ST Continues "To Boldly Go": A Fan Edit

I found this "fan edit" of the two part Star Trek Continues episode. To me it feels even more like an actual episode of TOS. I found a lot of the little "annoying" parts and extraneous plot threads have been cut out. But that's my opinion. What do you think of it?


Here are the original two parts for comparison:

 

I gave up after 15 minutes. Sorry, but there just is no way to make that ''story'' make any sense...

 

Their scripts were typically mediocre compared to their production values.

 

I originally posted this fan edit (along with the original version as a comparison) because, having seen the original, I felt that the editor did a decent job of cutting out a lot of unnecessary dialog that only muddle the story or made it feel un-TOS-like. The edit, in my eyes, helped raise the episode to be more on-par with TOS. I was able to follow the story in both version, but going forward if I ever want to revisit it, I will watch the fan edit.

I'm curious to know how do you feel about it? Did the edit improve the story, or make it worse?

 

Honestly I’m not watching it again. The edit might be an improvement, but as the story was a big meh no amount of editing can make it worth the effort.

 

I`ll give you a partial answer, but frankly there is so much nonsense in there that I could be writing this all day...Here goes:
It`s obvious they wanted a final episode like TNG`s ALL GOOD THINGS..., one that revisits the setting and some characters from ''their'' first episode. But here are SOME major problems:
( 1 ) Why did Lana and her husband stay on the planet instead of being with the other Espers?.
( 2 ) All the 30 Espers, Lana and her husband were already transformed, so why go back to the barrier?
( 3 ) Why bother with the Romulan charade at all? Both Lana and her husband had their powers for weeks, they should have been powerful enough to just take the Enterprise by force.
( 4 ) If the Espers were powerful enough to destroy a handful of Starships, why not just commandeer one to go to the barrier instead of that smaller ship?
( 5 ) Why bother saying they were about 30 Espers and you only ever show a handful of them?

I`m going to stop there before I give myself an aneurysm we already have 2 threads here where some of us elaborated in more detail months ago...Look some members adored that series despite its obvious weaknesses, all of them having to do with their scripts. I enjoyed some aspects of STC, mainly aesthetic ones and Todd Haberkorn possibly being the most satisfying portrayal of Spock since Leonard Nimoy, and that`s including Zachary Quinto.

 

Bixby, I hadn't made the connection between To Boldly Go and All Good Things--a great observation. STC's biggest problem is in it writing/storytelling, but then again, that is true for the vast majority of film. If there's going to be a stand-out issue, its likely the writing. That said, STC is, in my opinion, the best TOS-era fan film series in production values and acting, and, despite what I just said, in the writing too. Even Star Trek: New Voyages/Phase II pales in comparison to STC. Axanar has excellent production values, and is better written than STC, but it doesn't attempt to emulate the feel of TOS.

Here are some general observations about these fan films, first in how they vary from official episodes:
1. They are always derivative of official episodes, either as a sequels to the original episode or they use some aspect/character from a TOS episode. Perhaps it is in the DNA of these productions to do so--since they are already derivative by nature. This is a departure from the official cannon, which rarely referenced a previous episode. Once this pattern is noticed it quickly becomes annoying.
2. I also hate the references/homoges made to events/characters/terminology not found in TOS. It always sticks out like a sore thumb.
3. These fan films lack the subtlety of the original. They are way too preachy and overt, again, a problem with writing.
4. A big problem with the acting is that their portrayals often misses the mark. Kirk gives inappropriately nasty looks at the wrong times, leading you to think there is some underlying problem where there is none. Say what you will about Shatner, he was always on-point and hit the right tone consistently. A tough act to follow.
5. The constant questioning of orders/second guessing a superior officer in fan films is beyond annoying. The supporting cast have way too many opinions (in my opinion). Agree with it or not, Vic needed to be more of a Shatner when it came to cutting or taking lines given to the secondary characters. It this is any example of how TOS could have been, Shatner made the right call in insisting on streamlining the scripts to feature the lead actors (mainly himself).

Like you, I could go on and on, but here are a few things that these fan films have helped me to realize:
1. Just how incredibly talented and professional the cast and crew of TOS were. Top industry professionals. Period. They were able to produce a superior show on a weekly basis, within the limitations of 60s network television, than these fan films can manage with 6 months to a year to produce a single episode.
2. They demonstrate how without a network, sponsors, and the general public to keep tuned in, an episode can become a tedious, confusing, and convoluted mess.
3. My final observation is STC specific. It is not the same type of show that TOS was. TOS was by-in-large an action adventure with dramatic undertones. It also ventured into other genres like horror, fantasy, and comedy too. STC is by-in-large a melodrama with some elements of action-adventure. One big reason for the difference is likely financial. An action adventure story is likely much more expensive to produce than a drama, so that's understandable when you're producing episodes out of your own pocket. But even the more dramatic episodes of TOS were much more engaging that these fan films.

I've ripped on them enough. I hope the big takeaway is the appreciation these fan films produce in me for the actual article.

 

I don't like how the "fan edit" ended right with McKenna's demise.

Kor

 

You made me look at the end. That's terrible.

 

Yeah, that's not a proper story ending at all.
(not to mention being a poorly-done scene in and of itself, to put it diplomatically)

Kor

 

I did as well! Now I need to find the chemical eye wash station...

 

Yeah, I have some similar concerns. I can understand the desire to try to fix or improve something you think is broken. Lord knows I've privately recut stuff as editing exercises, but putting them out for public consumption is kinda...disrespectful, I guess.

 

I watched the original two-parter over the weekend. I enjoyed it for what it was, a bunch of fans attempting to make their own Star Trek. Though the McKennah character sticks out like a sore thumb, and not in a good way. Maybe a better actor could've made the character work?

 

I thought her acting was fine. I thought her part was badly written.

The OP appears to have switched the video to private so this thread now seems pointless.

 

That's sad to hear.

And that's the ONLY good thing about it.

The only one of these that wasn't like this was/is Star Trek: Aurora, which had an original story not related to any episode of TOS, and had original new NON-Starfleet characters.

BTW, here's the two Aurora movies:

I can see how that would get on people's nerves; for me, it's not a problem.

And they say that about Discovery and Picard while praising the fan shows....what a coincidence!

Chris Pine equals Shatner in his portrayal of Kirk, but then again, he's a professional actor like Shatner.

While the other characters doing that is annoying (and not how navies work in real life), Shatner doing what he did on the set of TOS was a dick prima donna move that just got him enmity for years to come from the others except for Kelly. At least he wasn't like this guy on the set of a certain police procedural set in Hawaii, who did the same thing, but was even worse.

The way I see it, fan films are like amateur theater, and should be regarded that way.

That can happen with amateur productions sometimes.

That's why they are amateur productions (although in the cases of the Star Trek fan shows-Aurora is an exception-they could be somewhat better in the other aspects mentioned by you.)

You and me both.

 

Is there something specific STC could or should have done to improve their scripts? Is there a lesson to be learned here, or are we resigning ourselves to the idea that fan films are like the wings of Icarus?

 

You raise a couple of good questions. I think putting their scripts through the same rigor that the writing staff of TOS did would have helped (I'm assuming that they didn't, but since I didn't participate in the process I don't know that for sure). TOS had subtleties that would need to be included if there's any hope of truly emulating what they did, subtleties that STC did not adhere to, perhaps because the writer(s) were either unaware of them, or were unable to reproduce them. TOS scripts had a lot of input from a variety of professional sources; from the network, from an outside research group, from show producers like Robert Justman, and often times from some of the best SF writers of the day (who penned some of the series' first drafts). Often each head writer also took a crack at writing a draft of the script, adding their own flavor to the mix. So much went into the crafting of each story that the final episode frequently bore little resemblance to the initial script treatment. As Roddenberry said, Star Trek was the hardest show on tv to write for, it was true then, and it would still be true today if they were producing the same type of Star Trek that was made back then. Having an objective editor shape the final product could also be of immense help. I felt the edit of "To Boldly Go" that I started this thread with was a good example of how much difference an edit can make. It's too bad the video has since been deleted.

I think the lesson to be learned is to have the humbleness required to allow your "baby" to be changed by others. This would be needed to transform something like STC from a vanity project/"love letter to TOS" into a facsimile of the actual article. Among other things, they would also need to somehow impose the same yoke on their production that TOS had, namely a network to answer to, advertisers to please, and an audience to keep tuned in. I don't know how they'd do that, but the same results cannot be achieved without those same pressures.

 

I felt most of STC fanfilms were unwarranted sequels to superior Star Trek episodes; and the narrative didn't focus on their lead characters. The fanfilms had this strange position to have the guest stars lead the direction of the stories told. STC's plot points were too on the nose and it didn't make it better when the camera has to veer into the secondary characters to make the same point and sprinkle it with fanservice because it has to have these volunteer actors something to do. As much as I adore the level of production design and the mimic lighting the fanfilm series felt more like TNG than TOS.

What the producers of this production should've asked themselves, "Should this story be told and what did the original story didn't have which it needed another one?" "Where was our heroes in the beginning of the tale and how will the story effect them after it was told?" Whatever those decisions were it showed on the screen, I had zero investment in the characters and the stories they were telling. When STC tried to tell an original tale the message I thought was too preachy and not allowing the story to have a natural conclusion; there was a plot about a woman not being Captain of a ship and Spock was in competition for the same ship. The narrative goes on and on about women not having the opportunity and should get it but by the end, it doesn't matter because the vessel gets destroyed. Other problems I had was I thought Spock was not a fair opponent for the woman, and in the back of my mind I doubted Spock would leave the Enterprise. I get the confused narrative was supposed to be a reflection of the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election, but did it have to be so obvious???

I could've thought of other avenues to make it work, but it still falls under the question should this story be told and should we waste a lot of money to invest in that??? Somehow they forced that bizarre subplot of the spaceship blowing up into their "To Boldly Go..." movie and it had me scratching my head because "The woman being Captain" episode didn't set up what was told. Could the woman had discovered something related to Espers which her actions caused her to lose an opportunity to be Captain and she now on trial for her decision? Where her suspicions lead to a secret base which was ignored by her superiors? For whatever it could've been I felt the connection of the three films didn't fit naturally in a narrative perspective.

 

The problem of course is that fan filmmakers generally have fannish concerns which get expressed in the scripts. Too much slavish duplication and dot connecting. I've yet to see any fanfilm with a script as well-structured as even an episode of Gravity Falls., and that includes the one I wrote waaaay back in 2004. Even Fontana's and Gerrold's scripts for New Voyages were rather subpar affairs, the former being rather surprisingly mediocre.

But the fact is that screenwriting is hard, and it takes a lot of working at it to produce anything any good. And when you start by trying to connect dots and do callbacks and sequels you're handicapping yourself from the get-go.