Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Sci-Fi

5-Year Mission Continues After 45-Year Hiatus 283

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

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

5-Year Mission Continues After 45-Year Hiatus More

5-Year Mission Continues After 45-Year Hiatus

Comments Filter:

  • 45 years ago... (Score:3)

    by bob_super ( 3391281 ) on Wednesday October 23, 2013 @03:24PM (#45216767)

    I can think of a few other things from 1968 that we'd like to get back...

    • Re:45 years ago... (Score:5, Funny)

      by Impy the Impiuos Imp ( 442658 ) on Wednesday October 23, 2013 @03:27PM (#45216827) Journal

      I miss Richard Nixon, too.

    • Re:45 years ago... (Score:4, Interesting)

      by AlphaWolf_HK ( 692722 ) on Wednesday October 23, 2013 @03:49PM (#45217153)

      I guess I'm a younger trek fan myself (started with TNG,) as I was never into the original series. I kind of forced myself to watch it while I was sick once (every episode) and didn't really think it was anything special.

      Modern references to star trek make kirk out to be this player who always gets laid, getting into fights, and talking like he was in the middle of a stroke. I never saw the getting laid, and the fights weren't anything spectacular like the JJ Abrams movies, and while he did talk like he had a stroke on occasion it isn't as bad as they parody it. Could be one of those things where you just had to be alive during that era to appreciate it (I was born in the 80's,) as I guess the getting laid part would have to be implied in more subtle ways than they were able to do with e.g. Data and Tasha Yarr in TNG as it was probably illegal back then.

      I did watch the first few minutes of this fan fic, and it does seem pretty true to the original. That said, I think if you're a fan of the original this is probably for you, but I couldn't remain interested for very long.

      • Re:45 years ago... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 23, 2013 @04:11PM (#45217397)
        The plots on the original series were more about cultural & human phenomenons that Roddenberry wanted to point out as things we need to overcome as a species. Later inclusions became more about the "gee whiz, rocket ships and 'splosions!" Perhaps you were expecting more the latter with none of the former?

        • Re:45 years ago... (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Princeofcups ( 150855 ) <john@princeofcups.com> on Wednesday October 23, 2013 @08:06PM (#45219515) Homepage

          The plots on the original series were more about cultural & human phenomenons that Roddenberry wanted to point out as things we need to overcome as a species. Later inclusions became more about the "gee whiz, rocket ships and 'splosions!" Perhaps you were expecting more the latter with none of the former?

          Exactly. A lot of what we think of as original Star Trek was implied. These days every last detail has to be spelled out in the name of characterization. The cultural references shouldn't be glossed over either. The Klingons are the Russians. They are NOT bumpy headed violent killing machines. They are just the other guys out there who we compete with idiologically. In other words, it's best to ignore TNG et al, since they depart drastically from TOS.

          • I didn't take it that way. They added that stuff in but it was intermixed. For example in the mirror episode (one which to this day receives very iconic lampooning via the infamous Spock gotee) was halfway through the airing and was obviously about the folly of Nazi style regimes, as well as the episode with the two aliens with opposite color skins was one of the last episodes, and it was clearly about social issues - i.e. race relations.

            I think they just added the bumpy heads to the klingons because they w

            • Re:45 years ago... (Score:4, Insightful)

              by An dochasac ( 591582 ) on Thursday October 24, 2013 @04:40AM (#45221415)
              The original series built upon a longer history of art, literature, war and peace. It referenced the bible, Greek and Roman classic literature, Shakespeare. You ended up quoting Milton, Dickens... when you thought you were quoting a playboy starship captain. That tradition held until this most recent reboot which had numerous references to previous Star Treks, but no grounding in the real world that that Star Trek plagiarized its ideas from.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        I don't know what you mean? I was born and raised in the 80s with TNG, and Kirk always came across as he did in the canon proper.. as a man who's legend preceded him due to circumstance and valor, like any legend. Even the womanizing thing is more of a bit of pop culture parody than canon.

        I don't know about my generation's fixation with fight scenes, but Abram's doesn't do it for me. I'll take a badly-staged Kirk vs Kahn fight scene over what I saw in the new films any day, because I managed to invest in th

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Omestes ( 471991 )

          I grew up on TNG, though I watched a ton of TOS thanks to reruns as a kid.

          Recently, when Netflix made them all streaming I rewatched both of them again in pretty much a marathon. TNG didn't age well, and get bit boring in the end. TOS was fun to watch. Even my girlfriend (not a nerd, no experience with ST) had a blast with TOS. TNG was a better show, and better written, but TOS is just plain fun. TNG didn't age well thanks to its special effects and long form plots. TOS has Kirk kirking things with hi

      • Did you come to it as an adult? (Score:5, Informative)

        by Beryllium Sphere(tm) ( 193358 ) on Wednesday October 23, 2013 @05:06PM (#45218009) Journal

        It's different if it's something you grow up with.

        Its place in history is easier to understand if you look at how awful mass media sf was in 1966. They were groundbreaking. Others later were able to do cathedra building.

      • I guess I'm a younger trek fan myself (started with TNG,) as I was never into the original series. I kind of forced myself to watch it while I was sick once (every episode) and didn't really think it was anything special.

        I was in high school when Star Trek first aired and watched it every week.

        I was just the opposite watching the first Star Trek: The Next Generation (TNG). I was very disappointed that they
        didn't keep to the original series, and refused to watch any other TNG.

        At the time people stopped by every Friday for cards, many would come early to watch TNG
        again I'd ignore it, "wow, the Enterprise was destroyed!", I just thought big deal and back
        to my computer (game).

        Much later a friend of mine never missed an episode

      • Modern references to star trek make kirk out to be this player who always gets laid ...
        as I guess the getting laid part would have to be implied in more subtle ways...

        I admit I can't think of too many examples off the top of my head, but didn't he definitely at the very least get very flirty with most of the women he ran into?

        There is one example that I remember that is much more subtle, however. I don't remember which episode it is... But you do see Kirk sitting on the bed and putting his shoes on. From e

    • I can think of a few other things from 1968 that we'd like to get back...

      But not the tank invasion, please...

    • This "un-boot" has everything of the original - except for the charm of the premise, the ethic of storytelling, and the charisma of the players.

      • Does it have shite acting?

      • Re:45 years ago... (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Aryden ( 1872756 ) on Wednesday October 23, 2013 @07:29PM (#45219265)

        This "un-boot" has everything of the original - except for the charm of the premise, the ethic of storytelling, and the charisma of the players.

        True, the charisma is missing, but the story is there. It's not as good as what Mr. Roddenberry wrote, but it is close. They got the good natured ribbing of Spock by McCoy and Kirk, they got their ethic and moral point across, and they created a drama that brought about the reveal of the moral. All in all, I thought it was good, now just replace Bones with a better Bones, hone the characters a bit more and you have a decent series.

  • TAS (Score:4, Informative)

    by Bradmont ( 513167 ) on Wednesday October 23, 2013 @03:26PM (#45216801) Homepage
    Didn't The Animated Series finish off the last two years of the five year mission? With the original cast and everything.

    • ib4 someone uses the word "canon."

      • TAS was until Roddenberry screwed around with licensing in the late 80's. There's really no reason it shouldn't still be when you consider the people involved in making it were all the same people who made the other Treks.

    • Didn't The Animated Series finish off the last two years of the five year mission? With the original cast and everything.

      I always figured the Animated Series most likely covered the 4th year, still leaving the adventures of the 5th untold.

    • Re:TAS (Score:5, Funny)

      by Belial6 ( 794905 ) on Wednesday October 23, 2013 @04:14PM (#45217433)
      There was no Animated Series. It is a myth like claims of sequels to Highlander and prequels to Star Wars.
  • Most amazing amateur film I've ever seen: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Wreck:_In_the_Pirkinning [wikipedia.org] And free (Creative Commons) licensed too.

  • Faithful (Score:3, Funny)

    by Russ1642 ( 1087959 ) on Wednesday October 23, 2013 @03:29PM (#45216865)

    If it's faithful to the original then it's going to suck. A lot.

    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward

      So does your mom but we don't complain. Some of us even enjoy it.

    • If it's faithful to the original then it's going to suck. A lot.

      You know, considering what a hatchet job Abrams has done to Star Trek, I'm surprised it took this long for the fans to come together and do something like this. I mean, there's Original Series, and then there's Abrahams Extra Crispy recipe... just scorched earth policy on everything you ever loved. Original is an acquired taste; It's atonement for a non-specific kind of sin. You know, you feel bad but you can't put your finger on it. Abrahams Recipe is when you have a specific sin in mind and wish to atone

    • Re:Faithful (Score:5, Informative)

      by jIyajbe ( 662197 ) on Wednesday October 23, 2013 @04:01PM (#45217293)

      Baseline: I am a trekker; I really, really like all of Star Trek, old and new.

      For all that it was the genesis of all things Trek, TOS is terribly painful to watch these days. Not an auspicious starting point for a fan-made series.

      What's funny is that they managed to write a story that was the same quality as most of TOS stories--mostly low; the actors reproduced the acting "skills" of the originals (especially Kirk! Wow!); and it was just as cheesy as the original show. I fully expected it to be hard to watch.

      But it wasn't! It was a labor of love, but they managed to go above that, and actually make an enjoyable episode, one that can hold its head up with the all but the best TOS episodes.

      Hats off to them all, and I think I'll open my wallet.

      • I started watching and if it wasn't for Scotty's 'accent' I would have continued. But christ on a crutch, this guy's fake accent makes Doohan sound like a Scottish native.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Morgon ( 27979 )

          Amusing fact about that - the guy that plays Scotty is actually Jimmy Doohan's son [imdb.com].

          I personally couldn't watch it because I was never a fan of TOS. It definitely succeeded in emulating it, though.

    • I think they should bring back Abraham Lincoln as a permanent character.

  • I've followed this and other projects for a while and the quality of the sets, costumes and SFX are right up there. Sadly, the acting is poor at best. I hate to single anyone in particular out but the main three characters really don't work. It isn't just that they are different people, it is just bad acting. I actually haven't had such a problem with the Abrahms reboots despite there being new actors because the standard has been decent so it isn't that. Of course, when you get the odd trek alumni in

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by msobkow ( 48369 )

      But bad acting was part of the charm of the original series.

      And no one in their right mind with a shred of honesty would ever claim that the acting was good on the original series.

    • Re:Good effort (Score:5, Funny)

      by Obfuscant ( 592200 ) on Wednesday October 23, 2013 @03:42PM (#45217059)

      Sadly, the acting is poor at best.

      So ... you're saying ... it ... is ... very much .... like ... TOS? Damn it, GreatDrok, I'm a doctor not an acting coach. I canna give you more than 100% out of the dilithium, GreatDrok, she'll not take it. Fascinating.

    • No mod points but I have to agree. For all that people (rightly) make fun of the "bad" acting in the original, the actors were by absolute standards not that bad. The fan remakes I've seen have acting that seems really amateur. Are they hiring professional actors for these?

      Like lots of skilled jobs, professional acting is a lot harder than it looks.

      • Are they hiring professional actors for these?

        This information is right on the Kickstarter, you can see everyone's bio. With the exception of Grant Imahara (from Mythbusters) and the fairly minor Security Chief they are experienced, professional actors (some are degreed) with plenty of stage and/or screen credits.

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by Cramer ( 69040 )

          May be, but "Apollo" is the only obvious, seasoned actor in this thing. And it's obvious the minute he starts talking. Everyone else is trying too hard to be their TOS character, or too rigidly just reading their part.

          Jesus, since when does Kirk take a freakin' vote?!?

    • I'm not sure if the originals had such good actors either. But anyway, I find that bad acting usually bothers me too. I see it all the time on Indie projects. I'm not sure if it's actually bad acting, or just that they are pressed for time and/or money, and not willing to redo the shot 15 times to get it right. We used to make movies all the time in highschool, and I found this was one of the biggest problems. People would completely botch their lines, but we'd use the scene anyway, because we were all

    • I think the biggest problem is the enunciation. Few of those actors can do it right.

  • Very good. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by gurps_npc ( 621217 ) on Wednesday October 23, 2013 @03:37PM (#45216977) Homepage
    Aside from the fact that the actors in Star Trek Continues have acting flaws that are not identical to those of the original cast (i.e. they are just as talented/untalented as the originals, but don't have the exact same instinctive mannerisms), this is an incredible recreation.

    It looks far better than the passable recreation "Star Trek Of Gods and Men" (with Koenig, Nichols and Russ in it). http://startrekofgodsandmen.com/main/ [startrekofgodsandmen.com]

    But I have much better hopes for the upcoming Star Trek Renegades (Koenig, et. al. second, better funded attempt) http://startrekrenegades.com/home/trailers-and-videos/ [startrekrenegades.com]

  • So, did Star Trek have a planned story arc? (Score:3)

    by GodfatherofSoul ( 174979 ) on Wednesday October 23, 2013 @03:39PM (#45217017)

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

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

      Short term, they'll probably all meet at the Pizza Hut tonight and then go to a local brew place for a couple of beers.

      Long term, I think most of them will eventually move out of their parent's basement and go to college, and then probably move back. I think some of them are saving up for a PlayStation 5.

  • The fan-based and fan-supported reincarnation [...] has CBS's consent.

    How did they manage to negotiate this?

    • Re:CBS's consent (Score:5, Funny)

      by sjames ( 1099 ) on Wednesday October 23, 2013 @03:57PM (#45217253) Homepage Journal

      I'm guessing Grant built a killbot and threatened to activate it in their lobby.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by mark-t ( 151149 )
      If I remember correctly, by being strictly non-commercial.

    • Re:CBS's consent (Score:4, Interesting)

      by tlhIngan ( 30335 ) <slashdot@worf.ERDOSnet minus math_god> on Wednesday October 23, 2013 @05:37PM (#45218293)

      The fan-based and fan-supported reincarnation [...] has CBS's consent.

      How did they manage to negotiate this?

      Maybe because CBS "gets it"?

      It's true this would never have happened back in the Viacom/Paramount days (Viacom actually threatened Star Trek fansites back in the day with C&D's) and back when the sole goal of Star Trek was to exact the maximum number of dollars available, even if doing so required being extremely petty. (They still do to an extent, given that Star Trek DVDs and Blu-Rays are twice the price as normal TV box sets).

      But I suppose CBS realizes that fandom is real, they can't control it, and if someone wants to make something that potentially could help them (since they own the rights to it and the movies are popular), well, it costs them nothing and gains them everything.

      I'm sure they also retain a lot of the rights - e.g., DVD and Blu-Ray

  • Don't forget about Star Trek: Renegades [startrekrenegades.com], which was funded through both Kickstarter [kickstarter.com] and Indiegogo [indiegogo.com]. Tum Russ ("Tuvok") is directing the pilot, and the cast looks reasonably impressive.
    • While that looks good, his first attempt (Of Gods and Men) was quite frankly, a disappointment, despite the presence of Koenig and Nichols. But I still have hope for Mr. Russ to come through (enough to send them a bit of cash.

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

  • That kinda bothers me the first thing I see is Holodeck technology in that vid. In season 1 of TNG, it was described as fairly new tech, of course that got retconned in Voyager as Janeway reminisces about using one as a child. Now it's in TOS era? I'm one of the few that actually liked Enterprise but even there it bothered me how they didn't make things primitive enough (having a transporter for one, no matter how leery of it they were) because it feels like the writers can't make do without these toys o

    • It first appeared in The Animated Series.

    • If you watched Enterprise and--okay, okay! I know most people hate it but please, hear me out...

      If you watched Star Trek Enterprise, they met an alien species who had holodeck-like technology in their era. But they didn't give them the technology or anything.

      Even if you totally dismiss the Enterprise episodes, this is a plausible explanation. That Janeway and others could have used a holodeck made by a different species outside the Federation, and it wasn't until a few years later that the technology was

    • Re:Holodecks were supposed to be new tech in TNG (Score:4, Informative)

      by Blakey Rat ( 99501 ) on Wednesday October 23, 2013 @05:07PM (#45218023)

      That kinda bothers me the first thing I see is Holodeck technology in that vid. In season 1 of TNG, it was described as fairly new tech, of course that got retconned in Voyager as Janeway reminisces about using one as a child.

      Crown me king of the dorks but... I gotta correct you on this one.

      TNG says the Enterprise holodecks are much better than previous versions. (And they get better still after the Binars work on them in that one episode, which is presumably also where it gets the magical ability to make a super-genius Moriarty due to a misspoken command.) They never say or suggest that the holodeck technology is brand-new in TNG.

  • And people wonder why the entertainment industry keeps producing sequels, remakes, rehashes, and re-imaginings...

  • What about "Star Trek New Voyages/Phase II" thing that has James Cawley as Kirk? (http://www.startrekphase2.de)

    Looks like we might have 2 groups creating Star Trek episodes.

  • Chris Doohan & Grant Imahara (Score:3)

    by Bob9113 ( 14996 ) on Wednesday October 23, 2013 @04:01PM (#45217289) Homepage

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

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by sconeu ( 64226 )

      My brother in law was in a band with Chris. Nice guy.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by wrf3 ( 314267 )

      And don't forget Jamie Bamber as Simone. I didn't recognize him in his spacesuit. When I saw his name in the credits I went back and looked again. Sure enough, another Apollo. Deep stuff -- one Apollo dies, another lives.

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

  • "I watched with pleasure the first episode some time ago and it stirred a lot of memories." - Rick B.

    You had your chance, Berman...

  • MOAR of the hot redhead (Score:3, Funny)

    by Cyfun ( 667564 ) on Wednesday October 23, 2013 @04:11PM (#45217405) Homepage

    I just hope we get to see more of the buxom Dr. McKennah in these episodes. I mean see her in more episodes. Not her naked. Or naked is fine too.

    Her IMDB: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1073676/?ref_=tt_cl_t8 [imdb.com]

  • Give us trek that none trekies at least has a chance of liking.

    Being faithful to the original series is all well and good, but your market is extremely limited. Far far more limited than just producing good modern Trek. I love TOS, but even most trekies do not consider it the best series.

    We need to reclaim Trek from the horrible things JJ has done, and you are not going to do that with something that 10 thousand people are going to watch.

    • It's a non-commercial effort made by and for people who specifically want what they're doing. Everything doesn't have to appeal to the greatest possible market.

  • Can't Stand (Score:3)

    by jordanjay29 ( 1298951 ) on Wednesday October 23, 2013 @05:26PM (#45218195)
    That the show is attempting to trap itself in the pitfalls of 1960's filming technology. The awfully-angled flyby shots and the 5:4 aspect ratio are acceptable for TOS, but not when you're making a show in 2013. I mean, seriously, I can watch this in 720p, but only with half my screen?

  • Was a great parody of star trek and darn good video. Trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtHM77IRkus [youtube.com]

  • Excellent. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by gallondr00nk ( 868673 ) on Wednesday October 23, 2013 @07:21PM (#45219211)

    At the risk of sounding like a damned space hippy [memory-alpha.org], I've missed Star Trek's fundamentally positive outlook towards the future of humanity. Trek gave a really strong feeling that we'd end up overcoming a lot of our problems as a species. I like that sort of utopianism, so any new series of Trek is good by me.

    TOS seems much maligned, and 40 years later it does seem rather awkward and dated, but there's some good episodes in there. Besides, who doesn't love some serious acting. [youtube.com].

    As an aside, this would be a good time to recommend the Post Atomic Horror [wordpress.com] podcast for anyone re-watching any of the series.

  • Somebody's never heard of Star Trek: New Voyages/Phase II, in spite of one episode nearly winning a Hugo Award and nearly a dozen actors from TOS contributing to various episodes, and even some of the original writers on board contributing new scripts? I hope it's just ignorance that motivated the OP and Soulskill to promote this to the exclusion of ST:NV and all the other Star Trek fan productions in active production. This is not "the most faithful re-creation of the original series".

    series site [startreknewvoyages.com]
    Wikipedia [wikipedia.org]
    list of episodes [wikipedia.org]

Slashdot Top Deals

Avoid strange women and temporary variables.

Close