Revisiting Star Trek Continues...

[StarCruiser]

^ THAT was the one serious issue I had with it. "DEI pandering" etc....

Otherwise, he does have the right point concerning the terrible writing and self-parody idiocy that I can't stand in current Star Trek.

There are many very good Star Trek novels and short stories out there that could be adapted. Having a few dedicated -REAL- SciFi writers as actual staffers, or at least tapped to help out; would also be better than what they are currently doing.

Instead of having something like 3 different shows in production - how about ONE really good show?

 

[Warped9]

Woke, wokeness, and DEI have become catch phrases that might mean different things to different people depending on who is using them. But his essential point is still on target. And his essential point is on a general mindset that has come to the fore in the past several years that is indeed pissing off a lot of people.

You can rant all you like about the far right, and very legitimately so, but the far left also has its issues and in some ways can be very much a pain in the ass.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

I rarely like that guy's take on almost anything. He also loves to tediously comment on "woke"ness, so I'm not giving him the timer of day.

Thanks. It was in my queue to watch and evaluate, but now I'll not waste the time.

 

[Warped9]

Thanks. It was in my queue to watch and evaluate, but now I'll not waste the time.

And so you dismiss everything based on one criticism. Thats one way to stifle a discussion.

 

[Firebird]

And so you dismiss everything based on one criticism. Thats one way to stifle a discussion.

It's a bad-faith argument if the YouTuber in question is framing it under the cloak of "anti-woke" politics.

 

[Warped9]

It's a bad-faith argument if the YouTuber in question is framing it under the cloak of "anti-woke" politics.

No. He has a valid essential point regardless of how he has framed it. We all know or have friends with whom we don’t agree on everything, but we can still listen to what they might say because we do agree with them on other things. Thats how you have a dialogue as opposed to shutting someone down because you’ve already prejudged them.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

And so you dismiss everything based on one criticism. Thats one way to stifle a discussion.

No. He has a valid essential point regardless of how he has framed it. We all know or have friends with whom we don’t agree on everything, but we can still listen to what they might say because we do agree with them on other things. Thats how you have a dialogue as opposed to shutting someone down because you’ve already prejudged them.

What discussion?

If you want to discuss something, why don't you post your own words, rather than simply linking to videos? I'd rather spend my time on this board talking to my fellow Star Trek fans than carrying on discussions via proxies and putting money into the pockets of third parties by watching their monetized videos.

 

[Treadwell]

This has been very interesting!

STC crewmember here. As such it wouldn't be appropriate to participate very much in the thread, as analysis is best when it comes from outside. Any counterpoints to criticisms would just seem defensive, and any agreement (and I have more than you might expect!) would be discourteous to my colleagues.

So I'll just offer a few "just the facts" clarifications:

- Matt Bucy was DP of Farragut's "Conspiracy of Innocence", despite the perceived change in lighting. Maybe he was trying to keep the looks separate, I don't know. It was shot immediately after "Lolani", so maybe he was fried....as many of us were. That was a long couple of weeks. (A lot of shared crew.) After that he chose not to do any more Farraguts.

- The STC sets were in Kingsland, GA, not Atlanta, which is 300 miles north.

- There was not as much long-term thematic planning as is being assumed. Smith was originally just going to be in Ep 3, McKenna was not conceived to make Spock quit the services, etc. It was one-show-at-a-time until at least halfway through.

- Had there been more episodes, it might have just been two. Vic often cited 13 as a good number, I think because that used to be the standard initial order of episodes of any new show, with more to follow if it did well. At any rate, another round of crowdfunding would have been necessary to make any more, and that well was running a bit dry.

- Therefore, no other episodes were planned other than ideas lightly tossed around...much less anything written. Two concepts I heard Vic mention: a "A Piece of the Action" sequel, and a musical episode. I wasn't excited about either. (I just broke my own rule there.)

- STC was produced 2012-2017, so if Chris has just turned 66, he'd have been 53 when it started.

- I think you eventually realized that "something's wrong with Connies" was a red herring.


I think that's it. As Spock told Uhura, "please proceed".

 

[Akiraprise]

At any rate, another round of crowdfunding would have been necessary to make any more, and that well was running a bit dry.

I think that seems to be true of a lot of projects in general now. Once people start shelling out money there is also a lot more pressure on the project to deliver something in a timely fashion. Which can affect quality especially when they drag on for years after the initial crowdfund and backers start getting agitated. The recently released VOY documentary is a good example of this.

 

[Maurice]

No. He has a valid essential point regardless of how he has framed it.

I can't speak for anyone who's not seen his videos, but I've seen enough of his work to know that, for me, any points of interest he might have aren't worth wading through his culture war comments to find. YMMV.

 

[Bixby]

- Therefore, no other episodes were planned other than ideas lightly tossed around...much less anything written. Two concepts I heard Vic mention: a "A Piece of the Action" sequel, and a musical episode. I wasn't excited about either. (I just broke my own rule there.)

Thanks for popping back in, Treadwell...

A musical? as somebody who can't keep a tune, I'd have been terrified at that idea were I part of the cast...could most of them sing?

 

[Warped9]

^^ SNW is doing that stuff. Thankfully STC dodged that bullet.

 

[Bixby]

Others talk about this. Dave Cullen gets it.

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

I was referring to current fanfilms only, i don't really want this to meander towards current TV trek, but what's done is done...

I did watch the first video you linked up, and basically he was griping how current Trek is written differently than OG Trek, he makes observations but no real analysis. He was stuck for a long time on swearing in modern Trek when there was none back then. He failed to mention that was because of broadcast standards in the 60s which were constraining AF: just look at the time Kirk said "Go to the devil!" because they weren't allowed to say "hell!" at the time, and so many other words we take for granted now.

His inserted ad for his own sci-fi book in that video tells you a lot about his likes and thought process...I have to say Maurice is pretty much on the money about him...

EDIT: I watched his second video where he went on at length that modern Trek just isn't made for him. At one point he mentioned "the golden era of Trek", which I'd be willing to bet isn't when I would consider it my favorite. Originally Trek was created during the era of the space race, women's lib, war protests, the counterculture, and OG Trek went on to shine a spotlight on these and many more issues. TNG once in a while did episodes on issues from the 80s, but really not that often...If Strange New Worlds went full on with current day topics, I'm sure he'd lose his everlovin' mind...

It did amuse when when he went on about SNW and their puppet episode, as if OG Trek never did that sort of thing...I don't know, but The Trouble with Tribbles and I, Mudd were hardly about weighty philosophical matters (a little bit when Uhura considered becoming an artificial being)...

 

[Treadwell]

Thanks for popping back in, Treadwell...

A musical? as somebody who can't keep a tune, I'd have been terrified at that idea were I part of the cast...could most of them sing?

Some could, I don't know about most...

 

[Treadwell]

Oh, and James Kerwin and Kipleigh Brown were not dating.

 

[Warped9]

Is there a discussion here or is this another excuse to complain about things in the franchise you don't like?

I have offered up legitimate and fair minded criticism on STC. And I've done that about current Trek as well. If you see those as mere complaints then whatever. If you like what I don't then enjoy.

This has been very interesting!

STC crewmember here. As such it wouldn't be appropriate to participate very much in the thread, as analysis is best when it comes from outside. Any counterpoints to criticisms would just seem defensive, and any agreement (and I have more than you might expect!) would be discourteous to my colleagues.

So I'll just offer a few "just the facts" clarifications:

- There was not as much long-term thematic planning as is being assumed. Smith was originally just going to be in Ep 3, McKenna was not conceived to make Spock quit the services, etc. It was one-show-at-a-time until at least halfway through.

- Had there been more episodes, it might have just been two. Vic often cited 13 as a good number, I think because that used to be the standard initial order of episodes of any new show, with more to follow if it did well. At any rate, another round of crowdfunding would have been necessary to make any more, and that well was running a bit dry.

- Therefore, no other episodes were planned other than ideas lightly tossed around...much less anything written. Two concepts I heard Vic mention: a "A Piece of the Action" sequel, and a musical episode. I wasn't excited about either. (I just broke my own rule there.)

- I think you eventually realized that "something's wrong with Connies" was a red herring.


I think that's it. As Spock told Uhura, "please proceed".

Welcome. Thanks for the input.

You reaffirm what Vic Mignogna said in Bunnytails' interview that general planning didn't happen until about halfway through STC's run. Still from there on there seemed to be a sense of plan woven in the background. That's the impression I got anyway.

As I said upthread, more than once, I had no criticism of Michelle Specht's performance, but that her character felt out of place in the TOS era. And it did look like McKennah was taking focus away from McCoy. The act of creating a connection between her and Spock created an impression that her purpose became to give Spock a rationale for leaving Starfleet which is a definite setup for TMP, to explain something never actually addressed officially anywhere in the franchise.

Does anyone know if a rationale was ever presented anywhere else in a novel or comic book or whatever?

Yes, the eventual reveal of the real fate of the starships being due to the Espers using them to test their abilities became pretty clear.

 

[Firebird]

I have offered up legitimate and fair minded criticism on STC. And I've done that about current Trek as well. If you see those as mere complaints then whatever. If you like what I don't then enjoy.

You quoted a post that’s not even in this thread. One that you already gave the same response to in that thread.