While there are many things wrong with this (excessive camera flare, excessive camera shake, questionable acting), one must remember it is a fan film. I actually enjoyed this more than the Abram abortions.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l94v4YOqxOc
Printable View
While there are many things wrong with this (excessive camera flare, excessive camera shake, questionable acting), one must remember it is a fan film. I actually enjoyed this more than the Abram abortions.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l94v4YOqxOc
The visuals were too "JJ Abrams meets nuGalactica" for my taste. Story was serviceable.
Try Brannnon Briges' "Time Travel Trilogy". (Star Trek: Spectre, Retribution, and Redemption). Astonishing recreation of TNG-style, right down to camera positioning, lighting, etc. Interesting characters and a decent story. The last film (Redemption) is the best, IMO.
Badly animated CGI with crappy Poser-based figures. I find it unwatchable.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Donovan
remember it is a fan film with a limited budget. I did find the 'Iconians' laughable, from my research they looked nothing like that. As far as being unwatchable, I would only say that if I had produced a film that was better.
Waveman, he was referring to my suggested viewing.
Owen, I think he did a very good job considering he was basically one man working on it all on his own. Yes, his tools had limits, and it's unfortunate that the voice casting fell apart so he had to use the temp track with only two voices, but the "cinematography" is first rate. Shot construction, lighting, and very faithful set reconstructions make it look and feel just like TNG.
More important and compelling though is his writing. He's really good at drawing out the nuances of his characters and handles their dialogue with a pretty deft touch. He even does something I didn't think it was possible for Trek to do: include openly gay characters in such a way that the viewers aren't hammered over the head with an Aesop every time they show up on screen.
Captain (later Admiral) Rayfe is the best parts of the great Starfleet Captains that have come before: as decisive as Kirk or Janeway, as personable as Archer or Sisko and as morally wise as Picard's better moments.
Commander (later Captain, later Admiral) Prentis is a better-rounded, more tempered incarnation of Riker.
The real jewel though is Kendra Erikson (later Ronston). She's everything Janeway ever was as Captain in film 3 but with none of Janeway's irritating self-righteousness or autocratic arrogance. The degree to which she goes out of her way to look after her crew shows the depth of her commitment to them as people more than as Starfleet officers under her command.
I'll even go so far as to proclaim the crew of the Fitzgerald the finest, most polished ensemble cast since TOS. They're simply marvelous to watch.
Still not as good as this one.
I actually enjoyed Horizons. I found the story interesting and believable. If I had to nitpick such an obviously low budget creation, it would not be to talk about effects, it was that the plot was slow in places. Given the choice between this, and nuTrek, I'm all in on Horizon.
Dude, if you're looking for Exeter, The Tressaurian Intersection is a lot better.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Tatterdemalion King
And second Continues episode "Lolani" is simply put one of the best out there.
Oh, it's not bad by any means. I just kind'a had a "meh" reaction to it. Not a fan of the Temporal Cold War as a storyline and the defector character is problematic from a canon perspective (as is BBEG showing his face).Quote:
Originally Posted by Pericles
I think that the better the effects, the less charm they have.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Donovan
The Farragut episodes in the style of TAS are pretty cute though.
Well, that's fair. I wasn't a huge fan of the TCW either. However, you can stretch Canon to fit that she was modified and you never saw Dikon's ears, so you never really knew that Romulans looked like Vulcans. I had a bigger problem with the bad guy's name as I kept thinking of the Japanese radish.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Donovan
Wouldn't she have TOLD them? I mean if she really was defecting. You'd think she would have said "Oh, by the way, any Vulcans you might see? They could be Romulans, cause they're our cousins and all..."Quote:
Originally Posted by Pericles
Eh.
Honestly, I also wanted a bit more about the Iconians. I thought they'd play a bigger part somehow. I got a very Stargate/Ancients vibe off of them.
Bonus points for the shout-out to the Rihannsu books with the Irrruhue mention. :)
yeah me too, but I suppose that would detract from the main story and extend the movie (costing more money). The real disappointment for me was the Iconians themselves (as I mentioned in the OP) Here's what they should have looked like (non canon but there is no canon portrayals of them AFAIK)Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Donovan
http://i1008.photobucket.com/albums/...ans-ingame.jpg
http://i1008.photobucket.com/albums/...10/Iconian.png
I would love to see their technology explored and explained in more detail, and you are right about the parallels with StarGate and the similarities between the Iconian gateways and Alteran's stargates.
I thought STO was at least semi-canon?
Fair enough, but I did say it was a stretch. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Donovan
Even if someone in Paramount said it nominally was, that's going to get rescinded the moment anyone on a TV or movie schedule is faced with actually integrating material from it into a show. The best you can probably hope for is casual mentions, a la the Among the Clans refs in Enterprise.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Donovan
yeah as TTK said, no. Unless it appeared in a movie or in one of the TV series it is not canon. I have found canon to be a slippery slope as the definition of canon seems to change from person to person, and many are sticklers for 'pure canon' and won't accept anything outside their rigid definition. It is particularly difficult for Trek as we have new age writers destroying the original canon and establishing their own, as well as computer games, books and now youtube (and other media) all adding to the mix and mudding the waters further.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Donovan
Given that canon was only invented so Roddenberry could try to reassert dominance over Trek in a way lateral to copyright it's kind of a moot point now.
IMO Abram's destroyed Trek canon more than anyone else.
That's fair enough, and that's pretty much what STO itself says on the subject. Their understanding is that they are "soft" canon or "canon unless/until contracted.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Tatterdemalion King
And that "intrusion" you're talking about is making for a lot of headaches over at the literary publishers because Licensing won't let them even look in the direction of anything STO-related and it's starting to muck up their own work because they've advance the universe almost to the Hobus Supernova event.
"Pure canon", however, is whatever the rights-holder says it is and they have at least given a temporary imprimatur to STO. Further complicating things is the fact that the rights holders have changed their minds from time to time, as GR himself did as well. Before Next Gen, the Klingons were going to be based on The Final Reflection, according to people who were in the loop back then. Then Gene and FASA had a big falling out and the rest as they say is history.Quote:
Originally Posted by WaveMan
Interesting explanation of those days here:
http://byteknightvol2.blogspot.com/2...notes-and.html
yeah I was looking for the word 'hard' instead of 'pure'.
You only have to read through this threadhttp://forum.trek-rpg.net/showthread...d+travel+times to see how conveluted canon is. The show often contradicts itself and the writers often don't stick to established canon, much to the great frustration of fans.