Slashdot Mirror
Trekkies Director Roger Nygard Answers
Roger Writes:
Thanks for inviting me to field questions on Slashdot. I had no idea how wide a reach this site has. It certainly outed my geek friends, those who popped me an email saying they saw the first posting. One of my editorial assistants, and Final Cut Pro expert, Jeremy Rousch, looks at me differently now. One week ago I was just some guy who had made some movies. Big deal. Now, post Slashdot mention, "I'M FAMOUS!" Being mentioned on Slashdot crossed me over some invisible line of notoriety. Thanks for that, Commander Taco.
Before I get started, here's a little background. I have directed and/or produced six independent features (3 narratives and 3 documentaries), directed and edited for the HBO series "The Mind Of The Married Man," as well as having edited a few projects.
Prior to shooting Trekkies, I had never attended a Star Trek convention, but I had been to a Fangoria convention, where I witnessed the auction of a pair of purportedly authentic Vulcan ears. They went for $350 bucks. That blew me away, and led to making sure we filmed an action in Trekkies.
And now here is my pre-plug to tell you that my requisite shameless plug is at the end of the questions, where you can find links to locate my films. (I put the pre-plug here so those who grow weary of my ranting and click away before the end will not go away plugless.)
Re:Schadenfreude? (Score:5, Interesting)
by Chundra (189402)(#10754884)
Are you a Star Trek fan?
How do you define "Star Trek fan"?
By the definition of the folks in my documentaries, the answer would be, no. The dividing line might be whether or not you have ever attended a Star Trek convention, by your own choice.
I am a sci-fi fan. Star Trek was one of many shows I loved as a kid. (Other favorites were Time Tunnel, Lost In Space, Land Of The Giants, Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea, UFO, Night Gallery, Probe, The Man From UNCLE, The Invaders, etc.) The difference was that Star Trek was on in syndication every day after school and as a result I have seen every episode of the Original Series so many times that I can still quote lines. For example:
"This is Tranya, please drink. I hope you relish it as much as I."
"There are witches, there are!"
"I remember the old ones." (Very deep voice needed)
"The one that bore me was killed in a freestyle match."
"It is not a dance, it does not gather food, it does not serve Vol."
"Sterilize! Sterilize! Must Sterilize!" -- Anyone have a pair of anti-grabs?
This stuff is forever burned into my cranium.
accusations (Score:3, Interesting)
by Savatte (111615) (#10756263)
http://www.rit.edu/~mds2184
How do you respond to accusations that you condescended and were basically laughing at the subjects in Trekkies?
I laugh at and condescend toward all those who accuse me of laughing and condescending.
Uh, let me start again...
If there is condescension in my work, I don't feel it. I like my interview subjects. Many have become my friends. Gabriel Koerner is a perfect example. We chat all the time, and he worked on Trekkies 2 doing all the digital effects, in addition to baring his soul a second time.
It's true, there is a lot of laughter in Trekkies. My feeling is that as a documentarian, you provide a soapbox for people who can choose to get on it and speak their mind, or not. Some make a great point and some don't. They are adults and it is up to them.
I've screened Trekkies for both Trek fan audiences and civilian audiences. Guess who laughs harder? The Trek fans of course. They get it, they have a great sense of humor about themselves. Or most do, anyway. Perhaps the few that don't feel like they are looking into a mirror, and they don't like what they see; they have not accepted the geek in themselves. So they accuse those who point it out as being condescending.
Being a geek should be a badge of honor. The geeks are inheriting the Earth. Who are the CEOs and the inventors and the writers and forward thinkers? Those geeks we all remember being made fun of in High School, only they are all grown up now and making bank.
Taking advantage of Star Trek geeks..... (Score:3, Interesting)
by Anonymous Coward (#10755971)
Some of the Star Trek "fans" in your movies, like the midget Daryl, clearly have mental health issues. Do you feel any need to get some of these people help or do you just profit from their stupidity like the people who make the Girls Gone Wild videos?
I don't provide counseling for anybody, but I do provide an avenue for somebody to express themselves.
All my films have been about obsession in one way or another. Obsession can be pretty funny when you take a step back and have a look at it.
And let's face it, there are certainly worse things to be obsessed with than Star Trek. Everybody has their little obsessions.
I wish I had thought of the Girls Gone Wild idea. Are you going to tell me you don't watch every nanosecond of those commercials?
Too Nerdy for The Movies (Score:5, Interesting)
by ThePolkapunk (826529) (#10756009)
Was there anything you shot or witnessed during the creation of your documentaries that was just too "hardcore" to put in? Were there things that were just so horrifically nerdy you had no choice but to leave them out? Anything that would alienate everyone except the heartiest star trek fans and alien conspiracy theorists? Was there anything that was just so scary you couldn't possibly put it on film?
No. We put it all in. The more exceptional the better. And you do have to focus on the extreme. If you made a documentary about baseball players, you wouldn't focus on the guy who bats .200, the average guy, the "normal" guy. People are intrigued by exceptional players. It's the same for any subject, including Star Trek fans.
Probably the most bizarre people I have ever encountered are some of the subjects in Six Days In Roswell, my film about UFO fanatics. We went to Roswell, New Mexico for the 50th anniversary of the alleged crash of an alien space ship and interviewed the pilgrims, the abductees, the experts, and the locals. The result? Are there really aliens? Abductions? Is that really the anal probe that was used on Whitley Streiber? You be the judge.
The award for the most extreme Star Trek fan in Trekkies 2 goes to Tony Alleyne, in England. He turned his flat into a space ship (70% based on ST: TNG) and lives in it. There is no bed, because he turned the sleeping area into transporter pads (which are functional, BTW). He sleeps on the floor. Does Tony have mental issues? I don't think so. He told us that building his Star Trek environment was therapy for him, after going through a break-up with his wife. And now he loves the publicity he gets from his creation. Similarly, anybody who goes out in public in a Star Trek uniform craves attention. What's the harm in giving it to them?
The most hilarious folks the second time around were the Star Trek theme bands in Sacramento. We shot five bands performing including, Warp 11, No Kill I, and a Klingon death metal band called Stovokor. They were so entertaining nothing else could follow them so we put that segment last in the movie. We also have released a soundtrack with two songs from each band, as well as some filk singers. ("Filk" is science fiction folk singing.)
Here are the lyrics to one of my favorite songs by No Kill I (be prepared for some profanity, the Gorn incites passions):
GORN! (by Ensign Baron von Grizman) Trekking through space Chasing some Gorn Fucking with the Federation A battle is born Taken from our ships Our savage nature calls Human pitted against Gorn Who's got the bigger balls? GORN! Can't kill Kirk GORN! Green fucking jerk! GORN! No can do! GORN! Fuck you! So we fight in an arena Amuse some fucking gods But this is Captain Kirk Not some fucking dog Gorn coming for me Like some fucking snail Death to humanity If I should fail. GORN! Can't kill Kirk GORN! Green fucking jerk! GORN! No can do! GORN! Fuck you! How 'bout a little chemistry Sulfur and coal Diamonds down the shoot Blow him a new hole! Hissing like a Sleastack The lizard king is torn Green motherfucker just got whacked! Toot my fucking horn! GORN! Can't kill Kirk GORN! Green fucking jerk! GORN! No can do! GORN! Fuck you
Why does... (Score:5, Interesting)
by WoodenRobot (726910) (#10755178)
http://www.buddhanet.net/
In your experience/opinion, why does Star Trek attract such a fanatical following, and why is there such ridicule directed towards those that consider themselves fans? It seems unique even among sci-fi franchises.
Star Trek has an underlying positive philosophy (IDIC, The Prime Directive, a better future for mankind, etc.) that makes it unique among sci-fi shows. This chord resonates among the Star Trek fans in such a way that it unites them and inspires this fanatical following.
The nerds will always attract ridicule from the less well informed (read ignorant), but the nerds have the last laugh.
Here we go (Score:5, Interesting)
by Jeffery (810339) (#10754797)
do you think the old or new Trekkies are more fanatical?
I think a cross section of each age group probably contains the same percentage of extreme fans. However, there may be fewer new Trek fans currently entering the club than there were in previous years--judged simply by the lesser interest in, and lower ratings for, the current series incarnation. By that reckoning, quantitatively, there are probably fewer fanatical new Trekkies.
Aging fanbase? (Score:5, Interesting)
by Darth23 (720385)(#10755425)
It seems to me that the Star Trek fanbase is aging, and there aren't really a lot of new fans getting into it. During the filming of Trekkies 1 and 2, did you notice large numbers of younger fans, and did there seem to be around the same number when you filmed the sequel - or did you notice any decline in the numbers of younger fans?
This is related to the previous answer. But I could add that although the numbers of new recruits per year may be fewer than in previous years, I don't think there is a declining fan base overall. Once a Trek fan always a Trek fan. But what's happening is that many, if not most, are satiated. After 6 series (I count the cartoon) and 10 movies and countless books and merchandise the fans need a little time off. I love a Thanksgiving turkey dinner as much as the next guy. But right after I've finished gorging myself, the last thing I want right then is another bite. I need some time off to digest--and then tomorrow I'll be just as hungry again for more. The fans need time to digest. That's all.
Audience (Score:5, Interesting)
by Anonymous Coward (#10755241)
I am curious about the audiences of your films. Were you intending for them to cater to the non-nerd community? Nerd community? Only hardcore fans of Star Trek, Alien Conspiracy Theorists, etc.? What audience did your films end up finding?
Like all filmmakers, I want my work to find the broadest possible audience. Otherwise you're making home movies.
With Trekkies, we knew we had a core audience of Star Trek fans, but we also wanted the film to crossover to non-fans. The sometimes contradictory reactions/reviews are fascinating. Some think the films mock Star Trek fans, some think they are a celebration of fandom. Some think Gabriel Koerner is a geek (in a negative sense), some think he is a hero.
I think the Trekkies doc is like a Rorschach test. Because we had no narration, because we don't overtly comment on the fans and their lifestyles, because we present the fans and allow the viewer to judge, people tend to project motives onto the filmmakers that coincide with attitudes within themselves. If they are intolerant of lifestyles such as those presented, they see the film as an indictment. If they are open-minded about how other people choose to live their lives, they see the film's presentation as sympathetic.
With Six Days In Roswell, we made a film that we hoped that hard-core UFO enthusiasts would enjoy as well as skeptics who find the whole thing absurd. Renowned alien experts like Stanton Friedman, Budd Hopkins, Peter Gersten, Don Schmidt and others make excellent points. But on the other hand, some people are clearly riding the alien wave doing things like selling alien beer, alien beef jerky, alien ashtrays, and staging the production, "Roswell, The Musical." --If you see only one musical before you die, you must see "Roswell, The Musical." The opening number, "Something In The Air," has to be seen to be believed and appreciated...
I also directed Suckers, a dramatic comedy about car salesman starring Daniel Benzali, Louis Mandylor, and Lori Loughlin. We thought that anybody going to buy a car (which is all of us) would enjoy seeing a realistic peek behind the curtain at a new car dealership (we reveal the secrets to how car salesmen do their tricks). Curiously, the core audience for this film turned out to be car salesmen themselves. Go into any car dealership and ask them if they have heard of Suckers and see the reaction for yourself. For them, it is sort of like mobsters watching The Godfather. They enjoy seeing their evil deeds dramatized.
More than just fandom with Trekkies? (Score:5, Interesting)
by notmikey (825548)(#10755041)
On the surface, it seems like Trekkies are just really big fans, and that fandom propels them to participate in the universe.
It seems to me, however, that something different is going on. Fandom is often emulation--the Spock ears, the "Dammit Jim" variations, that sort of thing. But Trekkies take it a step farther: they create new material that is meant to merge with the pre-existing Trek world. In this way, Trekkie-ness is more like playing D&D than being in a Sci-Fi film club.
What I wonder (and here's my question) is whether you've noticed some common ground that launches people to go past being a fan and becoming a Trekkie? Is it dissatisfaction with new series and recent movies being weaker than past ones? Possibly some other characteristic that fans tend to share that, when merged with fandom will lead into Trekkie-ness? Is there something inherent about the star trek world that encourages people to internalize their identification with the star trek world? Or is there nothing at all consistent about the way Trekkies enter that world?
You have hit on another basic vibe that makes Star Trek fans different. One critique of Trekkies was that we didn't go deep enough into this aspect of fandom (so we did in Trekkies 2).
Many Star Trek fans take what they perceive as the positive message of the show and they apply it to their lives in the real world.
For example, to move up in rank in a Star Trek club, you have to perform a certain number of hours of community service. Another example is that there is almost always a charity benefit of some kind at every convention. Why? These folks are do-gooders. They are good people. They want the world (and ultimately the Universe) to move in a direction toward the ideal portrayed in the show.
Trekkie Questions (Score:3, Funny)
by FerretFrottage (714136)(#10754850)
Do any fans buy the fact that even the slightest blast cases fires/sparks on the bridge? Do they hold the lowest price enterprise contractor responsible?
Ha! Maybe Halliburton will be out of business by the 23rd century; let's hope the Federation will have better quality contractors by then. Either way, there will always be profiteers substituting cheaper wires and pocketing the difference. But here's the upside: if there weren't selfish, greedy bastards out to line their own pockets at the expense of everybody else, battles with Klingons would be far less dramatic visually.
Something to keep in mind, post presidential election, is that in the long run conservatives always lose. If this statement were not true, we would still be living in caves. We wouldn't have cell phones, vaccines, and rockets. Conservatives will never go to the stars. They are too busy trying to hold society back.
Every new idea that is introduced is liberal at first. The idea that the Earth is round and revolves around the Sun was denounced by conservative leaders at the time. Fact-based evolution is currently being denounced and taken out of some school curriculums, to be replaced, or taught side-by-side, with faith-based creationism. Faith has it's place for some people in society, but it didn't get us to the moon and beyond.
Shooting and Editing (Score:5, Interesting)
by Anonymous Coward (#10754740)
What format are you using to shoot your documentaries (digital or film)? What workstations and applications do you use to edit your film?
Trekkies: Standard 16mm, 35 hours of raw footage, edited on an Avid, cut negative, 16mm answer print, blow-up to 35mm. We shot 16mm because we were self financing the project and that is the film format with the most cameras floating around. One of the main criteria we had when hiring camera personnel was, "Do you own a 16mm camera? You do? You're hired."
Six Days In Roswell: Super 16mm, 35 hours of raw footage, Avid, cut negative, blow up to 35mm answer print. I really wanted to try for better visual clarity on Six Days In Roswell. I love the look of Super 16mm. If you expose it properly you can't even tell it wasn't 35mm to begin with. 35 hours of raw footage is pretty low by most documentary standards, but in both Trekkies and Six Days In Roswell the footage was so rich, we didn't need to shoot more. Also, shooting film instead of video forces you to be more judicious. You can't let it run like you can with videotape.
Trekkies 2: DVCam (Sony DSR 500 and PD 150), 150 hours of raw footage, Final Cut Pro, mastered on DigiBeta. The future is digital. We shot a lot of footage, but since we were traveling to 8 different countries to create a portrait of foreign StarTrek fandom, we figured we should shoot as much as we could while there since we couldn't go back for pick ups. While Trekkies and Six Days took about 3-5 months of cutting, It took me 8 months to sort though all the Trekkies 2 footage. But the upside is in all the bonus material on the Trekkies 2 DVD, 80 minutes worth. I tried Final Cut Pro for the first time and welcomed the instant online capability.
polarity (Score:4, Funny)
by Fr05t (69968)(#10754695)
In your experiences, have you ever found a problem that couldn't be fixed by reversing the polarity of something?
A good solution in almost every exigency. Frost, you are a genius.
However, though some might, I personally wouldn't use this tactic for issues in the bedroom.
Extreme behavior (Score:5, Interesting)
by warrped (202864)(#10754840)
Have you ever considered juxtaposing the extreme yet socially reviled behavior of the 'Trekkies' against the no less extreme but socially accepted behavior of (for example) sports fans? Is it the 'socially aberrant' element that draws you to the subject?
Several fans discuss that issue in Trekkies 2. It would be humorous to dissect sports fanatics vs. Star Trek fans--but almost too easy. I'll wager that the average IQ of the guy wearing cheese on his head and screaming obscenities at a referee and the average Star Trek fan leave no comparison. It would be like shooting fish in a barrel.
There were dozens of comments suggesting future topics for Roger to apply his skills to, so I'm just lumping them all together. Roger, our readers suggest you document AD&D Players, Slashdot Readers, Football Fanatics, Everquest Addicts, and the LAN Party Phenom. They all essentially ask the question, "Why 'Trekkies'?" and how do you pick your subject matter.
I am an accidental documentarian. Trekkies was Denise Crosby's idea. I cast her in my first film, High Strung (which stars Steve Oedekerk, and will be re-released by Steve next year), and a few years later she pitched the Trek fan doc idea to me. I said, "I can't believe nobody has done this yet. It seems so obvious." After shooting our first weekend, I was hooked on documentaries. Unlike a narrative project, where it's a challenge to come as close to the script as possible, shooting a doc is a journey, it's exciting not knowing what's around the next corner, how the story will end.
What's next? I'll wager it will have to do with obsession. I'm sure all the ideas proposed above have their "extreme" members. But it will depend on the person, or persons, profiled. You can't make documentaries about things, you have to make them about people. When I meet the person involved in one of these activities who is so interesting that he has to be profiled, I'll start shooting footage immediately. Where are you? Are you out there? Drop me an e-mail (See my address below).
The quintessential question: (Score:3, Interesting)
by Jucius Maximus (229128) (#10754795)
Which captain do you think was the best?
I asked that very question of Star Trek fans in 1996 when we put up our first Trekkies website. The votes for 32 different captains are posted if you want to have a look. (Websites below.)
To summarize, Picard barely edged out Kirk, 2826 to 2799 votes. Q got the most votes for a non-Federation captain at 2079. I'm gonna go with Captain Pike (1178 votes).
For the last time... (Score:2)
by DwarfGoanna (447841) (#10755766)
I'm a Trek-KER you....*sigh* insensitive clod!!
That's cool. Is it cool for some to call themselves a Trekkie? We get even further into that world-rattling debate in Trekkies 2.
your last name (Score:2)
by latroM (652152) (#10755348)
Do you have Finnish or Swedish relatives? My surname is Nygård, so I'm quite interested.
Are you aware of the fact that you've been misspelling your name your whole life?
Ha! Yes. We don't have that "a" with the little knob on our keyboard over here. We will have to import some of those knobs.
My great grandfather, Louis Nygaard, came to Minnesota from Norway. He dropped the extra "a" at some point, saving the family thousands of pounds of ink over the generations.
Why weren't Shatner or Stewart interviewed? (Score:5, Interesting)
by GuyMannDude (574364) (#10756041)
My first question of the director is if he could verify my assumption: that Shatner and Stewart weren't interviewed for Trekkies because of money (as opposed to a conscious decision by the director to focus on the other actors). Second, if you did, indeed, want them in the film and they refused, did you work hard to get them? Did you try to negotiate their payment? Did they even consider your offer? Or did you simply get a letter from their agent saying, essentially, "Mr. Shatner is too important to be interviewed in your two-bit documentary."
We indeed wanted to include William Shatner and Patrick Stewart. Shatner is included briefly meeting with his fan club in Trekkies, but he refused to sit for an interview.
The way we got our interview subjects, was to ask to interview them whenever we crossed paths at conventions. When we tried to go through proper channels like agents, managers, and publicists, it was fruitless (Connor Trinneer is the exception). I think we are still waiting for Avery Brooks' agent to call us back. Our paths never crossed initially with Patrick Stewart, and the word we have gotten back since is that he is not a fan of the first film.
We never paid anybody for an interview. Documentaries typically do not pay their subjects. It's the nature of the form. If you had to pay everybody, documentaries would never get made because doc budgets are very low. Our budget on Trekkies was $120,000 by the time we got to a 16mm answer print. That money was coming out of our own pockets, so we couldn't afford to throw it around.
Favorite Episode? (Score:0, Funny)
by Anonymous Coward (#10754706)
Do you have a favorite Star Trek episode and a favorite series? If you say Voyager or Enterprise, you may be lynched.
The one where Frank Gorshin is running. Original series fans know exactly what I'm talking about.
Shameless plugging link zone! Here is where you can get Roger's films.
Trekkies & Trekkies 2 (available internet retailers, Best Buy stores, and hip DVD stores)
Favorite Captain tally
Official Paramount Site
Trekkies 2 soundtrack a Reboot Music release.
Six Days In Roswell on DVD or VHS
Lastly, here is Roger Nygard's Homepage and his email (which he included, so don't blame me, at least I fuzed it up for the robots!)
Thanks for your time Roger... Good luck on whatever you tackle next.
I seem to see a lot of comments lower than a score of 5. Don't we always use the high scores? Or is moderation so broken, you've given up using it as an excuse?
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
FTI: That blew me away, and led to making sure we filmed an action in Trekkies.
:-)
You are used to saying "ACTION" a lot, eh?
Thinking you're talking about an auction, right?
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
qntm.org
or is that so 90s now?
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
"why is there such ridicule directed towards those that consider themselves fans? It seems unique even among sci-fi franchises"
The nerds will always attract ridicule from the less well informed (read ignorant)....
That's funny, here I thought it was because it was the franchise most likely to inspire morbidly obese men to don skin-tight clothing and prostheses.
But seriously, I would say that a fairly specific image of the nerdy "trekkie" has been part of our collective consciousness for almost as long as the original series has been a fixture in popular culture. The same can't be said of the fanbase of Star Wars, Doctor Who, Tolkien's works, roleplaying games, or other immersive universes likely to inspire emulation; there just isn't a visual archetype for people to latch on to.
"Brain and brain! What is brain!"
-- Don't Tase me, bro!
"[Tony Alleyne] turned the sleeping area into transporter pads (which are functional, BTW)."
:)
Dude, hook me up with one of those! I'd much rather beam from place to place than spend part of my paycheck on gas every week!
"You're older than you've ever been, and now you're even older."
There is no bed, because he turned the sleeping area into transporter pads (which are functional, BTW)
.. Please describe the level of functionality. I can only assume they light up so this dork(*) can pretend he's beaming himself somewhere. People should really be more careful in their choice of words... functional transporter pads, LOL...
What the fuck? (Sorry, still have the GORN song in my head)
(*) Yeah, I know, if I'm posting here then I'm one too, yadda yadda...
Um, say what? The only relevant link I could find was a BBC show which has the guy claiming it works.
Bad italic tag placement in notmikey's question, by the way.
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
I remember "NO KILL I" pretty well too.
This one seems kind of obvious to me. When Star Trek was new it was basically the only game in town (lost in space notwithstanding) and it was amazingly revolutionary stuff for television. All the other shows are just more of the same, and they don't tend to push boundaries to nearly the same degree as TOS.
These days trek faces [and has faced] competition from other sci-fi shows which are arguably better, like Stargate, Babylon 5, et cetera. Back then, there was no competition.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes. --E. W. Dijkstra
Of course they work; they just have trouble teleporting anything larger than 10^-15 Angstroms.
NMG
How do you respond to accusations that you condescended and were basically laughing at the subjects in Trekkies?
I laugh at and condescend toward all those who accuse me of laughing and condescending.
Spoken like a true geek. Often times, I do the same thing to people who _laugh_ and _condescend_ me. Have made a lot of people think of me as a jerk, but these aren't the kinda people I particularly want to be associated with, anyway.
I'm an old geek (by today's thinking anyway) and i grew up watching ST-TOS. I had toy spock ears and phasers... I was called a Trekkie.
Nowadays some people call themselves trekkers...
Having been around since the beginning, is it fair to guess that Trekkies are OTS fans, whereas Trekkers and NG and newer?
Something to keep in mind, post presidential election, is that in the long run conservatives always lose. If this statement were not true, we would still be living in caves. We wouldn't have cell phones, vaccines, and rockets. Conservatives will never go to the stars. They are too busy trying to hold society back.
Every new idea that is introduced is liberal at first. The idea that the Earth is round and revolves around the Sun was denounced by conservative leaders at the time. Fact-based evolution is currently being denounced and taken out of some school curriculums, to be replaced, or taught side-by-side, with faith-based creationism. Faith has it's place for some people in society, but it didn't get us to the moon and beyond.
I was thinking of buying these documentaries - it's the first I've heard of them - but now, count me out. Why do you people always feel the need to get in a political or religious jab? I am a conservative leaning Libertarian, a Christian, and a Star Trek fan. I fully support any and all investment into space based technology. Then assholes like you come along with comments like this?
Screw that. I won't support your idiocy. Just like these Hollywood idiots who think they're politicians, you can't keep your mouth shut. Well, that's two lost sales.
Did someone have their personality slit in a malfunctioning transporter?
gee, you'd think the nice fatcatman would buy a copy at least.
"Omnis tuus capsa sunt inesse nos"
Or is the first (TOS) series just incredibly boring? Don't get me wrong, I love The Next Generation. I even helped a petition by reporing on it in our online paper (it got 150 000 signatures in a country of 4 000 000).
But TOS seem to be for those who lived in an era with low expecations on story and effects. IMHO, TNG (WTF? BBQ!) was the first series that had acceptable story lines and effects to accomodate such a series concept.
I also, god help me, like Enterprise. * ducks * Hey! I like the prinicple that man is fallable and stumbles out in the universe. Kirk seems to be a pompous asshole in TOS, and McCoy is just a cockknocker. The characters develops in TNG, and even in Enterprise.
I would've thought someone like Wil Wheaton would be totally open to a full interview for this sort of thing without needing to be paid or having to bother an agent/manager. I wonder if he was asked and if so, why did he refuse?
Trolls lurk everywhere. Mod them down.
At school when the halls are filled with foolish idiots I am ordering the helm to navigate thru them. Also tactical and engineering are there too. a typical walk is like "helm set a course for ..... full impulse, hard starboard, tactical raise sheilds and give me weapons"
For some more entertaining and obscenity containing Star Trek music, see Voltaire, the musician not the philosopher or author. I consider this guy a creative genius, which may say a bit more about me that I really intend. :)
Frank Gorshin was the black-and-white faced alien (or was taht the white-and-black... hmmm) in "Let This Be Your Battlefield", and an old-series episode, but was better known as The Riddler from the old Batman series.
I saw him on stage once in a play whose name I don't recall. He obviously was not feeling well, and I was left underwhelmed, but I still think he's great.
It's great to see the Gorn get some mention, even if it's just a silly song. I always thought that epsiode (Arena) was fascinating. When I was a kid, I loved this episode because it features Kirk fighting against a dinosaur-looking alien. As an adult, I can appreciate it even more. Unlike so many Star Trek epsiodes where Kirk is lecturing some other species about justice or equality, here Kirk is taught an important lesson about his own prejudice.
The episode begins with the Enterprise finding a Federation colony under savage attack by an unknown species. Countless men, women, and children -- all civilians -- have been slaughtered. Kirk is enraged and chases the attacking vessel across space. Spock tries to talk some sense into Kirk but he will have none of it. He pushes his vessel past safe limits in an attempt to catch the aliens. When when the two ships travel into space claimed by the Metrons -- an advanced, pacifistic species -- the situation changes considerably.
Realizing that both the Enterprise and the aliens are running on pure adreneline and not thinking things out, the Metrons decide to let the two sides satisfy their thirst for violence through a one-on-one battle between the captain of each starship. Kirk and the captain of the alien ship are transported to the surface of a barren world where they are to engage in hand-to-hand combat to the death. To Kirk's horror, he finds that his opponent is from a species of incredibly strong reptiles named the Gorn. Kirk quickly discovers that he is physically outmatched.
What makes this episode so fascinating is how Kirk changes during the course of the conflict. At the start, he is openly hateful of the Gorn, even going so far to as to admit that he has a natural revulsion towards reptiles. He considers them lower lifeforms. However, he is aware of his prejudice against them and forces himself to remember that his opponent is every much his equal intellectually. Late in the battle, he communicates with the Gorn captain through the universal translator device and discovers that the Gorn attacked the Federation colony because they believed it was an invasion. For the first time, Kirk is able to see the situation from the other side. The Gorn were acting in (perceived) self-defense.
By the time that the battle has finally reached the final confrontation between the two, Kirk has come to the conclusion that he is not qualified to judge the action of this species nor dispense justice. His surprising resolution of the conflict impresses the Metrons, who have been overseeing the battle.
The ambition of this episode -- airing in the 60s and with a limited budget -- is staggering in retrospect. Shooting a battle between Kirk and a reptile running around in the desert is impressive enough. But the fact that Kirk, the quintessential hero, is able to admit that he may have been wrong is something that is rare even in today's popular TV shows and movies. This episode was well before its time. Everyone remembers that episode where Spock has to wed that cold-hearted, logical Vulcan babe -- why doesn't Arena get mentioned more often as a fan favorite?
GMD
watch this
Man, I've never done this before (the MOD PARENT UP thing). Makes me feel... unclean...
But yeah, parent is hilarious, I think because it's what we're all thinking, and is concise.
Posting anonymous for as to not Karma whore, but....
O ne_TrekkedOut_Home.html
http://www.g4techtv.com/freshgear/features/43787/
He told us that building his Star Trek environment was therapy for him, after going through a break-up with his wife.
Hmm...are you sure you've got that the right way round?
It's been a while since I watched the first one, but I could've sworn that there was a minute or two of Wil saying something in response to an interview question cut into it somewhere. I can't remember the topic at that point, though. Maybe I'll pop it in and check when I get home.
"You're older than you've ever been, and now you're even older."
Every new idea that is introduced is liberal at first.
Read another way: Every good idea was once new... therefore every new idea is good...
That just doesn't follow, even if you agree with his point.
We interviewd Wil in the first Trekkies and he was great. Very gracious and intelligent. We ran into him at a Pasadena Creation convention. A good egg.
It's probably true that Trek fans are more intelligent than sports fans.
Lest the nerds on /. get too arrogant, though, I think I should point out that this is likely because sports fans comprise a much larger demographic. Interest in Trek (and SF, for that matter) is characteristic of people of above normal intelligence only. There are plenty of intelligent sports fans. It's just that there are plenty of sports fans of normal intelligence as well. That's not nearly as likely with regard to Trek.
"Beer is proof God loves us and wants us to be happy." -- B. Franklin
I also wanted to point out that the Trekkies 2 soundtrack is available on the Apple Music Store (Easy link).
Unfortunately Gorn is not on it, it would seem.
- (c) 2018 Hank Zimmerman
Great, now I'm going to have those lyrics stuck in my head for the next week.
At least it's better than the Llama Song.
Something to keep in mind, post presidential election, is that in the long run conservatives always lose. If this statement were not true, we would still be living in caves. We wouldn't have cell phones, vaccines, and rockets. Conservatives will never go to the stars. They are too busy trying to hold society back.
::cues the right wing fanatics::
Every new idea that is introduced is liberal at first. The idea that the Earth is round and revolves around the Sun was denounced by conservative leaders at the time. Fact-based evolution is currently being denounced and taken out of some school curriculums, to be replaced, or taught side-by-side, with faith-based creationism. Faith has it's place for some people in society, but it didn't get us to the moon and beyond.
FLAME ON!!
[Star Trek III]
[Star Trek: The Motion Picture]
[Star Trek VI]
Conservatives will never go to the stars. They are too busy trying to hold society back.
Some conservatives, the classically liberal ones, not the neo ones, are trying to hold the government back so society can go forward.
Faith has it's place for some people in society, but it didn't get us to the moon and beyond.
Tell that to many of the Apollo astronauts. Some would say their faith got them to the moon and who is this atheist to argue.
And the church has a lot to do with the birth of the scientific method.
Several fans discuss that issue in Trekkies 2. It would be humorous to dissect sports fanatics vs. Star Trek fans--but almost too easy. I'll wager that the average IQ of the guy wearing cheese on his head and screaming obscenities at a referee and the average Star Trek fan leave no comparison. It would be like shooting fish in a barrel.
Frontline covered this in an episode called The Persuaders. It is about how brands are able to engender such loyalty and how marketeers work to get enough people to self-associate with an inert product.
What was interesting was how some of the original studies of fans (of wrestling and others. I guess you can include sports and Trek in there) were compared to the study of cults and how the social patterns were eerily identical. As if there's some sort of primal need to merge with an icon.
It suddenly made sense why people said "Trek/sports is a religion".
What is music when you despise all sound?
Man, get with the times! How do you think all those technology companies got to China? They beamed over there, of course! Geez...and silly Americans think the Chinese are less advanced. =P
Hey, very good of you to sign up Roger. Extra cool points for you.
BTW, you've got mail.
DG
Want to learn about race cars? Read my Book
average IQ of the guy wearing cheese on his head and screaming obscenities at a referee and the average Star Trek fan leave no comparison
I would highly doubt that. Watching Sci-Fi doesn't instantly make you any more intellegent then anyone else, the fanatical fans are probably just as stupid as the cheesehead, and guess what, the fans in general have the same intellegence level as anyone else. He's just saying what he thinks Slashdot wants to hear.
"I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
Thanks for letting us put you "on camera" and answering our questions!
I have seen an extremely high percentage of your films (even back to the "Indestructible Man" series and "Beyond the Phone") and am familiar with your writing. I appreciate the way with your documentaries you have been able to throw your subjects' uniquenesses into sharp relief, presenting a spectacle without ever crossing the boundary into ridicule or condescension. I could never do what you do; I just don't have that kind of sensitivity. That you're an "accidental" documentarian is simply amazing.
Now check your server traffic and bear witness to the slashdot effect!
-MN '82 Thespian
At least Kirk could bluff a Klingon by threatening to blow his ship up and contaminate the entire sector with radioactive crap every once in a while!
Of course, good and evil is pretty cut and dried in a lot of sci-fi universes and Trek's no exception. I much prefer the early seasons of Farscape (Before the whole thing turned into a soap-opera in space) where the good guys were sometimes bad, the bad guys were sometimes good and everyone had their own ambitions which made them behave unpredictably from time to time.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
I feel almost famous now that i've had a question answered by the guy that made trekkies! :) i'll never wash this keyboard........
President Bush Supporter
If they are intolerant of lifestyles such as those presented, they see the film as an indictment. If they are open-minded about how other people choose to live their lives, they see the film's presentation as sympathetic.
Aww. Lay off a little, maybe? They're being overly harsh to you, but there are myriad more acceptable reasons for them to do so. They're overprotective. Lord only knows why.
This reminds me of the Irreversible director saying that everyone who was offended by his movie was only offended because they identified with the rapist. You can presume to know how to make a film, but not necessarily to know your audience. At least not so well.
And Iduno. I haven't seen the movies. Maybe he's right.
There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
I would say it's the opposite, actually: Being intelligent makes you more likely to find science fiction interesting.
"the fanatical fans are probably just as stupid as the cheesehead,"
Just as fanatical, perhaps, but probably not as stupid.
"and guess what, the fans in general have the same intellegence level as anyone else."
Unlikely. Geeks tend to be smarter than average. It's part of what marginalizes them in the first place.
Well, I hate Star Trek but I'm a filthy atheist liberal so I'd better buy ten!
According to Nygard, best... episode... ever
...but not half as good as the story that episode is based upon. Granted, the FX needed to do Brown's story justice were probably way beyond the 196x state of the art.
Life is like surrealism: if you have to have it explained to you, you can't afford it.
They are fully functional transporter pads. The only problem is that he has the only ones, and his remote targetting system isn't done yet, so when you hop on and he fires it up, the computer can only lock onto... the same pads.
And there you are. Instantly!!
Wasn't this director's "Six Days in Roswell" documentary aired on (the former) TechTV's series known as "Nerd Nation"? I was curious if anything had been cut out of that version broadcast on the channel vs. the original presentation. What I saw of it was great.
The Lynxpro
"Read another way: Every good idea was once new... therefore every new idea is good..."
You are engaging in a logical fallacy, much like "Dogs have four legs, my cat has four legs, therefore my cat is a dog" (lesson: just because a line of logic works in one direction, it doesn't automatically work in reverse).
To read it correctly: Every idea was new once, new ideas take some time to be accepted and replace the existing wisdom and so are likely to be adopted by the more liberal minded first, therefore new ideas are liberal (and those retaining the old ideas are, by implication, conservative).
The relative merits of new ideas versus old doesn't come into it, Nygard was pointing out that if nobody was PREPARED to try new ideas (like, I don't know, sailing west to the Indes, for example), nothing would ever have been achieved.
Breakfast served all day!
i think you're confusing party affiliation with conservative/liberal leanings. being a republican doesn't make you a conservative on all topics.
people who are generally conservative don't go out on a limb. and as they say, nothing ventured nothing gained.
After being insulted at first by Roger's answer, I realized it wasn't logical either. I am not convinced that new ideas are only thought up by "liberals". I think the differentiation shouldn't be thinking of new ideas, but the motivational/moral/ethical/political framework that examines new ideas and what to do with them.
We will have to import some of those knobs.
Please don't! We have enough knobs, tools, pricks, and jerks over here as it is!!
PC forces us all to use convoluted speech for any number ethic/financial/demographic/physical conditions. It's stupid enough as it is. I absolutely refuse to give PC lovin' to people who take a TV show too seriously. Trekkies who insist on "Trekkers" need to "get a life."
..... Trekkies, TREKKIES, Trekeeeeeeeeeeezzzzzzzzzzzzzzeeeeee!
Is that a howl of protest I hear?
1)Make cool documentary.
2)Be interviewed by Slashdot.
3)Respond to comments made about your interview.
4)Karma++
5)????
6)Profit!!!
Laugh at stupidity: mod idiots +1 Funny.
My first submitted question, and it's a throwaway cliche I didn't even expect to get modded up. Why did it get submitted at 2?
"You know why you do not see me styling wit my homies? Because I have no homies!!" -Mojo Jojo
If you're the guy who made the documentary with the selection on the Star Trek dentist -- I liked it very much. :)
I'm no insane Trekker, but I'm forced to admit I was once the First Office of the local Trek club, and I went as Data last year for Halloween (and I'm 31 years old).
My Data costume was awesome, too. Cheap, effective, and EVERYBODY knew who I was. I guess that says something about TNG!
Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
But what's happening is that many, if not most, are satiated. After 6 series (I count the cartoon) and 10 movies and countless books and merchandise the fans need a little time off. I love a Thanksgiving turkey dinner as much as the next guy. But right after I've finished gorging myself, the last thing I want right then is another bite. I need some time off to digest--and then tomorrow I'll be just as hungry again for more. The fans need time to digest. That's all.
But there is still a lot of things left under-explored in the Trek universe.
For example, I would like to see a series based on a Klingon ship and crew that recently joined the Federation. Two earthlings are assigned to the crew, and have to deal face-on with Klingon culture. It would be like boyscout nerds joining the football team. A Klingon focus would bring in the wrestling crowd, football fans, etc., creating a whole new set of fans.
Table-ized A.I.
A bunch of us were at a friend's house, and the remote control for the TV wasn't working. I opened it up and noticed that the batteries had been put in backwards. I took great pleasure in saying, out loud;
"I just have to REVERSE THE POLARITY!"
At which point two of us were overcome with hysterical convulsions of laughter for at least a half hour. Everyone else just kind of stared at us, wondering what the hell was so funny.
I guess they weren't Trek fans..
Don't knock HTML email. It makes my life easier, since I
But I have to respectfully disagree with your comments about conservatives giving money to corporate tax breaks rather than NASA. Funny you chose that as your example, because a common argument against space exploration has been "We have problems here on earth that need to be fixed first."
Government as a tool for solving social problems is solid liberal ground, especially when it comes to spending tax dollars.
I'll tell you what the 'effect' is! It's pissing me off!
Props on a reasonably interesting and entertaining Q&A. However, having seen many of the endless reruns of ST: TOS for about 30 years now, I must point it out if no one else will:
;-) Since I'm already in too deep, may as well point out that in (one of) the TOS episodes about androids, phrases like "I remember the old ones" must not be uttered without a 'Yes' coming either before or after said statement, no matter how deep one's voice is.
Anti-grabs? WTF?! Surely a true sci-fi fan knows that anti-graV is shorthand for anti-gravity, which perhaps would be a reasonable technical basis for dragging Nomad around good old NCC-1701. The V and B keys are adjacent, so maybe that was just a typo.
I just hope I'm not wrong. If it turns out that they did use anti-grabs, which would be I suppose a defense against unwanted sexual advances, then I'd have to surrender my fake Starfleet uniform after having made such a basic scientific error.
Uh oh... perhaps I have said too much.
Oh well, a certain twitch tells me it is time to watch the DS9 episode again where crewmembers inadvertently trigger old security systems, after which hilarity ensues. Must consult TiVo on when it will be shown again.
Finally, I've been waiting for a good Trek thread to say, as shameful as some might believe these admissions to be: I like Captain Janeway, enjoyed many of the Voyager episodes (though the series had as many rough spots as any ST series) regardless of 7of9's cleavage, and occasionally even enjoy an EP of Enterprise. Speaking of cleavage, was it just my circle of friends who referred to Counselor Troi as Counselor Cleavage in TNG, or was that more universal?
If it helps redeem my sci-fi cred' at all, I'd much rather be watching a new series from JMS, whether or not it was based on the Babylon 5 universe. Dark and heavy or not, I miss great new JMS material like B5 even more than I miss great ST material, damn it.
Let's examine, shall we?
Gorn: 6'3", ugly, mulifaceted eyes, male
T'Pring: 5'3", hot babe, exotic eyes, female
T'Pring is WAY more BONKABLE. THAT's why it's a fan favorite.
If you get a chubby over the Gorn, you've got some serious issues...
Actually, since the Lord, God, created this world 6000 years ago exactly as it is today, he also created all the good ideas back then too. Therefore, from our perspective, there are no good liberal ideas, because our lord and saviour gave all the good ideas to us just as our race began, leaving only crappy ideas like communism to be thought of by imperfect humans.
When we find the fossilized space ship, we'll show ALL you whiny liberals how things are really done! AND WE'LL BOMB IRAQ, BECAUSE IT'S JUST FUN TO DO! MWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
It's been a long time.
It really turns me on when you get all totalitarian and threatening! I'm going to think about your words again and again as I beat of to pictures of John Ashcroft and Benito Mussolini.
Oh, and thanks for adding to the impression that all us conservatives are idiots. An intelligent conservative might understand the sense in which Nygard was using the word conservative, and not get all bent out of shape.
Conservative is not some brand or trademark that belongs exclusively to the GOP, despite the way certain intellectual thugs are trying to co-opt it (just as they've tried to make Liberal a dirty word).
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
Read another way: Every good idea was once new... therefore every new idea is good...
The two statements are not equivalent, because you have made the converse error. Please read this for details.
Vino, gyno, and techno -Bruce Sterling
I don't think you're looking at it with proper logic... He is implying the use of an "->" operator, which is basically saying:
Good idea -> was new idea
This operator works only in one direction. I doubt highly that it was meant to be interpreted the other way around, as that would be illogical. But it seems pretty obvious that he didn't mean it to be the other way around, which is perfectly valid given the rules of logic. The problem isn't with what he said, but the fact that you tried to distort the meaning. When someone is giving a one way relationship, and you assume it is two way in order to invalidate it, you are invalidating the argument on fallacious grounds...
I believe it's called the Straw Man argument: misrepresenting an opinion in order to disprove it.
The fact of his assertion is that indeed every good idea was once new (A(X)(good(X) -> was new(X)). He then asserts that every new idea begins as being liberal (A(X)(Was New(X) -> Was Liberal(X)).
Let's do a little proof, shall we?
F = Good Idea
G = New Idea
H = Liberal Idea Goal: To prove A(X)(F(X) -> H(X))
1. A(X)(F(X)->G(X)) : Premise
2. A(X)(G(X)->H(X)) : Premise
3. F(c) -> G(c) : Universal Instantiation, 1
4. G(c) -> H(c) : Universal Instatiation, 2
5. F(c) -> H(c) : Hypothetical Syllogism, 3, 4
6. A(X)(F(X) -> H(X)) : Universal Instantiation, 5
Q.E.D.
What he was saying was logically valid. I don't see what you were complaining about... unless your intent was to purposely distort his position. You can say that his premises are incorrect (for example, that new ideas aren't always liberal, although that is questionable given the definition of Liberal... perhaps you could accuse him of Equivocation, as the definition of Liberal and the Semiotic meaning differ greatly) , but you cannot question the argument's structural validity.
-Vendal Thornheart
Brief correction of the above... line 6 of my proof was a Universal Generalization. Proof stays the same, I had just mislabeled the name of the rule.
-Vendal Thornheart
Good try, but you are guilty of similar fallacies to Mr. Nygard himself. In his argument, he is equivocating the strict definition of Liberal (that is, that which is unorthodox or against the status quo, which by definition is all truly "new" ideas) with the political definition. Indeed, your points about political Conservatism and Liberalism are both correct and valid: but since his argument was an equivocation to begin with (that is, though Mr. Nygard equivocates to Political liberalism, he is speaking of the "real" Liberal definition), it doesn't really address the direct issue. (not that it was bad argument you had [quite the contrary], but it was unnecessary.)
While he was guilty of Equivocation, you are guilty of the Straw Man fallacy towards the end of your argument. His argument was obviously not that Faith doesn't have a place in Society: though it was not worded the best way, it is painfully obvious that he feels that Faith should not be an imposed standard in our society: that is, for example, it should not be taught in schools.
-Vendal Thornheart
I have just printed out the 'little' discussion and I am keeping it next to my bed for next time I am having trouble sleeping.
When I was young we had no bloody CGI and special effects. The actors did it all with scary expressions, and the audience crapped their pants at the imagination of the horrendous events that took place off-screen. That's how we did sex scenes too, btw.
First, the Christian east never experienced the dark ages. If anything was the golden age of Christianity, it was the eastern Roman empire centered at Byzantium.
Second, the reason that western Europe experienced the dark ages was that the western Roman empire fell to repeated attacks by a number of various tribes (Vandals, Goths, etc.) most of which were Pagan.
If anything, it was Christianity that held society together during the dark ages in western Europe. If it hadn't been for libraries inside monasteries the written word would have virtually disappeared in the west.
Further, Christians from all eras have always been on the leading edge of progress. Gregor Mendel pioneered genetic theory. Blaise Pascal pioneered many areas of mathematics and discovered the vacuum. Louis Pasteur pioneered organic chemistry. Isaac Newton pioneered physics and calculus. Lord Kelvin pioneered modern thermodynamics.
Most of these men were not scientists in spite of being Christian, but were scientists because they were Christian. Believing that nature was God's creation, they thought that by investigating nature, they would learn more about God.
The view that Christianity has been a negative force with regards to scientific progress is an intentional distortion that was created during the Renaissance and Enlightenment and swallowed hook, line and sinker by many in the modern era. This negativity towards Christianity certainly has some basis in reason as the suppression of Galileo by the Catholic Church demonstrates. But to take that one side of the picture and present it as the full story only presents a small fraction of the entire story. For every Galileo that was persecuted by Christianity, there is a Mendel that was actively encouraged by Christianity.
"Speaking of cleavage, was it just my circle of friends who referred to Counselor Troi as Counselor Cleavage in TNG, or was that more universal?"
It was everyone.
Also, didja notice in the TNG pilot, how Troi was sitting at the bridge, in a miniskirt, and the camrea was placed at knee level?