Star Trek Continues Kickstarter 2.0

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Star Trek Continues Kickstarter 2.0

Posted by samzenpus on Monday January 19, 2015 @08:54AM from the to-boldly-make-some-more-episodes dept.

The Real Dr John writes Vic Mignogna and crew have launched their second Kickstarter campaign to produce 2 or more additional episodes of Star Trek Continues, a fan-based web series finishing up the 5 year mission of the original Star Trek television series. The first Kickstarter campaign raised enough money for 4 episodes, 3 of which have already been aired. Depending on how much funding they get this time, they plan to produce up to 4 additional episodes.

109 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Damnit Jim by Anonymous Coward · 2015-01-19 08:58 · Score: 5, Funny

I'm a doctor not a banker!
Amazing work.. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-01-19 09:03 · Score: 5, Insightful

These people are really knocking it out of the ballpark with the episodes they have done already. Seriously they got JJ spanked when it comes to the original series.
1. Re:Amazing work.. by MightyMartian · 2015-01-19 09:33 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  They're okay, but not nearly enough lens flare, and man oh man, shot length is insane. I really do demand far more quick cuts and dialogue needs to be cut to about three words per cut. Being a modern viewer, I don't want to hear all that blah-blah-blah, and just want to be nailed with a solid hour of uninterpretable action, shallow dialogue, even shallow characterization, and bad (or possibly even missing) plotting.
  
  --
  The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
2. Re:Amazing work.. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-01-19 10:10 · Score: 0
  
  And I'm still waiting for the part where Sulu starts building a robot...
3. Re:Amazing work.. by hairyfeet · 2015-01-19 11:18 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Man isn't it sad that the fan mades are getting better quality story wise than the actual bloody films? I just hope Tim Russ is able to do as good with the new Star Trek Renegades as these guys have done with STC. I saw his "Star Trek: Of Gods & Men" and it was damned good, well acted, nice twists and turns in the story, and unlike Generations he used the actors from ST: TOS that appeared in roles that actually mattered to the story.
  I don't know about everybody else but I found the JJ movies alternated between "WTF?" and "You have GOT to be kidding, that's retarded!" when it came to plot. Pines' Kirk comes off as a fratboy and the "plot" just seems to be an excuse to go from one action set piece to another. Honestly it felt more like a video game than a movie and NOT in a good way. That is why I'm happy we have these...now if we can only get Joss Whedon to let Greenwalt and Noxon do that Spike and Dru series my happiness will be complete.
  
  --
  ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
4. Re:Amazing work.. by ifiwereasculptor · 2015-01-19 11:22 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  They really, really are. My god, this Spock is SO MUCH better than Quinto's it's embarassing. All the cast is pretty great (with the exception of Grant - he's not an actor, and it unfortunately shows), with the new Scotty being the highlight of the series. Really, they god pretty much everything - pacing, writing, acting - right. Which is the main problem, I guess, since they enter uncanny valley territory. The new Kirk is great, very well done, very well researched, fights like a drunk Wrestlemania participant, exactly like the original... which seems to highlight the minuscule differences left in speech and body language (he should talk louder and faster, for instance). But really, a great, great job. I think we're all impressed and they'll surely get some of my money.
5. Re:Amazing work.. by ifiwereasculptor · 2015-01-19 11:26 · Score: 2
  
  Agree with you on pretty much everything. As for JJ Abrams's, there's a distiction to be made: the first one was actually somewhat enjoyable, despite the absurdities (red matter? WTF?). In Into Darkness, absolutely nothing made sense. Really, plot and character-wise, it was worse than Yor.
6. Re:Amazing work.. by MightyMartian · 2015-01-19 11:52 · Score: 2
  
  About the only actor in the reboots that I feel comes anywhere close to the original is Karl Urban as McCoy. Pine is just awful, and other than wearing the same shirt, has nothing in common with Shatner's Kirk. Zachary Quinto could probably be a passable Spock, if he wasn't waited with bad dialogue and pointless asides like the romantic angle with Uruha.
  All in all, the reboots to me are little more than a series of films that vaguely resemble Star Trek, but in no substantial way evoke the original series' strengths, or even attempt to create the kind of chemistry that the Kirk-Spock-McCoy triad had. Now maybe it is impossible, as chemistry between actors isn't something you can really force, but heck these fan productions do a far better job of evoking the friendship than a multi million dollar film with one of Hollywood's "ace" directors and a cast filled with all the young beautiful people that one could possibly get under one roof.
  
  --
  The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
7. Re:Amazing work.. by hairyfeet · 2015-01-19 12:06 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  It was enjoyable in that "its a brain dead boom fest" kinda way which frankly isn't what I go to a ST movies expecting or wanting. Hell the whole "Red Matter can send you back in time OR blow up a planet, just depending what the plot calls for" bullshit totally took me out of the story, not to mention the whole "alternate timeline" mess which made no fucking sense and doesn't behave anywhere near every. single. other. timeline. we have seen in the ST universe and we have seen plenty. I'll always remember what one reviewer said "It would be like you made a Batman reboot and out of the blue Batman could just burst into flames like Human Torch with NO explanation!"
  I mean if you wanna suspend disbelief with the new actors looking almost nothing like the originals? that is fine and dandy, I have no problem doing that with Star Trek Continues so I'm not gonna fault 'em for that, some of the originals are sadly gone and for some damned reason they didn't feel like they could tell any other story in such a wealthy universe? Fine, okay, I'll go along with that....but the fucking Klingons man, WHAT THE FUCK! Why do the Klingons look like fucking WOW Orcs, tell me why? I mean we even had a perfect explanation as to why TOS Klingons didn't have the bumpy forehead thanks to them fucking around with the same Eugenics that made Khan, but even if you wanted to write that event out by saying Marcus fucked with the time line that still doesn't explain WTH is up with them looking like fricking Orcs? And even if you give them that why in the hell are they spending countless trillions on starships when you have transporters that can reach across the galaxy faster than a fucking Tardis?
  I'm glad you found some enjoyment out of them because I found them to just be dreadful and I have a feeling history will NOT be kind to them, in a decade we'll look back at them and groan as much as we do at something like Attack Of The Clones (although to give them credit neither movie was as bad as Phantom Menace but I'd rather watch Ice Pirates than that snoozefest).
  
  --
  ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
8. Re:Amazing work.. by newcastlejon · 2015-01-19 12:11 · Score: 1
  
  I don't know about sad, but it's hardly surprising. On the one hand you have a group of people who greatly enjoy the source material and want to make more of the same for likeminded fans, while on the other hand you have a bunch of money-grubbing studio execs who want to make big bucks by milking a franchise and simmering it down to the lowest common denominator.
  The problem with Abrams is that he left it on the heat too long and had to fill out the mixture with leftovers from his other movies.
  
  --
  If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.
9. Re:Amazing work.. by tnk1 · 2015-01-19 12:45 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Actually, I don't have a problem in-universe with time travel via Red Matter. It makes about as much sense as going to high warp around a star and going back in time. Red Matter does something with altering or destabilizing mass to an extreme degree, causing a singularity which certainly could mimic a star's effect with the warp drive or simply causes a wormhole with an opening into the past. It's not too far outside of the usual faux science that Trek uses.
  What I am tired of is Star Trek relying on time travel. Just stop. Please.
  I know this isn't hard science fiction, and time travel is a common plot device in soft sci-fi, but at least make it rare or something. I get a headache with the epic things they do with time travel and how it still all ends up with them right back with everything the way it should be at the end of the episode/movie.
  All that said, it actually made sense for a reboot. Particularly since time travel was set up in canon to be so damn easy to do. Using time travel for a reboot is consistent, albeit annoying, since you really are just setting up an alternate time line, not "fixing the past". It's one of the few time travel stories in Trek to actually truly display the massive consequences of changing a timeline.
  As for the Klingons... eh. I had more of a problem with the transporter that lets Khan transport all the way to Qo'noS from Earth. WTF does that bad-guy Starfleet admiral need a dreadnought starship for when he could just transport megatons worth of weaponry through the Klingons' planetary defenses all the way from Earth? If they can transport a man, I doubt they would have trouble with a photon torpedo/bomb.
10. Re:Amazing work.. by ifiwereasculptor · 2015-01-19 13:01 · Score: 1
  
  You know what? You're right. I guess my brain rose-tinted the first film in comparison to Into Darkness, in very much the same way as it seems like a good idea to eat someone's dry shit than for my mouth to be blasted with diarrhea from three truckers who live on a strict diet of grilled cheese. Or, for an even grosser metaphor, how it seems The Phantom Menace isn't that bad when compared to Attack of the Clones. At least I can find amusement in seeing Rob Roy "pull out his little laser sword and go to town".
11. Re:Amazing work.. by mrchaotica · 2015-01-19 13:58 · Score: 1
  
  Hey, Chekov was decent (mostly because he didn't get enough screen time for the demented monkeys running the show to fuck up his characterization too badly).
  
  --
  "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
12. Re:Amazing work.. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-01-19 16:37 · Score: 0
  
  They're okay, but not nearly enough lens flare, and man oh man, shot length is insane. I really do demand far more quick cuts and dialogue needs to be cut to about three words per cut. Being a modern viewer, I don't want to hear all that blah-blah-blah, and just want to be nailed with a solid hour of uninterpretable action, shallow dialogue, even shallow characterization, and bad (or possibly even missing) plotting.
  Go play in the street and let the real Star Ttek fans enjoy these new episodes created by Vic Mignogna and crew. I watched the previous episodes and found them to be true to the original.
13. Re:Amazing work.. by Gadget_Guy · 2015-01-19 20:47 · Score: 1
  
  Go play in the street and let the real Star Ttek fans enjoy these new episodes created by Vic Mignogna and crew.
  Sometimes that whoosh sound overhead isn't the Starship Enterprise going by...
14. Re:Amazing work.. by delt0r · 2015-01-19 22:10 · Score: 1
  
  (red matter? WTF?)
  Yea cus dilithium crystals are right on the money and ignoring that the correct application of teleport solves pretty much most of plots was soo rock solid.
  
  You fans are all the same. You point out what is wrong with the new while it was twice as bad in the original. And please don't start with "it was intellectual". it was only if your a Texan neo nazi. " Oh.. killing people different to me bad?"
  
  It is star trek, the softest crappiest (technospeak anyone) form of sci fi invented by man. Futurama is more intelligent, more realistic and just better sci fi. You can't do crap with star trek because it was already crap in the first place. At least JJ work is interesting enough not to walk out before the end of the movie. If your sci fi is that crap *at* least have some action.
  
  --
  If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?
15. Re:Amazing work.. by delt0r · 2015-01-19 22:14 · Score: 1
  
  Oh and obligatory https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
  
  --
  If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?
16. Re:Amazing work.. by delt0r · 2015-01-19 22:16 · Score: 1
  
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?... says it all.
  
  --
  If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?
17. Re:Amazing work.. by slimshady76 · 2015-01-20 00:02 · Score: 1
  
  If they'd hear your suggestions, they'd be negating all the original series boredom and dull moments of Kirk staring through a window and Spock just looking to the infinity and beyond with nothing but a pair of pointy ears to make the scene interesting... Let's face it, the Star trek franchise paved the road for some of the most boring Sci-Fi shows ever. DS9 being the best example, and Babylon 5 the runner up.
18. Re:Amazing work.. by slimshady76 · 2015-01-20 00:04 · Score: 1
  
  I couldn't have said it better myself. Please mod this up.
19. Re:Amazing work.. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-01-20 02:03 · Score: 0
  
  When people write the scripts for any ST story they'll always put in parentheses (insert "techno-speak" here), it's standard procedure.
20. Re:Amazing work.. by JackieBrown · 2015-01-20 02:13 · Score: 2
  
  Karl Urban does a great job as McCoy. It might help that he is the only one that plays a grown up in the new series.
21. Re:Amazing work.. by Grishnakh · 2015-01-20 02:49 · Score: 1
  
  I'm glad you found some enjoyment out of them because I found them to just be dreadful and I have a feeling history will NOT be kind to them, in a decade we'll look back at them and groan as much as we do at something like Attack Of The Clones (although to give them credit neither movie was as bad as Phantom Menace but I'd rather watch Ice Pirates than that snoozefest).
  I'm very sorry to break this to you; you're probably around my age (~40) it sounds like, and yes, people of our generation did not like the SW Prequels. However, from the 20-somethings I've talked to about it, they actually *liked* those movies. A lot. Don't ask me why. I guess you could try to explain it away with the fact that, like us with Episodes 4-6, they were kids when those abominable movies came out, and did have amazing FX for the time (despite it looking like a cartoon and not realistic in any way), but that still doesn't explain how they, even when seeming otherwise like reasonably intelligent individuals, can have such high regard for these movies despite their horrifically bad dialog and plots.
22. Re:Amazing work.. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-01-20 02:57 · Score: 0
  
  Mignogna's Kirk has the signature fighting moves down pat, from the 2-fisted handstrike to the long-jump 2-footed kick. The only thing they get wrong with the fight scenes is the failure to substitute in an obvious (and poorly matched) stunt double for Kirk.
23. Re:Amazing work.. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-01-20 02:57 · Score: 0
  
  my a Texan neo nazi? WTF is that supposed to mean?
24. Re:Amazing work.. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-01-20 03:31 · Score: 0
  
  The Abrams reboot is an abomination. ST Continues is the best new Star Trek production I've seen in *decades*.
25. Re:Amazing work.. by MightyMartian · 2015-01-20 16:05 · Score: 1
  
  I can see how ADD sufferers would prefer the cinematic version of an epileptic seizure.
  
  --
  The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
26. Re:Amazing work.. by garbut · 2015-01-21 07:14 · Score: 1
  
  I fully expected them to spend the next movie going back to 'correct the timeline' and save Vulcan. They've gone back to save other things, why not for a whole planet? Leaving it destroyed is kinda un-treklike.
  
  --
  Oh, should I have sugar-coated that?
27. Re:Amazing work.. by hairyfeet · 2015-01-23 05:06 · Score: 1
  
  I would say both Urban AND Quinto are damned good, but as you noted Quinto was just unfortunate enough to be a target for JJ's bad writing whereas other than a few McCoy stereotypical lines it looks like Urban was allowed to play McCoy as a man and not an impersonation.
  
  --
  ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
28. Re:Amazing work.. by hairyfeet · 2015-01-24 06:37 · Score: 1
  
  They LIKED Phantom Menace? Really? Were they high? I don't see how even a kid could like all those boring as paint drying senate meetings or not cringe at the "Meesa steppin and fetchin, I step in the dookie!" bullshit! My two boys were kids when those came out and they thought they were absolute shite and its not like they hate sci-fi or are immune to nostalgia, the oldest loves anything related to Aliens and AVP and we know how much those stank, but even as kids they thought PM and AOTK were just painful.
  At least somebody enjoyed them, one of the worst movie watching experiences I ever had, hell they weren't even "so bad its good" they were just "so bad its awful". Hell I even enjoy some bad sci-fi, I loved the fuck out of the cheese fest that was battleship (c'mon he drifted a WWII battleship like it was a 70 Mustang, how can you not enjoy that cheese whiz goodness?) but the first 2 prequels weren't cheese, they were just rotten, boring, and as racist as somebody's grandpa, just sad.
  
  --
  ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
29. Re:Amazing work.. by Grishnakh · 2015-01-24 08:59 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, I really don't get it either. I know someone from that generation (now 25) who loves the Prequels (esp. #3) because she was young when they came out. She seems reasonably intelligent otherwise, she's not a complete moron or anything, so I really don't get it. She acknowledges that the dialog wasn't great but that doesn't seem to be deal-breaker for her. It's weird. Like you said, they were rotten, boring, and racist, and the VFX (which were admittedly amazing for the time) simply weren't enough to make up for that.
30. Re:Amazing work.. by hairyfeet · 2015-01-28 13:16 · Score: 1
  
  Oh lord, she liked the third one? man just shows you women will eat the most dumb stilted "romance" dialog if its delivered by a pretty boy, because the whole "love has blinded you?" scene was so damned tone deaf and unlike actual interaction by...well anybody not doing a line reading for dinner theater it just made me cringe the entire way, fucking terrible!
  
  --
  ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
31. Re:Amazing work.. by Grishnakh · 2015-01-28 14:33 · Score: 1
  
  I thought everyone liked the 3rd one the best of all the Prequels. I haven't seen it myself yet, but every single time I complain about the Prequels to someone and then I mention that I haven't seen the 3rd, they say that I missed the best one.
32. Re:Amazing work.. by hairyfeet · 2015-01-31 04:50 · Score: 1
  
  Dude the moron KILLS KIDS to "save his love" and after all this shit to save her, turning to the dark side, killing kids, being the lapdog the dumb fucktard just up and force chokes her ass while she is carrying his kid!
  The ONLY good in that movie is the first 10 minutes, those first 10 minutes actually felt like a Star Wars movie with the friendship and adventure...then the second the emperor shows up? Dumb shit ahoy, more "plot requires characters to be booger eating tards" than you can count, more scenes of Lucas writing "romance" dialog that sounds like dinner theater romance writing, more pointless battles that you don't give a single fuck about anyone involved....nope, still fucking terrible, it just had 10 good minutes at the front.....which come to think of it even then there was at least 2 "plot requires dumb because reasons" along with just dropping you in the middle of a battle with 2 factions that is so chaotic you don't know WTF is going on.
  Seriously man go look up "Confused Matthew Star Wars Prequels" for a look at just how fucking HORRIBLE these flicks are written, how even the most basic questions like "Who is this person, why are they here, why should I care" are NEVER even hinted at, much less answered, he explains better than I can ever do what went wrong and why and its entertaining (his review NOT the movies) to boot!
  
  --
  ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Ob. Space Balls reference by BarbaraHudson · 2015-01-19 09:04 · Score: 2

This Star Trek campaign is obviously an infringement on "Space Balls 2: the search for more money". :-)

--
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
So how are they by Anonymous Coward · 2015-01-19 09:06 · Score: 0, Interesting

I guess this means I've been living under a rock, but this hasn't been on my radar to watch at all yet. Are the first three pretty good? Are they adequately carrying on the legacy?
1. Re:So how are they by Jhon · 2015-01-19 09:13 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  They aren't bad at all. While I won't say they are "great", I enjoyed watching them and they certainly weren't a waste of my time.
2. Re:So how are they by bill_mcgonigle · 2015-01-19 09:26 · Score: 2
  
  They are very good. They get all the notes of the original as close to exactly-right as you could possibly expect of a production. I would go so far as to say a studio would do worse because they'd want to interject some new concept.
  It takes me 5 minutes of each episode to get used to "Kirk's" higher-pitched voice, but that incongruity fades rather quickly. And, sorry, but I keep expecting Grant to unleash a robot.
  Regardless, the first three were better "TV" than most of what's on broadcast today. And I suppose there's an outside chance that the success of "Continues" will have an influence on how Paramount views the fanbase.
  
  --
  My God, it's Full of Source!
  OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
3. Re:So how are they by MightyMartian · 2015-01-19 09:34 · Score: 1
  
  Unlike the two reboot films.
  
  --
  The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
4. Re:So how are they by newcastlejon · 2015-01-19 09:34 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  I've really enjoyed them so far. For me they rank in order of air date: the first one was pleasing mainly for the return of Apollo and the actor who played the role in TOS, the second is a really solid story in the original style helped no end by casting Lou Ferrigno as on Orion slaver and an admirable performance by (sorry, had to look this up) Fiona Vroom* and the third was an excellent continuation of Mirror, Mirror.
  Vig Mignogna plays Shatner to a T and easily surpasses him in the role of Mirror Kirk, while Chris Doohan (yes, it's his son) has obviously spent many an hour watching his old man and gets the accent just right. The series as a whole is well worth watching and I'll definitely be throwing some money their way if it means I get to enjoy more of the same; the show has clearly been put together by people who have spent far more time watching the original series than I. There are a number of small guest appearances that will bring a smile to your face, not least of which is Michael Dorn.
  *Points also earned for having such a cool name.
  
  --
  If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.
5. Re:So how are they by roc97007 · 2015-01-19 09:41 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  I guess this means I've been living under a rock, but this hasn't been on my radar to watch at all yet. Are the first three pretty good? Are they adequately carrying on the legacy?
  My background: I grew up watching TOS, was at first excited and then bored by TNG and the rest of the Berman series, and had my interest renewed by Abrams' films, which I believe are reviled primarily by Berman "endless meetings" era fans, and not first-run TOS fans. That said:
  Star Trek Continues (TOS-C?) is, so far, surprisingly good. The sets, costumes, tools, and effects are easily equal to TOS Remastered. But besides that, the plots are interesting and after you get over different people playing the characters, it's like episodes of TOS that for some reason you hadn't seen yet.
  Wife and I both loved them, and my 20 year old daughter, who grew up watching TOS Remastered, has given it her conditional seal of approval.
  Something we all agree on is that there needs to be more episodes. Daughter holds back full approval only because there hasn't been enough so far to have an informed opinion.
  
  --
  Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
6. Re:So how are they by roc97007 · 2015-01-19 09:43 · Score: 1
  
  > I would go so far as to say a studio would do worse because they'd want to interject some new concept.
  Cue the precocious kid and annoying pet...
  
  --
  Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
7. Re:So how are they by WillyWanker · 2015-01-19 09:54 · Score: 1
  
  Star Trek New Voyages/Phase II is far better. And they just released their latest episode Mind-Sifter in December.
8. Re:So how are they by dreamchaser · 2015-01-19 09:55 · Score: 1
  
  I guess it's a YMMV thing. I won't call them terrible, and obviously they put a lot of work into them, but I just can't watch them. I've tried. I haven't been able to make it more than ten minutes.
9. Re:So how are they by retroworks · 2015-01-19 10:22 · Score: 2
  
  I watched until 5:50. 2 Most important things:
  1) Chris Doohan is spooky (son of James Doohan, reprising his father as "Scotty")
  2) Has a holodeck like ST Next Generation, but says "Where no MAN has gone before" in opening credits
  Aside from that, it wasn't horrible, in fact they capture the 60's style so well that it's like a really good Vegas tribute act, an Elvis-Karaoke worth paying a compliment to.
  
  --
  Gently reply
10. Re:So how are they by drewsup · 2015-01-19 10:28 · Score: 1
  
  They are doing a great job maintaining TOS "feel", Vic does a great job as Kirk, Spock is so-so, Bones is well.... a tad limp. Overall they do pretty well being crowd funded and free,(as in BEER), I have looked at the other ones including the Farragut spinoff, most of the others as not quite to par, Hell call me an old fogey, I grew up TOS and enjoy seeing what could have been.
11. Re:So how are they by Anonymous Coward · 2015-01-19 10:47 · Score: 0
  
  I've really enjoyed them so far. For me they rank in order of air date
  Unfortunately, it goes downhill quickly in the third season with the "Space Rave Kids" episode and "Spock's Brain 2: Electric Boogaloo".
  
  an admirable performance by Fiona Vroom
  Vroom vroom? She sounds like a goer, eh? Know whatahmean, know whatahmean, nudge nudge, know whatahmean, say no more? Does she go, eh, does she go, eh? (etc.)
12. Re:So how are they by Minwee · 2015-01-19 10:57 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  They _are_ the original series. Same sets, same costumes, same props, just a different cast.
  It's not a "reboot" or "reimagining", it's actually an attempt to continue the original Star Trek as though it had never ended. While there naturally are some differences in writing style, the similarities to the original series are amazing.
  If you liked Star Trek (1966), watch it. If you preferred Star Trek (2009), then it may not be your thing.
13. Re:So how are they by Guspaz · 2015-01-19 11:53 · Score: 1
  
  I found episode 1 a bit iffy, but episode 3 (the mirror-mirror continuation) was much better. I haven't had a chance to watch episode 2 yet.
14. Re:So how are they by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · 2015-01-19 11:55 · Score: 2
  
  Sounds like a lot of buried rage there. Careful or it will flare up.
  
  --
  (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
15. Re:So how are they by Anonymous Coward · 2015-01-19 12:08 · Score: 1
  
  tos animated series has a holo dec and it was originally going to be included into star trek phase t the series in the 70s had star trek went to tv route vs going with the feature film for the original crew.
16. Re: So how are they by Anonymous Coward · 2015-01-19 12:27 · Score: 0
  
  Super good! Highly recommended
17. Re:So how are they by mrchaotica · 2015-01-19 14:08 · Score: 0
  
  They've only made 3 episodes, and one of them was a fucking mirror one? The DS9 ones sucked; the Enterprise one sucked, and I can only assume the TOS one sucked (I haven't actually seen it). Even the Star Trek Online mirror missions suck! Of all the things to waste their limited money on...!
  
  --
  "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
18. Re:So how are they by Guspaz · 2015-01-19 14:40 · Score: 1
  
  So, having never seen the original episode that they're continuing, you don't really have any basis for comparison, then, do you? You've just seen a bunch of spinoff stuff that didn't live up to the original.
19. Re:So how are they by flargleblarg · 2015-01-19 14:51 · Score: 1
  
  I liked all three a lot. And Lou Ferrigno in episode 2 is freaking awesome.
20. Re:So how are they by flargleblarg · 2015-01-19 14:52 · Score: 2
  
  The Star Trek Continues episode in the mirror universe is actually really good. Like seriously good.
21. Re:So how are they by Anonymous Coward · 2015-01-19 15:00 · Score: 0
  
  My favourite guest appearance was Marina Sirtis as the voice of the computer, complete with Betazoid accent. The mental gymnastics required to make her the obvious choice are mind blowing.
22. Re:So how are they by jdavidb · 2015-01-19 15:01 · Score: 1
  
  I discovered Star Trek Continues after it was posted on Slashdot a couple of weeks ago. This series is now responsible for jump-starting my children's interest in Star Trek, so I rate it highly! :)
  
  --
  Secession is the right of all sentient beings.
23. Re:So how are they by mrchaotica · 2015-01-19 15:19 · Score: 1
  
  Deep Space 9 did live up to the original (and perhaps surpassed it), and even Enterprise was better than most people give it credit for. It was only the mirror episodes, not the series they were in, that sucked.
  
  --
  "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
24. Re:So how are they by Guspaz · 2015-01-19 15:34 · Score: 1
  
  I was referring to the mirror episodes, not the series in general.
25. Re:So how are they by Kevin+Fishburne · 2015-01-19 18:11 · Score: 1
  
  I watched until 5:50. 2 Most important things:
  1) Chris Doohan is spooky (son of James Doohan, reprising his father as "Scotty")
  2) Has a holodeck like ST Next Generation, but says "Where no MAN has gone before" in opening credits
  Aside from that, it wasn't horrible, in fact they capture the 60's style so well that it's like a really good Vegas tribute act, an Elvis-Karaoke worth paying a compliment to.
  That some people today are insistent about the use of gender-agnostic nouns doesn't mean that those using lesser-so nouns in the past were bigots. I highly doubt TOS's use of the word "man" was meant as a slight toward women considering Roddenberry's vision and the fact that it was the first television program showing a white and black person kissing. The entire premise of Star Trek Continues is that it's a continuation of the original series, which used the word "man", so I doubt they intended it to be a slight or exclusionary either. I despise bigotry, but people gotta loosen up a bit. If I say to my kid, "Hey, it's the mailman!" and then realize it's a woman driving I'm not going to start calling them the "mail person" and flog myself for being a misogynist. Language is fluid and its primary purpose is to get the point across. I wonder how many people when they heard the "where no man has gone before" bit thought, "Those sexist bastards! They specifically chose to use the word 'man' instead of 'one' because they're sexist pigs!" I mean, really? I hope someday people will realize that bigotry and choice of words are two very different things and that it's the intent and meaning of language that should cause offense, not an individual word in a sentence.
  
  --
  Buy your next Linux PC at eightvirtues.com
26. Re:So how are they by TheRaven64 · 2015-01-20 00:13 · Score: 1
  
  Do they have any mechanism for downloading them? I could only find streaming versions. The Phase II and Axanar people both allow downloading, which makes it a lot easier to watch their stuff.
  
  --
  I am TheRaven on Soylent News
27. Re:So how are they by Anonymous Coward · 2015-01-20 01:12 · Score: 0
  
  considering Roddenberry's vision and the fact that it was the first television program showing a white and black person kissing.
  Actually, that prize goes to a British soap called Emergency - Ward 10, which featured the first black and white interracial kiss about four years prior to Star Trek's. Unlike the Star Trek kiss, which was forced upon them and unloving, the kiss on the British medical soap was a loving one and the characters ended up in a long-standing relationship.
  Still, saying the above, the Star Trek kiss, even if forced on the characters (their bodies were being controlled by the latest weekly instalment of aliens, being forced to kiss for their amusement), it still played a role in breaking down the racial barriers and deserves some credit.
28. Re:So how are they by JackieBrown · 2015-01-20 02:18 · Score: 1
  
  I liked the mirror episodes in Trek. They probably had the best continuity of the whole series.
  The first few minutes of the Enterprise one was great (takes place right at the end of the Star Trek: First Contact)
29. Re:So how are they by Anonymous Coward · 2015-01-20 02:19 · Score: 1
  
  ST-C gets it right in so many little ways: camera angles and framing, scene setups, facial expressions, and just the right amount of cheese. Episode 2, especially, was excellent in this regard. Best one liner (IMO) is Kirk yelling at the ensign.. ."Get a hold of yourself, mister!". Gave me goose bumps. Mignogna seriously channeled Shatner during that one.
30. Re:So how are they by Anonymous Coward · 2015-01-20 02:50 · Score: 0
  
  Just to follow up, episode 2 "Lolani" really is a great episode of Star Trek. People will talk about eps 1 and 3 more because they're sequels to TOS episodes, but "Lolani" really captures something special... it evokes the spirit of Star Trek in a way that no other production (fanmade or studio) has done for me since TOS ended.
  Having said that, I also really enjoyed many episodes of New Voyages/Phase II ("Blood and Fire" was excellent, although some don't like the gay relationship subplot), and even Starship Exeter's "Tressaurian Intersection" (the final act of which has finally been released after a huge delay).
31. Re:So how are they by Grishnakh · 2015-01-20 02:54 · Score: 1
  
  Like a lens flare?
32. Re:So how are they by Grishnakh · 2015-01-20 02:59 · Score: 1
  
  Star Trek's kiss was the first which American viewers got to see. So not the first TV kiss worldwide, but still the first in the US, at a time when British TV was probably never seen in the US unlike today.
33. Re:So how are they by Anonymous Coward · 2015-01-20 03:06 · Score: 0
  
  Star Trek New Voyages/Phase II is far better. And they just released their latest episode Mind-Sifter in December.
  Finally... after what, like 2 years? I will watch it, and I have high hopes for it... but for me, STC has raised the bar. My expectations are much higher now.
  I loved New Voyages / Phase II for a long time, but the delays between releases were getting to me. I know there was some chicanery in the background involving Mignogna (for the NV/P2 episode "Kitumba"), but that doesn't involve me. There are multiple sides to that story, and I'm never going to know enough to reliably suss out who's in the wrong.
34. Re:So how are they by Anonymous Coward · 2015-01-20 03:39 · Score: 0
  
  Even so, it wasn't actually a consenting kiss and there wasn't any feeling in it, seeing that both the characters were forced to do so. In that way, the viewers could rationalise it that the characters didn't actually want to kiss but were forced to against their wishes, which would appease some of the racist feelings (although not all). It's still a landmark scene, especially for the US, and maybe I'm being a tad unfair, but it's not the first full blown kiss with feelings. It's also important to recognise that it wasn't the first interracial kiss on TV and to give credit where it's due (which goes to that British soap, and which was a loving kiss).
  Anyone know what was the first proper kiss between black and white people on US TV?
35. Re:So how are they by bdenton42 · 2015-01-20 09:57 · Score: 2
  
  Vic does a great job as Kirk
  He's got the look and mannerisms down but he just does not have the command presence and the authority voice... he sounds wimpy and whiney. I think he needs to find a drill sergeant to work with him on it.
36. Re:So how are they by BranMan · 2015-01-21 09:54 · Score: 1
  
  If you ever find a way to download them, please post here and let me know. Us old-timers don't trust this new-fangled intarweb too much - I'd much rather download them, burn them to a DVD and both have a copy forever (everything on the WWW is temporary) and easily pull it out to watch it big-screen.
37. Re:So how are they by Kevin+Fishburne · 2015-01-21 15:07 · Score: 1
  
  Cool, I didn't know that. Seems like the U.S. is behind the times when it comes to that sort of thing (giving women the right to vote for example). At least we have the middle east to make us feel better. Those guys seriously need to get their shit together.
  
  --
  Buy your next Linux PC at eightvirtues.com
Kirk on Fan Films by rexbinary · 2015-01-19 09:07 · Score: 1

Spock: "Jim, the fan films are dying." Kirk: "Let them die!"
1. Re:Kirk on Fan Films by Bomarc · 2015-01-19 09:14 · Score: 2
  
  It's not the fans that are dying ... it's the competent executives (and writers). STC has them, and I they will continue.
2. Re:Kirk on Fan Films by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · 2015-01-19 09:18 · Score: 1
  
  Kirk: "Then ... ... ... ... let ... them ... die".
  
  FTFY
3. Re:Kirk on Fan Films by Anonymous Coward · 2015-01-19 09:27 · Score: 0
  
  I think you a word.
4. Re:Kirk on Fan Films by newcastlejon · 2015-01-19 12:22 · Score: 1
  
  Kirk: "Where's... ... Mr. ... Spock?"
  ...
  Kirk: "Good girl."
  Sends a shiver down my spine.
  
  --
  If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.
No!!! by Anonymous Coward · 2015-01-19 09:07 · Score: 0

They can start selling the episodes and use that money to make more episodes. I'm not giving them any more money.
1. Re:No!!! by alexander_686 · 2015-01-19 09:28 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Expect they can't sell them. As long as they give them away for free as fan based art, Paramount will tolerate the infringement. Start charging, probably not.
2. Re:No!!! by Anonymous Coward · 2015-01-19 09:30 · Score: 0
  
  They can't "sell" the episodes. CBS/Paramount owns the right to the IP and are only allowing them to do this as long as they don't profit from it.
3. Re:No!!! by tlhIngan · 2015-01-19 11:05 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Expect they can't sell them. As long as they give them away for free as fan based art, Paramount will tolerate the infringement. Start charging, probably not.
  Paramount is awful at that - they actually tried to shut down a bunch of fan sites many years ago because it infringed on their trademarks.
  CBS (who owns Paramount and pretty much reserves Paramount for movies) has been far more tolerant and I think actually gave their approval. Not to make money, but at least CBS won't pursue action against them for making this.
  Effectively, CBS has blessed this work of fan fiction...
"Kirkstarter 2.0" by BetterThanCaesar · 2015-01-19 09:26 · Score: 4, Funny

Submitter totally missed the "Kirk-starter" pun.
Anyway, I enjoyed the first three episodes. They capture the mood and cheese of the original series quite well. I've donated a few dollars to the second run as well now.

--
"Stop failing the Turing test!" -- Dilbert
1. Re:"Kirkstarter 2.0" by MightyMartian · 2015-01-19 09:36 · Score: 2
  
  I have as well. I feel it's money better spent than the money I forked over for the reboot films. At least when I look at the screen, I'm seeing what I consider the Star Trek experience, as opposed to a generic action film that happens to have the USS Enterprise.
  
  --
  The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Star Trek New Voyages by Anonymous Coward · 2015-01-19 09:32 · Score: 0

Another series already exists!
http://www.startreknewvoyages.com/
Vic? Pass by Anonymous Coward · 2015-01-19 10:22 · Score: 0

Vic Mignogna? I'll sit this one out, anyone who's been on the anime/comic con circuit and had the chance to meet voice actors has more than likely heard rumors about him or just seen him being a general ass compared to 90% of the other's.
Stick to being known to underage fan girls as Edward Elric please.
It's good by kuzb · 2015-01-19 11:38 · Score: 4, Informative

Star Trek Continues is surprisingly good, IF and only IF you happen to like the old-school filming and storytelling style employed by the original Star Trek. It's an amazingly faithful recreation which deserves a lot of props for hitting the mark so carefully.

--
BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
First season of TNG sucked.. by oldbitcollector · 2015-01-19 12:11 · Score: 3, Insightful

The first season of TNG wasn't that great.. It took the actors until the third season before The Next Generation got it's stride. Personally, I'd love to see this group given the chance to really get their stride.. If it's already better than JJ's.. Wait until they've had a few more episodes... I'm in....
Gotta disagree strongly . . . by mmell · 2015-01-19 14:13 · Score: 1

ST-C absolutely dead-on nails the look and feel of ST-TOS in every way. Even their CGI is immaculate.
With that said, they're all interesting. Check 'em all out, make your own decision.
1. Re:Gotta disagree strongly . . . by flargleblarg · 2015-01-19 14:55 · Score: 1
  
  ST-C absolutely dead-on nails the look and feel of ST-TOS in every way.
  Seconded. Other than the actors being different, it really, honestly, truly feels like you're watching lost episodes of ST:TOS straight out of the 1960s.
2. Re:Gotta disagree strongly . . . by WillyWanker · 2015-01-19 17:21 · Score: 1
  
  Have you seen Mind-Sifter? ST-C looks good until you compare it to New Voyages, and then you realize that it's not really all that great after all. And sure ST-C had Lou Ferrigno and Michael Forest, but New Voyages has had Walter Koenig, George Takei, and Denise Crosby. They also don't violate established canon like ST-C does.
3. Re:Gotta disagree strongly . . . by WillyWanker · 2015-01-19 17:23 · Score: 1
  
  Go watch Mind-Sifter on YouTube and compare it to any of ST-C's episodes. The difference is like night and day.
4. Re:Gotta disagree strongly . . . by flargleblarg · 2015-01-20 06:18 · Score: 1
  
  Watched Mind-Sifter. I liked it. They got the lighting and the camera style all wrong, though, whereas Star Trek Continues nails these things. Mind-Sifter did not at all feel to me like a a continuation of 60s Trek — it felt more like a reboot. I appreicate that they tried, but they missed the mark. I did really enjoy the tip of the hat to "Nightmare at 20,000 Feet", though, which was playing on the B&W television. :)
5. Re:Gotta disagree strongly . . . by WillyWanker · 2015-01-20 07:32 · Score: 1
  
  Didn't get the lighting and camera right? Are you fucking shitting me? I'm sorry, but you have no idea what you're talking about. Either that or you work for Continues.
The End by westlake · 2015-01-19 15:22 · Score: 1

I saw my first "studio quality" amateur replica of the Enterprise bridge set more years ago than I care to think about --- and as much as I admire the effort put into projects like this, I believe it is time to move on.
The modern era of science fiction is close on to a century old now. It's an enormous body of work in all media and all genres --- space opera, speculative fiction, etc., etc. --- that the geek has largely ignored for decades.
Why should the big boys like Disney, Pixar and Marvel have all the fun?
I'm asking that not only because my first instinct when hearing the words "The Prime Directive" is to kill them by fire.
1. Re:The End by gl4ss · 2015-01-19 17:50 · Score: 1
  
  more like 60-70 years rather than 100... ignored for decades? as if.
  speculative science fiction hasn't had a good run on hollywood in a while. just big explosions shit. star trek into the darkness had me thinking it's shit in the first 10 minutes. put enterprise underwater, do some stupid volcano stopping shit, break prime directive and all that in the first 10 minutes. it's like the watched a parody of into the darkness and then made a film based on the parody, what a paradox.
  
  --
  world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
2. Re:The End by Kevin+Fishburne · 2015-01-19 18:30 · Score: 1
  
  I've seen every Star Trek episode and film in order with the exception of TOS which I watched last in an epic and sadly final marathon. Sci-fi has moved on, but Star Trek deserves a place in our hearts that will be difficult to fill again. It was the first serious sci-fi drama on television and has more episodes and films than any normal human being would dare to watch. Star Trek began dying, or should I say everyone began moving on, right around the time TNG was ending and DS9 was beginning. Voyager was its gasps for air and Enterprise its final throes. Battlestar Galactica put the last nail in the coffin, making people realize just how different (and equally if not more excellent) a sci-fi television show could be. The two JJ films succeeded because they had a recognizable name and were simple action flicks.
  
  So Star Trek is dead. Everyone has moved on. That being said, let those who deeply love Star Trek for everything it has given us have a little fun with Star Trek Continues. They're not hurting anyone. Unless they violate the Prime Directive. Is it getting hot in here? Report! Compensate. Check the relays and coils and all that shit. AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!
  
  --
  Buy your next Linux PC at eightvirtues.com
This *IS* Star Trek! by Announcer · 2015-01-19 16:34 · Score: 2

The first fan-fiction Star Trek I watched was "New Voyages" a number of years ago. As a fan of Trek since TOS was in syndication in the early 70's (I was only 4 in 1966!) I have to admit, I was quite pleasantly surprised! Then, along came Star Trek Continues, running in pretty much the same vein, and with similar quality to "New Voyages".
As others here have said, this really *IS* like watching "lost episodes" from TOS! Both my wife and I really enjoy this! It is like getting brand new Star Trek stories, again... just a LONG wait between each one.
It is also quite telling, when you see that both of these high-quality fan-fiction productions are actually getting the ORIGINAL actors and actresses to reprise their TOS roles in various ways... this is where "time-travel" stories are actually being used in an enjoyable and meaningful way. For example, "World Enough and Time" (By New Voyages) was only the 2'nd Star Trek story to bring tears to my eyes! (The first was "Inner Light" on TNG.) Yeah, it was THAT good!
I look forward to watching what BOTH of these top-notch fan-fiction production groups do in the days ahead! If the Powers That Be would REALLY PAY ATTENTION, they would see what the majority of the Star Trek fan base REALLY WANTS.
Those "new" movies don't even deserve more than this one-line mention. I only saw the 1'st one. That did it for me. No more.
Live Long and Prosper, New Voyages and Star Trek Continues!!

--
Willie...
1960's production values??? Really? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-01-19 17:38 · Score: 0

I find the 1960's production values to be just too painful. Surely it would be all that bad if some effort were made to at least attempt some actual realism?
Meh by Anonymous Coward · 2015-01-19 17:39 · Score: 0

The sets look good, but I can't stand Vic's voice as Kirk. He sounds a little too whiney for the part even though he looks it.
If you want to see a good fan-based series, check out Axanar.
Hope for the Future by HatofPig · 2015-01-19 18:26 · Score: 1

Star Trek Continues is a fantastic fan series. I've been watching Star Trek fan films since the first episode of Star Trek New Voyages, Come What May, was released. It has been amazing to witness the subculture grow with the technology that enables its existence.
And consider what this says about Star Trek as a cultural force. It was an optimistic message during pessimistic times. In the 60s people needed hope for the future. Star Trek filled that need so well that now, in very different (but still uncertain) times, we end up with Star Trek spontaneously manifesting itself into existence all over the place. It's like a program embedded into the cultural psyche: Need hope? Go to Star Trek. No Star Trek? Make Star Trek. Humans are crazy.
I'm not sure if new episodes of my favorite 60s television show will really offer hype to today's post-modern outlook. I would love to see a Star Trek allegory on contemporary identity politics and the formalization and modeling of all of reality into the data-mined, consultant-approved Matrix we all inhabit today. It would probably have to be DS9esque in outlook, though. On that note, I thought Caprica was going to be the crown-jewel of socially-relevant contemporary science-fiction television but it got shit-canned after two seasons. Imagine if that happened to Babylon 5, what we would have missed out on? Now we have Doctor Who, whose offered fantasy is "leave the whole fucking planet behind". Huh.
Star Trek New Voyages just released their 9th official episode and a new one is out soon this month. Starship Exeter finally released the last act of their second episode last year, after a nearly 10 year wait. Check them out!

--
Silicon & Charybdis McLuhan Kildall Papert Kay
Episode 2; Worst Kiwi accent ever! by Anonymous Coward · 2015-01-19 21:50 · Score: 0

As a Kiwi, that fake NZ accent in the opening scenes was the worst I've ever heard. It was like a mix of Australian and American. Faceplate material.
Let Star * die. by jellomizer · 2015-01-19 22:34 · Score: 1

Star Trek, Star Wars...
These were shows/movies made decades ago.
Great for there time, but outdated now. Even reboots and new episodes featuring the next generation, brings in the money playing off of our Nostolga. They have to do so much work to explain why the cannon is changing because having the old shows showing things with limited effects and a different view on the progression of technology. Just clutters a good movie or show if just given a new universe.

--
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
1. Re:Let Star * die. by kuzb · 2015-01-20 06:15 · Score: 1
  
  If you don't like it, don't watch it. It's as simple as that. I don't understand the "I hate it so it must be purged from the Universe" mentality.
  
  --
  BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
hadn't seen these before by cascadingstylesheet · 2015-01-19 22:59 · Score: 1

Halfway through the first episode, and it's really good! For fan-made, this is incredible.
Incredible by Sqreater · 2015-01-20 03:49 · Score: 1

As someone who eagerly awaited each episode as a teen in the 60s I have to say these episodes are spot on. Great job. Amazing. But Spock should stop accenting his speech with head movements.

--
E Proelio Veritas.
Re:Incredible - but by Sqreater · 2015-01-20 04:07 · Score: 1

They should vigorously fight the present day force toward the gynocentrification of all plots and the forced equality of women in all things - as we absurdly saw, for example, when the ship's counselor and doctor became trained to do bridge duty on Star Trek: The Next Generation. All kinds of TV series today start out with a vigorous male theme and then rapidly decline into female soaps. ST 1 was a glorification of male attributes and culture in a sci-fi setting. To boldly go where no MAN has gone before. It was a different time. Change the tone and destroy the verisimilitude of this endeavor.

--
E Proelio Veritas.