"Pilgrim Of Eternity" - is it good enough?
- Thread starter Warped9
- Start date
I think efforts like these, while neat, only magnify the fact that Roddenberry and Company caught some very special lightning in the bottle nearly fifty years ago.
Pilgrims of Eternity was entertaining but suffers from many of the same flaws other TOS fan films: they use sixties sets and sixties uniforms but the stories just don't match the setting.
Some thoughts:
What exactly was the point of the Counselor? Beautiful actress though. Gene would've approved.
Why didn't the crispy-fried redshirt point his phaser away from the hull?
The roles the women played here made the Abrams films look downright progressive.
So, does a plague wipe out Apollo's little world at some point and then he holds Kirk responsible for not checking up on them? The Wrath of Apollo anyone?
Spock reminds me of Sheldon from The Big Bang Theory. That's not a good thing.
The actor playing Kirk needs to remember he's playing Kirk not William Shatner.
Pilgrims of Eternity was entertaining but suffers from many of the same flaws other TOS fan films: they use sixties sets and sixties uniforms but the stories just don't match the setting.
Some thoughts:
What exactly was the point of the Counselor? Beautiful actress though. Gene would've approved.
Why didn't the crispy-fried redshirt point his phaser away from the hull?
The roles the women played here made the Abrams films look downright progressive.
So, does a plague wipe out Apollo's little world at some point and then he holds Kirk responsible for not checking up on them? The Wrath of Apollo anyone?
Spock reminds me of Sheldon from The Big Bang Theory. That's not a good thing.
The actor playing Kirk needs to remember he's playing Kirk not William Shatner.
Shatner's performance of Kirk did change over the course of the series. What we see in "Pilgrim Of Eternity" is much more like the third season Kirk than the first season.
I agree that elements from outside TOS feel odd in such a production, particularly those elements from contemporary Trek such as TNG. Mind you some of those things could have been tweaked. The Counselor could have been given a different title and her role could have been more like that of ELizabeth Dehner or Helen Noel and then she mightn't have seemed so out of place. The holodeck is so associated with TNG and contemporary Trek that it almost doesn't matter the concept was introduced much, much earlier in TAS (the same can be said for TNG's main theme which is really a lift of the TMP main theme).
I also agree with the stories. I think STC did a better job of it than anyone else, but there is something about a lot of the fan film stories that feels like contemporary Trek. It might be understandable since a lot of those involved in the productions could have been weaned on TNG and the rest rather than TOS.
I agree that elements from outside TOS feel odd in such a production, particularly those elements from contemporary Trek such as TNG. Mind you some of those things could have been tweaked. The Counselor could have been given a different title and her role could have been more like that of ELizabeth Dehner or Helen Noel and then she mightn't have seemed so out of place. The holodeck is so associated with TNG and contemporary Trek that it almost doesn't matter the concept was introduced much, much earlier in TAS (the same can be said for TNG's main theme which is really a lift of the TMP main theme).
I also agree with the stories. I think STC did a better job of it than anyone else, but there is something about a lot of the fan film stories that feels like contemporary Trek. It might be understandable since a lot of those involved in the productions could have been weaned on TNG and the rest rather than TOS.
I agree. There was a very good chemistry between the lead actors in TOS, something that TNG was not able to capture. While Stewart has greater acting ability and depth than Shatner, he had rather two dimensional characters to lean against (Riker, Crusher).
I don't understand how the stories need to be done in a more advanced setting, say something like TNG. Stories depend upon characters and the sets are only there to facilitate the story.
The same reason why TNG had a counselor. That this is a position that has a purpose. Remember, this is the first episode of STC. Who knows how this character will evolve. I have a feeling that since the actress is Vic's fiancee, she'll likely figure prominently... as counselor, advisor, etc.What exactly was the point of the Counselor? Beautiful actress though. Gene would've approved.
I thought the very same thing. Let go of the trigger or point it away. I suspect that somehow the alien material formed an energy field over the crewman, making him unable to move and let go of the phaser. Unfortunately, we didn't see a visible effect of this.
It's like they captured the spirit of TOS to the core, even the depiction of women's roles. I hope that they evolve this aspect of their work.
What about Cawley's Kirk? I feel like your criticism is more aptly applied to him. Vic does channel some Shatner characteristics, but it also feels like he is creating his own persona of Kirk. It seems well balanced to me. I think you just need to give it a chance.
If we were talking about Phase II I would've commented on Cawley's version of the character. I don't think it's fair to compare the guy's performance to Cawley or Chris Pine for that matter. This version is picking up where Shatner left off in 1969 so that's who I'm going to compare him to.
For some fun pics go here: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?...26565463.92376.333296680037188&type=1&theater
Just click on the pic to go to the next ones.
Just click on the pic to go to the next ones.
Not too get too nit-picky, Warped9 and Feek61, but you both posted the same Facebook posts in the other "STC" thread. Thats getting a bit repetitive, don't you think? 
If anything, the two above posts were better suited to the other thread.
If anything, the two above posts were better suited to the other thread.
I've been a fan for decades, and I've never understood the Trek fan obsession with what an outside upper authority sanctions as "real fiction" vs. "fake fiction." It's all fiction. There are no different levels of fiction reality.
Did you like it or didn't you like it is really the only question that matters.
Did you like it or didn't you like it is really the only question that matters.
"What exactly was the point of the Counselor?...
The same reason why TNG had a counselor. That this is a position that has a purpose. Remember, this is the first episode of STC. Who knows how this character will evolve. I have a feeling that since the actress is Vic's fiancee, she'll likely figure prominently... as counselor, advisor, etc."
Jim Kirk already has a "counselor/advisor etc ". His name is Leonard McCoy.
The same reason why TNG had a counselor. That this is a position that has a purpose. Remember, this is the first episode of STC. Who knows how this character will evolve. I have a feeling that since the actress is Vic's fiancee, she'll likely figure prominently... as counselor, advisor, etc."
Jim Kirk already has a "counselor/advisor etc ". His name is Leonard McCoy.
"What exactly was the point of the Counselor?...
The same reason why TNG had a counselor. That this is a position that has a purpose. Remember, this is the first episode of STC. Who knows how this character will evolve. I have a feeling that since the actress is Vic's fiancee, she'll likely figure prominently... as counselor, advisor, etc."
Jim Kirk already has a "counselor/advisor etc ". His name is Leonard McCoy.
You know the counselor character wouldn't have bothered me, except that it seems from jump that this series is trying use to many TNG elements too quickly. You got both a holodeck scene and a counselor. Hell, you even got Marina Sirtis playing the computer voice.
If you're writing is strong, then relying on stunts like that aren't needed. The counselor character could have easily been a nurse but instead, as a nod to TNG, she was made a counselor. I don't mind nods to other series, as long as it's done in moderation.
Loken
Lieutenant Commander
I think that you reject Enterprise, tells me this whole thread is pointless. Enterprise is canon, whether you like it or not is irrelevant.
And all fan fiction is NOT canon and never will be.
So maybe it fits into your personal vision of what YOU want Star Trek to be, but you have already told me that is meaningless since you reject CBS canon.
And all fan fiction is NOT canon and never will be.
So maybe it fits into your personal vision of what YOU want Star Trek to be, but you have already told me that is meaningless since you reject CBS canon.
I don't have to accept a damned thing. And neither do the creators of STC.
doubleohfive
Fleet Admiral
Still, Warped9, you have to admit that by completely disavowing any officially produced series or film after 1991, you really are being something of a hypocrite about this. Shows and movies actually made by the people who own STAR TREK don't pass muster, yet you have the gall to ask if the latest fan production does? Seriously?
And even if you don't see the hypocrisy of it, or even admit that yeah, maybe it's a bit two faced to get so high and mighty about it, especially given that up until quite recently your expiration date, as it were for "good STAR TREK" was 1979, i think you'd be a little more magnanimous toward Loken who was simply observing a flaw in your logic, particularly given your nebulous idea of what constitutes "canon" to begin with.
And even if you don't see the hypocrisy of it, or even admit that yeah, maybe it's a bit two faced to get so high and mighty about it, especially given that up until quite recently your expiration date, as it were for "good STAR TREK" was 1979, i think you'd be a little more magnanimous toward Loken who was simply observing a flaw in your logic, particularly given your nebulous idea of what constitutes "canon" to begin with.
Last edited:
More importantly, it doesn't matter what you do or do not accept. What is, is, regardless of your internal fantasies.
There is no hypocrisy. The question posed is whether anyone might consider this fan production good enough to be included alongside the rest of TOS. It's asking for a personal opinion. It isn't asking whether TPTB should accept it because it's given they never will.
The issue that I ignore most of contemporary Trek isn't hypocrisy. It's my personal choice just as I might not choose to collect an entire set of whatever simply because it doesn't suit me, and there is no law that compels me to either.
One thing very apparent to me, as well, is that I enjoyed "Pilgrim Of Eternity" far more than all the contemporary stuff I ignore. In this the issue of what is "official" is completely irrelevant.
The issue that I ignore most of contemporary Trek isn't hypocrisy. It's my personal choice just as I might not choose to collect an entire set of whatever simply because it doesn't suit me, and there is no law that compels me to either.
One thing very apparent to me, as well, is that I enjoyed "Pilgrim Of Eternity" far more than all the contemporary stuff I ignore. In this the issue of what is "official" is completely irrelevant.
Then so is asking if this production is "official enough" or not.
How many times times does it have to be said? It's asking for a personal opinion!
If you don't want to participate than go elsewhere and talk about something that interests you.
Or do you need a government issue certificate of approval telling what you can or cannot like and enjoy?
I never said any such thing. If you don't like it then fine.
I was called hypocritical because I like a fan production while ignoring productions of "official" Trek. There is no hypocrisy in that whatsoever.
Similar threads
