. But I hated it when I'd see a good or potentially good character written poorly as to make them look stupid or ridiculous. That said I felt the same way when the I perceived the TOS characters poorly written in a couple of TOS episodes and films. In TNG I liked them all but Wesley and particularly Troi. Yeessh! In DS9 I didn't have major issues with the characters. In VOY I felt Janeway and 7of9 were the best characters, but that isn't saying much since I thoufght they were very badly written (and to some extent poorly conceived). I thought Robert Picardo was horribly wasted as an actor in the series. I liked Hoshi, or at least the potential of Hoshi, in ENT. But I just couldn't stomach much of anything else in the series other than a few of the alien ship designs.
No one else I know who has read this draft has expressed this, but I've reread what I have so far and I do see what you're saying. In my defense this is a first draft and not the finished product. I can definitely see where I can do some pruning.
I took a quick look at the text. There's a lot right there that most people get wrong, but it's not hard to find the ocsasional missing comma or hyphen (make it non-Trek).
Since I'm an editor, I tend to fall into the trap of reading for style and format rather than for content. That's why I have trouble reading for pleasure anymore. For my own various projects, I share the unfinished work with a very small circle of people. I'd never post a rough draft for public view. I like to maintain the illusion that the final version springs fully formed from my brow! (I've already said too much.)
Here's an updated version of the retrospective with a some more content and a little editing: http://freepdfhosting.com/b6589053e1.pdf