Another solid episode. As for the plot, I guess after all these years was expecting a TNG vibe where the nannites communicate with the crew, realize what they are doing and leave Kirk and Bones to recover. I was kind of surprised where the crew went right for the "destroy them" option. Also I would think Kirk would come up with a better strategy then shoot in the air, but I'm not a writer. Still, I'm hooked and see this as real Trek.
Star Trek Continues Ep. 5: "Divided We Stand"...(spoilers)
- Thread starter Warped9
- Start date
I said it before (somewhere), but I'll reiterate it here. I think STC needs a real knock-it-outta-the-park story. Something that really grabs you and elevates the game.
I think "Lolani" was along those lines when it was introduced. It wasn't perfect, but it struck me as truly ambitious for a fan production. They aimed to make something really in keeping with TOS' type of storytelling.
I'm wondering if perhaps these are productions that might age decently with time in similar sense as other productions have. Sometimes a production might not seem to quite click when it's introduced and yet with the passage of time is looked upon more favourably.
I'm not so concerned with a story appearing to be preachy given I don't see anything wrong with a story trying to say something. And, as has been said, TOS and other Trek has been preachy and in no significant way any different than what STC has done.
TOS and Trek in general has covered a lot of ground over the years and so it can be a challenge to come up with something that doesn't feel derivative of something the franchise has already done. And that there is yet another reason I think they would do well to refrain from continuity callouts, particularly the overt ones. That merely emphasizes the impression of "been there, done that."
I suppose I would suggest not looking to the Trek franchise as a primary source of inspiration. I would suggest looking beyond for inspiration for story ideas and then look to see if such ideas can be adapted to the TOS universe. Presently I'm going through an X-Files rewatch in anticipation of the six episode miniseries coming next January. During this rewatch I've periodically come across episodes where I wondered how it could be played out as a Star Trek story. I've experienced the same thing periodically while watching episodes of Stargate, JAG and other shows. Sometimes I've read a book that gave me the same thought.
This is what I'm talking about regarding looking beyond Trek for inspiration. I think it could help avoid or at least minimize that sense of feeling derivative and "been there, done that."
I think "Lolani" was along those lines when it was introduced. It wasn't perfect, but it struck me as truly ambitious for a fan production. They aimed to make something really in keeping with TOS' type of storytelling.
I'm wondering if perhaps these are productions that might age decently with time in similar sense as other productions have. Sometimes a production might not seem to quite click when it's introduced and yet with the passage of time is looked upon more favourably.
I'm not so concerned with a story appearing to be preachy given I don't see anything wrong with a story trying to say something. And, as has been said, TOS and other Trek has been preachy and in no significant way any different than what STC has done.
TOS and Trek in general has covered a lot of ground over the years and so it can be a challenge to come up with something that doesn't feel derivative of something the franchise has already done. And that there is yet another reason I think they would do well to refrain from continuity callouts, particularly the overt ones. That merely emphasizes the impression of "been there, done that."
I suppose I would suggest not looking to the Trek franchise as a primary source of inspiration. I would suggest looking beyond for inspiration for story ideas and then look to see if such ideas can be adapted to the TOS universe. Presently I'm going through an X-Files rewatch in anticipation of the six episode miniseries coming next January. During this rewatch I've periodically come across episodes where I wondered how it could be played out as a Star Trek story. I've experienced the same thing periodically while watching episodes of Stargate, JAG and other shows. Sometimes I've read a book that gave me the same thought.
This is what I'm talking about regarding looking beyond Trek for inspiration. I think it could help avoid or at least minimize that sense of feeling derivative and "been there, done that."
The McKennah-haters should be pleased, as she only had a single scene, and one that could easily have been deleted from the episode, with no impact on the story.
Personally, I like the McKennah character a lot (and I freely admit that part of it is the fact that Michele Specht herself is so darn charming), and have been hoping she'd have a more featured role. I could care less what canon says about when ship's counselors began -- part of the fun of FAN films is bending the rules a little bit, and trying new things.
Personally, I like the McKennah character a lot (and I freely admit that part of it is the fact that Michele Specht herself is so darn charming), and have been hoping she'd have a more featured role. I could care less what canon says about when ship's counselors began -- part of the fun of FAN films is bending the rules a little bit, and trying new things.
I was reticent about the McKennah character in the beginning, but I've come around to not having a problem with her. I just wasn't fond of her fulfilling the role McCoy traditionally played for Kirk.
I agree that her character is helped immeasurably by the fact Michele Specht can act and is indeed charming. While she played no significant role in this episode I'd argue she could have been seen somewhat more and it wouldn't have detracted from the story one bit. We've already seen a bit of something between her and Kirk--an echo of the old Kirk/Rand vibe--(and also a resonance of the actual Vic/Michele relationship) so McKennah could have hovered a bit over Kirk during his nanite induced coma. It could have been something like what Chapel did when Spock was injured in "A Private Little War."
At this point I think STC has given us a collection of interesting supporting characters that are kind of nice to see amongst the regular crew: McKennah, Drake, Smith, the female security guard and nurse whose names escape me at this moment. Plus we've seen Palmer and now MBenga appear. However, we haven't seen Kyle appear yet and I assume Christine Chapel and Janice Rand have left the ship for other pursuits.
On that note, though, I think it would be nice to see some more multiracial casting as we saw done in TOS.
I agree with most everything posted above, but I wanted to key in on this..
I was afraid that the music would become a liability, because once they got an orchestra in and started recording original music for one episode, they can't backpedal and go back to sample recordings for the rest. (I guess they could, but there would be a dip in the wrong direction if that were the case.) Anyway, I was worried about where they were going to find a 50 piece orchestra for every episode? Who's going to conduct and sync it? One thing that alleviated my concerns is that I noticed in the credits, "music performed by 'The STC Orchestra'". I think we can also count on Andy Farber's participation to continue composing original music and conducting.
That says a lot about this production. I don't think Vic will skimp on doing whatever it takes to service the fans and maintain or exceed the quality, because if it stagnates, these wonderful volunteers (many professionals) in all areas of production will start to leave, and it will become a snowball effect. I think that is one of the driving forces that will keep it going in the right direction, even though the story lines may not resonate with everyone. When have they ever?
I was afraid that the music would become a liability, because once they got an orchestra in and started recording original music for one episode, they can't backpedal and go back to sample recordings for the rest. (I guess they could, but there would be a dip in the wrong direction if that were the case.) Anyway, I was worried about where they were going to find a 50 piece orchestra for every episode? Who's going to conduct and sync it? One thing that alleviated my concerns is that I noticed in the credits, "music performed by 'The STC Orchestra'". I think we can also count on Andy Farber's participation to continue composing original music and conducting.
That says a lot about this production. I don't think Vic will skimp on doing whatever it takes to service the fans and maintain or exceed the quality, because if it stagnates, these wonderful volunteers (many professionals) in all areas of production will start to leave, and it will become a snowball effect. I think that is one of the driving forces that will keep it going in the right direction, even though the story lines may not resonate with everyone. When have they ever?
A
Amaris
Guest
Indeed. I do think STC is the top performer in terms of fan production. Their efforts continue to impress me, and this episode is no different. As far as characterizations go, I've said long before that Vic Mignogna is a scary good Kirk, and that I like Todd Haberkorn's Spock (he has definitely grown into the role), and of course Chris Doohan as Scotty couldn't be any better, but now I can say that Chuck Huber has sold me as McCoy, no doubt about it. He has the right personality, the right demeanor. I like his portrayal very much.
Also, regarding this episode (I found them on the STC website), but Blaque Fowler (Pappy), Chris White (soldier who discovers Kirk/McCoy), and Jay Pennington (skeptical soldier around campfire), were fantastic. I was thoroughly convinced by their performances; White's in particular, who had me on edge in those first few moments of Kirk and McCoy's discovery.
I really do appreciate what everyone at the STC team does, and it helps that I love TOS, but even if I didn't, I would still have to admire the attention to detail, the care put into every story treatment, and the continued effort to bring a high quality production to fans everywhere.
Also, regarding this episode (I found them on the STC website), but Blaque Fowler (Pappy), Chris White (soldier who discovers Kirk/McCoy), and Jay Pennington (skeptical soldier around campfire), were fantastic. I was thoroughly convinced by their performances; White's in particular, who had me on edge in those first few moments of Kirk and McCoy's discovery.
I really do appreciate what everyone at the STC team does, and it helps that I love TOS, but even if I didn't, I would still have to admire the attention to detail, the care put into every story treatment, and the continued effort to bring a high quality production to fans everywhere.
True enough. The stories are going to come under even closer scrutiny now, and that is where the focus on constant improvement needs to be.
And not just for this production. The entire fanfilm "industry" is really going to have to step up in terms of story and dialogue writing. Following quickly on the heels of that is acting. With so many productions now partly or entirely starring "pros" or semi-pros, the bar has been permanently raised.
Don't know where you're getting that from. Britain's other former colonies all went their own directions in the 19th and early 20th centuries, why wouldn't the Thirteen Colonies have simply followed that same pattern Revolution or no? Would Spain or France have had any greater grip on affairs in the Western hemisphere than in our history, with the Revolution or without one?
I don't see how any of them could prevent the rise of de facto independence in the Western hemisphere regardless of the course any particular Revolution took. The specifics would be different, but this like saying South America would still be directly ruled by Spain today if Bolivar had fallen off his horse and broken his neck at Trujillo.
Phantom said:
Trek has always had a bit of a schizoid attitude to war (between there being no extremism in defense of liberty and war being a savage practice mankind should put behind it, both attitudes that Kirk took at various points), but Kirk definitely inclined to the hawkish end of that spectrum, and his assessment of the Civil War as being essentially worth it for ending slavery and restoring the Union is largely history's assessment of it. So I really couldn't see him plausibly inclining to any other attitude.
Last edited:
The New Outer Limits had some really cool episodes that I think could be used for inspiration. I'd love to see "The Mutant" from the original OL adapted as a TOS episode.
Last edited:
Of course I can't know how an alternate play of history would turn out but my statement was based on the fact that the American independence movement inspired similar movements throughout the Western Hemisphere, in Europe and indeed some historians have argued, even the French Revolution. If it had failed many of those movements would have lacked inspiration and precedent. My claim is further based on the absence (in this counterhistory) of a well-funded and organized, resource-rich US obstacle to European colonial ambitions in the Western Hemisphere. Further, it is hard to imagine a British North America that having developed a lucrative cotton trade on the labor of enslaved black Africans and their descendants would then be ordered to give up that slavery as easily as the British ordered it given up elsewhere. After all, they came very close to intervening in the Civil War on behalf of the Confederacy, in large part because of cotton. While I disagree with the specifics of the below-linked essay's speculations, it cites sources and presents an interesting counter-history-
http://science.howstuffworks.com/science-vs-myth/what-if/what-if-america-lost-revolution.htm
I love Star Trek Continues, it was what lured me into fan productions, and generally has kept me here....
With that said, I give this episode a 3 out of 5 stars. Good production quality, good acting, overall well done, except the Story. The story was heavy on action, and light on exposition. I had a hard time keeping up with what was going on, and I was honestly surprised Kirk and McCoy never once really discussed their situation. Were they time traveling? Was Kirk Dreaming?
With that said, I give this episode a 3 out of 5 stars. Good production quality, good acting, overall well done, except the Story. The story was heavy on action, and light on exposition. I had a hard time keeping up with what was going on, and I was honestly surprised Kirk and McCoy never once really discussed their situation. Were they time traveling? Was Kirk Dreaming?
^^ I would have liked to see Kirk and McCoy discussing how they got where they were a bit more. McCoy made a few guesses in the beginning and then it was never discussed again, but it should have been. It might have taken about two minutes extra of running time.
McCoy's actions in the field hospital make me wonder if on some level he didn't really believe they had traveled in time. If McCoy thought, at least in some way, they weren't really back in past then he could have recognized, even unconscioysly, that whatever he did wouldn't really matter in terms of history. In that light then Kirk could have made more of a show of actually fighting during the engagement because he wouldn't really be killing anyone.
I don't know for sure how it could have played out, but it should have been discussed more.
McCoy's actions in the field hospital make me wonder if on some level he didn't really believe they had traveled in time. If McCoy thought, at least in some way, they weren't really back in past then he could have recognized, even unconscioysly, that whatever he did wouldn't really matter in terms of history. In that light then Kirk could have made more of a show of actually fighting during the engagement because he wouldn't really be killing anyone.
I don't know for sure how it could have played out, but it should have been discussed more.
I rather enjoyed this episode. Like others, I wish it had been closer in length to an actual TOS episode. And I too thought the
That sounds like "The Negron Complex," Paul Kinsey's terrible Star Trek script on Mad Men.
And, like Mad Men, I see STC as very similarly trying to authentically re-create the 1960s more than half a century later. It's simply impossible for the writers, producers, etc. not to see everything through the lens of contemporary sensibilities. Despite all of the meticulous attention to period detail, you can still tell it wasn't actually produced in that era. Certain aspects of character, story and production give it away.
But that doesn't mean it isn't good television. And I would say the same thing for Star Trek Continues.
And while this may sound cliche, I am hoping for some kind of geopolitical cold war allegory (a good one) using the Klingons or Romulans. That aspect of Trek has always fascinated me the most.
Either that, or mining some of the ideas that were running through literary science fiction of the 1960s.
I'm still formulating an opinion on the McKennah character... more to come later, maybe.
Kor
nanoprobes were a little too close to Borg technology for comfort.
That sounds like "The Negron Complex," Paul Kinsey's terrible Star Trek script on Mad Men.
And, like Mad Men, I see STC as very similarly trying to authentically re-create the 1960s more than half a century later. It's simply impossible for the writers, producers, etc. not to see everything through the lens of contemporary sensibilities. Despite all of the meticulous attention to period detail, you can still tell it wasn't actually produced in that era. Certain aspects of character, story and production give it away.
But that doesn't mean it isn't good television. And I would say the same thing for Star Trek Continues.
And while this may sound cliche, I am hoping for some kind of geopolitical cold war allegory (a good one) using the Klingons or Romulans. That aspect of Trek has always fascinated me the most.
Either that, or mining some of the ideas that were running through literary science fiction of the 1960s.
I'm still formulating an opinion on the McKennah character... more to come later, maybe.
Kor
Last edited:
The episode itself is fine and well crafted. I think the preaching was overdone and as someone from the UK I find the implication that the US civil war ended "slavery" as very a historical inaccuracy. I don't blame STC for this but some of the comments on this forum point that way. As we know slavery continued around the world after the 1860's and in some cases still exists today.
Also while the US finally got round to abolishing slavery by war the UK did it 30 years earlier by act of parliament and by winning the arguement. Just look up on google the Slavery Abolition Act 1833. and William Wilberforce its prime supporter. After this date the Royal Navy was tasked with intercepting slave ships from Africa and freeing the people on board.
one person also commented that the UK nearly sided with the south during the war this is far from the truth, an while i doubt wikepedia a lot the entry below is fairly accurate
The United Kingdom and its empire remained officially neutral throughout the American Civil War (1861–65). It legally recognised the belligerent status of the Confederacy; it never recognized it as a nation and never signed a treaty or exchanged ambassadors. However, the top British officials debated intervention in the first 18 months. Elite opinion tended to favour the Confederacy, while public opinion tended to favour the United States. Large scale trade continued in both directions, with the Americans shipping grain to Britain while Britain sent manufactured items and munitions. Immigration continued into the U.S., with Britons volunteering for the Union Army. British trade with the Confederacy fell over 90% from prewar, with a little cotton going to Britain and some munitions slipped in by numerous small blockade runners. The blockade runners were operated and funded by British private interests; they were legal under international law and were not a cause of dispute between Washington and London. The Confederate strategy for securing independence was largely based on the hope of military intervention by Britain and France, which never happened;
Back on the subject of STC generally I agreed that they don't to the "shoot em up" starship episodes seen elsewhere which i appreciate. Hopefully STC will continue to provide thought provoking episodes with less direct preaching.
Also while the US finally got round to abolishing slavery by war the UK did it 30 years earlier by act of parliament and by winning the arguement. Just look up on google the Slavery Abolition Act 1833. and William Wilberforce its prime supporter. After this date the Royal Navy was tasked with intercepting slave ships from Africa and freeing the people on board.
one person also commented that the UK nearly sided with the south during the war this is far from the truth, an while i doubt wikepedia a lot the entry below is fairly accurate
The United Kingdom and its empire remained officially neutral throughout the American Civil War (1861–65). It legally recognised the belligerent status of the Confederacy; it never recognized it as a nation and never signed a treaty or exchanged ambassadors. However, the top British officials debated intervention in the first 18 months. Elite opinion tended to favour the Confederacy, while public opinion tended to favour the United States. Large scale trade continued in both directions, with the Americans shipping grain to Britain while Britain sent manufactured items and munitions. Immigration continued into the U.S., with Britons volunteering for the Union Army. British trade with the Confederacy fell over 90% from prewar, with a little cotton going to Britain and some munitions slipped in by numerous small blockade runners. The blockade runners were operated and funded by British private interests; they were legal under international law and were not a cause of dispute between Washington and London. The Confederate strategy for securing independence was largely based on the hope of military intervention by Britain and France, which never happened;
Back on the subject of STC generally I agreed that they don't to the "shoot em up" starship episodes seen elsewhere which i appreciate. Hopefully STC will continue to provide thought provoking episodes with less direct preaching.
Finally the trade across the atlantic was abolished by the UK in 1807
Abolition of the Slave Trade Act 1807,[1] was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom passed on 25 March 1807, with the title of "An Act for the Abolition of the Slave Trade". The original act is in the Parliamentary Archives. The act abolished the slave trade in the British Empire, in particular the Atlantic slave trade, and also encouraged British action to press other European states to abolish their slave trades, but it did not abolish slavery itself. Many of the Bill's supporters thought the Act would lead to the death of slavery, but it was not until 26 years later that slavery itself was actually abolished.[2] Slavery on English soil was unsupported in English law and that position was confirmed in Somersett's Case in 1772, but it remained legal in most of the British Empire until the Slavery Abolition Act 1833.
Strange that the land of the free took so long to join in
Abolition of the Slave Trade Act 1807,[1] was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom passed on 25 March 1807, with the title of "An Act for the Abolition of the Slave Trade". The original act is in the Parliamentary Archives. The act abolished the slave trade in the British Empire, in particular the Atlantic slave trade, and also encouraged British action to press other European states to abolish their slave trades, but it did not abolish slavery itself. Many of the Bill's supporters thought the Act would lead to the death of slavery, but it was not until 26 years later that slavery itself was actually abolished.[2] Slavery on English soil was unsupported in English law and that position was confirmed in Somersett's Case in 1772, but it remained legal in most of the British Empire until the Slavery Abolition Act 1833.
Strange that the land of the free took so long to join in
ianintheuk... A question. Is it significantly more US-centric than some of the TOS episodes where Kirk, e.g. gets all hot and bothered about the US Constitution or Abe Lincoln?
I have long assumed that part of why most fan films outside the USA are set in the TNG/DS9/VOY era (with a resurgence this year of pre-TOS Trek projects; I know of 10 pre-TOS films in the works right now, with only 3 from filmmakers with prior releases; the UK and Canada do produce some TOS-era fan Trek.) was due to TOS being only superficially international, but in a deep way, very American-centric. This article is cited by a right-wing Trek friend to prove that Trek lost it's values with TNG, but to me the values here are US-centric. https://www.claremont.org/article/the-politics-of-star-trek/
I have long assumed that part of why most fan films outside the USA are set in the TNG/DS9/VOY era (with a resurgence this year of pre-TOS Trek projects; I know of 10 pre-TOS films in the works right now, with only 3 from filmmakers with prior releases; the UK and Canada do produce some TOS-era fan Trek.) was due to TOS being only superficially international, but in a deep way, very American-centric. This article is cited by a right-wing Trek friend to prove that Trek lost it's values with TNG, but to me the values here are US-centric. https://www.claremont.org/article/the-politics-of-star-trek/
Similar threads
