Roddenberry Podcasts
- Thread starter toonloon
- Start date
I listen to them at work. I have a cleaning job and there's no one around so I look forward to when I get a new one.
I'm currently experimenting with adding them to my Star Trek Blu-rays. Just to be clear before anyone comes down on me, I OWN all of the available Star Trek blu-rays. All series, all movies. I ripped WNMHGB onto my HDD and added the FREE podcast to the audio streams. I'm just waiting to see how it turns out. I like to watch TOS late at night and I always lament the fact that they don't have any commentaries. Now I may be able to solve that problem with the available free podcasts and me legally owning all the blu-rays.
I'm currently experimenting with adding them to my Star Trek Blu-rays. Just to be clear before anyone comes down on me, I OWN all of the available Star Trek blu-rays. All series, all movies. I ripped WNMHGB onto my HDD and added the FREE podcast to the audio streams. I'm just waiting to see how it turns out. I like to watch TOS late at night and I always lament the fact that they don't have any commentaries. Now I may be able to solve that problem with the available free podcasts and me legally owning all the blu-rays.
Very entertaining. These guys love the show but do not take it too seriously. They look at all the little plot flaws etc. as what they are, mistakes in a TV show made half a century ago. A good light hearted look at the show we all treasure.
Where are these podcasts available?
http://www.missionlogpodcast.com/
I've been enjoying these podcasts as well. I'm sure they will at least finish TOS.
Awesome, thanks!
doubleohfive
Fleet Admiral
These episodes are great. You guys should really check them out!
I enjoy them. Though when it was announced that Roddenberry.com was doing this podcast, I had hoped that there would be some additional inside info from the Roddenberry family... tidbits from Gene's notes, or anecdotes from the family, something like that. That has been my only disappointment. But for a podcast with two random guys talking about Star Trek episodes, it is quite enjoyable. I intend to continue listening.
doubleohfive
Fleet Admiral
I must ask then - what "important details" are they "getting wrong" ?
It's easy to criticize something with that particular item; it's another thing to back it up with evidence to prove it. i'll gladly eat my words if they have gotten some things wrong, but I'd like to know, specifically what you're referring to. Is it just one fact? Two? Or several? If so, what are they?
That's funny, because I just started a Star Trek podcast called Trekabout. The concept: a Trekkie (me) and a non-Trekkie start at the beginning and cover the franchise, two episodes at a time. All of it.
I'm finding it really fun to see how a non-Trekkie reacts to the show. What he likes, what he doesn't, and what he reacts to. Will he become a fan? Why do so many people still love Trek?
If this sounds interesting, check out the first episode here:
oncamazotz.com/2012/09/06/trekabout-episode-1-spock-was-right/
I'm finding it really fun to see how a non-Trekkie reacts to the show. What he likes, what he doesn't, and what he reacts to. Will he become a fan? Why do so many people still love Trek?
If this sounds interesting, check out the first episode here:
oncamazotz.com/2012/09/06/trekabout-episode-1-spock-was-right/
I wish I could give you details. Trust me, I'm not just criticizing for the sake of being ornery.
Because I AM a fan of Ken's, I tuned into his first and subsequent endeavors.
I like what they're doing. I like their approach. But they are getting some facts wrong.
Unfortunately, I have not listed them. Nor am I likely to. But they are glaring to me, as they would be to any 50-year-old fan who has seen, read, listened, watched, etc. EVERY thing about TOS.
I'm not trying to be a self-aggrandizing terminally weird fan. I'm sorry that I don't have the time to re-listen and make notes. Next time I catch one, I'll try. But let's face it, I'm usually listening with other things going on.
But I know what I know, Doctor.
doubleohfive
Fleet Admiral
Sorry, not buying it. As I said - it's easy to criticize something, but you're not even backing your assertion up. You claim they "got things wrong" and need to do more "fact-checking" but aren't even able to offer even one example of what you are claiming is the major fault of these shows for you.
I declare shenanigans. Nobody's asking you to re-listen to any of the shows. But for crying out loud, you're just blowing hot air here. Let me guess - you also have inside info that Rick Berman did plagiarize Babylon 5 for DS9 also, but can't name your source, right?
Drago-Kazov
Fleet Captain
Its decent, anybody else enjoys Dorktrek?
Ok, don't get your tunic in a twist. I spent another couple of minutes of my life listening to Ken's podcast on "The Man Trap". Frankly, these are a dish best served cold--and once.
In the podcast, Ken keeps calling the planet M-13, not M-113. He also refers to "Commander Spock".
Nits, of course. But he gets the planet name and the Spock's first-season rank wrong.
Let's get constructive rather than tossing about criticisms, of either the effort or the poster. I think the podcasts would be greatly enhanced if they got more into the behind-the-scenes production trivia, and I mean more than "Gene Roddenberry looped the 'Turkeys' line in Charlie X. That requires bringing out the sacred texts, "Making", "World", and "Inside". Plus the Jeff Bond book on music.
Finally, I really think they should go in production order, not original airdate, because they spend alot of time talking about how in this episode that happened, but in the previous one that hadn't happened. I want to hear production dates, Harvey Hart's ten-day shoot, the utter mess of "What are Little Girls Made Of?" that occurred because Gene R. was trying to write in and rewrite in his mistress.
Let me help.
In the podcast, Ken keeps calling the planet M-13, not M-113. He also refers to "Commander Spock".
Nits, of course. But he gets the planet name and the Spock's first-season rank wrong.
Let's get constructive rather than tossing about criticisms, of either the effort or the poster. I think the podcasts would be greatly enhanced if they got more into the behind-the-scenes production trivia, and I mean more than "Gene Roddenberry looped the 'Turkeys' line in Charlie X. That requires bringing out the sacred texts, "Making", "World", and "Inside". Plus the Jeff Bond book on music.
Finally, I really think they should go in production order, not original airdate, because they spend alot of time talking about how in this episode that happened, but in the previous one that hadn't happened. I want to hear production dates, Harvey Hart's ten-day shoot, the utter mess of "What are Little Girls Made Of?" that occurred because Gene R. was trying to write in and rewrite in his mistress.
Let me help.
doubleohfive
Fleet Admiral
1) Spock was, I believe a Lieutenant Commander during season one, yes? Is "Commander" not an acceptable shorthand for referring to someone who carries a Lieutenant Commander rank? How many times have we heard "Commander Data," "Commander La Forge," "Commander Worf," "Commander Dax," and "Commander Tuvok" over they years?
Also, was Spock not a Commander for the last two years of the show? Is it not possible that even if Ken misspoke, it could still be construed as simply being shorthand for Spock's actual rank?
2) More importantly: I sincerely disagree with you that incorrectly referencing "Commander" Spock and "M13" would constitute "get[ting] important facts wrong."
These are, as you said later, minor nitpicks.
So... you have no major, important facts to cite that they got wrong. Gotcha. Your criticism boils down to "They're not doing it the way I would do it so it must suck because I would do it better!"
The key point you are also ignoring is that these podcasts are being done based solely on re-watching the show. Yes, external texts and sources are being referenced, but what would be the point of filing through book after book to cite details already available in print?
More importantly - as hosts of the show, John and Ken also bring something else to the podcasts that you can't get anywhere else: their own personal opinions and interpretations of the shows and their impact on the franchise, on television and generally on the original series itself. These are the elements I find more interesting. These are the elements I'm listening for. Anyone can read "Inside Star Trek;" I've read it at least a dozen times since I got it fifteen years ago... I want something fresh, something new. John and Ken are providing that, warts and all.
Dude, you've got a hell of a way of promoting yourself if this is your objective!
All I did was offer an opinion, a few facts (at your insistence), and give some constructive criticism. Oh yes, and make a reference to a famous line like "let me help".
For that, you seem to have put shields on maximum and phasers on full.
Do you have some skin in the game? If so, I should say it's exceedingly thin.
For that, you seem to have put shields on maximum and phasers on full.
Do you have some skin in the game? If so, I should say it's exceedingly thin.
doubleohfive
Fleet Admiral
Now you're changing your argument. First you claimed that they "got important facts wrong."
Now you're saying that you just "offer[ed] an opinion and a few facts and gave constructive criticism."
I don't see how making a broad claim such as you did in your initial post, only to back up with, by your own admission "minor nits" as evidence constitutes anything near "constructive criticism."
On top of this, you've summarily ignored the other points I raised in favor of this podcast series to instead impugn my motivation for defending it.
I don't dispute that the M113 creature is supposed to be referred to as the M113 creature. I don't dispute that Spock was a Lieutenant Commander in the first season (facts you yourself brought up.) I merely stated that these were minuscule details; minutiae that if gotten wrong I can forgive. This isn't the Constitution or the Holy Bible. It's a fun podcast about a TV show a bunch of nerds really really like, and one some people take far, far too seriously.
As for me, I happy to be friends with one of the hosts of the show. But that doesn't mean I can't independently disagree with you or point out the flaws in your argument.
Now you're saying that you just "offer[ed] an opinion and a few facts and gave constructive criticism."
I don't see how making a broad claim such as you did in your initial post, only to back up with, by your own admission "minor nits" as evidence constitutes anything near "constructive criticism."
On top of this, you've summarily ignored the other points I raised in favor of this podcast series to instead impugn my motivation for defending it.
I don't dispute that the M113 creature is supposed to be referred to as the M113 creature. I don't dispute that Spock was a Lieutenant Commander in the first season (facts you yourself brought up.) I merely stated that these were minuscule details; minutiae that if gotten wrong I can forgive. This isn't the Constitution or the Holy Bible. It's a fun podcast about a TV show a bunch of nerds really really like, and one some people take far, far too seriously.
As for me, I happy to be friends with one of the hosts of the show. But that doesn't mean I can't independently disagree with you or point out the flaws in your argument.
Similar threads
