STC Ep. 6: "Come Not Between The Dragons" grading and discussion....(possible spoilers)

[Warped9]

Candidly one can find it a bit over syrupy when reading the comments on STC's FB page. Hey, I really like the production as a whole, but fawning is something I won't do.

In general they've been good and entertaining. Their worst episide was just okay rather than poor or outright bad. Their best effort could have still been better. And throughout they have some tendecies that I try not to let annoy me too much, but annoy me they do.

 

[9gs]

Candidly one can find it a bit over syrupy when reading the comments on STC's FB page. Hey, I really like the production as a whole, but fawning is something I won't do.

In general they've been good and entertaining. Their worst episide was just okay rather than poor or outright bad. Their best effort could have still been better. And throughout they have some tendecies that I try not to let annoy me too much, but annoy me they do.

True as for the FB comments. But I would venture to guess that 99+% of the fans of STC have never heard of Trek BBS. Those are the people who show up at conventions, contribute to the fundraisers, stand in line for autographs, and pictures with the stars of the show. Those of us that nit pick at it (I would include myself too in that but usually I keep it to myself) I hope do so that it might be even better. They have not made a "classic" yet but I believe this team is capable of it with the right script.

 

[mos6507]

comments like saying these are just as well-made as many in the real Star Trek, IMO, just serve to belittle just how immensely-talented writers and producers like Robert Justman, Gene Coon, Dorothy Fontana and George Clayton Johnson actually were.

Rose-colored glasses works both ways. Not every TOS episode was a masterpiece either. I think STC feels very 3rd season TOS-like to me and the only consistent downside is some subpar acting here and there (although I think Vic himself does a very good job).

Another thing STC does well is it keeps the plot moving at a brisk pace. The most common fan-film error other than acting is the pacing.

 

[Warped9]

The nitpicking is not a sign of overall dissatisfaction. TOS is my favourite all-time series yet I could still nitpick at things I wish they had done differently even in the best of episodes.

The things I nitpick with STC are things that could easily be fixed with a wee bit of editing or mild rewriting.

Except "The White Iris." I'm sorry, but I wouldn't have done that one at all or at least I would have had it heavily rewritten.

 

[Warped9]

I think STC feels very 3rd season TOS-like...

Agreed. I think it should be said that except for humorous efforts TOS' 3rd season did try for a variety of stories. Some of them worked and some didn't. 3rd season also avoided the parallel Earth gimmick seen enough times in 2nd season.

It would be interesting to see STC pull off a humorous story in the vein of "Shore Leave" or "The Trouble With Tribbles" (as opposed to the absurdity of "I, Mudd" or "A Piece Of The Action"). Or a horror style story that worked as opposed to what failed like "And The Children Shall Lead."

Another thing STC does well is it keeps the plot moving at a brisk pace. The most common fan-film error other than acting is the pacing.

As Robert Wise once said "pacing" is more than just keeping things moving briskly. It's also a matter of keeping things interesting. Action can be boring if it's redundant, repetitive or pointlessly dragged out. Dialogue can be engaging if it's tight, well written and well acted.

 

[BoredShipCapt'n]

A Tribbles-like story has been mentioned as something they'd like to do if they get the chance. They've got the comic talent to pull it off, too.

 

[Warped9]

A Tribbles-like story has been mentioned as something they'd like to do if they get the chance. They've got the comic talent to pull it off, too.

As long as they don't do an actual sequel. "More Tribble, More Troubles" is one of the most disappointing of TAS episodes.

 

[Bixby]

Rose-colored glasses works both ways. Not every TOS episode was a masterpiece either. I think STC feels very 3rd season TOS-like to me and the only consistent downside is some subpar acting here and there (although I think Vic himself does a very good job).

Snide comment aside, I can clearly see Star Trek's shortcomings back then, but even so i think I can safely say that apart from Lolani, the other STC scripts wouldn't have passed the second draft script phase under Gene Coon's watch. Lolani is a decent third draft..

Just look at the condensed plots for these episodes: ''Rapidly-aged former god throws a tantrum on the ship'' (didn't they already do that one?), ''Kirk has visions of dead former girlfriends'' (sounds like a soap opera plot), ''Kirk and McCoy relive a civil war battle on the psychic plane'' (ok, and?.. ) ''Spock overthrows Kirk in the Mirror Universe'' (''this one's kinda thin as far as high concept'')

 

[Astra]

I liked the humorous bits in the sixth episode. It was great seeing our well-known characters act in a somewhat different way. I always like a good mix best - some humor, some drama. There were times we laughed out loud, and there were times where you could have heard a pin drop. It may be a cliché but it’s still true. Amazing how quiet a room full of people can be. I had to remind myself to breathe once in a while.

 

[Warped9]

I don't know who does the story editing, but perhaps someone who could step back with a bit more objective eye could help.

Take "Divided We Stand" for example. It somewhat parallels "Spectre Of The Gun." But there was a real point to "Spectre Of The Gun" and the Melkotians also had an agenda to test our heroes much as Balok did in his own way in "The Corbomite Maneuver."

"Divided We Stand" basically just happens. There is no outside agenda and it's all an induced dream little different than one of TNG's holodeck stories where the tech goes wrong.


I think the best Trek stories were those that were about something and then inserted into the Trek framework. That is so much better than, "What if this happened to so and so?"

I don't necessarily mean a message story, but something genuinely interesting you can build around.

 

[BoredShipCapt'n]

As long as they don't do an actual sequel. "More Tribble, More Troubles" is one of the most disappointing of TAS episodes.

Right, Vic has emphatically said the tribbles were funny one time but that's it.

 

[Zaminhon]

I don't know who does the story editing, but perhaps someone who could step back with a bit more objective eye could help.

Take "Divided We Stand" for example. It somewhat parallels "Spectre Of The Gun." But there was a real point to "Spectre Of The Gun" and the Melkotians also had an agenda to test our heroes much as Balok did in his own way in "The Corbomite Maneuver."

"Divided We Stand" basically just happens. There is no outside agenda and it's all an induced dream little different than one of TNG's holodeck stories where the tech goes wrong.

I think, structurally, "Divided" has more in common with TNG's "The Inner Light" than "Specter of the Gun. I'll agree that the story wasn't very successful but the the overall production and location segments makes it worth watching.

 

[Draculasaurus]

I don't know who does the story editing, but perhaps someone who could step back with a bit more objective eye could help.

Take "Divided We Stand" for example. It somewhat parallels "Spectre Of The Gun." But there was a real point to "Spectre Of The Gun" and the Melkotians also had an agenda to test our heroes much as Balok did in his own way in "The Corbomite Maneuver."

"Divided We Stand" basically just happens. There is no outside agenda and it's all an induced dream little different than one of TNG's holodeck stories where the tech goes wrong.


I think the best Trek stories were those that were about something and then inserted into the Trek framework. That is so much better than, "What if this happened to so and so?"

I don't necessarily mean a message story, but something genuinely interesting you can build around.

I think you completely missed the point of Divided We Stand, at least the point I saw in it.
Kirk and Bones didn't know where they were. A simulation, time travel, a shared dream. It wasn't just about survival.
They had to decide whether to act on their moral convictions not knowing if it was going to have any effect or be worthwhile at all.
-Just like the other soldiers did, and just like we all do.
I thought it was exactly the type of moral allegory Star Trek should do.

 

[Zaminhon]

^ I think the messages, if any, were muddled. For instance, Kirk's speechifying about high ideals fell on deaf ears, which was interesting and sort of realistic when idealism disappears when you are in the middle of a bloody battle. The soldiers were right, they are just trying to survive long enough to get back to their families and "fighting for the freedom of ideas" or whatever has no place in their experience, and I guess by extension, the nanites experience. So was this a lesson for the nanites, did they learn anything, and what did Kirk come away with except for a sore leg?

Can't wait for Ep 6 this weekend so we can discuss that one instead of past eps.

 

[Warped9]

I think you completely missed the point of Divided We Stand, at least the point I saw in it.
Kirk and Bones didn't know where they were. A simulation, time travel, a shared dream. It wasn't just about survival.
They had to decide whether to act on their moral convictions not knowing if it was going to have any effect or be worthwhile at all.
-Just like the other soldiers did, and just like we all do.
I thought it was exactly the type of moral allegory Star Trek should do.

Then they were really just retelling "The City On The Edge Of Forever" and that was done far, far better.

 

[STEPhon IT]

Snide comment aside, I can clearly see Star Trek's shortcomings back then, but even so i think I can safely say that apart from Lolani, the other STC scripts wouldn't have passed the second draft script phase under Gene Coon's watch. Lolani is a decent third draft..

Just look at the condensed plots for these episodes: ''Rapidly-aged former god throws a tantrum on the ship'' (didn't they already do that one?), ''Kirk has visions of dead former girlfriends'' (sounds like a soap opera plot), ''Kirk and McCoy relive a civil war battle on the psychic plane'' (ok, and?.. ) ''Spock overthrows Kirk in the Mirror Universe'' (''this one's kinda thin as far as high concept'')

All of their tales are waaaay too heavy on the fanwankery; "Do you remember this? Do you remember that?"
It's true Gene Coon would never consider these stories at all because there not doing anything new. Claiming these things are more like the third season is quite a stretch because that season didn't suffer from sequelitis; even though the stories were not as well written as the 1st two seasons, those episodes did have something to say. As for STC, I don't know what its trying to say besides it making TNG series but shot in the wrong sets, and the wrong wardrobe, and wrong Enterprise.

And its a shame I have to write this also bc some small minds can't understand what nitpicking means. The production is amazing to see, and I enjoy looking at what Vic's people has done for each episode; that's enough for me to keep watching these things. It will never be Star Trek from the 1960's but I can gladly accept it for what it is... Vic Mignogna's fantasy of Star Trek.

 

[YJAGG]

Then they were really just retelling "The City On The Edge Of Forever" and that was done far, far better.

off topic I wonder if either C or NV ever thought about doing COTEOF as written by Harlan ( too much fan service?)

 

[Warped9]

No matter how supposedly brilliant Harlan's story was GR had every right to rewrite it to fit Star Trek better.

And it does.

I could see NV taking a crack at Harlan's original story, but not STC.

 

[Draculasaurus]

Then they were really just retelling "The City On The Edge Of Forever" and that was done far, far better.

Not at all.
In City on the Edge of Forever they know they are in their own past and that their presence has screwed up history. Setting it right is clearly what they have to do. It is clearly a sacrifice worth making.
In Divided We Stand they have no such certainty. They weren't risking changing the outcome of the Civil War. Kirk chose to sacrifice not knowing if it mattered because he decided that was the best way to live his life; committing to the world he was presented in accordance with his morals.
Anyway, that's the way I see it.

 

[Warped9]

Not at all.
In City on the Edge of Forever they know they are in their own past and that their presence has screwed up history. Setting it right is clearly what they have to do. It is clearly a sacrifice worth making.
In Divided We Stand they have no such certainty. They weren't risking changing the outcome of the Civil War. Kirk chose to sacrifice not knowing if it mattered because he decided that was the best way to live his life; committing to the world he was presented in accordance with his morals.
Anyway, that's the way I see it.

Regardless. It's territory already well covered before. I still this as a version of a holodeck story.