After this morning's grim entry, I'm feeling the need to lighten the mood a little, so here's a Star Trek-related meme that was recently done by both Jaquandor and SamuraiFrog. Seems I'm always the last one on the block to catch the latest meme these days... sigh.
It has come to my attention that today is Leonard Nimoy's 79th birthday. His Star Trek co-star and off-screen friend William Shatner turned 79 only a few days ago, on Monday. Strange to think that they're so close to the same age, and even stranger to think of how advanced that age is getting to be.
This is a morbid notion, but I find myself wondering how long one will outlast the other when time inevitably catches up to them. They've spent so much of their lives seemingly in parallel. When one of them finally passes away, will the survivor go on for years more, or will they be like a long-married couple who die within days of one another, unable to continue without their beloved?
But that of course is in the future -- hopefully, the distant future. For now, tonight, let us celebrate the friendship and longevity of two men who, 45 years ago, accepted what must've seemed like nothing more than a fun little acting job that might last a couple seasons, and ended up becoming icons and heroes to millions. Cheers, guys, and many happy returns!
As I've been puttering around the house on this day off honoring the birth of Martin Luther King, Jr., I've been listening to a segment of NPR's Talk of the Nation called "The 'Post-Racial' Conversation, One Year In." (Recall if you will that many observers believed President Obama's inauguration a year ago would usher us into "post-racial" America.)
Now, if you think about the recent flap over Harry Reid's "Negro dialect" comment, Rush Limbaugh's ridiculous insinuation that Obama is politicizing the Haiti disaster, and the barely disguised (or not-at-all disguised) racism of some of Obama's detractors -- not to mention the quickness of some of his supporters to label any opposition to the president racist -- it seems pretty clear to me that we're still a fair distance away from being over the sticky issue of race in this country. But that's something I've been hearing my entire life. Far more interesting to me is the question of what exactly "post-racial" is supposed to mean. What is this goal that our society seems to be eternally reaching toward, one stumbling baby-step at a time?
Continue reading "The Meaning of "Post-Racial," According to an Old-School Trekkie" »
There was an episode of the original Star Trek in which the Enterprise encounters another starship whose entire crew has been killed by an alien disease that sucked all the water from their bodies and then crystallized the remaining chemicals that comprise a living organism. The visualization of the end result was typically cheap, but reasonably effective: empty uniforms sprawled across consoles and heaped in corridors, with piles of what looks like rock salt spilling from the shirt collars and cuffs, pant legs, and boots. I think I've noted before that the one thing the original series had that none of the spin-offs or the recent reboot movie has managed -- or even attempted -- to capture was a deep sense of eeriness. Space was weird in the classic Trek series, and sometimes it was pretty damn spooky. The idea of the rock-salt disease gave me a major case of the willies when I was a kid, and those empty uniforms are an image that has stayed with me all these years.
Case in point: When I got off the train tonight at the end-of-the-line station, I noticed a little one-piece jumpsuit thingie of the sort worn by babies draped over a low fence that runs along the edge of the platform. Now, obviously what happened is that someone dropped it, and a good samaritan placed it in an obvious spot in case the owner came back looking for it. But I have to admit that for just a moment -- a brief, vertiginous, irrational moment -- I glanced downward, to see if there was a pile of white crystals on the ground below the jumper's collar opening...
Man, am I a geek or what?
Wil Wheaton posted up an item this morning that he called "the coolest picture you'll see all day," and indeed it was so: a vintage black-and-white photo of Leonard Nimoy in full Spock get-up, lounging against the front end of a '64 Buick Riviera (presumably his).
I intended to repost that photo here, but a commenter on Wil's site led me to this even cooler (and more amusing) reworking of the image:
And on that note, I'm off for this evening's activities. Hopefully, I'll get the chance to write a couple of entries over the weekend, but if not, y'all have fun out there...
It's Friday, and it's looking like my workload today is going to be pretty light as run up to the long weekend, so you know what that means... I'm in the mood for some time-killing netcrap! In keeping with the theme that's most preoccupied my mind (and this blog) for the last couple of weeks, I've put together a special all-Star Trek netcrap edition, starting with this clever little clip that points out the similarities between J.J. Abrams' Trek movie and another well-known and much loved sci-fi flick... and I don't mean the one that featured Ricardo Montalban:
I found that one over at one of my regular political reads, oddly enough.
As previously promised -- or threatened, depending on your point of view -- I have more to say about that new Star Trek movie that everyone's loving on. Before I get wound up, I'd like to reiterate again that I really did enjoy the movie, so don't misunderstand my criticisms of it. But you know, everyone is raving about how great it was, and I, in my usual contrarian, stubborn-old-fanboy way, just can't let that stand without argument. Because while it was better than I expected, there were a lot of not-so-great things about it.
Even though it's been out two weeks now, I'm going to assume that spoiler protocols are still in effect for some, so exercise caution in going below the fold:
I've now seen the new Star Trek movie a couple of times, and, for what it's worth, my opinion remains virtually unchanged from the brief comment I made the other day.
Here's the short and spoiler-free version: J.J. Abrams' update of the venerable sci-fi franchise is a fun and exciting summer popcorn flick that frankly surprised me (I didn't expect to like it at all, let alone as much as I admittedly did). However, it's also a movie with a lot of problems, both from a film-making and screenwriting perspective, and also in terms of how well it succeeds at being, well, Star Trek.
For the spoilerized and sure-to-be-incredibly-nerdy longer version, voyage below the fold...
Here's a nifty little video I spotted over at RetroThing:
As the source blog notes:
We live in miraculous times. When Star Trek was on the air, creating the transporter effect was time consuming and expensive. These days on YouTube a guy not only beams himself into some classic Trek footage, he brings along his Theremin and does a really nice rendition of the classic theme.
I'm sure my loyal readers are wondering, so yes, I have seen the J.J. Abrams reboot movie that opened this weekend. I'm still thinking about my reaction to it. I can say that I generally enjoyed it more than I expected to, but there are many aspects of it I have problems with, not least of which is why it had to be done at all. But then, I am something of a curmudgeon on these matters. Casual fans, non-Trekkies, and The Damn Kids are going to like it just fine, I suspect. More on this subject at another time...
What follows is without a doubt the most obscure LOLcat I've ever posted here at Simple Tricks... possibly the most obscure one I've ever seen, for that matter. I think I have maybe two readers who will get this one (no need to stand or anything, you know who you are). But I get it, and I think it's pretty damn funny:
This came from our old friend, The Bad Astronomer. I believe he created it, too, the clever fellow.
(Note: If you don't get it, I doubt an explanation will make it seem any funnier, but you can always try. Go here and here for the necessary context.)
I like Star Trek. I like Bettie Page pin-ups. Now I can enjoy both at the same time. Not everything about the 21st century sucks...
Obligatory shout-out: I picked this up from SamuraiFrog, who got it from here, where you can also get this image in sizes appropriate for your desktop. If you're into this sort of thing, of course...
I'm late in commenting on this, so I'm sure everyone reading already knows that Majel Barrett Roddenberry, the widow of Star Trek creator Gene Roddenberry and the only actor with the distinction of having appeared, in some form or other, in every incarnation of the long-running franchise -- including the Saturday-morning cartoon in the early '70s and, reportedly, the upcoming remake film -- died last week after a short fight with leukemia. She was 76 years old.
You'd never guess from the usual content of this blog, but I'm not always comfortable with my own fanboyism, especially when it comes to revealing the depths of my attachment to the nerdy stuff that consumes so much of my attention. Still, I have to admit that I flinched when I heard this news. Another of the original crew gone...
For many years, it's been something of a parlor game among the nerdy classes to speculate on what would happen if one of the starships Enterprise from the Star Trek franchise faced off in battle against an Imperial Star Destroyer from Star Wars. In fact, this particular hypothetical has been such a common topic of discussion in sci-fi fan circles that it's become a tremendous cliche: Much like those 2 a.m. college dorm-room discussions in which someone suggests that maybe, just maybe, our lives are only dreams and none of the other people in the room are real and how damn trippy would that be?, it's the topic that everybody has encountered at some time or another.
The outcome of this debate is both inevitable and inconclusive: it ultimately comes down to simple partisanship, i.e., which franchise the debaters happen to be a bigger fan of. The Trekkies usually cite Star Trek's defensive shielding technology (which seems to be lacking or at least far less impressive in George Lucas' universe) and the seemingly infinite flexibility of phaser weapons as the decisive reason why the Enterprise would kick butt. Meanwhile, the arguments of Star Wars fans (Warsies?) usually depend on the sheer scale of Imperial machinery and the brute force commanded by those British-sounding guys in gray.*
This video (one of the better-made ones I've seen in this particular sub-genre) introduces a hitherto ignored factor into the equation:
Picard and those guys on the Enterprise sure are smug bastards, aren't they? You think whoever made this clip was making a comment about the Trekkies he'd encountered? (Seriously, there's a subset of Trekkies that can be downright insufferable... Star Wars fans generally seem to be a lot more relaxed about their pet obsession, as long as you don't mention Jar Jar Binks.)
* For what it's worth (and at the risk of sounding even geekier than I did when I analyzed the provenance of the USS Kelvin the other day), I tend to side with the Warsies on this one. It's been established time and time again that the Enterprise's deflectors can only take so much abuse, so I think the Empire could win simply by dropping a hundred or so TIE fighters to pound away at the Big E while the Destroyer hangs back out of phaser range. The TIEs would be too small and fast for the E to efficiently take down with its artillery-scale phaser banks; meanwhile, the fighters' weapons might be puny against the E's shields but they would take their toll. It might take all day, but eventually the shields would collapse; then a couple of well-placed turbolaser blasts and it's back to Coruscant for a round of cold ones with Palpatine... but that's just my theory.
It looks like the publicity machine for the Star Trek remake is really starting to crank up. First, there's a slightly re-edited version of The Trailer floating around, which features a glimpse of an elderly-looking Leonard Nimoy as Spock. This version of the trailer is reportedly an exclusive gift from Paramount to Ain't It Cool News, but naturally it's already escaped into the wild and can be seen in a lot of different places, including here. I understand it's not intended to be shown in theaters, so if you're curious, you've got to watch it online. (Be aware that it's not all that different from the trailer you've probably already seen; they've just shuffled a couple scenes around and added a moment with Nimoy right at the end.)
The other noteworthy item for today is a cool website that's just gone live, a promotional tie-in with Intel that provides an interactive tour of the USS Kelvin (that's the starship we see getting pounded to bits in the trailer). The site is nicely designed (it's done up like a shipyard) and I thought it was pretty fun to play with. I presume more information will get added to it in the coming weeks (like maybe a tour of the new Enterprise?).
I don't know... I'm still dubious of this whole project, but I'll admit that my resolve is beginning to weaken. That interactive tour of the Kelvin has whetted my appetite and also given me some hope that Abrams might have some idea of what he's doing after all. To explain, I'm going to have to go all uber-geeky on you, so if you were repelled back in college by those sniffly guys who always sat by themselves in a far-off corner of the student union obsessing over imaginary objects, you might want to come back later.
I've placed a couple images of the Kelvin below the fold, along with my nerdy remarks. Some of the details I've been able to glean could be considered spoilers, so beware.
And... here we go...
I've been dithering over an entry on J.J. Abrams' Star Trek remake for weeks, ever since that first batch of production photos hit the Web. I had lots to say about them, but I procrastinated, let myself be distracted by other topics, and finally lost the moment. You folks out there with blogs of your own understand: it's all about being topical, and the farther away from "current" you get, the harder it is to work up the motivation.
Then came the first photo of the revamped Enterprise, and I was off again, repeating the same cycle.* And now here we are a week past the release of the first full-length trailer (viewable here, if you've somehow missed it), and everybody in the blogosphere has weighed in on the thing except me. I hate being behind the curve and frankly don't know what I've got to contribute that a million other people haven't already said, but I've had a few friends contact me and specifically ask why I haven't written about it yet, so I guess it's time I finally have my say.
Nevertheless, I am posting it anyhow...
Funny how "Khaaaaaaaann!" never gets old, isn't it? Happy Monday, everyone...
I've just learned that the Book of Mormon -- the foundation of the predominant faith here in my home state of Utah, the document which is considered by the LDS to be "another testament of Jesus Christ," and was once referred to by no less a personage than Mark Twain as "chloroform in print" * -- has now been translated into more than 100 languages, including -- are you ready for this? -- Klingon. Yes, Klingon, a.k.a. Klingonese, the entirely made-up language of that swarthy-skinned or literally boneheaded (depending on which version of Star Trek you prefer) race of imaginary bad guys (or good guys, in some versions, and in some episodes of some versions, since they tend to shift allegiances from time to time; it's all rather complicated, I'm afraid).
I'm rather gobsmacked by this news. Seriously. I'm one of the biggest Trekkies you're likely to meet (well, at least when it comes to the old-school stuff... I haven't seen Next Gen or Deep Space Nine in a very long time, and I didn't care for Voyager or Enterprise), but I've never understood the whole artificial language thing. What's the point of learning a fake language? Come on, people, isn't French hard enough for you?
In any event, if there are any young men out there who are about 19 years old and want to begin preparing for their mission calls to Qo'noS, check out the selections from the Klingon BoM on this website. Q'apla!
(I found this tidbit here, along with the wise observation that "...you thought ward basketball was bad now." Um, yeah... I certainly wouldn't want to play against these guys.)
* Full disclosure: I've never read even a single page of the BoM, so I can't speak as to its soporific qualities, and no disrespect was intended on my part. Sam Clemens is the one who said it, not me...
Yeah, I know, it's another lolcat, but this one seems so appropriate coming on the heels of the redshirt-death video...
more cat pictures
Real entry coming soon, I promise!
(For my non-Trekkie, non-nerd readers, the title refers to Dr. McCoy's oft-expressed discomfort with the process of beaming. He's always nervous about having his molecules scattered or reappearing inside a solid object. Which would, of course, be bad... I wonder if the JJ Abrams reboot movie will continue this gag, or if Bones will be "reimagined" into a manly man who's not afraid of such mundane little things. Sigh.)
Any student of classic Star Trek knows that one's sartorial choices have a direct impact on your potential longevity. So much so, in fact, that the term "redshirt" has come into general usage in sci-fi fandom to denote "the minor character who won't make it to the end of the episode." As evidence that color choices matter, allow me to present this amusing video montage:
The music is "I'm Alive" by ELO (that's the Electric Light Orchestra, for you young'uns in the audience). Extra credit to the first commenter who can name the one episode that racks up the highest redshirt body count (a clip from said episode begins this video, if that helps at all).
Aw, man... I just read over at Wil Wheaton's blog that Star Trek: The Experience, the museum/ride/restaurant/gift shop/ultimate geek mecca in Las Vegas, will be closing down at the end of summer, September 1.
I was planning to write today about that big fire at Universal Studios a couple weeks ago, and how annoying it is that most of the media coverage has centered on the loss of backlot sets and tourist attractions that can be rebuilt, while ignoring or downplaying the far more significant loss of hundreds of 35mm film prints spanning the entire history of both Universal's and Paramount's catalogs. (The original elements are safely stored elsewhere, but given the expense of striking new prints and the industry's determined march toward all-digital exhibition, it is unlikely that most of the affected movies will ever again be seen the way they were meant to be, i.e., projected by means of light shining through a strip of actual film, and I -- being the unabashed analog-phile that I am -- find that unutterably sad.)
I also thought I'd comment on the sad reports that one of the classiest guys ever to grace a movie screen, the legendary Paul Newman, is fighting cancer.
But you know what? After all the crapstorms I've weathered the last couple of weeks, I've about had it with the doom 'n' gloom stuff, so why don't we just watch a fun video clip? The audio here is William Shatner performing Pulp's "Common People" -- stop rolling your eyes, this is actually a good song, a cut off The Shat's album Has Been, which I found to be a surprise in about a dozen different ways, not least of which is how much it doesn't suck -- and the video is footage from the old animated Star Trek series, an early-70s Saturday morning classic. Enjoy:
I love how the mouth movements actually kinda-sorta synch up with the vocals, at least as well as they ever did back on Saturday mornings. As for that last scene with Kirk and Spock... well, that's why these two have an entire genre of homoerotic fanfiction named after them.
This is a little too long, but pretty it's it's pretty amusing:
What? I've never claimed not to have a dirty mind...
(Actually, this clip makes me want to go back and re-watch The Next Gen, at least the TV episodes. Not the dreary movies. It's been a long time since I've seen any of the TV eps, and I've just realized that I kind of miss them...)
Via.
For the record, I answered "yes" to items 1 and 3 only. And I can rationalize that I noticed the missing apostrophe because I'm a proofreader, right? Right?
(I suppose I shouldn't mention that, while I don't have a bat'leth, I do own a replica of Duncan MacLeod's katana. No, I really shouldn't mention that at all...)
Ack! I am ashamed to admit that I've been remiss in my fanboyish duties: I forgot to observe The Shat's seventy-seventh birthday on Saturday!
Luckily, E.E. Knight was on the ball; to honor the One True Kirk, he posted up a photographic tribute to the lovely ladies of the original Star Trek. I could be a little nitpicky with some of these choices -- several of these ladies were Spock's, Scotty's, or even Chekov's love interests, not the captain's, and some of them were simply there on the show and not any kind of love interest at all -- but that would be churlish. It's a fun entry with some nice eye candy (well, it's nice if you like 60s-style women, which, as it happens, I do).
Each lady gets her own poll question -- the adolescent and somewhat misogynistic "would you hit it?" -- but many of the answer options are funny, especially the bizarrely meta-textual ones. (My favorite is the first option for Elinor Donahue: "I'd hit it until Robert Young told me to stop hitting it for medical reasons. Then I'd ignore him because he only plays a doctor on TV." You see, Elinor played Robert Young's daughter on Father Knows Best, and Young played the title character in Marcus Welby, M.D., so that one's funny on something like six different levels. At least I think so. But then I really am a geek...)
Anyhow, click on over to Knight's tribute, and join me in wishing Bill a belated happy birthday. Let's hope there are many more to come!
A number of my regular blog-reads have already mentioned this, but in case you haven't heard, CBS.com is now offering all 79 episodes of the original Star Trek series as free streaming videos. They're supposed to be full-length and uncut (although they do seem to have unskippable commercials inserted at the original act-breaks), and based on my random sampling of a few scenes, they're clean transfers presented in fairly decent quality. Interestingly, they are the original un-"enhanced" episodes -- no modern-day CGI intruding on all the "living color" 1960s yumminess. So apparently not everyone thinks the revised editions are now the only official version of Trek. How refreshing.
(On a somewhat-related tangent, Toshiba's announcement last week that it was abandoning its HD-DVD technology has left the Star Trek: Remastered project -- i.e., the CG'd version -- in limbo. Toshiba was funding the update and counting on the series to be one of the prime movers of its HD-DVD format. Now the question is whether sales of the first season of Trek: Remastered have been sufficient to encourage anyone else to take up the reins and finish the final two seasons. This old-school, purist Trekkie would be perfectly happy to see the whole idea fade away...)
Star Trek is being presented as one of several "TV Classics" offered on the site, and I'm thrilled to see the unaltered version of the show getting some respect and some exposure. I will say, however, the CBS.com has a curious definition of "classic." In addition to Trek, they're also offering the '60s-vintage Twilight Zone, Hawaii Five-O, MacGyver, and... Melrose Place? Without getting into any debates over the merits of Melrose as a series, is it even old enough to be called any sort of classic?
For anyone who cares, Paramount has posted a high-quality version of that very cool teaser trailer for the perhaps-not-so-cool Star Trek reboot. You can check it out at the movie's official website.
John Kenneth Muir, a prolific writer and unabashed fan of the genre TV and movies of the 1970s and '80s, has a few comments inspired by that Star Trek reboot trailer I mentioned on Friday. While I'm not as receptive to this project as he seems to be, he nevertheless hits several nails squarely on their heads, and he even manages to give me a new perspective on how and why Abrams-Trek (as I'm starting to think of this project) may be a good thing:
In the months ahead, we're all going to be tempted to second guess the new movie. Is the right actor playing young Kirk? Do the Vulcans look like Romulans? Where is Gary Mitchell? Didn't Kirk serve on the Farragut before serving on the Enterprise? That's what fans like us do. We can't help it. I know I can't help it.
...I want a faithful Star Trek movie, but at the same time, I desperately want a Star Trek movie that my son Joel, when he is old enough, will love. I want a film that will inspire a generation of kids. I want today's kids to grow up with a reinvigorated, exciting, adventurous and bold Star Trek...a moral, progressive and heartfelt franchise like the one I grew up with and which, in many ways, made me the person I am today. I don't want Next Gen political correctness, I don't want the Love Boat in Space where the crew's family beams up to the Enterprise to go through some uninspiring family drama. I don't want fictional adventures in Holodecks...that's masturbation, not boldly going. And I don't want the United Nations in Space. I want what Star Trek was once about: space exploration....going where no man has gone before. I want excitement, adventure, and heart. I want Captain Horatio Hornblower in space again...not some kind of incestuous, insular vision that only a few die-hard Trekkies can appreciate. We must re-define faithful, I believe, in this case. I want a film that is faithful to Star Trek's pioneer spirit and Star Trek's swashbuckling heart. If I get that, but Kirk never served on the Farragut, well...so be it.
Much of the bloviating I've done on Star Trek over the years has been along these same lines, if not in these exact words: in my opinion, what all the spin-offs lacked and what the franchise drifted farther and farther away from over time is what Muir terms a pioneer spirit and a swashbuckling heart. (Thanks, John, for giving me the framing that I've never quite managed to articulate!) I would dearly love to see a film or television series that successfully resurrects that same spirit and heart, that inspires kids to look to the future with hope and imagination instead of indifference or fear, and which makes cynical old farts like me feel young and wide-eyed again.
This image is the first official still released from the upcoming feature-film reboot of Star Trek, and our first glimpse of what the good ship Enterprise is going to look like in this all-new take on the classic TV series. Just consider it the photo that launched a thousand blog posts. Click on it to be taken to a nice, big, magnifiable version that we can all obsess over.
As you can see, it depicts our old friend under construction. It's a powerful image, capable of inducing Pavlovian drool responses in old-school fanboys like myself, not to mention the spontaneous generation of truly astounding levels of geeky analysis.
Wil Wheaton's been watching classic Trek, specifically the episode where Kirk fights the reptilian Gorn, which Wil hasn't seen in years:
I'd ... forgotten about Spock's suggestion that maybe the Gorn were protecting themselves when they attacked the human outpost on Cestus III, and Kirk's initial refusal to consider it. It was pretty brave to put the idea out that someone you automatically assume has evil intentions may have a very good reason -- from their perspective -- to think the same thing about you. A big part of American mythology is that we're always the Good Guys who are incapable of doing anything evil or wrong, and I thought it was daring to suggest -- on network television in 1967, no less -- that maybe it's not that simple.
Even though Star Trek frequently looks silly and cheesy, I think it says a lot about the writing and the stories that audiences have not just overlooked that, but embraced it, for the last 40 years. I've seen movies that spent more on special effects for one shot than Star Trek spent in an entire season's worth, but I didn't care about the characters, and the story didn't stay with me for one minute after it was over. We know it's just a guy in a silly rubber suit, but when Kirk empathizes with him and doesn't kill him, it's still a powerful moment, and the message it sends about compassion and empathy is a powerful one that's just as relevant now as it was then.
Yep. That's why Star Trek endures. It's got nothing to do with the dated special effects that everyone seems to be so concerned with these days. It's the one quality that classic Trek consistently had and which all its successors achieved only intermittently, and that's good storytelling that actually has something to say. Something that, more often than not, remains relevant -- or at least interesting -- even after 40 years. God, I love this show... and I'm thinking that maybe I'll throw a few of my Trek DVDs onto the agenda for my holiday break...
(Incidentally, if you didn't catch it, this post's title is a play on another classic Trek episode I've always especially liked, "That Which Survives." Lee Meriwether turning sideways into a two-dimensional line and shrinking into a dot, the way the picture on the old black-and-white TV I had as a kid used to when I turned off the set, really freaked me out when I was young. Still does, actually... a very eerie effect.)
A couple weeks ago, The Girlfriend and I, along with several of our friends from the subgroup I like to think of as "The Usual Suspects,"* attended something rather unusual: a one-time-only theatrical screening of "The Menagerie," an episode of the original Star Trek television series. The screening was essentially a promotional gimmick for the release of the series on the HD-DVD format, so naturally what we were seeing was the "remastered" version of the episode -- that is, the one with all the new digital "enhancements." Not that anyone except me seemed to mind. We shared a sold-out house with several hundred enthusiastic members of the uniform-wearing faithful (there was even a guy there in full-blown Andorian make-up, complete with antennae!), and there was much ooh-ing and aah-ing over the digital recreations of scenes we've all seen a thousand times. Even I have to grudgingly admit that whoever is behind the CG tinkering is doing a very nice job of it. The new footage is very faithful to the look of the original series -- the Enterprise isn't suddenly an unnaturally manuverable cartoon -- and there has been no "Greedo shoots first" revisionism to any of the stories that I have seen. I will even concede that some of what's been done is an improvement. (Click here for a gallery of screencaps and judge for yourselves; my thanks to Mike G for sending me the link.) Nevertheless, as my Three Loyal Readers can probably predict, I remain opposed to the updates on basic principle.
My stubbornness on this point led to a pretty interesting conversation following the screening, which in turn led me to a whole new understanding of my own thoughts on this matter of updating old movies and TV properties, and which types of changes bother me and which types don't.
Continue reading ""The Mangerie," and My Manifesto on Digital Tinkering" »
As you may have heard, Paramount is hoping to revive its venerable -- and highly profitable -- Star Trek franchise with yet another feature-film adventure for the original Enterprise crew, i.e., Kirk, Spock, etc., only this time there will be a whole new gang of young actors playing the iconic characters. J.J. Abrams, the creator of Lost and Alias, is writing and directing, and the final member of the core cast was announced just last week. Here's the run-down:
The photoshopped image above (courtesy of ScreenRant.com) provides an idea of how the newbies may look in their roles as well as how they compare to the original actors. As usual, give it a click it to blow it up larger.
In addition to the core cast above, Eric Bana will be playing a villain named Nero, who is rumored to be a Romulan (plausible, considering the name and the fact that the Romulan culture of the original Trek was modelled on ancient Rome), and Leonard Nimoy is said to be appearing as a more, ahem, mature Spock in a brief cameo. That last bit suggests we can expect either a time-travel story (another one? Ho-hum...) or a frame story of some kind, no doubt intended to help legitimize the new cast by having one of the classic actors "identify" them as his old friends.
Based on what I've seen out there on the blogs, people seem to be generally positive about this effort to reboot Star Trek, with opinions ranging from flat-out enthusiastic to cautiously optimistic. I, however, am far more dubious of the whole -- forgive the pun -- enterprise.
Via Wil Wheaton, the very cool news that George Takei, a.k.a. Sulu in Classic Star Trek, has had an asteroid named in his honor:
An asteroid between Mars and Jupiter has been renamed 7307 Takei in honor of the actor, best known for his role as Hikaru Sulu in the original "Star Trek" series and movies.
The celestial rock, discovered by two Japanese astronomers in 1994, was formerly known as 1994 GT9. It joins the 4659 Roddenberry (named for the show's creator, Gene Roddenberry) and the 68410 Nichols (for co-star Nichelle Nichols, who played Lt. Uhura). Other main-belt asteroids have been named for science fiction luminaries Robert Heinlein and Isaac Asimov.
I've had the honor of meeting Mr. Takei on two occasions. The first time was at one of those "meet 'n' greet"-style conventions I've written about before, those impersonal things where you pay an outrageous admission fee for the privilege of standing in line for an hour or three so you can experience 20 seconds of face-time with your celebrity hero, snap a personal photo (if you're lucky, anyway; some stars -- Shatner, for example -- don't allow those), and walk out with an autographed 8x10 glossy.
The second occasion was much more interesting and satisfying. It was intended to be a big meet 'n' greet with a lengthy roster of genre talent, but it wasn't very well organized or advertised and, well, nobody showed up. To be honest, I wouldn't have gone myself if a friend of mine who knew the promoter hadn't gotten me some freebie tickets. My buddy seemed so pleased with himself for doing me this huge favor that I simply couldn't find a reason not to at least check it out.
At first glance, it was one of the most depressing events I've ever attended.
You know, there was a time in my life when I would've been ashamed to admit that I even understood this, let alone thought it was funny:
Hi, my name is Jason, and I'm a nerd.
(Actually, when you think about it, this is really a fascinating example the cross-connections within popular culture. Imagine trying to explain this to someone from the year 1975, say...)
[Update: Here is a version with sound, for that full, Shatner-esque effect.]
So, this afternoon, I've been rummaging through a folder of random crap that I've been meaning to blog about, looking to see if any of it still interests me, and I ran across the following image:
I ganked that picture from this site, which identifies the fancy red vest as "The Cosmoboy," a then-cutting-edge design from Pierre Cardin which was featured in the August 1967 issue of Cavalier magazine (which I believe was a nudie mag, ahem, gentleman's lifestyle periodical along the lines of Playboy).
Is it just me, or does that look really familiar? Maybe like... something from the 23rd Century?
My mom has always told me that if you hold onto an article of clothing long enough, it will eventually come back into style. Guess she was right...
Okay, so we all know intellectually that those imaginary spaceships we love in movies and on TV would be really frakkin' big if they were real, but do you have a genuine, visceral sense for how big? Have a look at the image below:
That's the handiwork of one Jason Fortuny, who decided to see how the U.S.S. Enterprise (the Next Generation version) would relate to his home town of Seattle. Various sources put the ship's official length at 643 meters. As you can see, that's gobsmackingly big in relation to real-world objects we can actually relate to, about seven city blocks long. Click the image to see it larger, and then click through to Jason's site to see the ship's silhouette laid over a GoogleEarth map of the city. Neat stuff...
Given the horrifying events at Virginia Tech this morning, the following video (courtesy of Chris Roberson) is either wildly inappropriate at this time or a much-needed break from the gloom. Personally, I just thought it was funny:
We're about to delve deep into the dark underbelly of geekiness here, folks, so you might want to strap yourselves in. Here there be dragons...
First, the background: There is within many fandoms a sub-culture of people who like to write their own stories using characters from whatever their favorite media obsession may be, and within this "fanfic" (short for "fan fiction") scene, there is a sub-sub-culture of those who write so-called "slash fiction." In broad terms, slash stories take established, heterosexual characters and reimagine them in homosexual relationships with each other. The original such pairing (as far as anyone can determine) was between Star Trek's Kirk and Spock in mimeographed stories that got passed around at early Trek conventions back in the 1970s; the name of the genre actually originates with the way these particular stories used to be categorized (i.e., "Kirk/Spock" or "Kirk-slash-Spock" stories).
All of which leads to my observation that some ideas never die:
(Hat tip to SF Signal for this. And if you haven't dared play the video yet for fear of what you might see, go ahead and click it. It's harmless, and more funny than anything.)
Sunday morning. I'm at The Girlfriend's apartment, waiting for her to finish getting ready so we can go to brunch, our usual Sabbath-day routine. Suddenly, I realize her poodle is staring at me with deep, imploring eyes... he needs to go outside and do his dirty, sinful business. Being the great guy that I am, I put on his leash and take him outside.
Through the open patio door at my back, I can hear brief snatches of unrelated sound: a TV chef blathering about oysters, a cacophony of cheering at a sporting event, gunshots, country music. The Girlfriend is channel-surfing. The disconnected rapid-fire audio stops, and there's now a familiar, urgent melody playing.
"Sounds like you found some classic Trek," I say over my shoulder.
"Bet you can't tell me which episode," she calls back.
I listen for a moment. I can't hear it terribly well...
"What is that, 'Amok Time'?" I ask. She doesn't answer me. Puzzled, I turn to look back through the door. She's sitting on the couch with the TV remote dangling loosely from one hand and a stunned look on her face.
"What?" I say, even though I already know.
"How do you do that?"
I shrug and wait for the dog to finish relieving himself while Spock, deep in the throes of pon farr, fights his captain and friend to the death for the sake of a woman...
I don't follow basketball and I wouldn't know Tim Hardaway from Tim Conway, but apparently he is taking some heat for bluntly admitting in a radio interview last week that he has a problem with gay people. That's not an unusual attitude in our society, of course, and you can even make an argument that Hardaway is to be commended for his honesty. I, for one, would certainly defend his right to say whatever's on his mind no matter how ignorant. But he should be prepared for the consequences:
Sulu rocks...
I've had a really crappy couple of days, the details of which I intend to blog about shortly. In the meantime, here's the one thing today that's managed to bring much of a smile to my face, a mash-up of classic Star Trek footage with Jefferson Airplane's "White Rabbit":
If nothing else, this reminded me of how much more expressive acting styles were in the '60s compared to now, how creative and striking the camera work and lighting was on the original Trek, and, most of all, how much drinking and drug usage there was on the old show. Feed your head indeed...
(Hat tip to Chris Roberson...)
Another Turkey Day is past, the trytophan slept off with nary a trace of hangover, and I've just had a slice of apple pie for breakfast. Yummy. I'm now ready to set off on our next blogging adventure, a journey that will take us deep, deep into the very heart of blackest geekdom. Don't be afraid, though. I've got a flashlight, and a good blaster at my side. And it's definitely not set for stun.
(Hm. Here's a random thought: do all blaster-type weapons in the Star Wars universe have a stun setting? Or do Imperial troops have some kind of special crowd-control blasters? Inquiring minds want to know, Uncle George!)
Anyway, I saw earlier this week that a web site called FilmCritic.com had posted a list of the Top 10 Movie Spaceships as determined by the site's editorial staff. The criteria used to determine "topness" were vague, consisting mostly of which examples struck the editors as "awesome." However, awesomeness is in the eye of the beholder, so naturally I have a few quibbles with their selections. To begin, here is their list:
I'm ten days late in mentioning the following items, but I was busy last week and I figure somebody out there might not have heard about them and would appreciate getting the word. Besides it's my blog and I want to mention them, so there...
Continue reading "Star Trek: The Auction, and One Man's Opinions" »
In celebration of Star Trek's 40th anniversary and relaunch in all-new computer-generated semi-glory, Lileks has applied his humorous cudgel to the less-than-inspiring efforts to keep the franchise alive during the mid-70s. This was the period between the cancellation of the series and its big-screen rebirth in Star Trek: The Motion Picture, when fans really didn't think the show would ever return and, presumably, they'd take whatever crappy souvenirs of their beloved obsession they could get. I remember seeing most of these ads in my old comic books. They looked pretty lame to me when I was a kid; they look really bad now.
From Star Wars to Star Trek: that's been pretty much the back-and-forth pattern of my life for decades now. They're the twin moons that rise and fall over my personal landscape. Or some labored metaphor like that. Anyway, to business:
Over the past couple of weeks, I've been gathering articles and blog entries about Star Trek's 40th anniversary -- hey, somebody's got to do it, right? -- and I now present the links below for your rainy-afternoon geeky reading pleasure.
Yesterday I caught my first episode of the new "enhanced" version of the classic Star Trek series, which you'll recall I already pre-denounced a week or so back, sight unseen.
And what is my official verdict now that I've examined the evidence with my own eyes. Eh.
Speaking of Star Trek (well, I was yesterday), today is the 40th anniversary of the premiere of that obscure little TV series that nobody's ever heard of. Forty years of split-infinitive goodness (referring, of course, to the show's motto: "to boldly go"; it may be grammatically questionable, but it is undeniably catchy, even soul-stirring). Incredible. I can't imagine how weird it must be for the surviving cast members and behind-the-scenes folks to still hear people talking about this show after all this time. (Granted, it's not talked about as much as it was ten or so years ago, but it hasn't exactly dropped off the pop-cultural radar, either.) Shatner has taken a lot of heat in the past for saying in that infamous SNL "Get a Life" sketch that, for him, Star Trek was just a job he did years ago, and he's baffled by the enduring loyalty of its fans. However, I think he's being more honest than other folks associated with the show who tend to wax poetic and/or philosophical about it, claiming that they knew all along they were involved in something special and revolutionary. I don't buy that. Back in 1966-69, it really was just a TV show, just another job for all those involved in its production, and I highly doubt that anyone truly thought it would still be remembered, let alone revered, four decades later.
A couple of items that caught my eye last week and that I'm only now finding the time to blog about:
