Revisiting Star Trek Continues...

[Warped9]

For all my criticisms I feel STC hasn’t aged badly. There isn’t much in it off the top of my head I find cringe inducing. It’s so obviously a labour of love and dedication. But even after only four episodes it’s apparent they couldn’t step back from their fannish mindset to be more critical of their own work.

Part of the intent might well have been, “Lets pretend it’s 1969 again.” but they also wanted, “Lets sneak some of this into it to neatly tie things together with later continuity.” If they could have resisted that impulse it would have served the first part of their intent better.

What they needed was a good, and more objective, script editor. Someone to snippet things out and say, “Take this out, rethink this and so on.” In the case of “The White Iris” I would have said, “No, you have to completely rethink this or come up with something entirely different. No way would this story have been done in this way in 1969 for one of the show’s established leading characters. There is nothing authentic about this.

 

[Cap'n Calhoun]

For all my criticisms I feel STC hasn’t aged badly

Agreed. It holds up much better than New Voyages.

I don't want to sound too harsh on NV, which I greatly respect as a labor of love, and it did produce a few very good episodes. The production value went up fairly quickly as well.

But overall Continues, much like TOS, has held up well and remains very watchable if one isn't distracted by externalities like those already discussed in this thread.

(Though I agree that "The White Iris" is a very mixed bag at best. In addition to the points you mentioned, it tries to do too much, and it's kind of silly that the whole plot requires on Kirk forgetting his password and not having a reset option.)

The final bit of fun is that the scene we open to is meant to be a demonstration of a holographic entertainment area that Scotty is working on. Many might automatically assume that a holodeck is a very TNG thing and has no business on the TOS Enterprise

Incidentally, I've long taken it that holodecks have existed for a while (as shown in TAS like you pointed out), but the one on the Enterprise-D were a significant upgrade from previous versions in terms of detail, sophistication, and sensory experience, which is why we get the reactions from Riker, Pulaski, etc. early in the show. When we saw the holographic simulator in Discovery it fit very well with this, so I didn't question it much. Seeing the one in Continues (and a similar one in The Ashes of Eden) fits with this as well.

 

[Bixby]

I could swear I remember a Security Chief character starting off in New Voyages and eventually ending up in Star Trek Continues. Am I imagining that? (After all these years, I might very well be.)

I'm making a guess, but you might be thinking of the actor who played Peter Kirk, who was a security guard on 2-3 New Voyages episodes IIRC, then appeared in one episode of STC (Fairest of them all?), this time as a no-name transporter techie.

 

[Bixby]

Agreed. It holds up much better than New Voyages.

Honestly, it's not that hard when you manage to raise $$6 figures and thus attract name talent...I may be mistaken, but I don't think James Cawley ever did that. To his credit, Cawley had amazing CG artists producing the effects on his shows.

Incidentally, I've long taken it that holodecks have existed for a while (as shown in TAS like you pointed out), but the one on the Enterprise-D were a significant upgrade from previous versions in terms of detail, sophistication, and sensory experience, which is why we get the reactions from Riker, Pulaski, etc. early in the show. When we saw the holographic simulator in Discovery it fit very well with this, so I didn't question it much. Seeing the one in Continues (and a similar one in The Ashes of Eden) fits with this as well.

The holodeck is probably one of the top 3 terrible concepts brought in by Roddenberry. It was surely brought in because it became too difficult to brainstorm an actual science-fiction reason that could explain away when the writers wanted to do a Sherlock Holmes-style detective story ("why not just HAVE Holmes and Watson"), instead of finding a brilliant idea for why Jack the Ripper ended up on a faraway planet. It was a lazy crutch.

 

[Bixby]

My preference was to do TOS as TOS. The rule on Exeter was to make it like it was contemporary to the original, with no foreknowledge of what was to come after 1970 (Startfleet Battles aside). Overt callbacks were minimal (the worst being connecting our "Quince" Garrovick to the TOS Garrovicks) and I think the only overt call-forward to later official Trek was Chang in "The Savage Empire," which many of us thought was a mistake, and something not repeated on

That's honestly the best policy IMO
One thing about fan film makers that has long bugged me, speaking specifically about the groups making non-Enterprise shows: When I'd see the Farragut and the Exeter crews (in "Savage Empire") encounter Klingons when those ships were more than likely zooming through space in a direction completely the opposite from the Enterprise vis-a-vis the Earth...like what? I know the fanfilm groups likely love the Klingons and itch to use them, but it just makes it seem like each ship is just following the other towards deep space....

I really prefer what Michael King and the Starship Valiant group created their own strange-looking aliens with entirely different motivations.

Too bad, there seems to only remain Broughton and Farragut Forward out of all of them from a decade ago. There's still two complete Bridge and ship's interiors out there, but not really anyone using them.

 

[FredH]

I'm making a guess, but you might be thinking of the actor who played Peter Kirk, who was a security guard on 2-3 New Voyages episodes IIRC, then appeared in one episode of STC (Fairest of them all?), this time as a no-name transporter techie.

Thanks, but no, I remember Peter. The character I’m thinking of was a very no-nonsense and competent “Yes, sir!” Security guy, very practical and blunt and kind of an antithesis to the typical throwaway Trek redshirt. It’s possible I’m thinking of Starship Farragut or one of the other fandom series that sort-of crossed over with NV and/or STC.

 

[Bixby]

Thanks, but no, I remember Peter. The character I’m thinking of was a very no-nonsense and competent “Yes, sir!” Security guy, very practical and blunt and kind of an antithesis to the typical throwaway Trek redshirt. It’s possible I’m thinking of Starship Farragut or one of the other fandom series that sort-of crossed over with NV and/or STC.

Got it! You're thinking of Lt Prescott from Starship Farragut (played by Paul Sieber). At one point Sieber went on to play an alien in distress in New Voyages' Enemy: Starfleet, and I think he brought his Prescott character to the Enterprise for one or two episodes...

 

[FredH]

Got it! You're thinking of Lt Prescott from Starship Farragut (played by Paul Sieber). At one point Sieber went on to play an alien in distress in New Voyages' Enemy: Starfleet, and I think he brought his Prescott character to the Enterprise for one or two episodes...

That’s it, thanks!

 

[Cap'n Calhoun]

I could swear I remember a Security Chief character starting off in New Voyages and eventually ending up in Star Trek Continues. Am I imagining that? (After all these years, I might very well be.)

Looks like your question has been answered, but I already did a compare on the IMDb listings for both shows, so here it is for posterity:

Actor	New Voyages/Phase II Role	Continues Role
Bobby Rice	Peter Kirk	Transporter Technician
Cat Roberts	Yeoman Janice Rand	Palmer
Christopher Doohan	Arex(uncredited)	Mr. Scott
Glen L. Wolfe	Extra	Ops Technician
Jeff Johnson	Finnegan	Security Guard
Joseph John Roberts	Crewman	Crewman
Kim Stinger	Uhura	Uhura
Larry Nemecek	Cal Strickland/Esterion Captain/...	Dr. McCoy/Crewman/...
Matt Bucy	Crewman/Meskan Security Guard	Abraham Lincoln
Matthew Ewald	Cadet Kirk	Crewman Kenway
Michele Specht	Kali	McKennah
Ralph M. Miller	Extra/President Nixon/...	Crewman/Farrell
Vic Mignogna	Extra/George Kirk/...	Captain James T. Kirk

 

[Bixby]

For all my criticisms I feel STC hasn’t aged badly. There isn’t much in it off the top of my head I find cringe inducing. It’s so obviously a labour of love and dedication. But even after only four episodes it’s apparent they couldn’t step back from their fannish mindset to be more critical of their own work.

Part of the intent might well have been, “Lets pretend it’s 1969 again.” but they also wanted, “Lets sneak some of this into it to neatly tie things together with later continuity.” If they could have resisted that impulse it would have served the first part of their intent better.

What they needed was a good, and more objective, script editor. Someone to snippet things out and say, “Take this out, rethink this and so on.” In the case of “The White Iris” I would have said, “No, you have to completely rethink this or come up with something entirely different. No way would this story have been done in this way in 1969 for one of the show’s established leading characters. There is nothing authentic about this.

I re-watched some of them over the weekend, and yes it does feel like the fannish mindset was too difficult to resist...

For example COME NOT BETWEEN THE DRAGONS has many similarities with DEVIL IN THE DARK, EMBRACING THE WINDS may be about the role of women in Starfleet, but it feels so much like a sequel to COURT MARTIAL. All it's missing is Samuel Cogley. TO BOLDLY GO seems to swipe bits from 4 or 5 different places...

But I'll agree with you, the actors' competence and the visual aesthetic keeps the episodes from being boring and tuning out.

WHAT SHIPS ARE FOR did test my patience with 2 things I will tell you, the repeated awkwardness of guest actors Anne Lockhart and John DeLancie calling each other "my dear", and as soon as Elizabeth Maxwell pops in we are forced to watch Mignogna playing Kirk as starving wolf...

I did re-watch Lolani, and apart from Kirk getting away with not having to face consequences for his decision, this one is probably their strongest episode of all (credit to the director)

 

[Warped9]

There are things I liked from almost all of them, but my intense interest started fading with every bit of fan service and TNG style story treatment. A great part of STC’s appeal is that despite its flaws it was still way more enjoyable than contemporary Trek then, now and for basically decades.

But what disappointed me most is that they were so close to really pulling it off. The episode I haven’t reviewed yet will reveal some of my more specific criticisms, but the essence of my criticism is, as Bixby says, they were borrowing heavily from previous episodes and later productions. Having similar story lines isn’t a crime—TOS did it themselves—but you need to bring something fresh to it.

 

[Bixby]

Question for you, Warped9: did they plan as far back as Fairest of Them All to eventually have an episode featuring super-espers, and that's why of ALLLLL the dozens of OG Trek female characters they could have chosen, they went with Smith? I would find it strange if they just went with her out of some fannish desire...(they could have just created a whole new female character, which they had no problem with that in To Boldly Go, there are at least 2 new unnamed navigators)

 

[Warped9]

Question for you, Warped9: did they plan as far back as Fairest of Them All to eventually have an episode featuring super-espers, and that's why of ALLLLL the dozens of OG Trek female characters they could have chosen, they went with Smith? I would find it strange if they just went with her out of some fannish desire...(they could have just created a whole new female character, which they had no problem with that in To Boldly Go, there are at least 2 new unnamed navigators)

I don’t have any real inside knowledge, but I suspect they had a general idea of where they wanted to go.

A big downer for me was the final two episodes that tied into TMP. Those episodes were written by Robert J. Sawyer, a professional science fiction writer and long time TOS fan. I’ve met and know Robert Sawyer. We chaired a discussion panel or two at a Toronto Trek convention about twenty or so years ago. I’ve enjoyed a number of his books. We’re friends on Facebook (for whatever thats worth). I respect him. But I was disappointed with his (fannish) work on STC. There was no way whatsoever the TOS creators knew what was in store for Trek a decade after they ended production in 1969—as far as they knew then TOS was done for good. So tying into TMP so obviously was a massive deal breaker me in terms of suspension of disbelief, along with tying back to WNMHGB. No fucking way that story would have been done in 1969/70.

 

[Bixby]

I don’t have any real inside knowledge, but I suspect they had a general idea of where they wanted to go.

A big downer for me was the final two episodes that tied into TMP. Those episodes were written by Robert J. Sawyer, a professional science fiction writer and long time TOS fan. I’ve met and know Robert Sawyer. We chaired a discussion panel or two at a Toronto Trek convention about twenty or so years ago. I’ve enjoyed a number of his books. We’re friends on Facebook (for whatever thats worth). I respect him. But I was disappointed with his (fannish) work on STC. There was no way whatsoever the TOS creators knew what was in store for Trek a decade after they ended production in 1969—as far as they knew then TOS was done for good. So tying into TMP so obviously was a massive deal breaker me in terms of suspension of disbelief, along with tying back to WNMHGB. No fucking way that story would have been done in 1969/70.

My opinion about Smith comes from having watched her be like a bull in a bar, and 2 scenes of her hand-to-hand fighting...Then I go back to Where No Man Has Gone Before, and Smith is just so demure and submissive. Brown really played Smith as a completely different person. Her portrayal was fine, they just should have called her a different name.

I have to have a few drinks when I watch To Boldly Go, because for me there's a loud WTF? moment about every 3 to 5 minutes...What a mess that 2-parter was...Unless someone sits Mignogna and Sawyer down for an interview, we may never find out why certain decisions were taken.

I have a feeling they may have asked for input what the crew would like to see and some of their wishes were forced onto Sawyer and they tasked him to make it work? To this date, I STILL don't understand why the Romulan Commander subplot was added (If I had a guess, it's that Mignona met Amy Ridell at a con, and he was eager to cast her before another show did).

I remember after the first part came out, and I wrote a post where I guessed the next part of the story, and I thought some of my guesses were quite good...and some guesses where I thought STC would go were on the money...(but many were not)

 

[Warped9]

"Divided We Stand" - 2/5

Stardate 6202.1 - After an explosion on the bridge Kirk and McCoy finds themselves in the midst of the American Civil War on the eve of a battle.

On the surface this is a serviceable episode if you don't think too much about it. But if you really start thinking about it falls apart. From within TOS it harkens back to things done before. One is time travel back to an ancient period of Earth history, but also to ideas within the episodes "The Savage Curtain" and "Spectre Of The Gun."

At first we think it might be time travel--Kirk and McCoy seem to think so--but that's soon undermined by the reveal Kirk and McCoy are lying unconscious in Sickbay infected by some alien bio-mechanical virus. So Kirk and McCoy are dreaming, but the wild part is they're having the exact same dream at the exact same time--they're sharing a dream/hallucination resulting from their infection. The Civil War scenario ties in with Kirk's esteem for Abraham Lincoln as revealed in "The Savage Curtain" (and, yes, we get a glimpse of Lincoln in this episode). The "Spectre Of The Gun" similarity is that what Kirk and McCoy are experiencing isn't real, except to them--something not revealed in "Spectre Of The Gun" until the very end of the story.

The sequences dealing with the Enterprise crew trying to save Kirk and McCoy's lives before they succumb to their infection completely undermines whatever jeopardy Kirk and McCoy believe they're experiencing. You just can't buy into whatever they're experiencing because you just know they're going to get out of it. Whatever dramatic tension the story tries to generate never really materializes because you know almost from the get-go exactly what's going on.

I'm going to sound like a broken record, but once again this story is written like it's really for TNG rather than TOS. It's loaded with TNG style terminology and references to science ideas that just weren't on the radar in the 1960s. Nanotechnology as a concept was first brought forth in 1959, but the actual term "nanotechnology" would not exist until 1974, well after TOS had ended production. Even so the term and concept would not be brought widely into the public consciousness until 1986, a year before TNG began airing. It's not impossible a writer, more likely a science fiction writer, could have become aware of the concept of nanotechnology first proposed in 1959, but they wouldn't have been using that exact terminology simply because it wouldn't exist until 1974, and then known by only a few within the scientific community until 1986.

Why am I going on about this? Because if you want to seem authentic and make the audience think it's 1969 you don't introduce a concept and terminology that no one in the 1960s would have ever known or heard of. You just don't.

And once again the writers here want to tie into later Trek by spinning off from story elements from a VOY episode, referring to the old Earth Friendship science probes mentioned in VOY and the nanotech viruses also introduced in that episode.

Now this still could have worked if they had simply tried to use terminology more likely or familiar to the 1960s. Calling it a bio-mechanical virus could have sufficed. But the moment they start talking about nanotech you're thinking WTF.

Shatner excelled at giving rousing monologues--he pulled you in enough where you bought into it--but the one given here by Mignogna seems a bit much and somewhat too earnest. His speech is just too boyscout as he's delivering them. Somehow I think Shatner would have managed to make it sound more natural.

But the biggest flaw of this production is the lack of believable dramatic tension--there really isn't any because you know everything that's going on almost from the onset.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[CaptainCalvinCat]

The only thing, I didn't like, was the way, they wrote out McKenna (so we can explain, why Spock went to undergo the Kho'li'nar and Kirk recommending having Counselors on board). The rest was quite okay.

 

[Warped9]

It’s hard not to harp on about McKennah. A ship’s counselor is such a TNG thing and has no place on TOS. But the writers here desperately wanted fan service to tie into later productions. And again I want to emphasize my criticism has nothing to do with Michelle Specht’s performance or even presence, but with what her character represented. They could have made her a ship’s psychiatrist like Elizabeth Dehner or Helen Noel before her.

Furthermore how they handled women in general here felt very 21st century even if TOS had been more assertive on that issue. Uhura was right there if they wanted to give an Enterprise female crewman more to do rather than introduce one or two new characters (or resurrect Smith from WNMHGB). And their whole approach to the issue of women commanding in Starfleet in the forthcoming “Embrace The Winds” really pissed me off, but I’ll comment further when I review that episode.

 

[CaptainCalvinCat]

My point was not, that she doesn't have a place on the ship - quite the contrary, I think, her character is very well written, just her death is something, that irked me.

 

[Warped9]

My point was not, that she doesn't have a place on the ship - quite the contrary, I think, her character is very well written, just her death is something, that irked me.

Yes, her demise was contrived to answer the question why Spock leaves Starfleet after the 5-year mission, something not really addressed in “official” canon.

What becomes increasingly apparent as STC progresses is that they wanted to tie into the continuity of later productions and address certain issues left unanswered or murky during TOS, most of which TOS never would have done or even considered bothering with. And that approach is greatly why STC comes off as very polished fanfic rather than seeming authentically canon.

 

[Bixby]

The only thing, I didn't like, was the way, they wrote out McKenna (so we can explain, why Spock went to undergo the Kho'li'nar and Kirk recommending having Counselors on board). The rest was quite okay.

Kirk recommends having a psychiatrist on ships, but it takes nearly 100 years for it to happen?