I finally watched this episode. Ok, I respect what these people are doing.. filming new TOS, and all the details, yadda yadda yadda. But this episode was all but unwatchable. I understand that ST can be social relevant when it wants to be.. but even that doesn't apply here. We don't have slaves today in this country. That being said, even if we can commend an episode for bringing out social issues through allegories, it still has to feel like Trek. But this episode is so stagnant and slow and preachy that it feels nothing like Trek. I mean it's too easy a target to pick on Orion Slave Girls and then have the crew put the their own morality up to it, but it's too obvious, too easy, and too on-the-nose, especially when slavery is part of the Orion culture... and the absurdity and wrongness of that culture was more effectively when done in passing, as in ENT's Borderlands. But this episode was far too slow, too bland, and too preachy. I can't respect it.
How do you know there is no slavery in North America? And human trafficking is widespread across the planet. While not perfect I thought overall they did very well and I look forward to more of their work. Apparently they've just finished principle filming on Episode 3.
There may be. Indeed. There's also racism today, but for Star Trek to release (for the first time) the half-black, half white race episode today would be to "on the nose," too preachy, and a bit too dated... which is exactly how Lolani feels. After a while, I felt that they were not even on a ship.. not because of the production design but just because of how slow and plodding and preachy the script got. The Orions are too blatant a target for something like this. And besides, whether we like it or not, the Orions (a part of Star Trek's vast milieu) use slavery as part of their culture. Remember the episode in Enterprise where they go to an Orion colony or something and see a slave auction. Archer's reaction was all that was necessary to drive the point home that slavery is wrong to him. In that episode it was part of the background, and it was presented in an interesting way, and the episode didn't preach it. It didn't bore us. Of course, I also hated TNG's "Half a Life," which was similarly plodding and preachy and downright boring.
I can't imagine you are old enough to have watched TOS first broadcast. I am. If you are that old, I recommend you get your memory tested. TOS WAS PREACHY. HELLO. While most of 1960 TV was go-along, get-along bland, TOS was entirely different, including it's willingness to speak directly to issues. As far as being slow is concerned, I suppose that's partly in the mind of each viewer. I didn't find this story slow, but clearly your experience is just as valid as mine. You say that sex trade slavery is not an issue today. I take it that you live in a happy alternative reality. So, I have to ask... Is there a Superman on your Earth? Any other group of Super-heroes? No Superman or other super-heroes on mine, but young folk being kidnapped and forced to work as sex workers... lots of that. I find your post... strange.
yes TOS was preachy, but it also had a lot of levity, action. It felt like they were a working crew not a soapbox
People get different take-always from shows and films. I found "Lolani" to be very much like TOS in some episodes in tone and approach. I didn't find it all slow. And, yes, there was levity in the episode, but it was in the right place. This story was also more straightforward like TOS' first and third season episodes. It didn't have the looser and sometimes jokier sensibility of second season. I liked that, but some might not. As I understand it Episode 3 will supposedly have more humour and action. It seems STC's intent is to do a variety of stories...just like TOS did.
Principle photography for STC 3 ended on Tuesday. I think this forth-coming episode will be our best yet. As far as "Lolani" goes; some folks like it; some dont so it IS like TOS, lol. Take care
Thanks for the add. I am old enough to have watched Trek since '66 and every version thereafter. In my opinion, STC is simply the BEST Trek since TOS ended. I know some of those involved with the production are here, and I just want to say, incredible job! Stumbled upon PoE last year and so glad I did, cause this guy is hooked! As so many have said, it's not just the attention to detail and production values, it's that "feel" of TOS. I watched "Lolani"" with my wife (4th time) who is a more casual trek fan. She's watched since '66 as well. When it was done, she asked two things: "OMG, how did they DO that?" and "That was just amazing! " Sums it up for me! I will add briefly to the discussion of the Mckenna role. First, I can't believe no one has ever mentioned that Jane Seymour's lead character in the great "Somewhere in Time" was named "Elise McKenna." Are Vic & Michelle SIT fans? I really enjoyed the new character in both episodes and Michelle is terrific. I just agree that this new character did have way too much screen time so early in the series at the expense of Spock McCoy and Scotty, esp. since it was the last chance to see Larry as Bones. IMHO, since STC isn't a weekly show, with lots of episodes to concentrate on different characters, I would have liked to see more of these great new actors flesh out their interpretations, before having a brand new character so dominate a brand new series. Just a thought to consider, yes?
See, I don't take the story at face value as to what it's "about". Yes, they're talking about slavery, but the metaphor is about people being disenfranchised because of their sex, which applies to groups like the Taliban as much as to slave trade.
On a separate note.. I like the cast. But for some reason, when I look at the Kirk. I keep expecting him to sell me a new car with Tru-coat from the factory I never ordered!
In this case, Lolani serves as the McGuffin (the prize everyone wants) but the real story is as Maurice pointed out, about more than just black and white questions of slavery.
Lolani isn't a MacGuffin. She's the representation of the larger plight writ small and made manifest in a single character so the audience can relate.
Yeah, I didn't get that either. MacGuffin would be if Kirk and Kenway were each simultaneously plotting to enslave her in addition to Mr. Ferrigno's character.
She was the center of attention. The ostensible point of the story, while the story was, as Maurice pointed out, about much more than just her plight as a slave. The fact that the story could be interpreted in various ways speaks well of the effort that went into it.
Yes, Lolaini is the center of attention. She was the catalyst for the story. Yes, the story is about something larger as Maurice points out, but that's theme. Lolani isn't a MacGuffin. She isn't some object that everyone desires like the Maltese Falcon, the quintessential MacGuffin. Kirk and crew want to help her, but they don't desire her. Only Lolani's slaver desires her. And the story wouldn't work without Lolani, you couldn't replace her with some other object or character. A MacGuffin is something which, in the end, doesn't matter what it is — a briefcase, the Holy Grail, the Rabbit's Claw, Godot, the Golden Fleece — and the story remains the same. Can't really do that here. Lolani is our in to the larger theme of the story. She is the manifestation of that theme, so that we as an audience can understand the larger plight through her struggle.
I just watched it and I thought it was a pretty good episode. Vic was even better as Kirk, having his mannerisms and reaction down pat. Chris Doohan looks and sounds even more like his father if that's possible. Though there are storyline issues here that just don't work for me. Tellarites are supposed to be Federation citizens and it's stated they can't prosecute Lolani because she's not a Federation citizen. Doesn't that pretty much mean that any non-Federation citizen can kill or harm a Federation citizen and get away with it? That would lead to chaos. Not to mention those Tellarites committed a serious crime. Governments are hypocritical but the Federation/Starfleet being so fanatical about sending Lolani back to her Orion slavers struck me as odd. If there was an angle like the Orion were offering something vital to the Federation or the usual standard corrupt admiral I can buy it. But I can't see the progressive Federation being so hell bent to send a slave back to her master. Not to mention you had the Orion assault Lolani and Kirk on their own ship. The main problem is there is NO WAY Kirk would have sent Lolani back into slavery. He might be conflicted about it at first but ultimately he would disobey Starfleet and do what he thought was right. He wouldn't have been cowed by a superior officier. As good as Star Trek Continues is, Kirk handing a slave back to her master is not James T. Kirk.