What was up with the strange wiggling shuttle pod doors near the end?
Star Trek Continues: Episode 3...
- Thread starter Warped9
- Start date
Not to stick my nose into the discussion, but sometimes something just works for you, or it doesn't. I can sort of maybe see where Warped9 is coming from.
I remember religiously watching next gen., but I noticed that by season four, I was beginning to trail off in my viewing. I'm not saying it was a watershed moment or anything, but I specifically remember the episode with Dr. Crusher and the terrorists. There was that police chief or whatever she was on the planet, and that they didn't even bother to give her character a name. Seemed to me there was some (for lack of a better word) laziness creeping in.
doubleohfive
Fleet Admiral
Oh, you mean Alexana Devos in "The High Ground" ? Because I'm pretty sure she had a name. It was Alexana Devos. 
I think possibly Warped9 is alluding to having thought Babylon 5 was doing the kind of science fiction he wanted from Trek.
Personally I find the decision to allow only the first three seasons of TNG Trek into one's "personal canon" a bit inscrutable, but everyone's got their thing.
Oh, you mean Alexana Devos in "The High Ground" ? Because I'm pretty sure she had a name. It was Alexana Devos.
I didn't notice her name mentioned in the episode, but I'll take your word for it!
Personally I find the decision to allow only the first three seasons of TNG Trek into one's "personal canon" a bit inscrutable, but everyone's got their thing.
It's kind of like music: you'd get the same thing from guys arguing over the pre/post Sammy Hagar Van Halen and whatnot.
doubleohfive
Fleet Admiral
Oh, you mean Alexana Devos in "The High Ground" ? Because I'm pretty sure she had a name. It was Alexana Devos.
I didn't notice her name mentioned in the episode, but I'll take your word for it!
So what's your critique then? That she "didn't have a name" or that "her name wasn't mentioned on screen" ?
Two very different things, and hardly a reason to check out of a series like TNG over.
Well, that wasn't the reason...as I mentioned, that simply stood out in my mind. I know not why.
It's not like I clicked the remote off in a huff at that moment or anything.
I was just overall saying that my interest was waning a bit: what was "appointment t.v." had become, "Well, I'm not doing anything else, I guess I'll watch Next Generation.". It may have had more to do with other factors in my life at the time.I'm definitely going to be re-visiting the series after I move later this year. As TwoTakesFrakes might say, "Of that you can be assured.".
How is that an odd point to make? People comment on how fast these episodes get produced and I simply pointed out an element which possibly contributes to it. If that's not "relevant" to everyone, so be it.
Last edited:
I didn't start this conversation.
B5 underlined all the things I had grown disillusioned with in contemporary Trek. It was engaging where Trek had become largely boring, mostly predictable, technobabble laden and mostly same old same old.
As for "not letting myself enjoy something," hey, I didn't produce that stuff. I just got fed up of the pablum TPTB were passing off as Star Trek.
It's not really a matter of "personal canon." It's more a matter of straightforward entertainment. I did a revisit of TNG a few years ago and found a bit more I liked than I remembered, but it basically still came to the same thing: just as TNG was getting more polished it was also getting blander. I also quickly lost interest with DS9 (after discovering B5) and never could stomach VOY and ENT, both of which I thought horribly written and horribly unimaginative, and I still think that. For what little it's worth I think VOY was the worst of the two, but that's hardly saying much. Periodically I did check in with what was being done with Trek and each time I saw nothing encouraging.
Trek became burdened by its own success. We were simply getting too much of it and it had been changed too greatly from the show I loved and admired (even with its missteps). The recent films were/are really the logical extension or next step of a property that had ever increasingly gone off the rails.
Fan productions are at heart an expression of fans' disillusionment and yearning to go back to the kinds of things they enjoyed. That said the various productions do reflect what their respective producers find most interesting. Which brings me to Star Trek Continues.
STC impresses me as getting back to the show I thought we'd never see again. It isn't exact, of course, because it never could be, but it's so damn close the distinction is largely meaningless. Their passion and enthusiasm for TOS is plainly evident in every frame. Of course it isn't the only way to play in the Star Trek universe, but I find it the most satisfying. It isn't above criticism, but then neither was TOS. But like TOS they get far more right than wrong, and like TOS among what they get right are the important things.
And in a funny way STC is a bit like getting a properly enhanced TOS (versus TOS-R) along with new never before seen stories.
Last edited:
Warped9 said:
(To mention this makes me really feel like a nitpicker, but since this thread has degenerated into pure silliness for the last few pages, I may as well...)
By the way, Wrath of Khan, which you mention you own, and that I'm assuming you like, came out in 1982...
Last edited:
There are parts of the film I like and parts I don't.
TMP and TWOK are somewhat like two sides of the same coin. One has intelligence yet could have used a bit more enrgy and passion while the other has loads of energy yet is dumb as a brick.
Last edited:
It was mentioned earlier in the thread but the reason why is because that is the way it works (on the original shuttlecraft which was used for filming). The same wiggling doors can be seen in TOS; most notably in "Metamorphosis"
I have written a brief story featuring "Fairest of Them All". The story also includes references to several other productions.
Did you ever write a follow-up on TTI once it was released? I recall you did one talking about how it was on its way.
doubleohfive
Fleet Admiral
Not for nothing, but for clarity's sake there's a bit of a factual error in the article, too.
Vic co-wrote the episode teleplay with director James Kerwin ("Teleplay by James Kerwin & Vic Mignogna") from a story by Vic alone ("Story by Vic Mignogna.")
As written, MikeH92467's article makes it sound like Vic wrote the entire thing on his own.
I have made the suggested changes. Just as an aside one thing I really dislike about Examiner is not having editors. It's like working without a net.
I'm going to make everyone wait 10 years for it.
But seriously folks. I am going to do it, but recent events have crowded my time and writing a full review really is different from the usual stuff. It also concerns me that writing a review may make it look like I'm presuming to know more and have more expertise than I may really have. As the saying goes "better to remain silent and be thought a fool..."
Trouble is, there are different kinds of editors. There's editors who edit for style and clarity, copy editors who fix spelling and grammar. Fact checking is usually up to the author and rarely checked by the editorial staff unless they have someone assigned to that task. I used to write for tech magazine and the editorial side rarely checked my facts.
I'm going to make everyone wait 10 years for it.
But seriously folks. I am going to do it, but recent events have crowded my time and writing a full review really is different from the usual stuff. It also concerns me that writing a review may make it look like I'm presuming to know more and have more expertise than I may really have. As the saying goes "better to remain silent and be thought a fool..."
Well, if you're uncomfortable writing a review, don't. I just wondered if you'd even mentioned the film since it's finally been released.
Similar threads
