Review Star Trek: Of Gods and Men Part 1.

[Rattrap]

I got it to DVD by downloading the Flash Video File through Firefox, then used Quicktime Pro and a Flash DivX that I found on line. It takes a while to make the conversion (I hit convert and went to bed) but the DV stream is nice and stable, if you want to go to all the trouble.

 

[nx1701g]

Babaganoosh said:
- Who is 'Commander Kirk' supposed to be?

Peter Kirk. The character appeared in Season 1's Operation: Annihilate and will be in an upcoming New Voyages episode.

- I'm surprised Chekov got on so well with Harriman. I'd expect Chekov to punch the guy in the face and accuse him of getting Kirk killed (didn't he do exactly that in one of the novels?).

It was explained in the movie too that Chekov and Scotty convinced Harriman to stay in Starfleet after the incident.

 

[Amaris]

Ptrope said:
^^


Seconded, LindleToe. Blish, any advice on how you got it to DVD? I'm looking for a download spot - for something as anticipated as this has been, I'm very disappointed that we get so little choice in how we can watch it. The medium is certainly not improving my perception of the content, and I'm hoping that being able to watch it smoothly might make it seem less haphazard in its pacing.

Another method is to use the newest RealPlayer, which has a "Download this video" option for streaming video. It DL'd it very quickly for me, and thank goodness the video wasn't jerky or stilted.


J.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

nx1701g said:

Babaganoosh said:I'm surprised Chekov got on so well with Harriman. I'd expect Chekov to punch the guy in the face and accuse him of getting Kirk killed (didn't he do exactly that in one of the novels?).

It was explained in the movie too that Chekov and Scotty convinced Harriman to stay in Starfleet after the incident.

Now that is indeed odd. I would expect them to be the first to advocate kicking Harriman's ass OUT of Starfleet.

 

[nx1701g]

^ Harriman said that Checkov and Scotty both told him it could have happened to anyone who was in command and that it wasn't his fault. Kirk himself in Generations - and repeated (though incorrectly) - told him that risk was part of the game if he wanted to sit in the Captain's chair.

 

[spoonman2]

I felt kind of disappointed although I hadn't got many hopes up anyway after all this time. Primarily though the biggest problem for me was with the streaming delivery system which on my machine was so choppy and poor quality I simply couldn't get into what I was watching.

So yes, my machine's somewhat behind the technology curve, or maybe the system doesn't like Opera or something else, but I routinely watch .avi, .wmv and Quicktime on this machine without problems. But not this streaming system.

The result was any scene that was intended to impress me with sfx I was just wrenched out of the action as the framerate chopped about. Whether this was what made the cgi look cartoonish I really can't say.

I understand the need of creators to have some control over distribution, and understand the appeal of streaming systems in this regard. But I feel that browsers were never designed to be video containers and as a consumer it's just not good enough (I'm reminded of the first VCR on the market; rental tapes were designed to be impossible for the user to rewind, to only allow them to view the movie once. That would be unacceptable now and was at the time, too). Creators need to find delivery systems which are also acceptable to consumers or we just won't watch their product. I certainly won't bother with Acts 2 and 3 unless I can have a better viewing experience, which currently for me means a file I can download or at least stream to my normal standalone player software.

Anyway the result is I don't feel I could give this thing a fair appraisal since I was skewed too much to negative feelings by the poor viewing experience. Had I had a better one, maybe I'd have liked it as much as Starship Exeter's Tressuarian Intersection or New Voyages' World Enough And Time.

Final point; did I get it correctly that the central conceit here is that without Jim Kirk the Federation would have become like the Mirror Empire? Why?

 

[MikeH92467]

CaptJimboJones said:
To be brutally honest, it mainly just made me feel bad that Koenig and Nichols' careers had diminished so greatly that they felt a need to appear in this.

I also think Sky Conway must be the world's greatest salesman, given that he convinced them to participate, since it will most certainly not help their careers going forward.

I think your assumption about why Koenig and Nichols appeared in this production may be a bit unfair. I think it's more likely that they're both just in a place where they can do something for fun. You're right that it will do nothing to advance their careers, but at this point, I don't think they're worried about climbing the career ladder anymore.

Certainly, I think your distrust and dislike of Sky Conway (is there something personal there, other than a generic disrepect of his admittedly..."colorful" shall we say...background) colors your objectivity a bit, although I've never argued that flesh and blood humans can, or should be, totally objective.

It strikes me that the whole project is a big fanboy production and doesn't make any bones about it. Based on that, I found episode 1 fun, despite the rough patches here and there. I enjoyed James Cawley's appearance and I admire his obvious hard work to polish his acting skills. I thought he held his own quite well among the full time pros.

On a fan production scale, I'd give it an 8, which I would say is good entertainment for the target crowd.

 

[KingstonTrekker]

Like many others, I have been waiting for this production with anticipation. I have now watched Part 1 twice, and it is pretty good. Thank you to everyone who contributed to giving us fans a new entry in the Star Trek universe! Your efforts are greatly appreciated!

The thoughts which follow are meant to be constructive in nature, and should in no way be viewed as negative; again, I really liked Part I!


I liked the story, although parts of it were a bit rushed. A few minutes of exposition were needed in a few spots, such as
-why the Enterprise B was not available to respond to the priority call, when it had apparently just dropped off Harriman. (Perhaps some time had elapsed?)
-why Harriman, Uhura, and Chekov were not protected from the changes in the timeline, as Kirks' landing party was in "City" (Perhaps Charlie used his powers to affect the Guardian?)

=The "needs of the many" speech could have been replaced with background information that a fleet was approaching Vulcan and the citizens needed to evacuate...

Perhaps some of these concerns will be explained in the final two parts.

The effects were of lower quality than the recent New Voyages episodes.

I loved the opportunity for the "minor characters" of TOS to be in the limelight. It was great to begin with a CAPTAIN's log entry from Uhura! I thought the pre-Guardian scenes in the TOS timeline were excellent; it felt like TOS! Nichols, Koenig, and Ruck were excellent. (I couldn't help wishing that Takei had been available...then perhaps these scenes could have been set on the Excelsior, using the sets seen in his recent New Voyages episode).

I thought Koenig was excellent throughout. Nichols was better in the pre-Guardian scenes; for some reason, her scenes on Vulcan felt kind of flat. Ruck was excellent in the post-Guardian storyline.

The other characters were also great. I loved Masterson's Orion!!! Hertzler's Klingon character was incredible...his acting tended to overshadow everyone else! It was good to see Garret Wang again...and not playing Harry Kim (one of my least favourite characters in Trek...and I am a huge Voyager fan).

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

nx1701g said:
^ Harriman said that Checkov and Scotty both told him it could have happened to anyone who was in command and that it wasn't his fault.

I know they said that, I just don't understand *why*.

I agree that it wasn't Harriman's fault that Kirk died. Harriman did the best he could, and Kirk willingly sacrificed himself to save the ship. We all know that. But I wasn't expecting Uhura and Chekov to agree that this was the case. They served with Kirk for so long that I would fully expect them to be the first ones to call for Harriman's head on a pike, unrealistic as this may be.

I mean, if one of your best friends had died, wouldn't you be looking for someone to blame?

 

[Tallguy]

Babaganoosh said:I know they said that, I just don't understand *why*.

I mean, if one of your best friends had died, wouldn't you be looking for someone to blame?

Maybe they figured this out:

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Tallguy said:Maybe they figured this out:

Excellent point.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Babaganoosh said:
I mean, if one of your best friends had died, wouldn't you be looking for someone to blame?

For an hour, or a day, or a week I suppose. But to carry on for a long period of time blaming someone who's not at fault after the first flush of anger isn't "normal" - it's deeply neurotic and dysfunctional.

Makes for good drama sometimes, but only on the condition that the audience is permitted to respond to such characters with pathos rather than expected to treat them as heroes or role models.

 

[JD]

Wow, I'm suprised people had so much trouble with the video, because I had absoultely no problems at all. Maybe my computer is just faster than I thought.

 

[NiteTrek]

Ok, I'm a bit confused with all the fan productions out there, but didn't Chekov die off of some old age disease in one of these episodes? How did they bring him back?

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

NiteTrek said:
Ok, I'm a bit confused with all the fan productions out there, but didn't Chekov die off of some old age disease in one of these episodes? How did they bring him back?

ST:OGAM is in its own continuity, separate from New Voyages (even though it uses some of the same sets).

 

[Rattrap]

NiteTrek said:
Ok, I'm a bit confused with all the fan productions out there, but didn't Chekov die off of some old age disease in one of these episodes? How did they bring him back?

That was in New Voyages' episode "To Serve All My Days". Officially, it takes place outside the "official" timeline. In short, Dorothy Fontana's story was so good that they decided to shoot it as written, even though it was a continuity nightmare. There is supposedly a "Special Edition" in production which will repair the continuity (I can think of a neat little thirty-second scene that would do so nicely...).

Personally, I have no problem with a really good story that takes place outside the normal timeline. After all, "The Visitor", arguably Deep Space Nine's best episode, does much the same.

 

[Tulin]

I would be fine with that IF Fontana's story was actually good.

It wasn't.

They promised us the world and instead we got Walter koenig sitting in a room talking to a younger version of himself about Edith Keeler and the hippies from "The Apple".

As a friend of mine said, "If they are going to get Koenig in, actually have him DO something!"


Considering the furore it created with the death scene, the payoff of the episode was NOT worth it. Don't get me wrong, I LOVE what the NV people are doing but that episode was really quite odd. Personally, I wasa more interested in the political intrigue b-story and what was happening on the colony worlds.

 

[Arlo]

"1701-M" confused the hell out of me until they said the word "museum" later, and even then it was still a "Wtf?"

- Was I supposed to believe this was the original Enterprise rebranded as a Museum? What about the refit?
- If not, was it a *brand new* ship built as a museum? What a bizarre waste of resources
- And given *that*, it is a museum staffed by people in retro uniforms? So they can stare at each other and say, "gee, don't we look authentic!"

Weird.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Some of the fan film producers are starting to face the same "macaroni and cheese" fan mentality that's been so limiting to Paramount's "Star Trek" productions: do something that's an experiment or in any way "off" from official continuity or "canon" and a certain segment of the audience reacts by either tuning out or complaining.

 

[CaptJimboJones]

MikeH92467 said:

CaptJimboJones said:
To be brutally honest, it mainly just made me feel bad that Koenig and Nichols' careers had diminished so greatly that they felt a need to appear in this.

I also think Sky Conway must be the world's greatest salesman, given that he convinced them to participate, since it will most certainly not help their careers going forward.

I think your assumption about why Koenig and Nichols appeared in this production may be a bit unfair. I think it's more likely that they're both just in a place where they can do something for fun. You're right that it will do nothing to advance their careers, but at this point, I don't think they're worried about climbing the career ladder anymore.

Well, I probably didn't word my original post particularly well. Koenig and Nichols are obviously legends, and appearing in OGAM isn't going to change that. I guess my feelings on the matter stemmed from the fact that it was just, jarring, frankly, seeing these two legends appearing in what seemed to me to be a very amateur production. I mean, IMO they should be on set with JJ Abrams filming Star Trek XI, not working for what must have been peanuts on an unlicensed fanfilm. (And yes, I know they haven't been cast in Trek XI, I'm not speaking literally.)

Certainly, I think your distrust and dislike of Sky Conway (is there something personal there, other than a generic disrepect of his admittedly..."colorful" shall we say...background) colors your objectivity a bit, although I've never argued that flesh and blood humans can, or should be, totally objective.

Nothing personal when it comes to Sky. I do think not enough people realize that he's a convicted con artist who was nailed by the authorities in California for specifically targeting Star Trek fans for one of his investment scams. So its "personal" only in that it's always bothered me that this guy who specifically targeted the Trek community in a financial swindle was the primary mover on this project.

It strikes me that the whole project is a big fanboy production and doesn't make any bones about it.

There I agree with you 100%. Which is why it's so startling to suddenly see these professional actors popping up in what otherwise is a fan movie. It would be like seeing Michael Caine suddenly walking on stage to play a role in your high school's production of "Our Town."

Had OGAM been a 100% amateur, fan-produced film I'd be giving it high marks. But they raised the bar themselves by bringing in pros like Tim Russ, Nichols, etc. So I'm not going to judge this thing against New Voyages or Exeter, its just not fair. But when you compare it to the real thing, well, it looks like crap, basically.

So therein lie my very mixed feelings about OGAM. But by all means, if you like it, enjoy the hell out of it and please don't take my words as any sort of personal criticism.