STC Ep. 9: ???.... (Coming this June)
- Thread starter Nightowl1701
- Start date
This is so awesome. Even if he's not Flint (and certainly not Q), John being in this episode instantly elevates it to an absolute must-watch.
I did contact Timby about updating the title of this thread, but I haven't heard back from him. Not sure who the administrator in charge of Fan Productions is - should I just start a new thread with the updated title/release date and we'll just go from there?
I did contact Timby about updating the title of this thread, but I haven't heard back from him. Not sure who the administrator in charge of Fan Productions is - should I just start a new thread with the updated title/release date and we'll just go from there?
I believe @GSchnitzer is the mod for this section of the board, he might be able to help you out.
You could wait until Ep. 9 is actually released then start a new discussion thread.
John deLancie is a great actor, one of the shining lights of the abysmal Torchwood: Miracle Day, and a nice guy.
At Destination Star Trek 3 in London there was a delay in getting ready for his photo session, so much to the dismay of the secutiry guard he went out to greet the people waiting in line!
Nice guy.
Anne Lockhart AND John de Lancie? STC's cup runneth over! Fantastic casting news, not to mention Kipleigh Brown's writing the episode.
There's no way they get Q and Sheba and give them just a couple of scenes!
Yet it's something that Vic has said from the beginning that STC will do -- tie into TMP and the later series. And thank goodness for it. That's what makes STC work as genuine "Trek" IMO (and apparently in Rod Roddenberry's opinion as well).
Of course, YMMV, but at least Vic is sticking to his guns and doing what he's said he would do from the start -- reference the latter Trek shows -- rather than simply re-creating TOS content that ties into nothing, as if it exists in a poor man's vacuum.
You mean like three TOS seasons which spawned a huge franchise that exists to this day?
That's exactly what I mean. This is 2017, not 1970. Mignoga has always said that he'd tie ST:C into the latter Trek content, and he's making good on his promises to the fans.
No, I didn't miss yours. I was just never into continuity porn.As you missed mine.
It's not continuity porn if a) it's subtle and not calling too much attention to itself (except for those looking for that kind of thing) and b) actually serves the story being told (without, you know, being the story).
By that criteria, of course, the two-part finale's (by necessity) gonna be the Trek equivalent of '50 Shades of Grey.'
By that criteria, of course, the two-part finale's (by necessity) gonna be the Trek equivalent of '50 Shades of Grey.'
Entirely subjective. I say they are, in spades. But YMMV, and as many on this board have said, simply don't watch it if you don't like it. I note that every time this board does a statistical poll on the latest ST:C episode, you and the two other major ST:C critics are in the tiny, tiny, tiny minority. A very vocal minority, but a tiny minority nonetheless. ST:C is obviously pleasing the vast majority of their fans.
There are only 3 episodes left, so I'm sure the critics will be relieved that they don't have to bother watching it any more.
There are only 3 episodes left, so I'm sure the critics will be relieved that they don't have to bother watching it any more.
LOL. I think it's called "Peters Syndrome": An intense dislike of Vic Mignoga and ST:C that is so intense, it compels one to talk about it over and over and over and over and over again on message boards.
Similar threads
