Star Trek Continues Ep. 5: "Divided We Stand"...(spoilers)

[Warped9]

But Kirk didn't really lose his leg. He only thought he did while caught up in the illusion. That said it would have been an interesting change to the character given that he could have a cybernetic prosthetic leg much like Drake's arm.

"Gentlemen, we can rebuild him. We have the technology..."

 

[Zaminhon]

But Kirk didn't know it at the time. I'm sure the full repercussions went through his mind while lying on the cot.

Morpheus: What is real? How do you define 'real'? If you're talking about what you can feel, what you can smell, what you can taste and see, then 'real' is simply electrical signals interpreted by your brain.

Eta:

( I see, I used the wrong tense in the post you were referencing, but I think you got my meaning.)

I hope we get to see Drake use his new Bionic Arm. ( Without the wind-up spring noise and slo-mo, please).

 

[Warped9]

Okay, I hate to do this, because of recent events, but, speaking as a "person of color", and one who has roots in the South, I could care less the "real" reasons for the Civil War. The fact of the matter is that the South, and in fact the United States for that matter, shouldn't have been engaged in the practice of slavery to begin with, especially given that the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights (along with the US Constitution) was suppose to be documents sanctifying the rights of free men and democratic values. When talking about the justification for the Civil War, ultimately, there are victims involved: the men who actively fought the war, the destroyed lives (on both sides) as the result of the war, and the freed men women who, after so long, had to learn how to be citizens of a nation that may or may not be hostile to them. And because of this, I blame the gutless politicians who couldn't compromise on the issue of both slavery and states rights. But more to the point, I blamed the Founding Framers for the Civil War, for not having the foresight that a country built on the values of a democratic Republic will end up becoming a House Divided. Ergo, the roots of the Civil War can be found on the street corner of Cowardice and Convenience. And again, as a "minority", I could care less about the reasons for the Civil War, but I do care that my people were freed in the end.

I think societal change is rarely drastic and sweeping. I think it's more usually incremental.

The Founding Fathers had an idea of a country where "all men were created equal," but their idea of "all men" might not have included people of colour outside their own race. From their perspective of the time many of them might not have seen people of colour being included in the definition of "all men." It's wrong and they should have seen it differently, but apparently they didn't.

And politics is also the exercise of compromise and negotiation. It's possible some of the Founding Fathers believed people of colour should have been included from the start, but the reality of the times (the perspectives of the majority) might have precluded that from happening right then and there. They effectively deferred it to future generations to deal with.


This episode could have been done a number of other ways. I wonder how it could have played out if it had been McCoy and Uhura who had fallen prey to the nanites. And it didn't have to be a story dealing directly with Civil War era soldiers.

Which brings me to a story idea I believe had been floated way back during TOS dealing with a planet where blacks were the dominant race and whites were the slaves. Obviously they didn't have the nerve to deal with the issue in such a head-on way back then and the idea was softened somwehat through the episode "Let That Be Your Last battlefield." Then there's also the embarrassing TNG episode "Code Of Honor."

This does make me wonder if there are any stories TOS passed on that could be salvaged and adapted today by STC. Certainly NV/P2 have done that with stories originally slated for the aborted Phase II series.


I also agree with the comment upthread about the episode's running time. I, too, would prefer the stories to clock out closer to 50 minutes rather than the contemporary 42 minutes.

 

[dswynne1]

^^ Thank you for a thoughtful response. I had trepidation about broaching the subtext of the Civil War, considering its legacy. And maybe, someday, we call all look back at history from a detached perspective, and have a honest discussion in that manner. I can honestly say that it sometimes feels very lonely within the African-American community when trying to espouse the virtues of founding of the US, even after putting its vices into context.

 

[GSchnitzer]

Okay, I hate to do this, because of recent events, but, speaking as a "person of color", and one who has roots in the South, I could care less the "real" reasons for the Civil War. The fact of the matter is that the South, and in fact the United States for that matter, shouldn't have been engaged in the practice of slavery to begin with, especially given that the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights (along with the US Constitution) was suppose to be documents sanctifying the rights of free men and democratic values. When talking about the justification for the Civil War, ultimately, there are victims involved: the men who actively fought the war, the destroyed lives (on both sides) as the result of the war, and the freed men women who, after so long, had to learn how to be citizens of a nation that may or may not be hostile to them. And because of this, I blame the gutless politicians who couldn't compromise on the issue of both slavery and states rights. But more to the point, I blamed the Founding Framers for the Civil War, for not having the foresight that a country built on the values of a democratic Republic will end up becoming a House Divided. Ergo, the roots of the Civil War can be found on the street corner of Cowardice and Convenience. And again, as a "minority", I could care less about the reasons for the Civil War, but I do care that my people were freed in the end.

I think societal change is rarely drastic and sweeping. I think it's more usually incremental.

The Founding Fathers had an idea of a country where "all men were created equal," but their idea of "all men" might not have included people of colour outside their own race. From their perspective of the time many of them might not have seen people of colour being included in the definition of "all men." It's wrong and they should have seen it differently, but apparently they didn't.

And politics is also the exercise of compromise and negotiation. It's possible some of the Founding Fathers believed people of colour should have been included from the start, but the reality of the times (the perspectives of the majority) might have precluded that from happening right then and there. They effectively deferred it to future generations to deal with.


This episode could have been done a number of other ways. I wonder how it could have played out if it had been McCoy and Uhura who had fallen prey to the nanites. And it didn't have to be a story dealing directly with Civil War era soldiers.

Which brings me to a story idea I believe had been floated way back during TOS dealing with a planet where blacks were the dominant race and whites were the slaves. Obviously they didn't have the nerve to deal with the issue in such a head-on way back then and the idea was softened somwehat through the episode "Let That Be Your Last battlefield." Then there's also the embarrassing TNG episode "Code Of Honor."

This does make me wonder if there are any stories TOS passed on that could be salvaged and adapted today by STC. Certainly NV/P2 have done that with stories originally slated for the aborted Phase II series.


I also agree with the comment upthread about the episode's running time. I, too, would prefer the stories to clock out closer to 50 minutes rather than the contemporary 42 minutes.

To his credit, Thomas Jefferson had an anti-slavery paragraph in his original draft of the Declaration of Independence. He was overruled, and the paragraph was excised before the document was officially adopted by the Colonies.

http://www.blackpast.org/primary/declaration-independence-and-debate-over-slavery

 

[Warped9]

^^ Which essentially affirms my basic point. It's easy to assume all our ancestors held the same views but, of course, that's an overly simplistic and erroneous assumption.

^^ Thank you for a thoughtful response. I had trepidation about broaching the subtext of the Civil War, considering its legacy. And maybe, someday, we call all look back at history from a detached perspective, and have a honest discussion in that manner. I can honestly say that it sometimes feels very lonely within the African-American community when trying to espouse the virtues of founding of the US, even after putting its vices into context.

A great deal of our history is romanticized and even sanitized as written by the "victors" to serve their own agendas and/or assauge any lingering sense of guilt and embarrassment. Yet these romanticed and sanitized versions of history can, over time, be accepted as fact by successive generations and it can be uncomfortable to face the reality when evidence to the contrary is presented.

In an ideal world the words of Dr. Martin Luther King would hold true for everyone that a person (be they man or woman) should be judged by the quality of their character rather than by the colour of their skin. Unfortunately we don't live in such a world and this is an issue we continue to struggle with even though we have made some progress. And none of us are immune from possible preconceptions and bias. Ironically this is a lesson I partially learned from watching Star Trek when I was young.

I, like most everyone, have met many people in my life. And throughout I've seen that the colour of a person's skin or the country of origin does not define their character. I have known people of different races and nationalities that I have liked and admired as well as disliked. Decency, generosity, kindness, intelligence, goodness of heart as well as ignorance, stupidity, callousness, arrogance and mean-spiritedness know no race or nationality. It's not something always easy to remember, but it is true.

 

[TOSalltheway]

I too found this episode nice to watch but overly preachy.

 

[Nightowl1701]

And politics is also the exercise of compromise and negotiation. It's possible some of the Founding Fathers believed people of colour should have been included from the start, but the reality of the times (the perspectives of the majority) might have precluded that from happening right then and there. They effectively deferred it to future generations to deal with.

One of my favorite scenes of the 1972 movie '1776' was the final vote on whether to adopt the Declaration of Independence. A unanimous vote of all 13 colonies was needed, and the delegate of South Carolina vowed 'to bury, now and forever, your dream of independence' if the slavery paragraph Jefferson wrote wasn't removed. John Adams, fiercely anti-slavery, wouldn't budge, and Benjamin Franklin had to step in:

John Adams: "Mark me Franklin... if we give in on this issue, posterity will never forgive us."
Benjamin Franklin: "That's probably true, but we won't hear a thing. We'll be long gone. Besides, what will posterity think we were? Demigods? We're men - no more, no less - trying to get a nation started against greater odds than a more generous God would have allowed. First things first, John. Independence. America. If we don't secure that... what difference will the rest make?"
John Adams: "Jefferson, say something..."
Thomas Jefferson: "What else is there to do?"
John Adams: "Well, man, you're the one who wrote it!"
Thomas Jefferson: "I wrote ALL of it, Mr. Adams." (personally crosses out the slavery paragraph himself)

Dramatized to be sure, but based largely on the actual words and writings of the men themselves.

 

[Zaminhon]

I really want to know how they pulled off that scene where the cannon ball explodes in front of Kirk. I freeze framed it and as far as I can tell that is Vic. Whether it is CGI enhanced or actual pyrotechnics, it looks incredible.

 

[Warped9]

Whether one is pleased or not with STC's efforts there is one thing I think they should be applauded for. They are definitely not going in for the "ship battles and pew-pew" stories. We might get one at some point, but for now they are telling more adult level types of stories. In that regard they are definitely abiding by the spirit of TOS as it was intended.

 

[aridas sofia]

Okay, I hate to do this, because of recent events, but, speaking as a "person of color", and one who has roots in the South, I could care less the "real" reasons for the Civil War. The fact of the matter is that the South, and in fact the United States for that matter, shouldn't have been engaged in the practice of slavery to begin with, especially given that the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights (along with the US Constitution) was suppose to be documents sanctifying the rights of free men and democratic values. When talking about the justification for the Civil War, ultimately, there are victims involved: the men who actively fought the war, the destroyed lives (on both sides) as the result of the war, and the freed men women who, after so long, had to learn how to be citizens of a nation that may or may not be hostile to them. And because of this, I blame the gutless politicians who couldn't compromise on the issue of both slavery and states rights. But more to the point, I blamed the Founding Framers for the Civil War, for not having the foresight that a country built on the values of a democratic Republic will end up becoming a House Divided. Ergo, the roots of the Civil War can be found on the street corner of Cowardice and Convenience. And again, as a "minority", I could care less about the reasons for the Civil War, but I do care that my people were freed in the end.

This episode made a point of having as a core concept the question of what freedom means to different people. Is it the freedom to care for your farm and family? To live without fear that what you have earned through your own hard labor will be taken from you? These are questions that occupied the minds of the participants of the Civil War - North and South, slave and free, rich and poor. It was appropriate they be featured here.

But freedom also encompasses those that would do unto others before being done upon. They act out of fear. They would develop their land before others developed the land around them, using what resources were at their disposal to do so. Their society would encourage it lest they be seen as weak and perhaps be recolonized or conquered. To people living on the edge of the world, facing a developed Europe hungry for American land and resources, any agreement that created a stronger government capable of holding the many states together and marshalling them to work to a common purpose and for their common good was deemed an agreement worth pursuing. Even if it was understood to be imperfect and not in agreement with the rational basis upon which rested the nation's very reason for being, that all men are created equal and equally endowed with the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

If they hadn't done this, the land that is the United States, Canada and Mexico would likely now be divided among Great Britain, France and Spain (and perhaps Russia). As subjugated colonies it is hard to say how colonial powers might have dealt with the slavery of black Africans and the American descendents of black Africans. What we know is that the agreement struck in Philadelphia in 1787 by which the thirteen states reconstituted themselves under the Constitution, allowed a culture to evolve that eventually did deal with the issue as best they could, and just as their forebears had done, left to their descendents further improvements.

It must be a horrible and sad thing to contemplate this history of oppression without any sense of how bad things might be had they not gone the way they did. History is the story of the weak and vulnerable being subjugated by the strong and (rightly or wrongly) privileged. One generation gives way to the next and maybe learns, bit by hard won bit, to do unto others as they would want to be done to. And importantly, to give up childish notions that fear can ultimately be overcome by getting just a little bit more, no matter the harm done. That is the legacy of the Founders, to use our freedom to become better people. Or not. Think of the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights as, like Martin Luther King, Jr. noted, promissory notes. They tell us what is ours. They don't tell us how to keep others from taking it, only that, as Kirk says in "Divided We Stand", enslaving one leaves open the enslavement of anyone, and thus threatens everyone.

 

[Warped9]

^^ Nice.

 

[Amaris]

I really want to know how they pulled off that scene where the cannon ball explodes in front of Kirk. I freeze framed it and as far as I can tell that is Vic. Whether it is CGI enhanced or actual pyrotechnics, it looks incredible.

I was seriously impressed with that whole scene.

 

[Phantom]

Whether one is pleased or not with STC's efforts there is one thing I think they should be applauded for. They are definitely not going in for the "ship battles and pew-pew" stories. We might get one at some point, but for now they are telling more adult level types of stories. In that regard they are definitely abiding by the spirit of TOS as it was intended.

I'll agree 100% on that.

Ultimately, my objection stems from the perspective assigned to Kirk that seemed at odds with the a man for whom the war was a "long ago" occurrence that long-since healed. His speach about "they're your brothers, and will be again" spoke to me of the attitude that Uhura had in the other episode with Lincoln in it. He had called her a "charming Negress", then apologized if he was out of line. Her response was "why should I be offended? We've learned not to fear words."

I would have liked to see Kirk keep to the idea that the war was a tragedy and a waste for all concerned, rather than the "Let's GO Boys!" over-simplified tone he ultimately took.

 

[Treadwell]

I really want to know how they pulled off that scene where the cannon ball explodes in front of Kirk. I freeze framed it and as far as I can tell that is Vic. Whether it is CGI enhanced or actual pyrotechnics, it looks incredible.

The stunt is Vic, but the explosion is CG.

 

[northstar]

Another solid episode from STC. Solid, but not really good. It felt basically like another bottle show, with a visit to some civil war reenactment (with seemingly amateur actors) thrown in. With a storyline I have seen a dozen times in different variations through TOS and TNG.

Kirk being unconscious and dreaming again after the last episode?
Modern motherboards behind the consoles?
Firing a ships phaser on an prosthetic arm?

Lots of such somehow little sloppy points have been pointed out.
I didn´t mind the short running time - the story didn´t allow for much more.

The music integration with the newly composed stuff was very convincing.

Fx were solid, although there weren´t many. Did they bind the arm and leg to the back while filming or was it digitally removed?

I hope for the next episode they try to be a bit bolder... even if it takes a little more time. There is no rush here.

 

[Warped9]

When watching their Ep. 5 gag reel it's shown that they bound Drake's arm behind him. So we can assume they did the same with Kirk's leg.

 

[Zaminhon]

I kept forgetting that Kirk and McCoy were in a virtual world until they flipped back to the ship, so no "Bottle episode" vibe for me. I thought the actors who had lines were consistently good. With that said, the guy who fell out of the tree needed a little work to be more convincing. Some of the shots seemed a little over staged, like they were trying to squeeze everyone in the shot. For instance, people were standing behind each other at the campfire rather than around it, and some of the formations seemed a little unnaturally tight, but these are minor things and understandable due to limited time and budget. What they managed to pull off was exceptional for a fan production.

On ship, the actor playing M'Benga was really good. Spock was again in charge and very good, as was the rest of the crew. Chekov got some pretty good lines, I particularly enjoyed his expression when Spock gave him an insurmountable challenge. I was also impressed with Scott Dengler as Drake. He's had a few lines in past episodes, but I think he proved himself as more than a walk-on extra in this episode.

 

[Warped9]

^^ It didn't feel like a bottle show to me either.

... the actor playing M'Benga was really good. Spock was again in charge and very good, as was the rest of the crew. Chekov got some pretty good lines, I particularly enjoyed his expression when Spock gave him an insurmountable challenge. I was also impressed with Scott Dengler as Drake. He's had a few lines in past episodes, but I think he proved himself as more than a walk-on extra in this episode.

I agree the cast did well. I really liked MBenga. I think the entire cast gets better with each new production. I would suggest Chekov dial the accent back just a wee bit. And to my ears he sounds more like JJtrek Chekov rather than TOS Chekov, but that's not really important.

It would be interesting to see Uhura featured once with a story where she plays a prominant role. I know Vic is effectively the star, but I'm reminded of those episodes like "The Galileo Seven" and TAS' "Slaver Weapon" where Kirk wasn't anywhere near the real action or even seen.

Another solid episode from STC. Solid, but not really good.

This strikes me as a rather contradictory statement. When someone says something is "solid" it generally connotes something without fault. But then you say it isn't really good which means it does indeed have faults (as you see it) and then proceed to say why.

I think what you mean to say is the episode was competent or serviceable, but nothing special.


In an odd way this felt more like a second season episode than a third (or later) season one. I think perhaps it's because during second season is when we got those parallel Earth stories: the Roman Empire, the 1920's Gangsters, the Nazis and such. Weird. Also we never got to see Kirk wear the green tunic after the second season (which I liked seeing here).

 

[Phantom]

I really want to know how they pulled off that scene where the cannon ball explodes in front of Kirk. I freeze framed it and as far as I can tell that is Vic. Whether it is CGI enhanced or actual pyrotechnics, it looks incredible.

The stunt is Vic, but the explosion is CG.

Couldn't tell. Kudos to the FX team then.

^^ It didn't feel like a bottle show to me either.

Another solid episode from STC. Solid, but not really good.

This strikes me as a rather contradictory statement. When someone says something is "solid" it generally connotes something without fault. But then you say it isn't really good which means it does indeed have faults (as you see it) and then proceed to say why.

I think what you mean to say is the episode was competent or serviceable, but nothing special.

And that's an assessment I think I'd agree with.

The trap that a production like Continues is going to quickly fall into is that it's performance to date from a production standpoint is going to become a back-handed liability.

We know what they're capable of in terms of sets/FX, and so forth. Just doing "good" work isn't going to carry them forever.

It's the same phenomenon that is driving the "bigger/more/flashier" rot in blockbusters. ANY film can do first-rate FX now, even on a large scale. The bar, as it were, has been raised.