Star Trek Continues casts Matthew Ewald

[doubleohfive]

Star Trek Continues' Facebook page made the announcement yesterday. And today, they shared a letter from Ewald himself:

Matthew Ewald said:

A letter to the fans from Ep.2 guest star Matthew Ewald. This is beautiful..: "It is with one of the greatest & most humbling of privileges that I can share my involvement as Crewman Matthew Kenway in episode two of the already acclaimed "Star Trek Continues!"

I have had the GREATEST of pleasure working alongside my fellow guest stars -- the legendary Mr. Lou Ferrigno & the impossibly astounding Fiona Vroom -- as well as the undeniably talented cast & crew of such a grand creation. Their kindness, professionalism, humility, passion & love, along with their honor, respect, and friendship, has allowed me to chase the stars to a dream long ago dreamed.

Because of ALL of them, especially Vic Mignogna, I was able to “boldly go.” And to this humble soul…that is something more grand and far more special than anything I could ever fully convey.

Acting is my greatest passion & love, it is every wish ever wished, every dream ever dreamed. It is my oxygen, my happiness. And I write this next part without hope or agenda, without arrogance or conceitedness, but I have been fortunate to have been a part of over 50 films & 2 television series -- I have chased the stars and I have experienced such wonders in this profession...

And when I was a little boy (before all of that above) clad in my very own Starfleet uniform -- that my loving parents had stitched and sewn together for me -- I would sit on my father’s lap before he would leave for work, and together, we would lose ourselves in “Star Trek” the Original Series.

He would always be wearing his uniform (law enforcement) and I would always be wearing mine (command gold), as we shared in the adventures of Kirk, Spock, Bones, and the rest of the cast and crew of the U.S.S. Enterprise on those grand journeys of exploration into the starlight.

Together…my father and I…would lose ourselves within the “hope” that was.

The Original Series had long since been over (and this was a little while before “The Next Generation”), but we would always watch two episodes back-to-back. And my father would ALWAYS say beforehand: “What do you think, kiddo? Want to watch some ‘Star Trek’ with your old man?”

50+ movies and two television series later in my career; a career where I have battled for the fate of worlds and seen the other side of nightmare…After ALL of that amazing fortune…I still hadn't heard my father use those words since childhood…We still watch movies together as often as possible -- still, to this day -- but I hadn't heard THOSE such words in a long, long while.

And then, a few months ago, my father poked his head into my den and said: “What do you think, kiddo? Want to watch some ‘Star Trek’ with your old man?”

Only this time, my father was talking about “Star Trek Continues.”

My very dear friend and brother Vic Mignogna -- along with an exceptionally talented group of souls -- have created something that…in my humblest of opinions, would honor what the great Mr. Roddenberry had created with the grand vision & legacy known as “Star Trek.” In my humble opinion, Mr. Roddenberry would be PROUD of “Star Trek Continues.”

And as I sat side-by-side with my father watching what those talented souls of “Continues” had created with their first episode: “Pilgrim of Eternity,” I became a little boy again, sharing in “Star Trek” with my dad. And I have to tell you…what a GIFT it was. What a cherished and everlasting gift it truly was.

And what a gift (a dream long ago dreamed) it will be to share in it again with my father, but this time not only as a fan…but as a character boldly going where no one had gone before.

So, for what it is worth, thank you Mr. Roddenberry for allowing us ALL to “chase the stars…”

Thank YOU Vic, for never being afraid “to boldly go.”

And an endless THANK YOU, to ALL OF YOU: the fans, the supporters, the star chasers -- thank you for everything that you all do, as well.

I cannot wait for you all to see the labor of love that is episode two. If anything…being a part of “Star Trek Continues” has taught me that sometimes you stop chasing certain stars, because you were fortunate, blessed, lucky enough, to have reached one of the brightest ones.

Respectfully,
-- Matthew Ewald --
“Crewman Matthew Kenway

As I recall, Ewald previously appears as a young Jim Kirk in Phase II's "Origins"/"The Protracted Man."

It's nice to see the interconnectivity between the fan films with the actors continuing, and clearly Ewald's enthusiasm for the project (however exaggerated for the purposes of PR it may be) is without question.

I say bring on episode 2!

 

[Bixby]

From what I could see in the two ''Origins'' clips, Ewald can hold his own. Looking forward to see what his new character can do.

As for Star Trek Continues, I just hope they try to be more TOS this time and in the future, than TNG. Esthetically speaking they've got the look, but now they need the heart.

As for the new character, Dr. McKennah. I really don't see why they needed to add her to the cast (well, I know WHY she was, but...), as she takes screen time away from the other main characters. In Pilgrim of Eternity, both Sulu and Checkov had precious little to do. I hope they balance this better as they progress...

Looking forward to all future episodes

 

[MikeH92467]

PUtting together an "ensemble" cast and giving them all "enough" to do is not easy. There were plenty of shows in TOS where some or all of the secondary cast got left out. It's just that when you have a couple of dozen shows per season to work with things can more or less even out.

 

[Potemkin_Prod]

To be honest, one of the reasons I like our vignette approach to fan films is that we can give two or three or four "secondary" cast members their moments to shine. STC certainly did this as well with their vignettes.

 

[Peach Wookiee]

I loved the command chair vignette.

 

[Bixby]

Putting together an "ensemble" cast and giving them all "enough" to do is not easy. There were plenty of shows in TOS where some or all of the secondary cast got left out. It's just that when you have a couple of dozen shows per season to work with things can more or less even out.

What I was getting as is, whatever ''function'' they were trying to achieve with shoehorned in new character Dr McKennae could have been better achieved with Dr McCoy, or even with Spock (I would have loved to hear a direct exchange between the supremely logical vulcan and a hot-tempered ultimate representation of the Id. Instead we got placid conversation between Apollo and the doctor...Even Scotty's rightful anger towards Apollo was totally defused in an almost off-screen way.

This is why I was likening Pilgrim of Eternity less with TOS than with TNG, where hot-blooded emotional conflicts were few and far between. TOS never needed psychologists, hologram rooms or even children onboard before, they sure don't need them now.

Would I vote for more of the unnecessary Dr McKennae in future STC épisodes? not on your life

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

Putting together an "ensemble" cast and giving them all "enough" to do is not easy. There were plenty of shows in TOS where some or all of the secondary cast got left out. It's just that when you have a couple of dozen shows per season to work with things can more or less even out.

What I was getting as is, whatever ''function'' they were trying to achieve with shoehorned in new character Dr McKennae could have been better achieved with Dr McCoy, or even with Spock (I would have loved to hear a direct exchange between the supremely logical vulcan and a hot-tempered ultimate representation of the Id. Instead we got placid conversation between Apollo and the doctor...Even Scotty's rightful anger towards Apollo was totally defused in an almost off-screen way.

This is why I was likening Pilgrim of Eternity less with TOS than with TNG, where hot-blooded emotional conflicts were few and far between. TOS never needed psychologists, hologram rooms or even children onboard before, they sure don't need them now.

Would I vote for more of the unnecessary Dr McKennae in future STC épisodes? not on your life

The focus on secondary characters and/or guest stars rather than on Kirk, Spock or McCoy is a misstep shared both by PHASE II and CONTINUES. While TOS had stories that featured guest or secondary characters heavily, such as "Balance of Terror" and "What Little Girls Are Made Of", the stories still focused on Kirk and Spock — they still drove the action.

But in PII and CONTINUES, Kirk, Spock and McCoy are more like the guest characters in someone else's show. Kirk doesn't make any hard choices and is quickly absolved of any responsibilities or consequences (looking at you "Enemy: Starfleet" and "Pilgrim of Eternity"). Moreover, Spock and McCoy are often underutilized as the outward, physical expression of Kirk's decision-making process. Their arguments — emotion vs. logic, this action vs. that action — are Kirk's mind at work. And it is Kirk who takes the decisive action, makes the final decision. Not so in fan productions.

The other misstep in CONTINUES is the need to link TOS and TNG, connecting the dots. Early PII was notorious for this and still is to an extant (looking at you "Kitumba"). Who cares about the first ship's counselor? The first holodeck? Those don't lead to good stories. They certainly didn't on TNG, except for the occasional "Big Goodbye" or "Hollow Pursuits". And like TNG, the characters are too buddy buddy. They don't argue, their worldviews don't clash. Why? Because in these stories, like TNG, nothing is really at stake for them.

 

[doubleohfive]

^Brilliant assessment, middyseafort and excellently stated.

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

^Brilliant assessment, middyseafort and excellently stated.

Thanks! I will add that another misperception of TOS is that it was an ensemble show. It was not.

While it had a cast of characters that went from episode to episode to establish continuity and a ship of 400, it was very much a show centered around its captain. Even in the earliest documents and the earliest episodes, Trek was firmly about the captain and the decisions he must make. The other characters were in service of that, even Spock. Later the show became about both Kirk and Spock as a team, which is something the Abrams' films get so right that the fan films get so wrong.

 

[Barbreader]

^Brilliant assessment, middyseafort and excellently stated.

Thanks! I will add that another misperception of TOS is that it was an ensemble show. It was not.

While it had a cast of characters that went from episode to episode to establish continuity and a ship of 400, it was very much a show centered around its captain. Even in the earliest documents and the earliest episodes, Trek was firmly about the captain and the decisions he must make. The other characters were in service of that, even Spock. Later the show became about both Kirk and Spock as a team, which is something the Abrams' films get so right that the fan films get so wrong.

As a person who watched TOS first run, but wasn't impressed, I disagree. This was one element TOS got wrong, and the fan films get right. TNG got it right, DS9 got it right, VOY, got it right, and to a lessor extent, ENT also got it right. TOS had an advantage over the others in that it could draw on a century of untouched science fiction writing to inspire new plots that had never been used before. TOS got that right. What's more, as time went on, the reason it stayed so focused on Kirk was Shatner demanded it. Even attempts to give his bridge crew a few extra lines met major resistance from Captain Ego. (No, I'm not a Shatner fan. I'm not even a fan of his Kirk, although I've seen some fan Kirks and even the Pine Kirk which improve on it substantially.) Part of the decline in the scripts might have been tied to budget constraints, but part of it was the insane limitations that put on writers.

Some of the best fan films focus on OTHER characters. World Enough and Time is about Sulu. Other fan films use another ship and crew altogether, making it about The Federation or Starfleet.

The narrow focus is also why TOS worked well for movies, while the other shows did not. Groups work better on TV where you have over 20 hours of production story every year. Narrow focus is great when you are producing two hours every two to four years. You can't do justice to a whole cast in two hours every few years.

I realize some of you have watched TOS as Holy Text (or Holy TV) for decades. It started the franchise, and it will therefore always be important. But that doesn't prove we all have to think nothing could improve on it. If you worship that aspect of it, you are free to do so, IDIC. But we don't all have to agree.

 

[doubleohfive]

^Brilliant assessment, middyseafort and excellently stated.

Thanks! I will add that another misperception of TOS is that it was an ensemble show. It was not.

While it had a cast of characters that went from episode to episode to establish continuity and a ship of 400, it was very much a show centered around its captain. Even in the earliest documents and the earliest episodes, Trek was firmly about the captain and the decisions he must make. The other characters were in service of that, even Spock. Later the show became about both Kirk and Spock as a team, which is something the Abrams' films get so right that the fan films get so wrong.

Speaking purely from a writing perspective, I couldn't agree more and it's very likely why I've so enjoyed Abrams' two films.

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

^Brilliant assessment, middyseafort and excellently stated.

Thanks! I will add that another misperception of TOS is that it was an ensemble show. It was not.

While it had a cast of characters that went from episode to episode to establish continuity and a ship of 400, it was very much a show centered around its captain. Even in the earliest documents and the earliest episodes, Trek was firmly about the captain and the decisions he must make. The other characters were in service of that, even Spock. Later the show became about both Kirk and Spock as a team, which is something the Abrams' films get so right that the fan films get so wrong.

As a person who watched TOS first run, but wasn't impressed, I disagree. This was one element TOS got wrong, and the fan films get right. TNG got it right, DS9 got it right, VOY, got it right, and to a lessor extent, ENT also got it right. TOS had an advantage over the others in that it could draw on a century of untouched science fiction writing to inspire new plots that had never been used before. TOS got that right. What's more, as time went on, the reason it stayed so focused on Kirk was Shatner demanded it. Even attempts to give his bridge crew a few extra lines met major resistance from Captain Ego. (No, I'm not a Shatner fan. I'm not even a fan of his Kirk, although I've seen some fan Kirks and even the Pine Kirk which improve on it substantially.) Part of the decline in the scripts might have been tied to budget constraints, but part of it was the insane limitations that put on writers.

Some of the best fan films focus on OTHER characters. World Enough and Time is about Sulu. Other fan films use another ship and crew altogether, making it about The Federation or Starfleet.

The narrow focus is also why TOS worked well for movies, while the other shows did not. Groups work better on TV where you have over 20 hours of production story every year. Narrow focus is great when you are producing two hours every two to four years. You can't do justice to a whole cast in two hours every few years.

I realize some of you have watched TOS as Holy Text (or Holy TV) for decades. It started the franchise, and it will therefore always be important. But that doesn't prove we all have to think nothing could improve on it, If you worship that aspect of it. you are free to do so, IDIC. But we don't all have to agree.

First and foremost, if you've followed any of my post in the past or in the fan writer's thread, you'll know that I don't treat any aspect of Trek as holy text. But fan films claim to be a "true continuation" of TOS, but they aren't able to get the fundamentals of the show they ape right. Let's get that straight first.

Second, the assumptions made are false. TOS got it right that the captain was the focus of the show, because that's the show Roddenberry created in his first pitch [Principal character: Captain Robert April] — "Horatio Hornblower in space" or "Gulliver's Travels in space". That's how Hunter was courted for the lead role and so was Shatner. The latter had every right to demand more screen time because he had a vested interest, including a financial one, in the success of a show that was pitched to him as a star vehicle and he was the star. Problems arose because Nimoy's Spock proved more popular. Roddenberry had to reconcile that — thus Kirk and Spock become more of a team, as suggested by Isaac Asimov. In fact, in his letter to Asimov, Roddenberry was insistent that STAR TREK need a human lead, its captain.

Because we as fans have affinity for the secondary characters doesn't mean the show was about them. It wasn't. It was never designed that way. Very few shows in the 60s were designed as ensembles, except say MISSION:IMPOSSIBLE, and even then it was only as tools to move the plot. And that wasn't a limitation on the writers, it was a conceit of the show they were writing for. Besides, Spock put a similar constraint as the network desired more Spock stories after he proved popular. "Side of Paradise," anyone? That was re-written as a Spock vehicle when it was originally a Sulu romance.

And TNG didn't get it right. STAR TREK, be it TNG, VOY, ENT or DS9, is a show about the captain and decisions he/she must make. TNG screwed itself with splitting the captain's role. Was it about Picard or Riker? Who was the lead? That schizophrenia marred the series in its first two years. Nor did it ever get the ensemble right. It never did get the balance between the characters right, which is why Denise Crosby left and why Troi almost was cut from the cast. The other problem is that other than Picard, Data and Worf, the rest of the characters were interchangeable in a story, even one featuring them. They had no real worldview, like Spock or McCoy, to create adequate conflict or change the way a plot resolved. VOY was laughable at this. ENT was TOS-reset with Spock as a woman and McCoy as the engineer. DS9 did a better job with its cast, but was still very much about Sisko as captain (or commander).

As for fan films ... WEaT was good, but it still made several missteps and didn't give Kirk any meat to resolve the problem of the story. Sure, it was a Sulu story but Kirk still should've taken action in the story. Which he didn't. After all, Kirk is the lead of the show, not Sulu.

STARSHIP EXETER gets it. It may be about OTHER characters, but it captures the concept better than PII or CONTINUES. It's about Garrovick and the decisions he makes. He drives the action.

Finally, the concept can and should be improved upon. I've made that cry for fan films in the fan writer's forum. But that doesn't mean the lead character, be it Kirk or Garrovick or Captain Whoever, shouldn't drive the action and take decisive action.

 

[doubleohfive]

YES YES YES YES!

Agreed, 100%. Oh, if only the fan film writers would see this post and take it to heart.

 

[RCAM]

I definitely agree with the point that they're a little off on the "true TOS continuation" concept because of the focus on secondary characters. Now, that doesn't mean they're bad episodes or bad writing (though middy asserts that), but it does mean the structure of their shows is somewhat different from the original show.

The only instance where the focus on secondary characters has bothered me and taken away from my enjoyment of the story in the realm of fan films is Phase II becoming "The Peter Kirk Show." That was the most egregious example of getting away from the structure of the show. "Blood and Fire" was insufferable; making it a two-parter so that they could include interminable romance scenes with unestablished characters was a big mistake.

 

[Maurice]

Middyseafort has it exactly right.

There's no reason a show like Star Trek can't feature the secondary cast more, but many fanfilms make the mistake of giving us not terribly interesting minor characters to focus on and leave the primary decision makers either out of the story or peripheral to it, at the cost of making them feel indecisive and weak. If you want an ensemble you have to come up with a group of characters who can shoulder stories focusing on them.

 

[RCAM]

I think TOS, by the way, is the only show singularly about "the decisions the captain must make." Every other show extended the moral quandaries to the supporting characters.

 

[Pauln6]

The early episodes of Trek were a bit more ensemble and better for it IMO. Do I want a fully ensemble show - probably not. Do I want the landing party to consist of Kirk, Spock, and McCoy - definitely not. In fact the absence of decent guest crew on Voyager and Enterprise weakened those shows.

I applaud the inclusion of a new female character, who certainly has enough personality to fulfill the dynamic originally intended for Rand but I question putting her in such a stereotypically female role and once whose limitations were well documented by Marina Sirtis. I would also still like to see Chapel and Rand as more than just cameos.

 

[Noname Given]

^Brilliant assessment, middyseafort and excellently stated.

Thanks! I will add that another misperception of TOS is that it was an ensemble show. It was not.

While it had a cast of characters that went from episode to episode to establish continuity and a ship of 400, it was very much a show centered around its captain. Even in the earliest documents and the earliest episodes, Trek was firmly about the captain and the decisions he must make. The other characters were in service of that, even Spock. Later the show became about both Kirk and Spock as a team, which is something the Abrams' films get so right that the fan films get so wrong.

As a person who watched TOS first run, but wasn't impressed, I disagree. This was one element TOS got wrong, and the fan films get right. TNG got it right, DS9 got it right, VOY, got it right, and to a lessor extent, ENT also got it right. TOS had an advantage over the others in that it could draw on a century of untouched science fiction writing to inspire new plots that had never been used before. TOS got that right. What's more, as time went on, the reason it stayed so focused on Kirk was Shatner demanded it. Even attempts to give his bridge crew a few extra lines met major resistance from Captain Ego. (No, I'm not a Shatner fan. I'm not even a fan of his Kirk, although I've seen some fan Kirks and even the Pine Kirk which improve on it substantially.) Part of the decline in the scripts might have been tied to budget constraints, but part of it was the insane limitations that put on writers.

Some of the best fan films focus on OTHER characters. World Enough and Time is about Sulu. Other fan films use another ship and crew altogether, making it about The Federation or Starfleet.

The narrow focus is also why TOS worked well for movies, while the other shows did not. Groups work better on TV where you have over 20 hours of production story every year. Narrow focus is great when you are producing two hours every two to four years. You can't do justice to a whole cast in two hours every few years.

I realize some of you have watched TOS as Holy Text (or Holy TV) for decades. It started the franchise, and it will therefore always be important. But that doesn't prove we all have to think nothing could improve on it. If you worship that aspect of it, you are free to do so, IDIC. But we don't all have to agree.

As someone who also watched TO first run, I honestly hated the retcon of Star Trek that TNG became. For me, if 'Star Trek Continues' wants to do TNG type episodes, that's great - let them switch to TNG sets and the like. If they claim they want to continue in the 'TOS style' - great too - but loose the 'TNG sensibilities - like Kirk looking for a consensus among his senior officers before making a decision. Yes, Kirk DID often ask for opinions, but in the end, after weighing the opinions and situations made his own decision.

Foe me, Kirk's command style has always been summed up best by an exchange in the briefing room from TOS - "The Corbomite Maneuver":

Lt. Bailey: "We have Phaser weapons. I vote we blast it."

Capt. Kirk:"I'll keep that in mind Mr. Bailey; when this becomes a democracy."

The TNG-esque 'sensibility' they put into their version of Kirk is really grating and out of place for a group claiming to want to do stories in the TOS era. (IMO)

 

[Pauln6]

For me, Kirk's command style has always been summed up best by an exchange in the briefing room from TOS - "The Corbomite Maneuver":

Lt. Bailey: "We have Phaser weapons. I vote we blast it."

Capt. Kirk:"I'll keep that in mind Mr. Bailey; when this becomes a democracy."

The TNG-esque 'sensibility' they put into their version of Kirk is really grating and out of place for a group claiming to want to do stories in the TOS era. (IMO)

I think if you are talking pure combat tactics then you're probably right (and it worked out pretty badly in TWoK). I'm not 100% convinced that TOS Kirk is so blinkered that he won't seek more of a consensus on other issues, such as those involving diplomatic repercussions. TOS very rarely listened to the advice of any of his female officers either. He was probably distracted by that light shining in his eyes all the time.

 

[PattyW]

I absolutely agree that fanfilms tend not to "get" that the show is Kirk & Spock & McCoy...and that Gene saw those three as actually three different parts of one person. The rest of the crew were MEANT to be an ensemble - and the original cast are the first to point out that almost always their lines were interchangeable. (Explaining why Chekov could step so easily into Sulu's shoes while George was filming Green Berets) Did their rare "featured screen time" come to define their characters for us? Yes, but that wasn't what was intended by the writers or producers at the time. (You only have to read Gene's "Writer's/Director's Guide" to see this is what he intended and looked for in scripts.)

As story editor on P2 I was making a concerted effort to choose and edit scripts that went in that direction. (I'd like to say I went that way with Kitumba, but it's been so long I frankly don't remember. It is most DEFINITELY why I recommended Rick Chambers as a writer to James. In fact, my recommendation pretty much said "This guy GETS TOS...I don't care if you use this script, but you've got to get him to write for P2 because he GETS it!") It really is the number 1 failure on the part of writers. Too many TNG ensemble scripts that are supposed to be TOS. I personally feel there is value to both approaches, but an ensemble script doesn't belong on a TOS ship any more than a TNG episode should have Picard acting like Kirk. There's probably a note as far as time period that people haven't considered. Kirk is commanding a ship during the "exploration and birth" period - when ships went out for years at a time with very little contact with "home" and a lot of risk and danger. Think of England's exploration period that, yes, Hornblower and Lord Nelson commanded ships during. TNG and Picard take place during the age of colonies. I'm not saying there weren't still things to discover, but it was safe enough to bring your family along.

The number 2 failure of fanfilm scripts, IMHO, is the fanboy compulsion to go where we've already been before. Any fanfilm that has figured out what they are doing and done their "shakedown trip", as you will, has the ability to BE TOS for the 21st century. They have the chance to tell new, exciting stories about new people and new places that are topical to today's world and make us think. That was the best of TOS - and I don't see ANY of them doing that. STC and P2 are both in the place to do so - but here we are seeing Apollo and Magna Roma and Marcus. I'd like to see BOTH of them fulfill their potential finally...rather than stay the fanboy's dream of being in episodes they saw when they were kids.

As for Kitumba "filling in the gaps"...well, I plead guilty...because of my sense of OCD. With this episode taking place in the TOS universe - where the Klingons were far from honorable and the warriors were seemingly all affected by the augment virus - I just needed to find a way to fit the feature film and TNG Klingon "pieces" into the universe of Klingons I spent my childhood in. It wasn't the purpose of the episode, I just couldn't write it without coming up with an explanation for myself so that everything was tied up neatly for me.