I will express my opinions in my own way in the manner I see fit. If you take them as stealth digs then that's your issue.
I think this discussion of this subject has actually been rather civil otherwise.
Star Trek Continues: Episode 2 "Lolani"...
- Thread starter Warped9
- Start date
I think this discussion of this subject has actually been rather civil otherwise.
Random thoughts:
I re-watched this episode again, and I want to say again how awesome Lou Ferrigno was. An inspired choice for the role.
Also, I am sold on Vic as Kirk, and I'm sure he will get even better as more episodes are released.
The guy playing spock needs a lot of work but he's growing on me. Spock is probably the hardest character to play, though. Nimoy is just one of a kind.
Chris Doohan is perfect.
Most of the actresses in the show give off way too many "modern" vibes for me, if that makes sense. Too many 90s/00s/10s inflections and mannerisms. But it's a minor annoyance and maybe they are doing it intentionally.
I don't mind the Mckennah character that much but I agree with the camp that says she steps out of line too much with her Captain. Only Bones is really allowed to do that. If this continues I hope Kirk addresses the issue with some disciplinary action. Captain Kirk does not get P-whipped.
I re-watched this episode again, and I want to say again how awesome Lou Ferrigno was. An inspired choice for the role.
Also, I am sold on Vic as Kirk, and I'm sure he will get even better as more episodes are released.
The guy playing spock needs a lot of work but he's growing on me. Spock is probably the hardest character to play, though. Nimoy is just one of a kind.
Chris Doohan is perfect.
Most of the actresses in the show give off way too many "modern" vibes for me, if that makes sense. Too many 90s/00s/10s inflections and mannerisms. But it's a minor annoyance and maybe they are doing it intentionally.
I don't mind the Mckennah character that much but I agree with the camp that says she steps out of line too much with her Captain. Only Bones is really allowed to do that. If this continues I hope Kirk addresses the issue with some disciplinary action. Captain Kirk does not get P-whipped.
Yes, I've had a similar feeling. But I really noticed it with McCoy when he said there was evidence Lolani had been in a "scrap." It just didn't sound like something McCoy would have said. No biggee, but I did notice it.
Writing in the vernacular of a bygone era is tricky. A friend of mine wrote a screenplay set in 1954 and had one character describe another as "awesome" and I went, "ummmm...." And he was alive in 1954!
You don't realize how much language changes in subtle ways. A great example is that Mad Men, which is fairly pedantic on such things, still slips and has characters using words and phrases uncommon in its time period, like "leveraged" and characters saying "you need to" when in 1960s they'd more likely have said "you ought to".
Also, there's a modern American trend where many younger women talk higher and go up on the last syllables of words (a la Valley Speak) which isn't how women spoke in the 60s.
You don't realize how much language changes in subtle ways. A great example is that Mad Men, which is fairly pedantic on such things, still slips and has characters using words and phrases uncommon in its time period, like "leveraged" and characters saying "you need to" when in 1960s they'd more likely have said "you ought to".
Also, there's a modern American trend where many younger women talk higher and go up on the last syllables of words (a la Valley Speak) which isn't how women spoke in the 60s.
Last edited:
doubleohfive
Fleet Admiral
Asked and answered. Thanks.
I did not suggest that the conversation had been uncivil. Merely I pointed out that you seem unable to couch your praise for Star Trek Continues without also taking simultaneous pot shots at the various professional productions in the franchise you have always compained about. I thought perhaps you could be reasoned with to maybe dial it back a bit without leaping to the conclusion that I was trying to censor you (which I wasn't) but clearly that was an error on my part.
Everyone else: Please note: That's not me trolling Warped9. That's some constructive criticism about his posting style here, in this thread and this forum.
However, I digress and will drop the issue. Carry on.
Last edited:
Actually this is exactly what you're doing.
Any remarks I've made in terms of technobabble, call outs or connect-the-dots (continuity porn) to other productions have been in context of those things not being present in TOS. And if STC is trying to be a direct TOS followup then those things mentioned above shouldn't be in it, in my opinion. I have kept my remarks in that context. If you take those as stealth digs then it's your issue in trying to insinuate I'm indulging in drive-by swipes.
I shouldn't have to tip-toe in my viewpoint or apologize for my preferences in entertainment. I've done nothing inflammatory and I don't care for your insinuating otherwise.
doubleohfive
Fleet Admiral
Let's go back to talking about Star Trek Continues, shall we?
A
Amaris
Guest
It really is one of those things that can take one out of a show, even if one knows it's unintentional. I try not to be harsh, because words do change gradually, though I have no tolerance for period pieces set hundreds of years in the past and use words that are more modern slang.
Well, let me add that I have no tolerance if the slang isn't part of the piece. If it's a classic work with a modern twist, I get that, but modern sensibilities soaking into a work that's trying to stay true to the original environment in which it was written, that is annoying.
Some of the changes are regional. Language has become much less regional over the last 100 years. I'm not sure that even in the 1950s in New York City people would say, "you ought to." Just as some places say, when you wait at a bank you are "in line" and other locations say you are "on line." (In New York you get "on line" and it's not the internet.) On the other hand, I agree that the word "leveraged" has come into common usage more recently. A friend who is working on a novel set in 1972 uses only dictionaries published around then or somewhat earlier to check his word usage.
A
Amaris
Guest
I do the same when I write stories set in past decades. I have a number of dictionaries for that purpose. I have a neat little dictionary from the late 1800s, so that should I write a western space fiction, it will be authentic!
Well said. And it would be a very challenging thing to guard against.
On their FB page one continues to see lots of wishful suggestions:
- revisit the Mirror Universe.
- bring back Harry Mudd.
- revisit the planet of the Providers.
- Tribbles.
- bring back Kor, Kang and/or Koloth.
- revisit the Iotian planet
...etc, etc, etc,
All I can think is "no." Just, please, no.
One poster stated while he enjoyed the Apollo revisit he'd rather see new things and new characters he'd never seen before.
Yes.
A
Amaris
Guest
They'd have said "you oughta" in NYC.
Also, "you'se guys."
Er, probably. I don't know, I live in Ohio.
My family has lived in New York City since it became Greater New York. Before that, we lived in the City of Brooklyn. I'm going to be 59 this year. So, I'll say this will no concern that you'll disagree, because... if you do, you are wrong. There are multiple accents here, divided by class and ethnic group, and each speaks somewhat differently. Wall Streeters speak differently than Cabbies. There is a distinctive (and IMHO, very lovely) New York African-American accent. It's a mixture of New York and Black and It's one of the nicest in the City. I'm not sure I've ever heard it on TV, though, except in local news coverage. I hear it a lot as I shop in Harlem and it is also spoken in parts of Brooklyn. The old Tirdy-tird accent... I don't hear that nowadays, except in the old movies and on some West-coast based TV shows. I don't recall hearing it in my youth, either. As a child I asked my parents why on TV New Yorkers talked so funny, and they said people did speak that way in the late 1920s and early 1930s. Of course, you'll say my parents were wrong, and my childhood ear, growing up in the 1950s, was wrong. It could be that in those days it still existed around the dockworkers, but it was no longer common in the ordinary blue-collar neighborhood of my early years. There is still a blue-collar accent, but it's slightly different.
Graffitti likewise was washed from NYC subway cars by 1980, but continued to appear on them on TV for decades after that.
Fortunately, NY has adopted a pro-film pro-TV policy and most shows set here are now shot here, so that type of error is less common.
In fact, Marvel/Disney has just announced some web series that will be shot here.
I suspect in 1964 NYC, an ad man would not have said, "you oughta" that's very blue collar. He probably would have said, "you should."
Graffitti likewise was washed from NYC subway cars by 1980, but continued to appear on them on TV for decades after that.
Fortunately, NY has adopted a pro-film pro-TV policy and most shows set here are now shot here, so that type of error is less common.
In fact, Marvel/Disney has just announced some web series that will be shot here.
I suspect in 1964 NYC, an ad man would not have said, "you oughta" that's very blue collar. He probably would have said, "you should."
I think we can also get somewhat deaf to certain things we get accustomed to. My parents have a distinct French Canadian accent yet I don't notice it like I do in some of my other relations. Funny, but my older brother, myself and my two younger sisters don't have a French Canadian accent probably given because we were born and raised in Ontario and English became largely our first language. When I do speak French I don't think I have an English accent, but maybe I do. Then again I grew up in a home and listened to relations where I could easily pickup the French Canadian pronunciations.
And if you really listen you can detect all sorts of subtle accents in people, not surprising with how much people have been moving around this past century.
Five years ago I moved away from the greater Toronto area to Brockville, Ontario, a much smaller community. It's only a four hour drive west from Toronto on highway 401. But right off I started to pick up certain small differences in how many local people spoke. It isn't a huge difference, but it's there.
I, too, can really notice the different patterns of speech in older films. That was one of the things that sometimes throws me when watching a show like Mad Men. They make an effort (not always successful) to make the characters speak befitting the 1960's era. Knowing it's a modern production it can sometimes be odd because usually period films or series don't make that effort and we're used to hearing mostly contemporary speech patterns. It's even more amusing how we adapt to changing times because we don't really notice much how our own speech patterns have changed. Back in the '60s and '70s everyone spoke the same (to us) and yet now revisiting it we see it was different than how we speak now.
Fascinating really.
And if you really listen you can detect all sorts of subtle accents in people, not surprising with how much people have been moving around this past century.
Five years ago I moved away from the greater Toronto area to Brockville, Ontario, a much smaller community. It's only a four hour drive west from Toronto on highway 401. But right off I started to pick up certain small differences in how many local people spoke. It isn't a huge difference, but it's there.
I, too, can really notice the different patterns of speech in older films. That was one of the things that sometimes throws me when watching a show like Mad Men. They make an effort (not always successful) to make the characters speak befitting the 1960's era. Knowing it's a modern production it can sometimes be odd because usually period films or series don't make that effort and we're used to hearing mostly contemporary speech patterns. It's even more amusing how we adapt to changing times because we don't really notice much how our own speech patterns have changed. Back in the '60s and '70s everyone spoke the same (to us) and yet now revisiting it we see it was different than how we speak now.
Fascinating really.
Well, if they ever do a show set in Mississippi, I hope whoever does it will note that the pronunciation is Be-LUX-ee, not Be-LOX-ee. All you have to do is say Be-LOX to anyone from the deep south to immediately tag yourself as a Yankee. I even heard the guy who announces Professional Bull Riding for CBS Sports say Be-LOX-ee when he was promoting an upcoming event. 
Ooops, I just realized I went completely off topic with that rant. Would somebody be kind enough to get us back on topic before Greg notices?
Ooops, I just realized I went completely off topic with that rant. Would somebody be kind enough to get us back on topic before Greg notices?
I agree here with respect to Chris Doohan. He does a great Scotty. And there are times I'm forgetting I'm not looking at James Doohan playing the character.
Ferrigno was also a great choice. I'm looking forward to episode 3.
There's no denying there are regional accents and dialects and even sayings, but to nitpick the examples I gave re Mad Men is missing the forest for the trees, as the point is still valid that it's easy to get the vernacular wrong since it's constantly evolving.
Heck, I've asked people from other countries and a regions to go over dialogue I've written for contemporary characters just to make sure I'm not betraying said characters by making them speak incorrectly.
Back to the topic, though, all TOS fanfilms fall into this trap.
Heck, I've asked people from other countries and a regions to go over dialogue I've written for contemporary characters just to make sure I'm not betraying said characters by making them speak incorrectly.
Back to the topic, though, all TOS fanfilms fall into this trap.
And my point is that it's not easy to do, and that even the professionals often get it wrong.
Similar threads
