5-Year Mission Continues After 45-Year Hiatus

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

5-Year Mission Continues After 45-Year Hiatus

Posted by Soulskill on Wednesday October 23, 2013 @08:22AM from the fascinating dept.

Okian Warrior writes "Hackaday brings us news about a continuation of the original Star Trek series. The Kickstarter-funded project is attempting to complete the original 5-year mission, which ended after only three seasons on the air. The fan-based and fan-supported reincarnation is cleverly titled Star Trek Continues and has CBS's consent. Check out the first episode, Pilgrim of Eternity. For being fan-made, it's actually pretty good." The attention to detail in the sets, costumes, and even lighting is incredible. It's far and away the most faithful re-creation of the original series I've ever seen.

201 of 283 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

45 years ago... by bob_super · 2013-10-23 08:24 · Score: 2

I can think of a few other things from 1968 that we'd like to get back...
1. Re:45 years ago... by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · 2013-10-23 08:27 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  I miss Richard Nixon, too.
  
  --
  (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
2. Re:45 years ago... by AlphaWolf_HK · 2013-10-23 08:49 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  I guess I'm a younger trek fan myself (started with TNG,) as I was never into the original series. I kind of forced myself to watch it while I was sick once (every episode) and didn't really think it was anything special.
  Modern references to star trek make kirk out to be this player who always gets laid, getting into fights, and talking like he was in the middle of a stroke. I never saw the getting laid, and the fights weren't anything spectacular like the JJ Abrams movies, and while he did talk like he had a stroke on occasion it isn't as bad as they parody it. Could be one of those things where you just had to be alive during that era to appreciate it (I was born in the 80's,) as I guess the getting laid part would have to be implied in more subtle ways than they were able to do with e.g. Data and Tasha Yarr in TNG as it was probably illegal back then.
  I did watch the first few minutes of this fan fic, and it does seem pretty true to the original. That said, I think if you're a fan of the original this is probably for you, but I couldn't remain interested for very long.
  
  --
  Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
3. Re:45 years ago... by Tiger4 · 2013-10-23 08:57 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Let's not get too hasty! Wandering in the wilderness is not to everyone's taste
  
  --
  Behold, this dreamer cometh. Come now, and let us slay him... and we shall see what will become of his dreams.
4. Re:45 years ago... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · 2013-10-23 09:06 · Score: 2
  
  I can think of a few other things from 1968 that we'd like to get back...
  But not the tank invasion, please...
  
  --
  Ezekiel 23:20
5. Re:45 years ago... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-23 09:11 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  The plots on the original series were more about cultural & human phenomenons that Roddenberry wanted to point out as things we need to overcome as a species. Later inclusions became more about the "gee whiz, rocket ships and 'splosions!" Perhaps you were expecting more the latter with none of the former?
6. Re:45 years ago... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-23 09:15 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  Could be one of those things where you just had to be alive during that era to appreciate it (I was born in the 80's,) as I guess the getting laid part would have to be implied in more subtle ways
  
  Or it could be that you are really obtuse. If you can't honestly see that Kirk got his hands on more women than Pickard I'd have to say the failure is in your lack of education more than anything else.
  
  the fights weren't anything spectacular like the JJ Abrams movies
  
  Again, you're obtuse. No one has probably ever said that the fights in TOS were spectacular, just that Kirk was quick to throw a fist in comparison to any other Enterprise captain.
  
  while he did talk like he had a stroke on occasion it isn't as bad as they parody it.
  
  Total facepalm on this one. You obviously don't deal much with the realm of parody.
  
  I couldn't remain interested for very long.
  
  Probably not enough CGI and T&A to keep you strung along, eh? You seem like a very jaded little gem from the current generation of unimaginative gimps that were raised on endless doses movies that have paper thin plots and an average shot time of about 3.2 seconds. I just love talking to your ilk about anything. So dimwitted that you can't appreciate something that isn't smacking you in the face for your total attention at every opportunity.
  
  A generation of overstiumlated bores.
7. Re:45 years ago... by Jeremiah+Cornelius · 2013-10-23 09:17 · Score: 1
  
  This "un-boot" has everything of the original - except for the charm of the premise, the ethic of storytelling, and the charisma of the players.
  
  --
  "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
  Never been known to fail..."
8. Re:45 years ago... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-23 09:20 · Score: 1
  
  Could be one of those things where you just had to be alive during that era to appreciate it (I was born in the 80's,) as I guess the getting laid part would have to be implied in more subtle ways than they were able to do with e.g. Data and Tasha Yarr in TNG as it was probably illegal back then.
  Oh it would have been legal; they just didn't have the battery technology for Data to make that scene.
9. Re:45 years ago... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-23 09:23 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  I don't know what you mean? I was born and raised in the 80s with TNG, and Kirk always came across as he did in the canon proper.. as a man who's legend preceded him due to circumstance and valor, like any legend. Even the womanizing thing is more of a bit of pop culture parody than canon.
  I don't know about my generation's fixation with fight scenes, but Abram's doesn't do it for me. I'll take a badly-staged Kirk vs Kahn fight scene over what I saw in the new films any day, because I managed to invest in the characters. That, and the unique blend of camp and seriousness just doesn't exist in Abram's remakes.
  Moreover, while most of the TOS episodes don't hold up too well today, some of them still do if you're willing to give them a few conceits relevant to their era. It's not like there's a higher ratio of "gold" to "crap" in modern Trek series; as much as I wish there was, if I'm being fair to TOS, even my beloved TNG didn't really fare any better once I factor out nostalgia.
  I'm more interested in seeing this because it means other projects might come about from it, including TNG, Babylon 5, and other shows I wish got more such love from their fandoms. Seeing original actors involved in a passion project is icing on the cake.
10. Re:45 years ago... by operagost · 2013-10-23 09:27 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  We already got him back... he's a black Democrat.
  *ducks downmods*
  
  --
  
  Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
11. Re:45 years ago... by Gilmoure · 2013-10-23 09:27 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  Don't sugar coat it; tell him how you really feel.
  
  --
  I drank what? -- Socrates
12. Re:45 years ago... by cayenne8 · 2013-10-23 09:28 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Like pubic hair? Yea, I'm pretty sick of all this "look like a little girl when I'm really 30" crap, too.
  Ugh...no!!!
  Look at some good old, 70's pr0n....Debbie Does Dallas or the like, man...if you wanted to go down on one of those ladies, you'd better take a machete and a sherpa with you if you wanted any hope of ever returning alive!!
  Seriously, I don't like mandatory flossing after eating....
  
  --
  Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
13. Re:45 years ago... by Bucc5062 · 2013-10-23 09:33 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, I enjoyed that one...and agreed.
  
  --
  Life is a great ride, the vehicle doesn't matter
14. Re:45 years ago... by Dripdry · 2013-10-23 09:33 · Score: 1
  
  Give it a proper Kickstarter pitch and a little song and dance number... who knows, anything's possible!
  
  --
  -
15. Re:45 years ago... by Hognoxious · 2013-10-23 09:43 · Score: 1
  
  Does it have shite acting?
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
16. Re:45 years ago... by BrookHarty · 2013-10-23 10:02 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  Like pubic hair? Yea, I'm pretty sick of all this "look like a little girl when I'm really 30" crap, too.
  Ugh...no!!!
  Look at some good old, 70's pr0n....Debbie Does Dallas or the like, man...if you wanted to go down on one of those ladies, you'd better take a machete and a sherpa with you if you wanted any hope of ever returning alive!!
  Seriously, I don't like mandatory flossing after eating....
  Whoa whoa, 70's porn actually had good stories, today its all about 2 minute video clips on your phone.
  This younger generation will never know about classics like Deep Throat. A woman who could not orgasm until a Doctor told her, that her clitiorous was in her throat.
  Thats some brilliant writing right there.
17. Re:45 years ago... by tinkerton · 2013-10-23 10:09 · Score: 2
  
  You can duck but you can't run - apparently. It's worth considering though. This guy tried it. http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2011/07/22/Barack-Obama-The-Democrats-Richard-Nixon#page1
18. Re:45 years ago... by Jeremiah+Cornelius · 2013-10-23 10:13 · Score: 1
  
  As I said, everything, without the charm.
  
  --
  "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
  Never been known to fail..."
19. Re:45 years ago... by Trax3001BBS · 2013-10-23 10:41 · Score: 1
  
  I guess I'm a younger trek fan myself (started with TNG,) as I was never into the original series. I kind of forced myself to watch it while I was sick once (every episode) and didn't really think it was anything special.
  I was in high school when Star Trek first aired and watched it every week.
  I was just the opposite watching the first Star Trek: The Next Generation (TNG). I was very disappointed that they
  didn't keep to the original series, and refused to watch any other TNG.
  At the time people stopped by every Friday for cards, many would come early to watch TNG
  again I'd ignore it, "wow, the Enterprise was destroyed!", I just thought big deal and back
  to my computer (game).
  Much later a friend of mine never missed an episode of TNG; about season 5 or 6 we were
  at his place when it came on, I was stuck. Don't remember the eposide but it was pretty good,
  so much so I started watching it. Afterwards no matter what TNG episode came on it was new to me,
  and an enjoyable hour; reruns everyday was just great.
  "wow, the Enterprise was destroyed" is now one of my favs. "Cause and Effect" where the
  another ship was caught in a time loop, which results in it's coming out of nowhere destroying the
  Enterprise -where the number three was important.
  The original Star Trek I've even watched without sound as it had been viewed so much, which resulted
  in the game of who can recognize the episode first; now seems very dated.
  But I still don't watch any of other spin offs, just so far you can take it and TNG was that point for me.
20. Re:45 years ago... by RenderSeven · 2013-10-23 10:59 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  Funny insightful troll - the trifecta of mods.
21. Re:45 years ago... by mattack2 · 2013-10-23 11:01 · Score: 1
  
  Modern references to star trek make kirk out to be this player who always gets laid ...
  as I guess the getting laid part would have to be implied in more subtle ways...
  I admit I can't think of too many examples off the top of my head, but didn't he definitely at the very least get very flirty with most of the women he ran into?
  There is one example that I remember that is much more subtle, however. I don't remember which episode it is... But you do see Kirk sitting on the bed and putting his shoes on. From either a commentary or maybe one of the little new segments they showed when SciFi ran the uncut episodes, one of the people involved was very surprised that they were able to get that on the air, because (my paraphrase) "it clearly implies that he just had sex".
  Though even watching "The Dick Van Dyke Show" again as an adult, there were a few times when I think it was more adult than one would think. Something like Rob telling Laura that it's time to go to bed, and him raising an eyebrow and smiling at the same time.
  (It's amazing how different shows are nowadays... even ones I think are very funny, like "Two Broke Girls", which even out-raunches "Two and a Half Men".)
22. Re:45 years ago... by Omestes · 2013-10-23 11:15 · Score: 1
  
  I grew up on TNG, though I watched a ton of TOS thanks to reruns as a kid.
  Recently, when Netflix made them all streaming I rewatched both of them again in pretty much a marathon. TNG didn't age well, and get bit boring in the end. TOS was fun to watch. Even my girlfriend (not a nerd, no experience with ST) had a blast with TOS. TNG was a better show, and better written, but TOS is just plain fun. TNG didn't age well thanks to its special effects and long form plots. TOS has Kirk kirking things with his fist, awesome music, cool rubber costumes, and green chicks in go-go boots...
  TOS goes with beer and chips better than TNG or anything subsequent.
  I didn't couldn't really stomach rewatching DS9 or Voyager, I didn't like them when they were on the air, and like them a bit less now. DS9 would have been okay, except it starts so damn slow, and has far to much Warfling and Ciscoling to really be watchable. At least Wesley Crusher was so bad he was kind of amusing (at least 20 years later). And Voyager is just pants, and killed Trek for me for good.
  
  --
  A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
23. Re:45 years ago... by qvatch · 2013-10-23 11:36 · Score: 1
  
  You're just assuming he stopped reading after the third line or so, eh?
24. Re:45 years ago... by ifiwereasculptor · 2013-10-23 12:08 · Score: 1
  
  just that Kirk was quick to throw a fist
  Usually not quick and often enough not a fist, but yeah.
25. Re:45 years ago... by Aryden · 2013-10-23 12:29 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  This "un-boot" has everything of the original - except for the charm of the premise, the ethic of storytelling, and the charisma of the players.
  True, the charisma is missing, but the story is there. It's not as good as what Mr. Roddenberry wrote, but it is close. They got the good natured ribbing of Spock by McCoy and Kirk, they got their ethic and moral point across, and they created a drama that brought about the reveal of the moral. All in all, I thought it was good, now just replace Bones with a better Bones, hone the characters a bit more and you have a decent series.
26. Re:45 years ago... by sysrammer · 2013-10-23 12:29 · Score: 1
  
  He forgot the "stay off my lawn" part.
  
  --
  His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
27. Re:45 years ago... by Darinbob · 2013-10-23 12:48 · Score: 1
  
  Don't forget the classic: "uh.. pizza delivery?"
28. Re:45 years ago... by Darinbob · 2013-10-23 12:50 · Score: 1
  
  How many do this in real life though, when they're not being filmed or sexting?
29. Re:45 years ago... by Princeofcups · 2013-10-23 13:06 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  The plots on the original series were more about cultural & human phenomenons that Roddenberry wanted to point out as things we need to overcome as a species. Later inclusions became more about the "gee whiz, rocket ships and 'splosions!" Perhaps you were expecting more the latter with none of the former?
  Exactly. A lot of what we think of as original Star Trek was implied. These days every last detail has to be spelled out in the name of characterization. The cultural references shouldn't be glossed over either. The Klingons are the Russians. They are NOT bumpy headed violent killing machines. They are just the other guys out there who we compete with idiologically. In other words, it's best to ignore TNG et al, since they depart drastically from TOS.
  
  --
  The only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican.
30. Re:45 years ago... by slick7 · 2013-10-23 14:14 · Score: 1
  
  Give it a proper Kickstarter pitch and a little song and dance number... who knows, anything's possible!
  Don't forget the Doohan.
  
  --
  The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
31. Re:45 years ago... by R3d+M3rcury · 2013-10-23 14:30 · Score: 1
  
  I was a kid back then and you are right, things were more implied than spelled out.
  Well, it was the late 60s. According to lore, the Brady Bunch was the first prime-time network television program to feature a married couple sleeping in the same bed. That was 1969. So, no, you're not going to see Jim Kirk boffing hot alien babes. The best you would get is a kiss.
  The only exception I can think of is the episode "By Any Other Name." This is the episode where the Kelvans take over the Enterprise and Kirk, Spock, McCoy, and Scotty corrupt the Kelvans and convince them to stay with the Federation.
  There's a scene where Jim is seducing one of the Kelvan babes. It cuts to another scene and, when we come back, Jim is putting on his shirt and the woman in question is saying something about her hair being a mess.
  I may have the wrong episode, though. But I do remember that scene.
32. Re:45 years ago... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-23 14:44 · Score: 1
  
  True the actor playing Bones doesn't look at all like DeForest Kelly but he didn't do a bad job IMO. It would just take a bit of getting used to his different look. Same with Spock honestly, he looks quite different but does a decent job.
  I think people just have to accept that unless someone cloned the original cast, they're not going to be 100% the same. Not a fatal issue really, so long as the stories, cinematography and acting are at least as good as this episode.
33. Re:45 years ago... by HybridST · 2013-10-23 15:17 · Score: 1
  
  Dax asked Worf about the smooth foreheads in DS9 the trouble with tribbles revisit. He said,iirc, "I'd rather not talk about it."
  Haven't seen it since original air so i might be wrong.
  
  --
  Ever notice that Cobra Commander sounds an awful lot like Star scream?
34. Re:45 years ago... by AlphaWolf_HK · 2013-10-23 15:54 · Score: 1
  
  That wasn't just Dax, also Miles O'Brien, Bashir and a few others giving Worf a strange look all at once when they saw that and asked "those are Klingons?"
  They actually addressed the difference in appearance in Enterprise with a three part episode, it was one of the ones in the last season. A very good episode(s) too, as well as another two part episode that revisited the mirror universe that was also good and came in around the same time. Enterprise was getting good right before it got axed.
  
  --
  Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
35. Re:45 years ago... by AlphaWolf_HK · 2013-10-23 16:09 · Score: 2
  
  I didn't take it that way. They added that stuff in but it was intermixed. For example in the mirror episode (one which to this day receives very iconic lampooning via the infamous Spock gotee) was halfway through the airing and was obviously about the folly of Nazi style regimes, as well as the episode with the two aliens with opposite color skins was one of the last episodes, and it was clearly about social issues - i.e. race relations.
  I think they just added the bumpy heads to the klingons because they wanted to make it more believably sci-fi. And it truly does add an element of depth to the story, otherwise it gets kind of annoying that all aliens look the same. Even in TNG they still kept that element that the Klingons weren't just bad guys to kill by adding Worf as a starfleet officer, and even explored their culture into heavy depth and had the Enterprise crew play a role in preventing a Klingon civil war. This was all done during the Roddenberry years, btw.
  
  --
  Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
36. Re:45 years ago... by narcc · 2013-10-23 17:19 · Score: 1
  
  Acute, obtuse, whatever. All we can say for sure is that neither one of them are right.
  
  --
  Required reading for internet skeptics
37. Re:45 years ago... by geezer+nerd · 2013-10-23 18:08 · Score: 1
  
  I know this was a fan effort, and I enjoyed the whole episode. The feel of TOS was really there for me. But, let's face it, the actors (fans) were a bit beyond the expected age demographic one would expect in a spaceship crew. Too many were a bit old to be serving in quasi-military roles. The guy playing Bones was particularly off-putting. But the youngish lady doctor certainly lit up the screen.
38. Re:45 years ago... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-23 19:17 · Score: 1
  
  Do they shave their underarms and legs to look like little girls too?
  Why is it to "look like little girls" only when it's pubic hair?
39. Re:45 years ago... by DNS-and-BIND · 2013-10-23 19:38 · Score: 1
  
  First of all, it's "Soviets", not Russians. People forget the first country enslaved by the Bosheviks was Russia.
  Secondly, if you look at 50s and 60s science fiction, there was the concept of "Space Mongols". This was a race that had space travel, but didn't invent it and didn't know how to create new starships. Instead they conquered other races that could do so. The Klingons are clearly this type.
  
  --
  Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
40. Re:45 years ago... by AlphaWolf_HK · 2013-10-23 19:57 · Score: 1
  
  I think that if I were that obtuse, I wouldn't have cared for the first season of Game of Thrones. Sure it's got some fight scenes and mild CGI, but it mostly features people just talking, and if you don't pay attention to what they are saying then the action oriented scenes are rather meaningless.
  You've really got to have a good mix of both though. For example, one of the Mortal Kombat movie sequels (I think it was the second one) was almost nothing but pure fight scenes, and was one of the most boring movies I've ever watched; however, the first one was watchable (though I've certainly seen better movies) and it had far less fighting.
  The Matrix (first one) is also a good example. If you took out either the fighting or the philosophical elements it would have been kind of lame.
  
  --
  Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
41. Re:45 years ago... by Akzo · 2013-10-23 21:11 · Score: 1
  
  Smooth headed Klingon's were infected with human DNA after they experimented with genetic engineering: http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Klingon_augment_virus
  
  --
  Sig is for Signature, so you don't have to manually sign every post.
42. Re:45 years ago... by jalopezp · 2013-10-23 21:35 · Score: 1
  
  Men shave their beards as well, do they look like little boys? These things come and go with fashion, but a hairless or trimmed pubis has been a recurring theme in society ever since antiquity. Reasons may include hygiene, aesthetics, or religion, and shaving may focus on some areas more than others (beards, heads, armpits, pubis), but hair removal is an intrinsic part of many human societies.
43. Re:45 years ago... by An+dochasac · 2013-10-23 21:40 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  The original series built upon a longer history of art, literature, war and peace. It referenced the bible, Greek and Roman classic literature, Shakespeare. You ended up quoting Milton, Dickens... when you thought you were quoting a playboy starship captain. That tradition held until this most recent reboot which had numerous references to previous Star Treks, but no grounding in the real world that that Star Trek plagiarized its ideas from.
44. Re:45 years ago... by Joining+Yet+Again · 2013-10-23 22:12 · Score: 1, Interesting
  
  I don't mean to piss on your parade, but this hair-removal tradition started thousands of years ago precisely to look like a young innocent virgin. It reprised in the '80s when businessmen realised that you can make a lot of money telling people that YOU ALL LOOK AWFUL THE WAY YOU WERE MADE AND MUST MODIFY YOURSELF SO BUY OUR PRODUCT.
  But I admit that I don't think "little" girl when I see "shaved all over". Instead, I suspect (and usually find) low self-esteem - just like when I find someone is circumcised.
45. Re:45 years ago... by Half-pint+HAL · 2013-10-23 23:33 · Score: 1
  
  I've got nothing to say... I'm only responding on reflex....
  
  --
  Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
46. Re:45 years ago... by Half-pint+HAL · 2013-10-24 00:25 · Score: 1
  
  I'm more interested in seeing this because it means other projects might come about from it, including TNG, Babylon 5, and other shows I wish got more such love from their fandoms. Seeing original actors involved in a passion project is icing on the cake.
  The problem is that a story isn't just the actor, it's the writer. There are two diametrically opposite problems in fanfic, and most falls into one or other trap:
  1) Because the fan doesn't know why the original author wrote the characters the way he did, he is forced to make the characters walk the same path, parrot the same old tired lines, and never progress in any way.
  2) Because the fan doesn't know why the original author wote the characters the way he did, he ends up creating a character progression that is completely out-of-character for the person in question.
  Consider, for example, Dumbledore from Harry Potter (never read, never watched). No-one knew he was gay until JK Rowling warned the script writers off making a reference to an ex-girlfriend. Rowling's choice of words when announcing this publically was telling: I always thought of Dumbledore as gay. Even to her as the writer, there was no explicit choice there -- she was running on her instinctual feel for how the character feels, thinks and acts. But apparently it was relevant to his actions, as he reacted to something in the story because he was in love with a particular character. Not knowing this may lead the fanfic author to consider that reaction as simply characteristic of the character, rather than specific to the circumstance in question, and the character is reduced to charicature.
  Another thing to bear in mind is the advice I once read from a successful author that you should never be a fan of your own characters, because if you start to like them too much, you end up getting sloppy and letting them away with all sorts of stuff. Hell, just look at how many times in Stargate SG1 the colonel did something remarkably stupid and ill thought through that turned out to save the day. The colonel, played by series executive producer Richard Dean Anderson....
  
  --
  Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
47. Re:45 years ago... by Joining+Yet+Again · 2013-10-24 01:36 · Score: 1
  
  Whatever the means, the end is the same.
  And it would be an oversimplification of psychology to regard the following of a very strong fashion as a "decision".
48. Re:45 years ago... by Joining+Yet+Again · 2013-10-24 01:58 · Score: 1
  
  It's not a necessary consequence, but it provides another reason for associating shaven body with "little girl" other than "'E'S A PAEDO GET 'IM!" It takes a good dose of arrogance to believe that millennia of culture are suddenly irrelevant, even if other interests are at work (e.g. profit motive).
  Man has been obsessed for most of recorded history with the idea of female virginity and symbolism around a woman's "purity", desiring to impose and then conquer "innocence". The "little girl" is the archetypal innocent female. Understanding the connection doesn't mean you want little girls, because it doesn't say that you are attracted to prepubescent bodies.
  Now I do think it's weird that so many people are turned off by one particular secondary sexual characteristic, but that's the power of marketing. The US cuts the end off guy's cocks, rips the end out of cats' digits, and takes the hair off everyone's bodies - except on the head, where it still mustn't be too long unless you're Jesus. It also has a pathological fear of breasts. Odd country.
49. Re:45 years ago... by FilmedInNoir · 2013-10-24 02:03 · Score: 1
  
  I'll go beyond the article's mere talk of economic policy to the two other points grabbing a lot of press:
  Nixon spied on the DNC, Obama is spying on everyone everywhere.
  Nixon's need to keep the Vietnam War going, to increase his odds of re-election, allowed for the Kent State Massacre.
  Obama has the Drone Assassination program as policy. Could also call him out for not dealing with the Occupy movement in a responsible way
  and saying a "Robin Hood" tax would just further impact an already hard hit economy...
  Although the whole concept of trickle down economics has been disproved time and time again.
  Yes, that needs citation, and damn it we're back to economic policy again. :(
  
  --
  Sig. Sig. Sputnik
50. Re:45 years ago... by Grishnakh · 2013-10-24 02:14 · Score: 1
  
  The problem is that a story isn't just the actor, it's the writer. There are two diametrically opposite problems in fanfic, and most falls into one or other trap:
  1) Because the fan doesn't know why the original author wrote the characters the way he did, he is forced to make the characters walk the same path, parrot the same old tired lines, and never progress in any way.
  2) Because the fan doesn't know why the original author wote the characters the way he did, he ends up creating a character progression that is completely out-of-character for the person in question.
  No, this isn't a problem for shows like Star Trek. In case you didn't realize, there is no "writer" for ST episodes. Every episode had a different writer or writers. This isn't Harry Potter or whatever, it's a TV show where every episode was written by someone different, and unlike shows like Babylon 5 or LOST, there was no over-arching plot tying the episodes together. There may have been some collaboration among the writers to make sure they got the characters consistent and they kept the technical details more-or-less consistent (like using Jeffries tubes), but it's not like they had some master plan for how every character was going to develop throughout the series.
51. Re:45 years ago... by __aasehi2499 · 2013-10-24 03:24 · Score: 1
  
  There is a distinct lack of testosterone in this 'most faithful re-creation'.
52. Re:45 years ago... by Half-pint+HAL · 2013-10-24 04:11 · Score: 1
  
  But there was still Gene Roddenberry at the top to say yay or nay.
  
  --
  Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
53. Re:45 years ago... by Pherdnut · 2013-10-24 05:50 · Score: 1
  
  It's weird. I was born in '75 and have enjoyed both. But now, aside from a few iconic scenes and episodes ("I am NOT a merry man"), it's TNG that's nearly unwatchable for me but I'm almost always up for a classic Trek episode if I haven't seen it recently. I'm also perfectly interested in the newer Trek series. The plots were typically very clumsy and hamfisted IMO. Far too many blatant pat civics lessons. Way too much conflict resolution with the emitting of science fantasy particles at things. And FFS, how many transporter accidents can you have before you finally just say !@#$ it, I'm using the shuttle from now on?
  On the flip-side, the TOS often revolved around super-science failing, requiring Kirk-levels of chutzpa to remedy a problem. Hell, Kirk's bravado often both started and ended the conflicts.
  That said, TNG did set the stage for more to come and oddly enough, Data may be my favorite character in all of Star Trek. In fact I think the data-centric episodes are the only ones I can really go back and enjoy now. Okay, and the Klingons. They did good on taking what the original series movies did with Klingons and running with it. Maybe it's just that I wish they'd gone with hardwood floors rather than carpeting.
54. Re:45 years ago... by mcgrew · 2013-10-24 06:29 · Score: 1
  
  You sound like a friend of mine who was born about the time TOS was cancelled. He hated TNG until an episode with the Borg aired while he was at a friend's house, and he was hooked after that.
  I liked DS9. It was different not only from other Star Treks, but other TV sci-fi... and Avery Brooks impressed me as an actor. He'd had a regular role in "Spencer For Hire" as a pimp/gangster and the Sisko character was completely different, down to the speech (ebonics in Spencer, Starfleet in DS9).
  I got a kick out of Doctor Johnnycab in "Voyager".
  
  --
  Free Martian Whores!
55. Re:45 years ago... by mcgrew · 2013-10-24 06:51 · Score: 1
  
  Could be one of those things where you just had to be alive during that era to appreciate it
  You hit the nail on the head. TV was even more prudish then than when you were young, and all the things you already had like cell phones, self-opening doors, personal computers, less primitive hospital facilities were all fantasies from the future in 1966. The Star Trek you saw was not the Star Trek I saw.
  That said, I like TNG better, too, even though I was rooting for Lore to throw Wesley out the airlock before Data threw Lore out.
  I saw part of the new episodes and some of it was close, some wasn't. The new Spock sucked, the new Scotty hit the nail on the head (of course, he was played by James Doohan's son). The guy who played Kirk nailed Shatner even if he didn't look much like him. And Uhura, sheesh, Nichols was hot, the new Uhura is a plain Jane.
  
  --
  Free Martian Whores!
56. Re:45 years ago... by mcgrew · 2013-10-24 06:54 · Score: 1
  
  Um, lets see... filthy air, filthy water, the draft, college kids getting shot by the national Guard, the Vietnam war, the cold war, Nixon's war on drugs, society's war on homosexuals, institutional racial discrimination, twenty five inch CRT TV's (the biggest on the market then), being scorned for being a nerd (you young nerds are lucky), lack of things we take for granted like microwaves, computers, cell phones... oh yeah, life was paradise when I was sixteen (rolls eyes)
  
  --
  Free Martian Whores!
57. Re:45 years ago... by AbominousSalad · 2013-10-24 08:37 · Score: 1
  
  You meant to say during.
  
  --
  Every trollism an AC posts is prefixed, in my mind, with "A. Coward whined, in a weak and cowardly voice:"
58. Re:45 years ago... by cthulhu11 · 2013-10-24 10:35 · Score: 1
  
  In other words, it's best to ignore TNG et al, since they depart drastically from TOS.
  That, and of course the Wil Wheaton factor.
59. Re:45 years ago... by AlphaWolf_HK · 2013-10-24 17:14 · Score: 1
  
  Shatner himself identified (and I guess other people did the same) as a Shakespearean actor. Recall the original pilot episode featured a different captain (Pike) and only replaced him because the actor simply wasn't interested in doing more episodes (boy what a career buster - though he ended up dieing of natural causes at about the time the series ended.) I wouldn't be surprised if that is how much of it landed there, because Shakespear himself frequently revisited Greek and Roman literature and history, so Shatner would fit right in. It made sense that way: I don't think Kirk made a convincing gangster or cowboy outlaw, and it wouldn't surprise me if the writers thought the same. They did a lot of stuff like that to bend the writing to the actors; recall when Sulu became a samurai, and Scotty's drinking being used to outwit some nefarious aliens more than once. Likewise, Pike had this sort of "All American" feel to him, and the pilot episode was all about resisting oppressors.
  On a related note, you know what I actually thought was funny was how several episodes suggested the crew of the Enterprise were Christian (how a marriage was done, the use of a cross in several instances, and then that one episode where they rejoiced at the end when they discovered that an alien civilization had just found Jesus) even though both Kirk and Spock were played by Jews. Of course this could have just been a way of giving the mainstream American audiences something to identify with (public school prayer having been outlawed only three years earlier with the majority of the population wanting it to remain.)
  
  --
  Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
60. Re: 45 years ago... by Sigg3.net · 2013-10-24 19:48 · Score: 1
  
  In existentialism proper, as e.g. Heidegger's analysis of Das Man under Temporality, a need to follow the front line of fashion has the clinical determination of anxiety.
  I don't know the historical details of fashion, but if we're in the 2nd decade of a trend it may also be described as a norm, and a feminist critique would seem reasonable. I am a man and would not shave my stomach or chest unless it was for surgery.
  
  --
  Defining Statistics and Social Research
61. Re:45 years ago... by Trax3001BBS · 2013-10-25 11:24 · Score: 1
  
  So basically your little story is to detail how biased, shallow and judgmental you are. Oh, stupid too.
  Whew, not a problem. Thought this might be another grammar lesson; something to the effect that one sentence
  needed to end in a preposition as the fourth word proceeding it had an e before i.
  To add to this thread I see http://thepiratebay.sx/ front page is supporting this project as well.
TAS by Bradmont · 2013-10-23 08:26 · Score: 3, Informative

Didn't The Animated Series finish off the last two years of the five year mission? With the original cast and everything.
1. Re:TAS by MickyTheIdiot · 2013-10-23 08:31 · Score: 1
  
  ib4 someone uses the word "canon."
2. Re:TAS by Scarletdown · 2013-10-23 08:37 · Score: 1
  
  Didn't The Animated Series finish off the last two years of the five year mission? With the original cast and everything.
  I always figured the Animated Series most likely covered the 4th year, still leaving the adventures of the 5th untold.
  
  --
  This space unintentionally left blank.
3. Re:TAS by Belial6 · 2013-10-23 09:14 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  There was no Animated Series. It is a myth like claims of sequels to Highlander and prequels to Star Wars.
4. Re:TAS by Gilmoure · 2013-10-23 09:29 · Score: 1
  
  The Kzinti were cool.
  
  --
  I drank what? -- Socrates
5. Re:TAS by Scarletdown · 2013-10-23 09:34 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Oh. All this time, I figured that with only 22 episodes, that would have only been a single season.
  Still, despite the typical craptacular Filmation art and animation, it did have some decent writing to carry it where the visuals failed.
  And a big thumbs up to Roddenberry for refusing to let Filmation assign a kiddy cadet to each senior crew member.
  
  --
  This space unintentionally left blank.
6. Re:TAS by ArbitraryName · 2013-10-23 09:37 · Score: 1
  
  TAS was until Roddenberry screwed around with licensing in the late 80's. There's really no reason it shouldn't still be when you consider the people involved in making it were all the same people who made the other Treks.
7. Re:TAS by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-23 09:55 · Score: 1
  
  That episode was set in Larry Niven's Known Space.
8. Re:TAS by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-23 10:23 · Score: 1
  
  Well, close. The original story, "The Soft Weapon", was set in Known Space. Larry revised it to sell to ST:TAS, substituting Enterprise crewmembers (with Spock playing the part of the Pierson's Puppeteer), and the Kzin became a limited part of the Trek universe. (Years ago I had a Star Trek map of the galaxy which showed the various empire delineations, the Kzinti Empire was on there although smaller than the Klingon or Romulan empires.)
  But if you like Kzinti, read the shared-universe series The Man-Kzin Wars from Baen Books, where Larry lets other people play in a small section of his Known Space.
9. Re:TAS by JoeMerchant · 2013-10-23 11:31 · Score: 1
  
  And Spock had better voicing in it too...
10. Re:TAS by terryk29 · 2013-10-23 12:09 · Score: 1
  
  But if you like Kzinti, read the shared-universe series The Man-Kzin Wars from Baen Books, where Larry lets other people play in a small section of his Known Space.
  Seconded. I have the first 5 or so of these books; each contains 2 or 3 novellas by various authors, some self-contained, some continuing in later books. Damn good reads!
  In a preface or two, Niven tells how contributions had to stay true to the canon. Nitpick: I wish that included the cover art - Kzinti don't look like tigers; they're orange, barrel-chested, and have bat-wing ears, tanj damnit!
11. Re:TAS by Aryden · 2013-10-23 12:30 · Score: 1
  
  Agreed.
12. Re:TAS by Princeofcups · 2013-10-23 13:08 · Score: 1
  
  Didn't The Animated Series finish off the last two years of the five year mission? With the original cast and everything.
  The Animated Series is more of a crossover with Larry Niven's Known Space universe, Kzinti et al., than a continuation.
  
  --
  The only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican.
13. Re:TAS by R3d+M3rcury · 2013-10-23 14:32 · Score: 1
  
  Though you did have a "Kitty Cadet"...
14. Re:TAS by techybod · 2013-10-23 19:49 · Score: 1
  
  indeed. shame there is only 1 matrix film...
  
  --
  "Friends help you move, Real Friends help you move bodies"
Please let the "Star Wreck" guys get in on this by ron_ivi · 2013-10-23 08:26 · Score: 3, Interesting

Most amazing amateur film I've ever seen: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Wreck:_In_the_Pirkinning And free (Creative Commons) licensed too.
1. Re:Please let the "Star Wreck" guys get in on this by mrbester · 2013-10-23 09:17 · Score: 1
  
  This is probably why there had to be such attention to detail. Star Wreck had so much in it that any fan produced film even vaguely to do with sci-fi series is going to be compared to it.
  
  --
  "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
2. Re:Please let the "Star Wreck" guys get in on this by mrbester · 2013-10-23 09:29 · Score: 2
  
  Additional: random coincidence. The new film was funded with help from Kickstarter, Pirk's ship in Star Wreck was called Kickstart.
  
  --
  "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
Faithful by Russ1642 · 2013-10-23 08:29 · Score: 3, Funny

If it's faithful to the original then it's going to suck. A lot.
1. Re:Faithful by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-23 08:35 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  So does your mom but we don't complain. Some of us even enjoy it.
2. Re:Faithful by girlintraining · 2013-10-23 08:49 · Score: 1
  
  If it's faithful to the original then it's going to suck. A lot.
  You know, considering what a hatchet job Abrams has done to Star Trek, I'm surprised it took this long for the fans to come together and do something like this. I mean, there's Original Series, and then there's Abrahams Extra Crispy recipe... just scorched earth policy on everything you ever loved. Original is an acquired taste; It's atonement for a non-specific kind of sin. You know, you feel bad but you can't put your finger on it. Abrahams Recipe is when you have a specific sin in mind and wish to atone for it.
  
  --
  #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
3. Re:Faithful by jIyajbe · 2013-10-23 09:01 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  Baseline: I am a trekker; I really, really like all of Star Trek, old and new.
  For all that it was the genesis of all things Trek, TOS is terribly painful to watch these days. Not an auspicious starting point for a fan-made series.
  What's funny is that they managed to write a story that was the same quality as most of TOS stories--mostly low; the actors reproduced the acting "skills" of the originals (especially Kirk! Wow!); and it was just as cheesy as the original show. I fully expected it to be hard to watch.
  But it wasn't! It was a labor of love, but they managed to go above that, and actually make an enjoyable episode, one that can hold its head up with the all but the best TOS episodes.
  Hats off to them all, and I think I'll open my wallet.
  
  --
  "Don't blame the log for the fire." --Andrew Ratshin
4. Re:Faithful by khellendros1984 · 2013-10-23 09:04 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  I'm surprised it took this long for the fans to come together and do something like this.
  Then be surprised no more, it's been done before. I think I watched part of an episode when it first came out, but I don't remember my impression of it. Obviously, I wasn't impressed enough at the time to continue.
  
  --
  It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
5. Re:Faithful by wisnoskij · 2013-10-23 09:35 · Score: 1
  
  I think they should bring back Abraham Lincoln as a permanent character.
  
  --
  Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
6. Re:Faithful by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-23 09:41 · Score: 1
  
  I really didn't expect to last through three minutes of this when I clicked the link. But I ended up watching the whole damn show. I agree with jlyajbe-- hats off to them all! Nicely done!
7. Re:Faithful by theshowmecanuck · 2013-10-23 10:55 · Score: 1
  
  I started watching and if it wasn't for Scotty's 'accent' I would have continued. But christ on a crutch, this guy's fake accent makes Doohan sound like a Scottish native.
  
  --
  -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
8. Re:Faithful by Morgon · 2013-10-23 11:16 · Score: 1
  
  Amusing fact about that - the guy that plays Scotty is actually Jimmy Doohan's son.
  I personally couldn't watch it because I was never a fan of TOS. It definitely succeeded in emulating it, though.
  
  --
  [DISCLAIMER: This post is a work of satire and should not be misconstrued as a holy text upon which to base a religion.]
9. Re:Faithful by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-23 11:26 · Score: 1
  
  You realise 'this guy' is Doohan's son, do you?
10. Re:Faithful by theshowmecanuck · 2013-10-23 13:33 · Score: 1
  
  That, and a couple of bucks will get you a coffee. i.e. it doesn't matter who's son he is, it's a terrible even for a fake accent.
  
  --
  -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
11. Re:Faithful by swalve · 2013-10-23 14:31 · Score: 1
  
  So far, my biggest problem with the production is that the sound is too good. They need to equalize it down to sound more like TOS.
  
  The actors did surprisingly well at recreating the action and movement of the original characters. The way Kirk sat in the Big Chair at the beginning was eerie.
12. Re:Faithful by wisnoskij · 2013-10-24 00:26 · Score: 1
  
  What episode did you watch?
  I watched the whole thing because of this review, and it was by far the worst TOS episode, it has some very faithful/good parts, but just does not make any sense.
  The story is absolute crap.
  
  --
  Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
13. Re:Faithful by Grishnakh · 2013-10-24 14:58 · Score: 1
  
  The Star Trek: Phase II episodes are actually really good, except for the first 1 or 2. You probably watched one of those. Watch the newest ones, such as "Enemy: Starfleet", or the ones with the original Sulu and Chekov actors. You will have to excuse some of the acting though; the Kirk and Bones actors are actually pretty decent (esp. the Bones actor), the Spock actors (there's at least 3) are OK, but some of the others are obviously very amateur. Of course, this is an entirely amateur effort, so you have to expect that.
Good effort by GreatDrok · 2013-10-23 08:34 · Score: 1

I've followed this and other projects for a while and the quality of the sets, costumes and SFX are right up there. Sadly, the acting is poor at best. I hate to single anyone in particular out but the main three characters really don't work. It isn't just that they are different people, it is just bad acting. I actually haven't had such a problem with the Abrahms reboots despite there being new actors because the standard has been decent so it isn't that. Of course, when you get the odd trek alumni in these then they stand out as being more comfortable in the roles. Now, if we can get CGI up to a standard where we can produce lifelike replications of the original actors then we're really talking about being able to continue the series.

--
"I have the attention span of a strobe lit goldfish, please get to the point quickly!"
1. Re:Good effort by msobkow · 2013-10-23 08:42 · Score: 1
  
  But bad acting was part of the charm of the original series.
  And no one in their right mind with a shred of honesty would ever claim that the acting was good on the original series.
  
  --
  I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
2. Re:Good effort by Obfuscant · 2013-10-23 08:42 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Sadly, the acting is poor at best.
  So ... you're saying ... it ... is ... very much .... like ... TOS? Damn it, GreatDrok, I'm a doctor not an acting coach. I canna give you more than 100% out of the dilithium, GreatDrok, she'll not take it. Fascinating.
3. Re:Good effort by joe_frisch · 2013-10-23 08:45 · Score: 2
  
  No mod points but I have to agree. For all that people (rightly) make fun of the "bad" acting in the original, the actors were by absolute standards not that bad. The fan remakes I've seen have acting that seems really amateur. Are they hiring professional actors for these?
  Like lots of skilled jobs, professional acting is a lot harder than it looks.
4. Re:Good effort by CastrTroy · 2013-10-23 08:46 · Score: 2
  
  I'm not sure if the originals had such good actors either. But anyway, I find that bad acting usually bothers me too. I see it all the time on Indie projects. I'm not sure if it's actually bad acting, or just that they are pressed for time and/or money, and not willing to redo the shot 15 times to get it right. We used to make movies all the time in highschool, and I found this was one of the biggest problems. People would completely botch their lines, but we'd use the scene anyway, because we were all just trying to have fun, and nobody wanted to spend 2 hours doing a 10 minute scene.
  
  --
  
  Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
5. Re:Good effort by ArbitraryName · 2013-10-23 08:53 · Score: 2
  
  Are they hiring professional actors for these?
  This information is right on the Kickstarter, you can see everyone's bio. With the exception of Grant Imahara (from Mythbusters) and the fairly minor Security Chief they are experienced, professional actors (some are degreed) with plenty of stage and/or screen credits.
6. Re:Good effort by LordNimon · 2013-10-23 09:10 · Score: 1
  
  I think the biggest problem is the enunciation. Few of those actors can do it right.
  
  --
  And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
  To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
7. Re:Good effort by ArbitraryName · 2013-10-23 09:38 · Score: 1
  
  Seems safe to say he's seen an episode or two:
  
  Larry Nemecek as Dr. McCoy A native of Norman, OK, Larry is author of the best-selling “ST: The Next Generation Companion” and “Star Trek: Stellar Cartography,” with editor/producer credits on Communicator magazine, Star Trek Fact Files, startrek.com and now his column in Star Trek magazine and his own TREKLAND vidchat/blog site. His BA and MA in theatre sparked a host of stage credits, and recently he guest-starred in the "Divine White" webseries nominated for a 2011 LA Comedy Award. Along with story credit for the “Prophecy” episode of Star Trek: Voyager, Larry also shares two Associated Press state news awards, leads the “Hollywood 2 Vegas” Star Trek Tour for Geek Nation Tours, and appears in numerous Trek documentaries while shooting his own, "The Con of Wrath."
8. Re:Good effort by CronoCloud · 2013-10-23 10:01 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, but his voice is all WRONG! And he didn't do the eyebrow thing! Eomer in the Abrams films did a better job of portraying McCoy's curmudgeonlyness.
9. Re:Good effort by Cramer · 2013-10-23 11:50 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  May be, but "Apollo" is the only obvious, seasoned actor in this thing. And it's obvious the minute he starts talking. Everyone else is trying too hard to be their TOS character, or too rigidly just reading their part.
  Jesus, since when does Kirk take a freakin' vote?!?
10. Re:Good effort by ifiwereasculptor · 2013-10-23 12:34 · Score: 1
  
  Enunciation was alright. The voices were too off, though. Sure, finding people to sound alike could be hard, but Kirk's voice is way too high, for example. Scotty's ok, mostly because his terrible, pitch-altering fake accent is almost exactly like the original Scotty's terrible, pitch-altering fake accent.
11. Re:Good effort by flargleblarg · 2013-10-23 19:21 · Score: 2
  
  Are you kidding?? Nimoy was amazing. Still amazing in those.
Very good. by gurps_npc · 2013-10-23 08:37 · Score: 4, Interesting

Aside from the fact that the actors in Star Trek Continues have acting flaws that are not identical to those of the original cast (i.e. they are just as talented/untalented as the originals, but don't have the exact same instinctive mannerisms), this is an incredible recreation.
It looks far better than the passable recreation "Star Trek Of Gods and Men" (with Koenig, Nichols and Russ in it). http://startrekofgodsandmen.com/main/
But I have much better hopes for the upcoming Star Trek Renegades (Koenig, et. al. second, better funded attempt) http://startrekrenegades.com/home/trailers-and-videos/

--
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
1. Re:Very good. by TrekkieGod · 2013-10-23 16:26 · Score: 1
  
  I agree completely. I started watching it, planning on just seeing the beginning of the episode to get a feel for it, but I couldn't stop until the end.
  As you said, some of the actors are a bit off in their mannerisms, but the writing so perfectly caught the feel of TOS that it didn't matter. Everyone had a moment or two in which they channeled the original actors, simply as a result of their lines capturing the very essence of the show. The production is top-notch. The set looks exactly like the original Enterprise, the music you expect to hear pops up at exactly the right moments, and the trademark TOS close-ups happen when you expect them to. I thought it was a nice touch they continued a story from the original show, with the same guest actor even.
  The only thing I wish they hadn't done were the TNG references. Don't get me wrong, I love TNG, but a holodeck and ship's counselor on the 1701 don't make any sense considering we don't see either in the TOS movies. It's just too early. In fact, TNG made a point to have Starfleet personnel be impressed with the holodeck technology on the Galaxy class, so I'm pretty sure it was supposed to be fairly new then.
  
  --
  Warning: Opinions known to be heavily biased.
2. Re:Very good. by eyenot · 2013-10-23 16:41 · Score: 1
  
  Well, come on, maybe it's not a holodeck. Maybe it's a holographic projector in a room fitted with 4 wall-sized PMOLED screens.
  They even showed the "rustic" projector rigs jutting out of the walls. TNG didn't give us that, just gave us dialogue expecting us to suspend disbelief.
  I don't think it's fair to call what Kirk was enjoying a "holodeck".
  I'm interested in seeing whether the writers can show restraint in maintaining it as a degraded technology.
  Other missed it, but to me, it was a subtle dig at the TNG writers. The "Continued" writers included this prototype of something leading up to the holodeck, but then they left it behind and didn't bring it up again in the same episode, at all, whatsoever.
  Tell me, what technologies introduced in TNG or its spin-offs were just throw-away introductions that didn't somehow deal into the plot? Including in that notoriously crutch-like way?
  I think that by bringing in this primitive holodeck precursor and then not mentioning it again, they were doing two things:
  1) Acknowledging the mistakes TNG made in relying heavily on the holodeck as an ever-present antagonistic threat to the Enterprise and crew
  2) Laughing it off by doing the exact opposite of what TNG did.
  I wouldn't be surprised if the writers didn't plan to mention this holodeck precursor again in the series, except maybe as a nearly humouristic element in a single episode. Certainly not the recurring, weird-assed, existential problem the 1701-D faced so often.
  
  --
  "Stratigraphically the origin of agriculture and thermonuclear destruction will appear essentially simultaneous" -- Lee
So, did Star Trek have a planned story arc? by GodfatherofSoul · 2013-10-23 08:39 · Score: 2

Just curious if there was ever any info released about where the show planned to go in the short or long term.

--
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
1. Re:So, did Star Trek have a planned story arc? by Obfuscant · 2013-10-23 08:45 · Score: 1
  
  Just curious if there was ever any info released about where the show planned to go in the short or long term.
  Short term, they'll probably all meet at the Pizza Hut tonight and then go to a local brew place for a couple of beers.
  Long term, I think most of them will eventually move out of their parent's basement and go to college, and then probably move back. I think some of them are saving up for a PlayStation 5.
2. Re:So, did Star Trek have a planned story arc? by sunami · 2013-10-23 09:00 · Score: 1
  
  Wrong stereotype, actors work as waiters.
3. Re: So, did Star Trek have a planned story arc? by ArbitraryName · 2013-10-23 09:32 · Score: 1
  
  There were a few. Peyton Place, a contemporary of Star Trek might have been the first in prime time, though it was still technically a soap opera.
4. Re:So, did Star Trek have a planned story arc? by Obfuscant · 2013-10-23 13:07 · Score: 1
  
  Ok, so they'll go to the Pizza Hut tonight to work their normal shift. Then go to a brew place and bus a few tables. But they're still saving up for a PS5 and hoping someday to move out of their parent's basement.
CBS's consent by tepples · 2013-10-23 08:39 · Score: 1

The fan-based and fan-supported reincarnation [...] has CBS's consent.
How did they manage to negotiate this?
1. Re:CBS's consent by sjames · 2013-10-23 08:57 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  I'm guessing Grant built a killbot and threatened to activate it in their lobby.
2. Re:CBS's consent by mark-t · 2013-10-23 08:57 · Score: 2
  
  If I remember correctly, by being strictly non-commercial.
  
  --
  File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
3. Re:CBS's consent by Hamsterdan · 2013-10-23 09:16 · Score: 1
  
  Exactly. Same goes for Phase II (some eps are pretty good actually)
  
  --
  I've got better things to do tonight than die.
4. Re:CBS's consent by tlhIngan · 2013-10-23 10:37 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  The fan-based and fan-supported reincarnation [...] has CBS's consent.
  How did they manage to negotiate this?
  Maybe because CBS "gets it"?
  It's true this would never have happened back in the Viacom/Paramount days (Viacom actually threatened Star Trek fansites back in the day with C&D's) and back when the sole goal of Star Trek was to exact the maximum number of dollars available, even if doing so required being extremely petty. (They still do to an extent, given that Star Trek DVDs and Blu-Rays are twice the price as normal TV box sets).
  But I suppose CBS realizes that fandom is real, they can't control it, and if someone wants to make something that potentially could help them (since they own the rights to it and the movies are popular), well, it costs them nothing and gains them everything.
  I'm sure they also retain a lot of the rights - e.g., DVD and Blu-Ray
5. Re:CBS's consent by Obfuscant · 2013-10-23 13:20 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe because CBS "gets it"?
  The same CBS that sells "24/7 access" to the cameras in the Big Brother house, and then turns them off whenever it wants to keep what's going on inside a secret? The CBS that started that experiment by giving free access and then figured out it could make tons of money by selling it?
  The same CBS that forced Time Warner to drop them from the lineup because TW wouldn't pay the fees that CBS was demanding for their "programming" that they were broadcasting for free to anyone with an antenna? That CBS?
  Just wanted to make sure we're talking about the same CBS.
  
  and if someone wants to make something that potentially could help them (since they own the rights to it and the movies are popular),
  Since the latest movies have rewritten the universe, I guess anything that relates to the old universe is public domain? The only thing the remake guys might have to pay royalties on is the patented technique of shining bright lights from off screen directly into the lens to create annoying and sometimes painful lens flare effects. I don't watch a lot of major productions anymore, but the new ST I did, and I swear the people in charge were doing everything they could to remind the viewers that they were watching a movie, and that the suspension of reality necessary for a good sci-fi flick wasn't necessary for this one. Every scene reminded you that there was a camera by creating deliberate artifacts, instead of trying to remove the camera as a middleman in the process.
6. Re:CBS's consent by schnell · 2013-10-23 13:48 · Score: 1
  
  Since the latest movies have rewritten the universe, I guess anything that relates to the old universe is public domain?
  This right here is why I love Slashdot. Absolutely nowhere else on the Internet can you find people with otherwise highly above-average IQs who may seriously believe that retcons trump copyright law.
  
  --
  "95% of all Slashdot .sig quotes are incorrect or completely fabricated." -Benjamin Franklin
7. Re:CBS's consent by eyenot · 2013-10-23 16:30 · Score: 1
  
  Quality of work. CBS isn't dipshit-stupid and/or staffed primarily by angsty geeks who rarely get outside of their real or figurative boxes, so I'm sure they saw the merits of the show and felt it deserved to "pass".
  
  --
  "Stratigraphically the origin of agriculture and thermonuclear destruction will appear essentially simultaneous" -- Lee
8. Re:CBS's consent by tepples · 2013-10-24 01:32 · Score: 1
  
  So how did they convince CBS to consent even to a pilot in order to demonstrate quality of work? Some companies like Square Enix are notorious for cease-and-desisting even high-quality work.
9. Re:CBS's consent by Obfuscant · 2013-10-24 03:29 · Score: 1
  
  Whoosh.
Very first scene using tech from Next Generation by rminsk · 2013-10-23 08:40 · Score: 1

So the first first scene of a continuation of the Original Series introduces technology from the Next Generation. The very technology that was used as a huge crutch for writers for the Next Generation. I think I'll pass.
Star Trek: Renegades by Dialecticus · 2013-10-23 08:42 · Score: 1

Don't forget about Star Trek: Renegades, which was funded through both Kickstarter and Indiegogo. Tum Russ ("Tuvok") is directing the pilot, and the cast looks reasonably impressive.
1. Re:Star Trek: Renegades by gurps_npc · 2013-10-23 08:44 · Score: 1
  
  While that looks good, his first attempt (Of Gods and Men) was quite frankly, a disappointment, despite the presence of Koenig and Nichols. But I still have hope for Mr. Russ to come through (enough to send them a bit of cash.
  
  --
  excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
Great! by JeffElkins · 2013-10-23 08:48 · Score: 2

If the whole thing is as good as the first ten minutes, I'm in. The actors for fine (Scotty is excellent) and it's leagues better than the crap JJ Abrams is putting out.

--
Why is all the good stuff already modded 5, when I have mod points?
Holodecks were supposed to be new tech in TNG by rolfwind · 2013-10-23 08:50 · Score: 1

That kinda bothers me the first thing I see is Holodeck technology in that vid. In season 1 of TNG, it was described as fairly new tech, of course that got retconned in Voyager as Janeway reminisces about using one as a child. Now it's in TOS era? I'm one of the few that actually liked Enterprise but even there it bothered me how they didn't make things primitive enough (having a transporter for one, no matter how leery of it they were) because it feels like the writers can't make do without these toys or imaginative enough to make a logical progression of tech. Of course, it starts feeling like the future stops advancing in a couple hundred years, other than being able to go to a higher warp.
1. Re:Holodecks were supposed to be new tech in TNG by ArbitraryName · 2013-10-23 09:19 · Score: 1
  
  It first appeared in The Animated Series.
2. Re:Holodecks were supposed to be new tech in TNG by Kylon99 · 2013-10-23 09:27 · Score: 1
  
  If you watched Enterprise and--okay, okay! I know most people hate it but please, hear me out...
  If you watched Star Trek Enterprise, they met an alien species who had holodeck-like technology in their era. But they didn't give them the technology or anything.
  Even if you totally dismiss the Enterprise episodes, this is a plausible explanation. That Janeway and others could have used a holodeck made by a different species outside the Federation, and it wasn't until a few years later that the technology was traded to the Federation members and/or became widespread enough that anyone had easy access. Maybe she went to an alien theme park and had fun in one, but it wasn't like that species was going to hand out plans to the technology to just anyone.
3. Re:Holodecks were supposed to be new tech in TNG by Blakey+Rat · 2013-10-23 10:07 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  That kinda bothers me the first thing I see is Holodeck technology in that vid. In season 1 of TNG, it was described as fairly new tech, of course that got retconned in Voyager as Janeway reminisces about using one as a child.
  Crown me king of the dorks but... I gotta correct you on this one.
  TNG says the Enterprise holodecks are much better than previous versions. (And they get better still after the Binars work on them in that one episode, which is presumably also where it gets the magical ability to make a super-genius Moriarty due to a misspoken command.) They never say or suggest that the holodeck technology is brand-new in TNG.
  
  --
  Comment of the year
4. Re:Holodecks were supposed to be new tech in TNG by Trogre · 2013-10-23 12:22 · Score: 1
  
  Also:
  "I can see my house from here."
  - A Klingon being shown a holodeck in ST:Enterprise episode "Unexpected".
  Do I lose karma for citing Enterprise?
  
  --
  "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
5. Re:Holodecks were supposed to be new tech in TNG by eyenot · 2013-10-23 16:19 · Score: 1
  
  Hmm.
  Well, if we had a holographic projector worth mentioning in our time in our life, I bet we would not consider it to be anywhere near a holodeck.
  And if we made it into a room with an "immersive" 4-walled background image and/or film to accompany the holograph, I bet we would still not quite consider it a holodeck by TNG standards.
  I do hope, though, that they don't go too far with the capabilities of the holodeck in "Continued". I like the aesthetic of a still background image and too-sharp images with everything in focus coming from the holographs.
  I never did understand the holodecks from TNG, how they could get lost in these holodeck worlds when they're all really just a few meters away from one another. I even had the official book that's supposed to be diagrams and explanations of the technology in the series, as well as the same book for TOS. Holodecks, I can assure anyone, were never really explained. So I have a problem with holodecks as sinister plot devices to begin with.
  
  --
  "Stratigraphically the origin of agriculture and thermonuclear destruction will appear essentially simultaneous" -- Lee
6. Re:Holodecks were supposed to be new tech in TNG by AbominousSalad · 2013-10-24 09:14 · Score: 1
  
  Except that marketers are already calling an iPhone with good sensor apps, a tricorder.
  
  --
  Every trollism an AC posts is prefixed, in my mind, with "A. Coward whined, in a weak and cowardly voice:"
Danger, Will Robinson, Danger! by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-23 08:55 · Score: 1

Having watched that flick a few weeks ago, I can say that it's definitely a cut above all the other fan flicks on Youtube.
However, it's still falling into the same trap as all the other fan flicks. Instead of writing a completely original story, the flick is basically what I call "fan-wanking": either bringing back some of the guest stars from the TOS days (same actors as in this case, or different ones), or taking one of the series stars from TOS, and use them in some cockamamie time-travel nonsense plot.
The only redeeming quality of this particular flick is James Doohan's son in the role of scotty. The dude is a spitting image of the old man, and the same voice, and accent. Quite surreal, watching his acting performance. And he can act. JJ Abrams is a douche, for picking someone else, instead of the authentic deal, here.
1. Re:Danger, Will Robinson, Danger! by 0123456 · 2013-10-23 10:48 · Score: 1
  
  JJ Abrams is a douche, for picking someone else, instead of the authentic deal, here.
  To be fair, he'd have to have actually watched 'Star Trek' to know what Scotty looked and sounded like.
And people wonder... by DerekLyons · 2013-10-23 08:56 · Score: 1

And people wonder why the entertainment industry keeps producing sequels, remakes, rehashes, and re-imaginings...
Re:Very first scene using tech from Next Generatio by Java+Pimp · 2013-10-23 08:57 · Score: 1

It looks like they were trying to show that Scotty invented or at least had a hand in creating holodeck technology. I don't remember TNG ever discussing the origins of the holodeck. Besides, TOS used left over costumes from bad westerns and gladiator movies to move their plots along. Not much different from what the holodeck was used for.

--
Ascalante: Your bride is over 3,000 years old.
Kull: She told me she was 19!
What about "Star Trek New Voyages/Phase II" thing by denis-The-menace · 2013-10-23 08:58 · Score: 2

What about "Star Trek New Voyages/Phase II" thing that has James Cawley as Kirk? (http://www.startrekphase2.de)
Looks like we might have 2 groups creating Star Trek episodes.

--
Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration
Chris Doohan & Grant Imahara by Bob9113 · 2013-10-23 09:01 · Score: 2

I'm not much of a celebrity wonk, but Chris Doohan (son of James Doohan) playing Scotty, and Grant Imahara (from Mythbusters) playing Sulu -- nice.

--
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
1. Re:Chris Doohan & Grant Imahara by sconeu · 2013-10-23 09:35 · Score: 2
  
  My brother in law was in a band with Chris. Nice guy.
  
  --
  General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
2. Re:Chris Doohan & Grant Imahara by wrf3 · 2013-10-23 11:29 · Score: 2
  
  And don't forget Jamie Bamber as Simone. I didn't recognize him in his spacesuit. When I saw his name in the credits I went back and looked again. Sure enough, another Apollo. Deep stuff -- one Apollo dies, another lives.
Big shoes to fill by sl4shd0rk · 2013-10-23 09:04 · Score: 1

Watched a bit of it. The kind of nailed it. The effects, lighting, swelling music - a lot of talent went into this and that should be recognized. If you're looking for an exact duplicate of TOS you will be disappointed. Try to keep in mind these enthusiasts have big shoes to fill. The other Star Treks were not able to fill those shoes either and they knew it. That's why the cast and set was so different.

--
Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
Re:Star Trek New Voyages by Thud457 · 2013-10-23 09:05 · Score: 1

nuts to these handful of Trek rehashes, I want to know why Man Conquers Space can't seem to make any progress.

--
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
From the site by Guspaz · 2013-10-23 09:11 · Score: 1

"I watched with pleasure the first episode some time ago and it stirred a lot of memories." - Rick B.
You had your chance, Berman...
MOAR of the hot redhead by Cyfun · 2013-10-23 09:11 · Score: 3, Funny

I just hope we get to see more of the buxom Dr. McKennah in these episodes. I mean see her in more episodes. Not her naked. Or naked is fine too.
Her IMDB: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1073676/?ref_=tt_cl_t8

--
In Soviet Russia, dot slashes YOU!
1. Re:MOAR of the hot redhead by ArbitraryName · 2013-10-23 09:34 · Score: 1
  
  That word doesn't mean what you think it means.
2. Re:MOAR of the hot redhead by CronoCloud · 2013-10-23 10:04 · Score: 1
  
  All captains should have a hot redhead...or be a hot redhead (in Janeway's case)
3. Re:MOAR of the hot redhead by ArbitraryName · 2013-10-23 10:30 · Score: 1
  
  "Buxom". It does not mean simply "large breasted". It means "plump, especially with large breasts". Buxom women are bigger everywhere.
4. Re:MOAR of the hot redhead by AbominousSalad · 2013-10-24 09:18 · Score: 1
  
  -1 Ew (Janeway)
  
  --
  Every trollism an AC posts is prefixed, in my mind, with "A. Coward whined, in a weak and cowardly voice:"
Re:Very first scene using tech from Next Generatio by ArbitraryName · 2013-10-23 09:12 · Score: 2

ST: The Animated Series introduced the holodeck.
Re:Star Trek New Voyages by Gilmoure · 2013-10-23 09:39 · Score: 1

Darkstar remake would be cool

--
I drank what? -- Socrates
Re:Very first scene using tech from Next Generatio by mythosaz · 2013-10-23 09:40 · Score: 1

From: http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Holodeck

By 2364, the Federation Starfleet had begun installing holodecks aboard their vessels. (TNG: "Encounter at Farpoint")
During the 2360s and 2370s, a starship could have one or more holodecks depending on the vessel's size or purpose. For example, Defiant-class starships did not have a holodeck, while Galaxy-class vessels had several. (TNG: "11001001", "Homeward")
The two holodecks of Intrepid-class starships were the only places other than sickbay where the EMH was able to exist (without a mobile emitter) after the crew modified his program so it wasn't as tightly integrated into the sickbay's systems. In Prometheus-class starships, the EMH could move more around the ship freely because all decks were equipped with holoemitters. (VOY: "Message in a Bottle")
Re:I don't get why this is news for nerds? by Gilmoure · 2013-10-23 09:40 · Score: 1

Yeah, only nerds would like something like this.
Still, Star Trek is the new Shakespeare so we 500 more years of this.

--
I drank what? -- Socrates
Bad Idea by wisnoskij · 2013-10-23 09:41 · Score: 1

Give us trek that none trekies at least has a chance of liking.
Being faithful to the original series is all well and good, but your market is extremely limited. Far far more limited than just producing good modern Trek. I love TOS, but even most trekies do not consider it the best series.
We need to reclaim Trek from the horrible things JJ has done, and you are not going to do that with something that 10 thousand people are going to watch.

--
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
1. Re:Bad Idea by ArbitraryName · 2013-10-23 09:56 · Score: 2
  
  It's a non-commercial effort made by and for people who specifically want what they're doing. Everything doesn't have to appeal to the greatest possible market.
2. Re:Bad Idea by lord_mike · 2013-10-23 16:39 · Score: 1
  
  This trekkie prefers the original TOS series, since that's what I grew up with. I'm loving this new series, and I hope it lives long and prospers!
Re:Very impressive production by Thud457 · 2013-10-23 09:48 · Score: 1

the incredible numbers of ways death stalks so many of them
holy cow, I never thought of it from that angle. It really is "Voyage of the Space Beagle" to some degree. Ok, not Lovecraft, but still -ish.

sciencefiction in particular seems to get caught up with superficial things like spectacle and shiny new effects. I like to think of TOS as being a stage play, with similar production values. The ideas and stories have to be more able to stand on their own feet. Yeah, that's filthy cherry-picking retconning, but it helps me to make it through the day in this world we live in.

--
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Kirk by Snufu · 2013-10-23 09:49 · Score: 1

TOG.
Just one thing... by Endophage · 2013-10-23 09:49 · Score: 1

It's a very good effort, it's just unfortunate that Vic Mignogna has such a nasal, weedy voice. Shatner had a voice and way of speaking that exuded confidence and leadership. Vic's voice makes me feel like he'd run away from most Kirk worthy situations.
1. Re:Just one thing... by CronoCloud · 2013-10-23 10:12 · Score: 1
  
  yes, but he does have the Shatner Softness in the voice...that sort of compensates. And he's the right height. I must admit I was looking for the girdle under the uniform.
Re:I agree by CronoCloud · 2013-10-23 09:58 · Score: 2

Yep, wondered if they were going to try some kind of voice synthesis using Majel's samples but they did one better.....Lwaxana's daughter.
It really wasn't bad at all, a little cheesy, but TOS was a little cheesy. And how did they get the set to look so perfect, the lighting was spot on. Did they gaussian blur the ladies?
I was not, however fond of the Bones portrayal, not curmudgeonly and gravelly enough. Also Uhura seemed a bit off...until she sang, then I realized why they went with her....she can sing. They also used her first name.
In regards to the primitive Holodeck as has been said, TAS had it. IIRC some of the novels have also mentioned it.
I did notice the women's boots were not consistent in style, but otherwise the costumes were fairly spot on.
Did you come to it as an adult? by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · 2013-10-23 10:06 · Score: 4, Informative

It's different if it's something you grow up with.
Its place in history is easier to understand if you look at how awful mass media sf was in 1966. They were groundbreaking. Others later were able to do cathedra building.
amazing by GarretSidzaka · 2013-10-23 10:09 · Score: 1

loved it!!
please don't knock it until you watch the whole episode. definitely not amateur
Can't Stand by jordanjay29 · 2013-10-23 10:26 · Score: 2

That the show is attempting to trap itself in the pitfalls of 1960's filming technology. The awfully-angled flyby shots and the 5:4 aspect ratio are acceptable for TOS, but not when you're making a show in 2013. I mean, seriously, I can watch this in 720p, but only with half my screen?
1. Re:Can't Stand by Dr.+Spork · 2013-10-23 12:40 · Score: 1
  
  I hate to break it to you, but if you watch TOS on your fancy 2013 monitor, it will also fill up only half of your screen. That's just how TOS looks, and this show is meant to look exactly like that. I think they've done an amazingly good job. Yeah sure, the acting is pretty weak and the script is almost as bad, but the nerd in me was satisfied from just taking in the perfection of all the shots, of all the sets, the cakey makeup, the props, the incidental music and especially the lighting. All that stuff looked and sounded exactly right, which is to say, TOS-wrong. The 4:3 aspect ratio is an essential part of it. I'm incredibly impressed by the look and the sound. If the acting and scriptwriting improves, this will be truly great! In 4:3!
2. Re:Can't Stand by eyenot · 2013-10-23 15:56 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  I don't feel like the acting is weak. Allow me to delve into details.
  Spock's nasal voice instead of the deep register we've come to expect from Nimoy struck me as "off". I immediately expected that I would come to find it annoying. However, the actor faithfully captures the Vulcan's calm, direct demeanor. I chalked the nasally, nerdish voice of Spock's actor up to an "interesting actor flaw".
  Then there's McCoy. I could easily imagine Kelly sitting down with a nice young girl or two in the woods, playing acoustic guitar. He was kind of one of those rustic hippy sort of personalities. Grating and sensible, but romantic and passionate. Yeah, well, this new guy is a tad overweight and smacks a tad of "gay". However, I think he perfectly captures the McCoy character. We can chalk up what's lacking to Kelly's interpretation. This new guy delivers perfect deadpan, which is pretty important for McCoy's sarcastic and wise wit.
  Kirk was a good Kirk. As others noticed, he obviously studied the hell out of the part.
  Scotty's, well, original Scotty's son apparently. He obviously enjoys the part and puts a lot of emotion into it. He almost looks like he's going to break into tears out of love for his precious Enterprise and the illogical and unnecessary danger she's being put in. He's the consummate engineer.
  And there's Sulu. That guy delivers with so much arm-swinging gumption it's hilarious, but he keeps it so muted! He never crosses the line into cheese-land! And did you see him almost cracking up on the bridge? It's obvious that Sulu's actor will be able to deliver with just as much subdued grinning as the original.
  Uhura obviously loves her part, as well. She really shined during her delivery in the opening of the "rec room 6" scene. I think the way she held herself on her forward foot was a slight bit ungraceful, but wow, what shoes to fill. The original actress for Uhura was a real smooth woman. I think this girl does great, most importantly she gets into the part. Maybe when her hair gets longer, she'll put it into a more 70's do.
  Everybody else was pretty much carbon copy of the original.
  Somebody mentioned the sets being CGId to look plastic-textured. I beg to differ. I think some of those sets were built with a lot of plastic. It's not like they don't have access to it -- obviously they built the space suits. The hallway leading to the recreation room, check out those joist panels coming down from the ceiling. That hallway is definitely built.
  The lighting was really picturesque, too. No moment was wasted with washed-out effects.
  Personally, having seen the recent big-budget reboots with all the camera lens flare covering everything up, and having seen this other fan-made thing "Phase II" that seems to prefer dark and blurry shots, I think there's apparently a sort of guilt complex hazard in making a remake of such a famous show. I'm sure the directors feel like they can't live up to it and so the lens flares and blurs and darkness are supposed to offer the audience a chance to suspend disbelief for fleeting moments.
  That approach doesn't work for me. This approach that "Continues" is using, where everything is well-lit and filmed in classical style, it spot-on. It allows them to go a step further and showcase that actual thing called The Writing.
  
  --
  "Stratigraphically the origin of agriculture and thermonuclear destruction will appear essentially simultaneous" -- Lee
3. Re:Can't Stand by eyenot · 2013-10-23 16:56 · Score: 1
  
  Just realized that the original Kelley (sp) rendition of Bones McCoy also tended to set off my gaydar. So, I guess the new McCoy is closer on that I figured -- hey, what do you know. I just referred to him as "the new McCoy". Guess some of those character flaws are more subtle than we might think.
  
  --
  "Stratigraphically the origin of agriculture and thermonuclear destruction will appear essentially simultaneous" -- Lee
4. Re:Can't Stand by smoore · 2013-10-24 00:18 · Score: 1
  
  The sets were faithfully recreated from the original plans. No CGI involved except in a few scenes where the set wasn't finished and they CGIed in the end of a corridor. They are located in Kingsland, GA. Vic told us at Dragoncon that they should be available for tours starting next year.
  
  --
  Shawn Moore http://www.teuse.net
Im sending a few $$ by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-23 10:36 · Score: 1

Just because they used the same guy who played Apollo in TOS, what a great way to reprise a character!
Galaxy Quest by Trax3001BBS · 2013-10-23 10:46 · Score: 1

Was a great parody of star trek and darn good video. Trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtHM77IRkus
Re:Star Trek New Voyages by jlv · 2013-10-23 11:23 · Score: 1

nuts to these handful of Trek rehashes, I want to know why Man Conquers Space can't seem to make any progress.
I'd love to see Man Conquers Space finished!
Re:Star Trek New Voyages by jlv · 2013-10-23 11:25 · Score: 1

Interesting thing I saw was that this is being made by the folks who did Starship Farragut, which was another "in the style of the original" web series. As I recall, they even had a call out on one episode to the folks doing New Voyages.
I actually thought the New Voyages episodes were pretty good.
Re:Star Trek New Voyages by jlv · 2013-10-23 11:28 · Score: 1

I just looked... I'd forgotten that that David Gerrold and D. C. Fontana had penned episodes (not to mention all the original cast who made appearances).
Incredible by gargleblast · 2013-10-23 12:04 · Score: 1

The attention to detail in the sets, costumes, and even lighting is incredible.
Just by the way, if it's incredible I won't bother watching.
Incredible
Ob. Inigo Montoya
Excellent. by gallondr00nk · 2013-10-23 12:21 · Score: 5, Interesting

At the risk of sounding like a damned space hippy, I've missed Star Trek's fundamentally positive outlook towards the future of humanity. Trek gave a really strong feeling that we'd end up overcoming a lot of our problems as a species. I like that sort of utopianism, so any new series of Trek is good by me.
TOS seems much maligned, and 40 years later it does seem rather awkward and dated, but there's some good episodes in there. Besides, who doesn't love some serious acting..
As an aside, this would be a good time to recommend the Post Atomic Horror podcast for anyone re-watching any of the series.
1. Re:Excellent. by Ihlosi · 2013-10-23 21:32 · Score: 1
  
  I've missed Star Trek's fundamentally positive outlook towards the future of humanity.
  Hate to break it to you, but this is the mirror universe.
2. Re:Excellent. by AbominousSalad · 2013-10-24 09:28 · Score: 1
  
  Hmm, desperate North Americans having burned their global rep until their global rep burned them back... too defeated by destitution and low education that they eventually turn feral... their only higher brain function being the ability to barely maintain a shotgun empire founded on racism and paranoia...
  Legit comment is SO legit.
  
  --
  Every trollism an AC posts is prefixed, in my mind, with "A. Coward whined, in a weak and cowardly voice:"
It's Star Trek by gman003 · 2013-10-23 12:54 · Score: 1

As a direct continuation of the original series, it hits the mark. Same sort of story, same sort of style.
Whether that is a good or a bad thing is up to you, but if you like the original series, you'll like this, and if you hated it, you'll hate this.
Personally, I think it did well by doing a character-oriented and fundamentally optimistic story. Far, far too much science fiction these days is depressing - grimdark futures, endless dystopias, and a constant cycle of getting darker and edgier. It avoided both that, and the second persistant flaw, overly raised stakes - at worst, the Enterprise was in danger, but never more, and rarely even that. While this continuation failed to correct the third major flaw I see in modern scifi - the use of pseudoscience and handwaved technology as magic, failing to try to actually predict or speculate where existing science and technology are taking us - it did so in devotion to the original series. It would not have been Star Trek without the often unscientific plots.
That is really the only failure of this attempt. They tried to exactly continue Trek, instead of trying to improve upon it. I'm pretty sure they spent quite a bit of time trying to get the CGI Enterprise to look like a plastic model, making the lighting look like an old TV show. Hell, they even cut to commercial breaks, even used 4:3 instead of 16:9. The only signs this was made in 2013 instead of 1973 are the occasional nods to The Next Generation.
Perhaps expecting them to try to do *better* than Star Trek isn't realistic. Maybe they decided nostalgia was better than some marginal technical improvements. I don't know.
I'm legitimately impressed with everything else. By fan-vid standards, this was amazing. It was even entertaining as a work on its own. I'll probably watch the next episode, if they make one. I just feel like there's still a void out there that needs filling - a piece of optimistic science fiction that actually cares for the science in its own right.
Someone's probably going to tell me that if I want something like that, I should write it myself. Maybe I will.
Pull Quote by NotQuiteReal · 2013-10-23 13:25 · Score: 1

"Apparently you can't teach and old god new tricks."

LOL'd at that one.

--
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
New Voyages/Phase II is dramatically better by macraig · 2013-10-23 13:40 · Score: 4, Informative

Somebody's never heard of Star Trek: New Voyages/Phase II, in spite of one episode nearly winning a Hugo Award and nearly a dozen actors from TOS contributing to various episodes, and even some of the original writers on board contributing new scripts? I hope it's just ignorance that motivated the OP and Soulskill to promote this to the exclusion of ST:NV and all the other Star Trek fan productions in active production. This is not "the most faithful re-creation of the original series".
series site
Wikipedia
list of episodes
1. Re:New Voyages/Phase II is dramatically better by eyenot · 2013-10-23 15:36 · Score: 1
  
  I went and took a look, because I'd love to shore up both sides of a pointless argument.
  Sorry, but all arguments aside, nothing about the presentation of "Phase II" impressed me. It seemed kind of blazed-out or something, with cinematography reminiscent of a psychedelic shoegazer music video, poor casting, poor writing, and inconfident acting. Though they did do better choosing voice actors (apparently), it's a television show, not a radio drama.
  You have to admit that the pilot for "Continues" was dead-on, and great writing, and that this "Phase II" is over-camped.
  
  --
  "Stratigraphically the origin of agriculture and thermonuclear destruction will appear essentially simultaneous" -- Lee
2. Re:New Voyages/Phase II is dramatically better by lord_mike · 2013-10-23 16:10 · Score: 1
  
  No, the casting and acting in this new version is much better, even though there's been improvement in the more recent series (the beginning ones were just plain awful). It also has better production values overall, I don't see why both can't coexist together.
3. Re:New Voyages/Phase II is dramatically better by macraig · 2013-10-23 16:17 · Score: 1
  
  The acting here wasn't bad - many of the Hidden Frontier episodes had horrendous acting - and the scripting was decent, but I still wouldn't call it "dead-on" or "great". Most of the cast aren't "dead-on" depictions of the original cast, neither in morphology nor acting; it was hard for me to forget that I wasn't watching TOS. Still, it showed enough promise that they roped Doohan's son and Michael Forrest into it, so it bears watching, but the promise isn't fully realized and may not ever be with the current cast. Yes, Cawley had a little too much fun exaggerating the Kirk character, but otherwise New Voyages' cast, sets, and scripting was/is better. I'm curious how much (and which) of ST:NV you could have watched in such a short stretch before your reply. World Enough and Time would have been the episode to watch.
  I got distracted and didn't say it earlier, but my very first reaction when beginning to watch this was to wonder why these folks didn't simply pool their talents with those of the New Voyages crew? There's what seems to me to be a needless duplication of effort here, especially the physical sets and props work. Had this talent and script (and Michael Forrest) been produced as a New Voyages episode I wonder if it might have been considerably better?
Good... but 3 years worth? by Oligonicella · 2013-10-23 14:19 · Score: 1

I was expecting camp and I got camp. Mind you, it wasn't intended. But camp can be good and this was excellent. Even the actors were chosen to imply the origins and everything else was spot on.

All that praise aside, this was very much worth one shot. A three year series to match the "6 year voyage"? Not so much. .
Just "wow" by eyenot · 2013-10-23 15:28 · Score: 1

Wow, this, was really, really, really, really good. Like read in other comments, I have to say that I expected much, much less than what was presented. But it became apparent after the first few moments that any fears of bad acting or casting could be forgotten, and once the big reveal at the end of the first scene was concluded, I realized that the writing might possibly be good, as well. After seeing the whole episode, I have to say that the writing is absolutely spectacular. What a great episode!
I can only hope that every episode has a cameo. I would in particular LOVE to see Jane Wiedlin (original guitarist of the Go-Gos, played the crazy-haired woman broadcasting from Earth in "The Voyage Home") in an episode. Hell, I'd love to see her as a regular cast member. And of course it would be interesting to see George Takei.
What a great concept and so well executed. I can't wait to figure out how to give them my feedback. Annoyingly, the YouTube comments are turned off. I guess it's kind of apparent that nobody wants to hear what the average YouTube viewer has to say about shit. (Most of the really high quality things I find on YouTube turn comments off.)

--
"Stratigraphically the origin of agriculture and thermonuclear destruction will appear essentially simultaneous" -- Lee
Re:another one? by lord_mike · 2013-10-23 15:40 · Score: 1

Except the New Voyages Phase II is... well... awful. They did a good job with sets and such, but the acting is absolutely terrible... pretty much unwatchable. I mean the guy who plays Mr. Spock has a giant beer gut. It's just not that good, especially compared to this recreation. This episode really captures the feel of the original series, and it has decent acting. I mean they even have the light shining on Kirk's face just like the original. They really did a good job here. I wish the actors had lower pitched voices, but if that's the only complaint, that's not too bad.
Re:I don't get why this is news for nerds? by eyenot · 2013-10-23 16:11 · Score: 1

Hell -- it was news to me!
Unless you were clairvoyant, it was news to you, too.

--
"Stratigraphically the origin of agriculture and thermonuclear destruction will appear essentially simultaneous" -- Lee
Re:Very first scene using tech from Next Generatio by eyenot · 2013-10-23 16:25 · Score: 1

*facepalm out of embarassment for you*
I mean, come on. The story was fucking phenomenal.
They took one moment out, one tiny moment, to (retcon or not to retcon, hmm, depends on which fans you ask apparently) some tech into the universe.
Then, did you not notice, they didn't use it at all? The rest of the show was largely practical effects and these magical things called writing and acting and ... ... wait. Basically, you saw that there was a holodeck being invented, found that to be somehow implausible in a totally fictitious universe, and decided not to continue to enjoy the show.
Listen: you need to get out of your house. STAR TREK ISN'T REAL. ALSO, VIETNAM IS OVER.

--
"Stratigraphically the origin of agriculture and thermonuclear destruction will appear essentially simultaneous" -- Lee
Really good stuff by PingXao · 2013-10-23 18:02 · Score: 1

Not to denigrate any of the other projects going on, but I thought this was brilliant. Maybe you have to be as old as I am to appreciate it. I was a little kid when TOS first aired and it will forever be my favorite Star Trek series. These guys did a marvelous job of lighting, sound, cliches (Kirk with his shirt off, anyone?) sets, dialogue, story, beats and pauses between scenes (for the "commercials"). I can't complain about the acting. Their casting choices were probably very much dictated by happenstance, enthusiasm and luck of the draw.
I think Gene Roddenberry would have approved.
Casting isn't just for metal workers by sharknado · 2013-10-23 18:06 · Score: 1

Great sets and effects. Writing isn't bad. Casting is definitely the weakest link...Uhura needs to be hotter, the captain needs to be manlier, and there's just something off about Spock and Bones. Scotty was not bad.
Re:Highlander? by Half-pint+HAL · 2013-10-24 00:33 · Score: 1

That would have made more sense than the plot of Highlander 2....

--
Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
Re:Very first scene using tech from Next Generatio by Half-pint+HAL · 2013-10-24 00:43 · Score: 1

Two characters walked through the hologram. That alone tells you This Is Not A Next Generation Holodeck.

--
Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
The Roddenberry Era :) by Dakiraun · 2013-10-24 01:04 · Score: 1

The likes and dislikes for this are certainly going to be based on personal tastes and opinions, heh. I think any fan of the original series and cast (of which I am) will appreciate this and other efforts (such as Star Trek New Voyages) to continue the look, feel and messages of the original show.
Star Trek can roughly be divided into two eras - Roddenberry, and post-Roddenberry. As a fan of the original, the first movies and TNG, the Roddenberry era is what works best for me. I think (and bear in mind it's just my opinion) that Roddenberry was a good sort of compass as to how the series should be and where it should go. Except for Start Trek V... that was just... you know what? We'll just omit that one. :P Anyway, post-Roddenberry, the series began to do some weird things to me, it just started on a real downward spiral. The TNG movies seemed to get progressively worse, Deep Space Nine was kind of dark and boring, Voyager was a real roller coaster ride of hits and missed and Enterprise was just awful. The new Abrams reboot takes it so far off the beaten path that it doesn't even seem like Star Trek anymore.... to me, anyway.
So, in a Roddenberry-era sense, this new series is very good - certainly true to that feel, and true to the original cast behaviour and mannerisms. Cast-wise, I think it's fantastic that Dohann's son is playing Scotty, and was surprised to Mythbuster's Grant playing Sulu (though I think he's trying way too hard to be George Takai.... ohhhhh my). It's amazing that they got Michael Forest back to play Apollo, and they did a fantastic job on the various age-based states of health. Heck, even Maria Sirtis signed on to do the computer voice, cool.
One thing I would question though, as has been mentioned, was the choice to use the 5:4 (or 4:3, whatever it is) aspect ratio - that seems a rather bad idea given the year. I hope future episodes will switch up to at least a 16:10 format or wider. I think as the show progresses (if it progresses), the actors will also get a bit more comfortable in their roles and it will seem less strained.
Ultimately, for those of us who like the Roddenberry era, this is a nice tip of the hat and a good alternative to the modern movies. :)
Android Tricorder Killed By CBS by tepples · 2013-10-24 01:29 · Score: 1

Being noncommercial didn't help the tricorder app.
Finally... by liamoohay · 2013-10-24 01:33 · Score: 1

IRS and NSA resources being put to good use!
Re:Star Trek New Voyages by LeadSongDog · 2013-10-24 03:09 · Score: 1

Darkstar remake would be cool
Not nearly as cool as a Red Dwarf remake.

--
Oh, I'm sorry sir, I thought you were referring to me, Mr. Wensleydale.
Re:another one? by AbominousSalad · 2013-10-24 09:24 · Score: 1

I personally like ST:Phase 2 quite a lot. It's jarring seeing the cast change every episode, though...
All's I can say is, if JJ can make an alternate timeline, the floodgates are open. Send forth the Kirk clones.
Better yet, send forth the Picard clones. If any part of Trek canon needs to be forked from Last Known Good, it's TNG.

--
Every trollism an AC posts is prefixed, in my mind, with "A. Coward whined, in a weak and cowardly voice:"
Re:Highlander? by Grishnakh · 2013-10-24 14:54 · Score: 1

What's really shameful is that Highlander (1) and Highlander 2 both had the same director and writers. WTF happened?
They're not the one who've gone where... by jtalle · 2013-10-25 18:19 · Score: 1

I prefer Star Trek New Voyages. They've been doing it longer and have a stable of episodes already. Startreknewvoyages dot com