Waste of Great Sets and Effects - Star Trek: New Voyages (2004) Discussion

[–] clay56 15 years ago

It's definately getting better.
I still don't care for Charles ("Scotty") Root or real life urologist John ("McCoy") Kelley either. I think they're still there because they're pouring so much of their own money into the production. James Crawley who's heading up this project is tolerable as Kirk. I believe his playing Kirk was a condition of his establishing and keeping STNV going. The good news is that "Blood and Fire" is Ben Tolpin's first and LAST appearance as Spock. The person playing Spock in the next story, I believe it called "The Child," was a stand-in for Zachary Quinto in ST XI. Based on his photo on the "New Voyages" website, I'd say he could be Leonard Nimoy's long lost clone. The same could be said about the actor currently playing Checkov who looks and sounds almost exactally like Walter Koenig. And an honorable mention goes to Bobby Rice from the "Hidden Frontier" web series who's done a solid job as Ensign Peter Kirk.
Opinions vary, and certainly I can understand nearly all of them. I just find myself looking forward to new "Phase II" episodes MORE than I do the upcoming JJ Abrams film.
If nothing else, its free to everybody with a PC with internet access.
Thats a pretty hard entertainment deal to beat. :)

reply

[–] ORBuddha-1 15 years ago

I'm actually happy that not everything sed above was back, catching reruns of the old Star Trek on TV Land, the up comming movie, and Star Trek The New Voyages have turned me into a Star Trek Fan not yet a full blown trekie. I thing the best acter in the fan series is the one who plays Checkov, and I think the people behind the serise know it too.

Still very skillfull and delicious

reply

[–] roska-posti 11 years ago

Waste? Heck no, I love this series!

I think "World Enough and Time" was the best Star Trek episode I ever saw! And I love the original series. This episode had excellent writing and so good characters. I can't stop praising this episode! Amazing fan work!

I think just about every episode I've seen, has has good stories. They don't shame at all compared to the original series.

And then about acting...

The idea is that they all are making imitations of the original crew - as these are supposed to be the same characters. But imitations aren't the originals, nor should we expect them to be. They are making their own, new Spock, new Kirk and new Uhura. I don't want to judge them based on how well they copy the originals.

Cawley is a decent actor. He at times over-acts, but not so bad I would be disturbed about it. He has dynamics and overall makes a believable young captain. None of the other fan Star Trek series have half as believable star ship captain, as New Voyages. All the others are missing dynamics.

Stacy (Spock in "the Child") is just a GREAT Vulcan (and a great Spock as well). I love his take and acting. He is the best of the whole crew, in my opnion. Quinn wasn't a bad Vulcan, but Stacy rocks.

I'm sad to see Julianne Irons as Uhura (in "World Enough and Time")is no more in the crew. I would have kept her. Of this new Uhura (Kim Stinger) I can't say anything. I don't recall her at all. Apparently I need to watch "the Child" again.

Chekov (Zungre) and LaSalle (Boyd) I find both very good crewmen. They are both natural actors. Boyd is maybe the best actor after Stacy. But Zungre is the most likeable of them as a character - so I'd say he made a good job.

Kelley (Dr. McCoy) isn't comfortable with acting yet. He is a bit stiff and over-acts. But if you look him in the first episodes and in "the Child" - maybe I got accustomed to him, or maybe he has improved, but he doesn't ruin Bones to me any more. He and Spock made me already laugh with their bickering.

I have no complains with Root (Scotty) in "the Child". Earlier I thought that he was the weakest actor along with Kelley. But this time was doing fine. Not great like Stacy or Boyd, but fine for a fan production. The other fan Star Trek productions would be LUCKY to get him.

Guest stars, George Takei (Sulu), Christina Marie Moses (Alana) and Ayla Cordell (Irska) have been all very, very good. I love Christina's Alana to sky high and Takei surprised me positively. And hey, make Irska and Isel permanent crew members!

A great fan production indeed. I think far best of the fan Star Trek productions (others I've seen are: Osiris, Farragut, Potemkin). Definately waiting forward to see new episodes. Both thumbs up!

Lexa is cute!

reply

[–] metdvls-1 15 years ago

I watched the last episode, Blood and Fire and was amazed by the effects and said, "Hey! I'll give it another try." Then 4 minutes in I was confronted by a gay scene that turned me off. I stopped it and deleted the episode.

If you want to make shows that people watch, then don't force a display of a life style that 90+% of the world's population does not subscribe to.

Too bad too. I thought they would have finally made AN EPISODE WORTHY OF THE NAME STAR TREK. There was a reason why they never had a gay character in Star Trek- Rodenberry, Justman, Berman, Piller knew it would be bad business. You can kill, mame, rape and comit genicide on TV, but people don't want to see two gay guys going at it.

reply

[–] clay56 15 years ago

Actually Gene Roddenberry himself WANTED a gay character in Star Trek. According to the IMDB trivia section of the TNG board, Geordi LaForge was originally intended to be gay. Had to wait MANY years for it to actually happen even if only on the web. Although to my knowledge it was done on the webcast "ST: Hidden Frontier" series first.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You can kill, mame, rape and comit genicide on TV, but people don't want to
see two gay guys going at it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How ironic that multiple acts of hatred and violence can be shown on television. And yet ONE act of love and affection remains taboo.

reply

[–] metdvls-1 15 years ago

My point was not what he wanted, it was what he did.

There are many great gay actors, but if Gandalf started going at it with Frodo because Ian McKellen was gay, the series would never had made a dime. There are ways to approach the subject without offending anyone. This was not one of them.

reply

[–] clay56 15 years ago

---------------------------------------------------------
"My point was not what he wanted, it was what he did."
---------------------------------------------------------
In reference to Gene Roddenberry, the point I myself was making was that he didn't live to see his FULL vision of a time of more tolerance due mostly to the intolerance of the time in which he lived.

-------------------------------------------------------------------
"There are ways to approach the subject without offending anyone."
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Perhaps, and then again, the first TV interracial kiss may have ocurred years later had Star Trek's creators worried about those who would have been offended.

reply

[–] cmitche-1 15 years ago

We're not talking about the "First" gay kiss on tv though.

We're talking about something they put in simply for shock value. My buddy is gay, and he was offended by the scene. Said that it "painted a bad picture".

reply

[–] TheSolarSailor 12 years ago

We're talking about something they put in simply for shock value. My buddy is gay, and he was offended by the scene. Said that it "painted a bad picture". >>> Having just watched it, my problem is that the whole gay marriage issue was really forced. I mean, I think that the 23rd century should sport an environment where a character being gay would not be an issue, and here it certainly was treated as suspect, odd, something to be kept a secret, and something they both ran a risk over when bringing it to Kirk's attention. This is the kind of plot that you tackle via allegory. To include a gay character in the show itself, it shouldn't have been presented in this light. Good intentions with the episode, but this ultimately isn't the way to do it.

And yes, I to am gay.

- - - - - - -
Whose idea was it for the word "Lisp" to have an "S" in it?

reply

[–] blow110 11 years ago

I have to agree that the scene was simply overdone and 'in your face'. Carlos Pedraza of Hidden Frontier was also a producer on Phase II when the whole gay character thing started with 'Blood and Fire', and he and Bobby Rice obviously have an agenda to produce 'Gay Trek', not simply to have it as part of the story, but front and center...in your face. And yeah, from that perspective, it is offensive and not what people are looking for.

They can make the point, he's gay and has a boyfriend and they're intimate, then move on like every other scene. But I agree, they were going for shock value or some and the scene went on way too long. My two cents.

reply

[–] colonel52 9 years ago

yeah I agree to long, and plus he was a kirk! should have ben another character
and done differently.

http://tvtalk-your-show.forumotion.com/

reply

[–] juvevk 15 years ago

It's funny how no one complaints about seeing two women kiss on network television. But two men kiss...? Oh, the world is coming to an end!
Be Tolerant. If you don't like the scene, skip past it. Blood and Fire is a great story. Watch it and skip anything you are not comfortable with.
Just remember, there are a bunch of religious fanatics that oppose Sci-Fi in general. This does not mean we should not make Sci-Fi movies or TV-Shows just because they take offense in it.

reply

[–] rootbeerafloat 15 years ago

The problem with the gay scene wasn't that there were gay characters in Star Trek, it was that it was like "LOOK, THERE ARE GAY CHARACTERS IN STAR TREK, SEE?? SEE?? WE FINALLY DID IT, AREN'T WE EDGY??" I'm not gay, but just because I'm not one of the "10%" doesn't mean I wouldn't be interested in a gay subplot, as long as it had a point and seemed natural. Maybe it comes into play later, but in the first half all it was used for was some dumb camp with "Kirk". If I were a gay Trek fan, I'd be insulted that they made it into something so trivial, and that the "actors" who portrayed the gay characters were *beep* terrible.

I don't understand why a gay character in Star Trek would even matter, if there's no money, no poverty, etc., on Earth, surely by then homosexuality would be a non-issue too. Plus the remaining bigots would have ACTUAL alien races to direct their hatred towards. It wouldn't add any conflict, so what's the point?

reply

[–] clay56 15 years ago

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The problem with the gay scene wasn't that there were gay characters in
Star Trek, it was that it was like "LOOK, THERE ARE GAY CHARACTERS
IN STAR TREK, SEE?? SEE?? WE FINALLY DID IT, AREN'T WE
EDGY??""
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I suppose it's all in the eye of the beholder. At least the characters were descrete in displaying their affection behind closed doors and not on the bridge for everyone to see...like Captian Kirk did more than once. :)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I don't understand why a gay character in Star Trek would even matter,
if there's no money, no poverty, etc., on Earth, surely by then
homosexuality would be a non-issue too."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Evidently it IS mostly a nonissue, at least in THIS story since, despite initial mild surprise, neither Kirk nor anyone else seemed disgusted or outraged when Peter Kirk spoke of his feelings for another man.
Looks like the part of the twenty-third century Gene Roddenberry has always wanted has finally arrived...if only on the internet.

reply

[–] metdvls-1 15 years ago

"suppose it's all in the eye of the beholder. At least the characters were descrete in displaying their affection behind closed doors and not on the bridge for everyone to see...like Captian Kirk did more than once. :)"

The problem is that the producers of the show were not discreet with the POORLY written and acted scene.

There are ways to do gay. The writers and producers of Will & Grace got it. People wanted to accept Will for who he was because it wasn't thrown in their face. The episode on the other hand flies in the face.

reply

[–] clay56 15 years ago

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"There are ways to do gay. The writers and producers of Will & Grace got
it. People wanted to accept Will for who he was because it wasn't thrown
in their face. The episode on the other hand flies in the face."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To its credit, "Will and Grace" at least once addressed network censoring and banning certain displays of same sex affection. If fans of "W&G" formed their own internet series, it's most likely such displays would be shown that were forbidden by network TV execs.

reply

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] arvig 12 years ago

To be clear, I'm mostly commenting on the original post from Jan 6th 2009 (even if that does seem to be nercoposting in a way) and a small amount of the debate about the "gay" scene in "Blood and Fire". It looks like there was a flame war here as well, but I can't even tell what happened since most of the posts that apparently were involved with that were deleted by moderators anyway.

1) I agree, a lot of the acting isn't the best. It can be hit and miss at times. But at the same time, at the risk of sounding like a "fanboy", I also think people need to remember that the actors aren't getting compensated to the best of my knowledge. Otherwise, they are working for free as far as I know. That doesn't mean people shouldn't comment on their acting. I am just suggesting that if you feel an actor has done a poor job, constructive comments other then rabid flaming would be much more helpful, and also if you do decide to follow the series, potentially make it more enjoyable.

2) As for the "gay" scene during Blood and Fire, I don't object to having Peter Kirk be homosexual or even having a romantic scene. But it did seem forced into the episode just to establish that yes, the character is openly gay and yes, no-one on the Enterprise would care or discriminate against him for being such, especially not his uncle Capt. Kirk. Having said that, if the scene was just the same, but done with Peter Kirk being hetrosexual and a woman being in his room, the scene would have felt just as forced to me. There are much better ways to establish a romantic interest for a character, gay or straight then this sudden "Oh here, let's tack on a brief love scene!". So was I offended? No. But did I feel the scene spliced in regardless of if it was a gay or straight love scene? Yes.

3) As for the flame war..um...hope it's done with. :P Too many posts involved with that were deleted anyway, so I have no idea what it was about anyway, nor do I want or need to know past I suppose some idle curiosity. But I'm not curious enough to ask, just comment.

Anyway, feel free to comment, agree, disagree or even lightly troll/heckle..but not flame. If you flame, you'll just be ignored, don't waste your time, assuming I do come back to this thread to see if anyone replies. :P

reply

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Sir_Loin_of_Beef 12 years ago

No one is is talking about you, Genovese.

However, right off the bat, you're contradicting yourself - as you say, SAG actors have appeared on New Voyages, and continue to do so. And yet, no one's got in trouble over this. I haven't heard of any sanctions against George Takei or any of the others you mention. So either the show has worked out an agreement with SAG and the actors, or your eternal harping about this "Global Rule One" is for nothing. Either way, it doesn't affect or involve you, so your opinion on this means absolutely nothing to the New Voyages crew...

Also, it doesn't matter if Cow Creek Films is a SAG signatory or not - they've not been involved in the production of the show in years - and before you go off on another of your tirades about facts and proof, a simple look at the credits of the shows themselves from 2007 on will show you that, had you bothered to look - but knowing you, you didn't, since you've never been one with a good grasp of facts - or even a passing acquaintance with them...

To everyone else, I'd like to apologize for the bloviating troll known as Anthony Genovese hiding behing the "oscar-35" username, since he doesn't have the morals to do so for his long history of attacks on various fan groups. His sad life consists of harping around the edges of groups he desperately wants to be a part of, but since they rightly shun him, all he can do in his cowardice is to rant and rave about inconsequential matters - as any perceptive person can see.

Go crawl back into your troll cave, Genovese - the adults are talking here, and your childish antics are not not appreciated...

'Nuff said: http://www.redshirtfilmette.com

reply

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] singanewsongtonight 11 years ago

Genovese, shut. up. No one was talking to you or about you.

I think the "friend" who felt it "painted a bad picture" had a point. In what we would consider to be a truly enlightened society, a romantic scene is just a romantic scene. Not forced into the story, not issued as an underlined plot point, but a scene emphasizing the romantic relationship no matter who the players are. To over-play or over-emphasize it is to create an aura of "specialness" that isn't welcomed. Remember when being "black" was so "cool"? Most African Americans HATED that and I don't blame them. Is this overcomping the polar opposite of racial prejudice? I don't think so. I think it's still someone who is uncomfortable with gay relationships on the screen.

Like old Oscar-35 (Anthony Genovese) here. He's uncomfortable with gay relationships on or off the screen. He's uncomfortable with any relationship in which he has to pay a bill. As for HIS fan fiction, I've seen it, and you can see the quality of his productions simply by googling "kalifornia kaleidoscope". The WRECK of a film, The Redshirt Insurance Filmette Series (of ONE) was 13 minutes of PAINFULLY condescending script written by Anthony Genovese in which a silly Star Trek pun was excruciatingly jammed into the viewers face and TWISTED until they could not even in infancy miss the joke. The color bleed by the editor, Anthony Genovese, was so bad that part of the film showed insurance salesman, Dave something from the USS Angeles, being SLASHED with red paint nearly all through his scene. Santa Claus' shirt tinted his beard pink. The entire film was shaky and grainy, and the lighting, by the way, was atrocious (lighting by Anthony Genovese). The direction was agonizingly patronizing to the viewer, the sound echoed through a tin can to get to the viewer, and what was suppose to be "cheesy" on film, turned out to be just plain bad (directing, sound and production by Anthony Genovese). So, as you continue to read Anthony Oscar-35 Genovese's "complaints" about other fan fiction, please keep in mind that the worst fan film every created by breathing life forms was....his.

reply

[–] Thalek 11 years ago

Actually, I think that "Plan 9 From Outer Space" by Ed Woods qualifies as "the worst fan film every created by breathing life forms". Although I'm not sure what Mr. Woods was a fan of, except making bad movies. The fact that Mr. Woods actually found financial backers proves that P.T. Barnum was right when he said "There's a sucker born every minute".

Then again, despite being a crew member on The Redshirt Insurance video, I've never been allowed to see it. It's possible that after seeing Mr. Genovese's work, I might have to revise my opinion of Mr. Woods's work.

reply

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] filmbuff1974 11 years ago

It's close enough. Remember, this is a sixties retro show and the goal was/is to recreate as close as possible what THE ORIGINAL SERIES show would have been like had it not been cancelled and proceeded, without interruption, to a fourth season.

Live Full & Die Empty. Tap Your Potential and Realise Your Dreams!

reply

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] filmbuff1974 10 years ago

by TheSentinel68 » 3 days ago (Fri Feb 14 2014 01:43:48)
IMDb member since January 2006

If you want a waste of sets and effects - then you can look no further than Star Trek Continues.

My response:

I wouldn't call STAR TREK CONTINUES a waste of sets and effects. It has somewhat of the flavor of the original series with the weak spot being the scripts and a couple casting decisions (that being Mr. Spock and the counselor).

I will be following both series with enthusiasm. But between the two efforts I have really come to enjoy more and look forward to the STAR TREK NEW VOYAGES:PHASE II series.

Damn shame both teams could not have combined resources and kept a consistent "fourth season" of the original series.

Live Full & Die Empty. Tap Your Potential and Realize Your Dreams!

reply

[–] Polaris01313-1 10 years ago

It would have been great if they could have combined resources. Unfortunately, Vic Mignogna, John Broughton, Michael Bednar, and the rest of farragut Films can be blamed for that possibility not ever happening. Their unprofessionalism and unethical business practices prevented that, indefinately.

Actually, the 4th Season of the original series is The Animated series. Paramount confirmed that when TAS was released in a DVD set back in 2006.

reply

[–] filmbuff1974 10 years ago

byTheSentinel68» 6 hours ago (Tue Feb 18 2014 19:13:14) Flag ▼ | Reply |
IMDb member since January 2006

It would have been great if they could have combined resources. Unfortunately, Vic Mignogna, John Broughton, Michael Bednar, and the rest of farragut Films can be blamed for that possibility not ever happening. Their unprofessional ism and unethical business practices prevented that, indefinitely.

Actually, the 4th Season of the original series is The Animated series. Paramount confirmed that when TAS was released in a DVD set back in 2006.

My response:

You're right. The animated series could be considered a fourth season but I don't think an animated series is what all those "Trekkies" had in mind when they wanted the series to renewed for a fourth season.

I consider STAR TREK NEW VOYAGES: PHASE II the live action season we would have enjoyed had that campaign been successful. This is why I really connect with the efforts to keep the set design, props ,costumes, and music retro in look and feel.

STAR TREK CONTINUES is continuing (no pun intended)that effort. I sincerely hope both series succeed in filming at least twenty to twenty-five episodes.

But most of all, KEEP IT RETRO!

Live Full & Die Empty. Tap Your Potential and Realize Your Dreams!

reply

[–] Polaris01313-1 10 years ago

"TheSentinel68 as well as others who insist on stirring up bad blood between the Phase 2 and Continues productions have been told to stop in no uncertain terms by top Phase 2 executives, including Robert Mauro and Jim Cawley himself. TheSentinel68's excuse for not doing as was requested? He expects Jim Cawley to cater to him and *personally* tell him to stop. Seriously."--raspail

Another sign of a Vic fanboy and a clear indication that mankind has a VERY LONG way to go.

Raspail, I HAVE NOT BEEN told by James Cawley to stop. If he does, I will be more than happy to honor and respect his wishes in the matter. I don't know where you get your delusions, but just to make it crystal clear to you personally, I DO NOT, repeat, DO NOT expect anyone to cater to me.

I am not stirring up bad blood. That was already done by Vic Mignogna, John Broughton, Michael Bednar, and Farragut Films, themselves.

All I am doing is just stating an opinion that is backed up by well documented and posted facts. Got that loud and clear?

I'm amazed that you haven't gone after Alec Peters, since he is the one who made this information public back in December of 2011.

reply

[–] raspail 10 years ago

45. Robert Mauro - February 7, 2014

#43 Jeremey and others…

Ladies and Gents, Blue Thunder (aka Christopher Brent) is not apart of Star Trek Phase II nor was ever apart of Phase II, nor will he ever be a part of Star Trek Phase II. We have asked him to stop making any posts that imply otherwise.

And as we’ve said, NUMEROUS times in the past, we do NOT condone ANY such behavior from our crew – ANY of our crew who, in the past, has done so, has been told to stop.

If you are a fan of STC, great! If you are a fan of our series, great! If you’re a fan of both, great! We don’t see any reason people should use posts about them to malign them in our name, nor any reason people should use posts about us to malign them in STC’s name, AND BOTH SUCH THINGS continue to happen.

We would hope that such people, those vocal few, fans of EITHER show, will grow up a bit and stop.

On behalf of the Star Trek Phase II Production Team,
Robert Mauro
Producer

You have been told to stop. The above came from Robert Mauro, so it may as well have come from James Cawley himself. You *know* this, but you just don't want to stop your lunatic crusade. See this---> "On behalf of the Star Trek Phase II Production Team" This means Cawley too. This means *especially* Cawley, since he's the big cheese. You have been told to stop. You just don't want to.

By expecting Cawley to make you a formal personal request, you are indeed expecting him to cater to you *personally*. This is absolutely despicable behavior on your part. You have no respect for Jim Cawley, his staff nor his production. You only say that you do but in reality, even Jim Cawley has to bow down before your obsessive and unhinged vendetta against Mignogna. You're a disgusting smear merchant and a liar.

"I am not stirring up bad blood. That was already done by Vic Mignogna, John Broughton, Michael Bednar, and Farragut Films, themselves."

Nope, now *YOU* are doing it. The past is the past, all parties that actually were involved in the drama have moved on and wished each other success. They want the issue dropped and for fans of all the productions to get along. You are not doing this because you ultimately only care about you and what you want. So no loser, it is *YOU* who is stirring the shyt. You are the embodied antithesis of Star Trek and all it stands for. Everyone involved in the drama has made peace and moved on. You continue to foment hatred and ugliness. You're disgusting.

******You are not welcome at Phase 2******

Why is that, Christopher Brent? Answer that question. Why did Robert Mauro feel the need to make a statement like this about *you* personally?:

45. Robert Mauro - February 7, 2014

#43 Jeremey and others…

Ladies and Gents, Blue Thunder (aka Christopher Brent) is not apart of Star Trek Phase II nor was ever apart of Phase II, nor will he ever be a part of Star Trek Phase II. We have asked him to stop making any posts that imply otherwise.

Those are some very serious and clear words. They *do not* want you around. Why is that, TheSentinel68 AKA Blue Thunder AKA Christopher Brent? Why did Robert Mauro feel the need to be so crystal clear about you? To emphasize, he said this about **you** specifically. Because you were falsely implying a connection to them? This proves you a liar, doesn't it? To tell people that you were a part of Phase 2 when you really weren't is lying, is it not? Why would you lie? Since you are a known liar, how can anything you say be trusted? Hmmm? Why did Robert Mauro say this about you? Gonna answer?

You have no concern as to the production of future Phase 2 episodes. You are simply a viewer and nothing more. The day to day of Phase 2 is none of your fvcking business. It's pathetic that you are so desperate as to keep trying to inject yourself in a conflict that has been laid to rest. *beep* grow up and find a better use for your time.

For anyone else reading this, here are TheSentinel68's (AKA Blue Thunder AKA razorburn AKA Christopher Brent) lies exposed, starting with the 4th post down. Lots of reading but well worth it to see TheSentinel68 completely exposed and dismantled:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2732442/board/flat/216033722?p=8

reply

[–] raspail 10 years ago

filmbuff1974, don't waste your time with TheSentinel68. He has been going around to various Trek boards attempting to poison people against Star Trek Continues for no more reason than his own personal unhealthy obsession with Vic Mignogna. He poses as both razorburn and Blue Thunder elsewhere and he posts the same vile nonsense over and over and and has even been known to create sock puppet accounts in order to give the appearance of people agreeing with him. This garbage that he spews was masterfully and quite surgically dismantled by another user named chipwolfe. You can see that here:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2732442/board/flat/216033722?p=7

TheSentinel68 as well as others who insist on stirring up bad blood between the Phase 2 and Continues productions have been told to stop in no uncertain terms by top Phase 2 executives, including Robert Mauro and Jim Cawley himself. TheSentinel68's excuse for not doing as was requested? He expects Jim Cawley to cater to him and *personally* tell him to stop. Seriously.

So in reality, TheSentinel68 has absolutely no respect for Cawley or Phase 2 as he continues posting lies about both Mignogna and Continues, as well as executives over at Farragut Films. He continues doing this well after he's been told not to anymore. Take the time to read chipwolfe's posts as they are quite thorough in documenting the lies that TheSentinel68 insists on spreading. It should also be noted that TheSentinel68 has been officially disowned by Robert Mauro. He does not, nor did he ever have a dog in whatever fight went on between both productions and he is not now or ever welcome anywhere near the Phase 2 production. Robert Mauro made that quite clear. He seems to be a toxic individual whom they don't want around. Whatever behind the scenes fight that went on between the two productions is over and the folks at Phase 2 want the hostilities to cease. Jim Cawley has even congratulated the Star Trek Continues production and wished them well. He has personally *praised* them.

Do yourself a favor and just hit the ignore button on this loser. He is a liar and lies even to himself about the quality of Continues. The show has garnered almost universal praise in both recreating TOS Trek and for Mignogna's portrayal of Kirk, but TheSentinel68 insists on calling both the show and Mignogna garbage and worse. He is nothing but a toxic smear merchant with an unhealthy fixation with Vic Mignogna.

Consider this post a public service and warning about TheSentinel68.

"Spock is the shiz-nit!"

reply

[–] filmbuff1974 10 years ago

"TheSentinel68 as well as others who insist on stirring up bad blood between the Phase 2 and Continues productions have been told to stop in no uncertain terms by top Phase 2 executives, including Robert Mauro and Jim Cawley himself. TheSentinel68's excuse for not doing as was requested? He expects Jim Cawley to cater to him and *personally* tell him to stop. Seriously."--raspail

My response:

I watch both efforts with no thought about what is going on behind the scenes. The final product is what ultimately determines if I'm going to invest my time with the series or any other television series.

For the most part I think both series have succeeded well in keeping the look and feel of the original series. So much in fact that I much prefer it to the JJ Abrams re-boot franchise. I declare that with all seriousness.

Despite some issues with the casting decisions and acting level of the cast,the production design, sets, costumes, props, and Alexander Courage's music cues have kept very close to the original series. After I've watched episodes in both series there is NO DOUBT that I've experienced a production made by fans of the original series that do in fact GET IT!

Live Full & Die Empty. Tap Your Potential and Realize Your Dreams!

reply

[–] raspail 10 years ago

Amen. Both shows excel at recreating TOS Trek and that is all I care about. The behind the scenes drama does not concern me or interest me at all. To both James Cawley and Vic Mignogna I say thank you, thank you, thank you for for bringing back my beloved Star Trek. I hope both productions will live long and prosper!

"Spock is the shiz-nit!"

reply