FanMade: Review Star Trek Phase II “Blood and Fire, Part 1″ December 20, 2008
by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: New Voyages/Phase II, Review , trackback
Coming in just under the wire, today the fan series Star Trek Phase II released their first (and only) episode of the year (and their first since changing names from New Voyages). "Blood and Fire, Part 1" has generated a lot of buzz for its controversial subject matter, but is it also good Star Trek? TrekMovie weighs in with a full review below. [SPOILERS]
REVIEW "BLOOD AND FIRE, PART 1"
Right from the start, "Blood and Fire, Part 1" shows off why Phase II is the most well-known of the fan films. The teaser throws you right into the action of a battle between the Enterprise and a Klingon warship with unrivaled effects and all the on-set antics you would want to go along with them, including plenty of classic Trek ‘everybody lean right’ moments and lots of console explosions. This is followed up with an introduction to Phase II’s new Spock, Ben Tolpin, who immediately shows the calm competence we expect from our favorite Vulcan. Add to that some witty banter between Kirk (James Cawley) and Chekov (Andy Bray) and a dramatic well-delivered concluding Kirk close-up and warning that ‘there will be consequences’ and we have what may be one of the better opening teasers all of Trek, including the ‘real’ Trek. So does the rest of the episode match up?
"Blood and Fire, Part 1" kicks off with action
Although the first act does drag a bit, director David Gerrold delivers a nicely paced episode, and even comes in a little short of normal length. This helps "Blood and Fire, Part 1" feel more like a traditional episode, unlike the previous two outings from New Voyages which felt bloated. The story of "Blood and Fire" revolves around a distress call from the USS Copernicus which appears abandoned and headed in a death spiral towards a star. In fact, the Klingons from the opening teaser seem to only be a plot device to damage the Enterprise, but perhaps they will play a bigger role in Part 2. A no-win scenario involving Kirk’s orders and his mission team on board the Copernicus is at the heart of the story, but there is also a secondary plot involving Kirk’s nephew Peter Kirk (Bobby Rice) who has joined the Enterprise crew to be closer to his husband-to-be Alex Freeman (Evan Fowler), both of whom end up on that ill-fated boarding party.
Like with past New Voyages episodes, there seems to be too much emphasis on the guest star ‘B story.’ Barely into the first act and we get a long romantic scene between these two new characters and it seemed a bit gratuitous. Although both actors put in good performances throughout the episode, but they seemed uncomfortable in the overly-long intimate scene. Call me a traditionalist, but I think Star Trek is really about Kirk, Spock, McCoy, and the core crew and so it seems out of place to devote half the first act (and so much of the episode) on a romance between two new guests actors. Even if a younger version of Peter Kirk appeared in the TOS episode “Operation — Annihilate!” he is essentially a new character here. It might have worked better had the romance been with one of the regular cast, but perhaps it would be a bridge too far making of the core bridge crew Star Trek’s first gay character.
Kirk’s Nephew (Rice) and his boyfriend Freeman (Fowler)
For the rest of the episode the script from Gerrold and Carols Pedraza (based on an unused TNG script by Gerrold) flows like a Trek episode should, with a good mix of action and character moments. The pair know their Trek giving each of the cast dialog that rings true to their characters. The only exception would be the scene when Kirk is presented with the ‘Order 9′ no-win scenario and, although it raises the stakes and serves the plot of the episode, he seems un-Kirk-like in acquiescing so easily. Being that this is coming from the same writer as "Trouble with Tribbles" there is also quite a lot of good humor in the episode, although some of the jokes seemed to be uncharacteristically breaking the fourth wall, including a moment when McCoy talks about red shirts with targets on them. That being said, one of the funnier lines involves Peter Kirk invoking the name of "Mr. Sulu" during pillow talk with his boyfriend, a line made even funnier due to the real life George Takei being the only openly gay Star Trek actor from the main cast. Also, like many classic Trek episodes, "Blood and Fire" has some scary, almost horror-film, elements too it. The Regulan Blood Worms infecting the USS Copernicus deliver some frights and a (probably too over the top, but pretty cool) gross out moment. The only issue with all of this is that there is a bit of a kitchen sink feeling with the different emotions going from tension, to fright, to romance, to humor, sometimes creating awkward transitions.
Kirk (Cawley) and Spock (Tolpin) share a lighter moment
The classic weak link of all fan films is the acting, often being delivered by fans with little or no acting experience. Although "Blood and Fire" does suffer from some of this to an extent, it is probably the best outing for the troupe so far. Both John Kelley (McCoy) and Charles Root (Scotty) show marked improvement in making the characters their own and move away from imitation of the original actors. But Kelley could dial down the attitude a bit as he sometimes plays Bones classic irascibility as antagonistic. Kim Stinger also does well playing Uhura, sharing a delightful scene with Root, Kelley, Cawley and Bray, whose Chekov is sometimes better than Koenig’s original. As mentioned before, Ben Tolpin, a professional actor, is a welcome addition to the cast, who has quickly made Spock his own. "Blood and Fire" also introduced Patrick Bell who was not very convincing playing the Vulcan Lt. Xon (a character planned for the unproduced Phase II series from the 70s). As for the Captain himself, Cawley also showed improvement playing the part of Kirk, but he is always best when he is playing Kirk and not when he sometimes falls into playing Shatner playing Kirk.
(L-R) Chekov (Bray), Uhura (Stinger), Scotty (Root), Kirk (Cawley) and Bones (Kelley)
Like with "World Enough and Time" and the ‘Night in 1969′ edition of "To Serve All My Days," the effects are outstanding and in line with work you see from the ‘Remastered’ Star Trek and other current Sci-Fi TV series. Joel Bellucci and the Phase II visual f/x team have created a look that is both in line with The Original Series, but still brings new modern techniques. This not only goes for the space shots, but also small touches to the live action, like graphics added to the main view screen and our first look inside Mr. Spock’s viewer.
USS Copernicus in space…
…and in Spock’s viewer
The Phase II production continues to be top notch including everything from the sets to editing to the hair and make-up. Although there don’t appear to be any new sets, the redress of the USS Enterprise standing in for the Copernicus was very well done in giving you the sense of a different ship that is in serious distress. This episode also introduced some newly designed props (like a cool phaser rifle) as well as some genuine Phase II and TMP era uniforms (crew jumpsuits and Scotty’s radiation suit). All in all a flawless recreation of the look of Original Series, with some nice new additions befitting the transition towards the TMP era.
Peter Kirk tries out his new phaser rifle while on board the Copernicus
"Blood and Fire" ends on a big cliffhanger, leaving a lot to be resolved in the concluding part. Although there was much touting of this episode as an AIDS allegory, we only get the barest hint of that in Part 1, so perhaps that social commentary has to wait until Part 2, as will those ‘consequences’ for the Klingons who do a disappearing trick for the rest of the episode. Also coming in part 2 is the guest spot of TNG’s Denise Crosby.
All in all "Blood and Fire is another good entry from the Phase II team. The episode did start off with a bang and provided a few highlights on the way, but the rest of the episode didn’t deliver as well as the opening teaser. Although there are improvements from previous episodes, I would still rank this one as second behind last year’s "World Enough and Time," guest-starring George Takei. Regardless, I am very much looking forward to Part 2 to see how this all plays out.
What will happen to the Enterprise crewmen on board the Copernicus?
…Find out next time on Star Trek Phase II
Download BAF Part 1 now: details at Phase II Site, plus more mirrors listed on Phase II Forums. [Part 2 should be out sometime around March, but there is no official date set yet].
Majel Tribute added
After the news of the death of Majel Barrett Roddenberry, the Phase II team added a short but touching acknowledgment to the beginning of the episode.
Comments»
Wow. That was so touching for Phase 2 to remember The First lady of Trek. Great Show with great action. Star Trek has come a long way and will go where no man has gone before. The battle action was almost to movie Quality and it was a great Episode. Can’t wait for the Next Episode.
How did Peter Kirk age so quickly from “Operation – Annihilate” to “Blood and Fire”? Wouldn’t the time span be only three or four years?
it was an awesome episode i cant wait for part 2
hey Anthony. Any idea when the Next Episode will Be released. Also to James Cawley. Great Job on Phase 2. You guys are doing fantastic work on Phase 2 and should be commended. I wish there was a way for you guys to get Phase 2 on to Either Network TV or at least into Syndication or even the Sci Fi Channel.
I with AP on keeping the focus on the lead characters. The “B” story characters often seem like filler going back to TOS / TMP and all that followed.
i am downloading this and look forward to watcing it if its as goo as the rest i am in for a real good treat
If i remeber correctly Peter was probly about 14 or 15 in the Tos Operation Annihilate. So lets say 4 years went by then he would be 19 or 20. So a little bending of cannon but thats just being a bit nit picky. But was a great Episode none the less and i for one can’t wai for the Next Episode.
PS: The schematic inside the Spock viewer doesn’t match the Copernicus.
I have been waiting for quite sometime for an episode like Blood and Fire, since the very first time I saw Star Trek. And then finally, Phase II showed a person that was like me. I take that back, two people that were like me. Thank you.
I would agree with most of what you wrote, Anthony. And yes, the romatic element did seem a bit long. However, I do think it was way overdue and hence, the time they gave it was justified.
I am also eagerly awating the second part. Let’s hope it lives up to what they started with this part one. Let’s hope they don’t kill off one of the lovers. Isn’t it time gay couples on any screen don’t have to pay the ultimate penance for being gay? Let them get married and live long and prosper…together.
I’d rank it third behind the Takei and Koenig episodes, but still good overall.
I wasn’t bothered by the gay romantic scene, but it deel a little gratuitous nonetheless. It seemed to drag on more than any hetero romance scene I’ve seen in Trek.
But for a fanfilm, terrific job overall.
haven’t seen it yet–I just wanted to chime in here to suggest that your review needs at least one, possibly two revisions. There are a lot of sentences up there which drop subjects and barely make sense. It’s very distracting.
First of all, this is a very compelling, and certainly impressive episode. Watching it was kind of bitter sweet because who knows when we’re going to see the conclusion. I am certainly looking forward to it.
Now, that being said….
I think the episode would have been better without the gay scene. In fact, I think you could have replaced the Freeman character with a woman, and very little of the drama would be removed. Having the gay scene means, as a father, I’m not sure if my eight-year-old son should watch this episode. He’s seen and enjoyed all the others. I’ve never had to worry about screening anything Star Trek before.
This episode was supposed to be an allegory about the AIDS epidemic. Obviously, this story remains unfinished, but as it stands— so far I don’t see a lot that has to do with aids. Those blood worms seem to simply be ravenous creatures that apparently can’t be stopped.They are so dangerous and contagious that even a star ship needs to be destroyed to supposedly kill them. The crewmen that are infected (Spock, Rand, etc.) did nothing but board the crippled ship Copernicus. This is the kind of thing that typically happens on Star Trek. Crewmen beam in to a questionable and dangerous situation. The one crewman that was consumed by the worms opened some kind of panel and they swarmed down upon him. Anyone could have done that. I know that anyone can get AIDS, but it’s typically transmitted through gay sex or needles. I guess the AIDS allegory is going to come out in Part II, because so far I think it’s a stretch to go there. I also think the gay storyline is the least interesting thing about the episode. The real drama is how Captain Kirk is going to avoid killing Spock and the others and still do the right thing. If Peter Kirk had been in love with a female crew member, I think all the great drama of the story would still be there. Also, younger kids could see what is essentially a very cool Star Trek episode.
Thank you, James Cawley, and the rest of your crew. What you are doing is exciting , impressive, and very entertaining. I also think it’s very fair to say that what you are producing is legitimate Star Trek. I hope you get Part II online soon.
Wow! Absolutely terrific! Congratulations and many thanks to the entire Phase II crew. You get better and better with each episode, and I’m really impressed by that.
John Kelley’s and Charles Root’s performances are right on target now, as was already mentioned in the review.
The Copernicus is perfect. I also enjoyed the animated computer displays.
And what a cliffhanger!!
So far, I’d rate this my co-number one, together with World Enough And Time, maybe with World Enough slightly ahead because of Takei’s appearance.
I agree with #10 that the romantic scene was simply too extended for Star Trek, gay or straight doesn’t matter. But they did a great job depicting a gay couple and gay marriage as a non-scandal in the 23rd century.
I also found that redshirt being eaten alive a bit drastic for my stomach.
I think it was a good artistic decision to skip David Gerrold’s long dedication from the teaser trailer. Don’t get me wrong, I respect Gerrold’s opinion and I wouldn’t want to see it censored or something. I only think a good story speaks for itself, it doesn’t need such an extensive comment/explanation.
The Klingons do return in Part two, to follow up on the events of theTeaser.
And don’t worry Anthony, it may seem like Kirk gives in on the code 9, but remember He is Kirk! Believe me there is a major reason behind the importance of Peter and Alex to the story, which when all is said and donne allows you to see a side of JIm Kirk rarely if ever shown. Thank’s for the Great review! We have been BOMBARDED with downloads and The comments on the net have been overwhelmingly supportive and positive!
Merry Christmas Everyone!
James Cawley
I agree with Anthony in his review 100%. ‘ thought the
exact thing as I was watching it…
Can’t wait for Part 2 – looks good!
Q
Well now we know why there aren’t any Kirks in the 24th century… except for that brief stint with Jim on the rickety metal bridge…
…and we all know what happened to him…
Joel Bellucci and his team of FX people have done an outstanding job on this episode, and their hard work and dedication to the project shine more brightly now than ever before…
Just want to make it clear that, though I was slated to do some of the effects work on this episode, my schedule precluded me from being more than moral support… and an occasional sounding board for Mr. Cawley.
I think the Phase II folks are steadily improving on every new episode…
A minor point, if you will permit it, a question about new Trek terminology, as used in this review:
Why was the term “away team” introduced with TNG and why was the ancient naval “landing party” discarded?
Sincerely,
C.S. Lewis
I managed to see a wet print of part 2 and I believe it to be better than the first. The pacing picks up and the acting is kicked up a notch. World Enough and Time was the first New Voyages/Phase II episode I saw and then there was this one. I believe these guys do an amazing job.
CS Lewis
actually ‘away team’ was just me…in the episode they actually used the term ‘mission team’…I changed the above review to reflect that, although I really dont think it matters as it is just ‘the guys who beamed over’ by any other name
#12. Mark Anton.
“I think you could have replaced the Freeman character with a woman, and very little of the drama would be removed.”
That was exactly the point. :)
What the hell is with the two guys dry-humping each other?? I’m sorry, but I’ve just lost a TON of respect for the Phase Two guys. Pushing blatant homosexuality in our faces is NOT the kind of Star Trek I want to watch! >:o( Completely uncalled for and not in the spirit of Star Trek. Disgusting!!
Yaaaaaaaaaayyyy!
Kirk has a gay nephew! Great! I am *so* jealous he’s getting married!
Plus he’s cute – I want one like that.
Well done TREK II
First off, they are not “Dry Humping” if that is what you see, then you must be doing something wrong in your own bedroom. I do not need or want your respect. I believe in complete EQUALITY for people regardless of who they sleep with , what God they believe in, or what color they are, or anything else. THAT is the future Gene Roddenberry envisioned, and that is the one I want to be a part of. If I upset you with the content of this episode and I even for a moment made you think, I did my job.
James Cawley
Well said James. :)
Yes, the term “mission team” is used in the episode, not “away team.” But in the TOS era, even the “mission team” might have been more appropriately called a “landing party.” (Well, actually since it was a ship they were going to, it probably would have been called a “boarding party.”)
I think the fact that “Blood and Fire” was written back in 1986 as a script for TNG could well be contributing to some of the TNG-related anachronistic language in the script, although most of them were caught before the episode was shot.
From an “in-universe” standpoint, we know that the term “landing/boarding party” fell into disfavor and was replaced largely by “Away Team” by the time of Picard’s era. We don’t know when the gradual switchover in terms began, but perhaps it began in the fourth year of Kirk’s five year mission, right here with the events of “Blood and Fire.”
Somehow, Cawley manages to look like he’s doing a Walter Koenig impression in that photo above with Spock! :)
…So, is it my imagination, or has Cawley abandoned his Elvis-Do for something a bit closer to…Glen Campbell?
“First off, they are not “Dry Humping” if that is what you see, “
…Perhaps, but are they at least using protection? :-P
#25
James Cawley, I’ve not seen any of the phase II episodes, but you just earned a new gay fan in me. Thankyou sir!!
You don’t need me to say it, but keep up that spirit of equality.
#29-LOL!
#30- Yes, their uniforms!
James
Brad,
warning for trolling
lets not turn this into a debate on homosexuality.
If you notice in the review, I barely mention it as it is really irrelevant to the story. My note about the scene being too long would be the same regardless if it was a man and a woman. I believe that you need to ‘earn’ a romance scene and we don’t know these characters to care enough to warrant that scene so early.
And James,
I do understand that the characters are important to the story and the Klingons will be back, but in my book I just would like to see more of Kirk and Spock.
I never pegged Peter Kirk to be gay! I always remember him as that young cadet in the “Sarek” novel, who was shagging that Klingon chick.
Anthony and Greg, thank you for your kindly replies. I will research this more and perhaps, should the occasion arise, report back on my findings!
Sincerely,
C.S. Lewis
Anthony,
Oh, don’t worry! There is plenty of Kirk,Spock and McCoy in Part two!
This is “new” Trek and very welcome.
Would you rather see “Spock’s Brain” ?
James…glad to hear it!
James,
I enjoyed the episode, and though it was well done. Thanks for the tribute to Majel. I hope the new movie honors her in the same way. I don’t know if you ever got to meet her or how well you knew her but from the time I was at the studio during the production of STTNG she was a wonderful person.
The only thing I did see that was a bit of a blooper was the captain on the Copernicus was moving around a bit in the background.
Anyway, keep up the great work and looking forward to part two.
While I didn’t mind the relationship between Peter and Alex, it felt a little awkward to watch the bedroom scene (though I was laughing hysterically at the Sulu joke). Maybe because the way it was shot, how they were behaving, and how little music there was in it made it feel sort of voyeuristic like you were actually in there in real life; even if it was a straight couple, I’d feel weird being in the same room while they were in bed together.
I also have to disagree with the notion that if Alex was female that it would lose any of the drama. Captain Kirk’s reaction to what Peter had to say has a bit of a layer of subtext to it after finding out his nephew wants to marry a man. How much did he really know about him? Did he even know he was gay? It speaks a lot about the relationship between Peter and his de facto father figure and I’m interested in seeing where this goes and perhaps if Peter is retained as a character beyond the second part.
All in all, an excellent entry into fan film pantheon and I look forward to the next episode. Heck, it almost makes me want to get off my lazy butt and dust off that fan film script I’ve been tinkering with.
“Would you rather see “Spock’s Brain” ?”
Maybe… but that’s more to do with the costuming of the aliens in that episode than it actually being any good. Hehe.
I don’t know why people always cite Spock’s Brain as the worst episode of TOS, when it was clearly “The Omega Glory”.
Anyway, that’s enough derailing I’m sure. Downloading Blood and Fire now, should be good fun. I’ve enjoyed watching this series develop.
I love the new mood lighting on the enterprise, kinda reminds me of the Sci Fi Era of Mystery Science theater 3000.
Just watched “Blood and Fire: Part 1″ a little while ago. I agree that it’s not as good as “World Enough and Time,” but it was a fantastic entry not only to “Trek” fan films, but to “Trek” as well. The surprising element was that the gay couple element was not used as a “shock element,” but as just another regular character element, and I thought that was more appropriate. The chills were good, and we can see that the production values have grown immensely, and the actors have improved. This is definitely the highest quality fan show out there.
I give this episode an A-, and am looking forward to Part 2.
God bless!
While Omega Glory was the worst written episode the acting in Spock’s Brain plumbed the depths of the abyss……
James Cawley, thanks to you and your awesome team SO much for the new episode! And keep up with the boundary pushing, you’ll find it fuels that torch you hold rather adequately.
Mr. Cawley,
First I would like to say that I am not trying to be a troll, and I’m not trying to ignite some big argument. I am personally disappointed that you are glad that I’m upset by what I’ve seen in your show. Unfortunately, as Mr. Roddenberry is no longer with us, and I do not know of any of his personal views on homosexual subject matter, I will consider the verdict out on that topic.
Regardless of one’s belief of equality, I personally feel very disappointed in having to sit through a portion of the episode that was a bit too much “in my face” and I do not appreciate it. I’m sure others may both agree and disagree with me. My previous post was an immediate reaction to my personal disappointment. I still stand by my personal view, but I do not see this particular subject matter as being in line with the true spirit of Star Trek. Yes, it is obvious to me that over the next few hundres years, there may be changes in regard to this subject, but I would rather not be bombarded by things I personally find offensive in a show that I would have otherwise enjoyed. Regardless of whether or not it is your opinion that you’ve made me think, it is not appropriate. IF you want to change my mind about the subject matter, shoving it in my face is not the answer.
Let’s just agree to disagree.
After watching Part 1 of Blood and Fire, I did like this episode.
One thing I am bothered by is not having the ability to show this episode to my 5 year old son.
I have absolutley nothing against homosexuals or themes pertaining to that.
I have many gay friends both male and female.
I am a heterosexual male and I do believe its important to treat everyone as equals however, how can I show this star trek episode to my child? You cannot tell me that Star Trek is for adults only. Yes the movies might have stronger adult themes but the episodes to me should be meant for everyone. I watched TOS as a little child.
Whatever my child chooses to be when he grows up is for him to decide and I will support him but I cannot let him watch this when all he understands is mommy and daddy and is 5 years old.
As much as everyone has the right to be inclined to whoever or whatever they choose, enough with the gay trek. please.
Especially when its “ooh look I’m gay” for “ooh look I’m gay” ’s sake and not contributing much to the storyline.
We’ve had it rammed down our throats in Hidden Frontier and the umpteen spinoffs and now on Phase II.
That said, Phase II handled it much better than HF.
Aside from the gayness, this episode of PII is first class. Acting, sets, effects all five star.
Looking forward to part 2.
Well done all.
James, my apologies … my earlier entry posed what could come off as a nitpicky, critical question while failing to note that this was a very high-quality, well written and suspenseful episode. Well done to you and your team!
By coincidence, back in 1990 I did my own Trek fan film that centers on Peter Kirk 20 years after the incident at Deneva. Starfleet finds the Enterprise adrift, Kirk and Spock missing, her crew unconscious and with no memory of what happened. Peter, first officer on a science vessel, is given command of the Enterprise and sent to find Kirk and Spock … but what he finds instead is something that innocently yet systematically destroyed an entire civilization, and just as innocently threatens others. It was fun to write and produce … but believe me, the end product was WAY, WAY, WAAAYYY behind yours! Again, nice work!
Although I thought it was kind of gratuitous, it’s about time we have openly gay characters in an incarnation of Star Trek. It’s way over due.
Dear Mr. Cawley and the entire cast and crew,
what an amazingly great episode! So far, ‘In Harm’s Way’ was my favorite, but now BAF is. Everything, really everything was perfect, except the strange overalls (they remind me of clothes that only small kids wear). But oh hell, what an atmosphere on the Copernicus!!
Tolpin, who I first didn’t like as Spock from the pictures, would be a perfect Nosferatu.
Thanks for an extremely exciting episode! The music and effects were perfect, and so was the acting. Both Kirks performing classic Shatner lines – loved that :D
Greetings from Germany
Brad,
Thank You for your reply. I am not trying to force you to watch anything, You absolutely have the right to feel or think anything you wish. I merely wanted to point out thru my post that your perception of what the characters are doing in that scene was wrong, and that the way you wored your intial post was hurtful to others. You May may not agree with homosexuality, but we both should agree that neither of us has the right to hurt another, even if it is with just words. Star Trek does indeed prtray a future where all people are treated equally, I only wish we as a people could do that here and now.
Drew,
Let me say, You seem to be a Great Father, I am not sure at what age a child is ready to see a Gay couple or Flesh eating worms!
May I applaud you for taking the time to screen it first, to see what is or is not good for their children to see. You are the parent, and only you can make that decision/ I wish all parents would take the time to do this, from everything from video games to tv!
James
I love this website because we get to hear from the creators, writers, artists, etc themselves. They tune into what we are saying whether it’s positive or negative. My thanks to the guys that make this site run! I’m sorry I haven’t had a chance to view the first part yet as I am at work. Happy Holidays to everyone!
For parents questioning the appropriateness of this episode for their children, first of all, I deeply respect that you care enough about your children to be concerned about what they watch. I hope you will hold depictions of gay relationships to the same standard you use for straight relationships — nothing more, nothing less. For children who are old enough to view this level of physical intimacy, but unfamiliar with gay relationships, it might help to explain that these characters are expressing affection in the context of a caring and committed relationship. (Peter Kirk, after explaining how he met his fiance, goes on to say, “there’s never been anyone else for either of us.”)
In other words, subtract the homophobia, and you’re left with pretty wholesome stuff. The overall depiction of the gay relationship, including the “humping” scene, may not be perfect — it could have been fine-tuned a little — but we need to remember that this is not a $100 million production. I applaud all those involved, and very much appreciate what they have accomplished. I also appreciate Mr. Cawley’s comments above. As a 50 year-old gay man who loved TOS, I need to say this: Role models are like oxygen. For gay people, the 60s were like the vacuum of space. This episode heals a little of that scar.
By the way, anyone willing or interested in learning more about the movement for gay rights should run out and see the film “Milk.” Gay people are not fighting for special privileges. As Milk explains, we are literally fighting for our lives.
Awesome attention to detail in the set design & effects are great, yet this show still seems gay somehow….I bet it’s all the gayness.
Forty years ago, my father refused to watch TOS because he was “disgusted” by one of the officers on the bridge who happened to be both a woman and black. I received countless “lectures” about why the crew “really” had her on their crew, and I suffered several family discussions where my father expressed his disappointment in Star Trek due to their inclusion of a character that he (and, I might add, many of his peers) found distasteful and inappropriate for their children to view. Thank goodness we have come so far, and alas, we still have far to go. In an age of politically correct viewpoints, gay people are the last minority whose inclusion creates such debate. Congratulations to James Cawley and Phass II for continuing the convictions of Mr. and Mrs. Roddenberry.
I cannot find this episode on the offical Phase II site. All they have for viewing are the previous episodes. Could someone help me with this?
#55 – Not wanting to expose a child to a confusing adult themed scene isn’t “homophobia”. That term is too readily used, Is there ANY context in which an adult free-thinking individual can disapprove of same sex relationships without being declared homophobic?
———
What I read into Kirk’s double-take when Peter told him about his intentions towards Alex wasn’t Kirk questioning his choice of a male in a disapproving way, but in a humorous “Peter doesn’t like girls? What’s wrong with girls? *I* like girls… a lot!”
Like we might react to someone who likes Mint Chip Ice Cream when we love Rocky Road…
At least, that’s what I got from the scene and made it funny for me.
People like Kirk can prefer hetero relationships without being “homophobic”
I don’t like Mint Chip Ice Cream but I am in no way afraid of it, or hate people who love it…
A very touching tribute for Majel from the Phase II crew.
Oh, and I loved the episode! Each show gets better and better!
Wait until Enemy: Starfleet comes out! It was wonderful to see it being filmed.
#37, #41 Re: Spock’s Brain.
Awright, stand at ease, you two. Spock’s Brain was written by Lee Cronin, AKA Gene L. Coon. Gene didn’t put his real name up there because he knew he was writing the ultimate Star Trek spoof. It has everything. Hot alien chicks in go-go boots, McCoy saving lives, Kirk writhing in pain (several times!), the Enterprise in hot pursuit, Spock talking McCoy through his own surgery, and gags at the end.
Keen-eyed Search for Spock fans might notice this as the first time Spock was walking around “out of his mind”.
Carry on.
Spock’s Brain made a great Wonder Years episode…
I haven’t watched the episode yet, but congrats to James Cawley and friends for getting an episode out this year. I am a big fan of the show, and I wish you guys nothing but continued success.
Thanks everyone for your comments on “Blood and Fire.” I finished writing my draft of the script almost exactly two years ago, and it feels like a lifetime has passed since. To finally see it “broadcast” and having a wide audience view it has been gratifying today.
A script certainly takes a long path from a writer’s keyboard to the audience’s computer, and while some things don’t always turn out the way they looked in my head, it’s great to see the story come to life.
Regarding the AIDS allegory aspect of the story, when I re-wrote David Gerrold’s TNG script for New Voyages/Phase II I updated a number of things. Among them was de-emphasizing the AIDS allegory. In this day and age, I don’t believe AIDS requires an allegory. It’s a disease who fury remains unquenched across the globe.
Instead, this updated version of “Blood and Fire” examines what we can, will and won’t do in the face of crisis, and confronts our notions of what a friend is and what truly makes someone a foe. It’s more about loyalty, love, and sacrifice. The more we understand our humanity, the better we can face the challenges before us in our time (AIDS included).
Certainly, in a time where many are willing to sacrifice human rights on the altar of their own prejudice, “Blood and Fire” aspires to provoke just the kind of challenges we’re seeing here.
Best regards,
Carlos Pedraza
#57 — Fantastic. Couldn’t have said it better myself. Star Trek is about imagining a future without prejudices.
@2: Could be http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soap_Opera_Rapid_Aging_Syndrome ?
@23: They weren’t really dry humping so much a pawing each other. The scene was little too much for me, though. I cringed a little. Oddly enough, if it were two attractive women (such as it was in the Season 5, Episode 5 of “House, M.D.” “Lucky Thirteen”) I’d find the scene really hot….
Anyhow, I enjoyed the episode. The acting is getting better, the costumes look great (they fit everyone properly), the specials are great, the sound is great. And what’s with Ensign Kirk’s very unregulation haircut?
to everyone who bitched in previous threads about the design if the USS Kelvin being blasphemous, you now know where they got the idea from…the USS Copernicus here… especially since Cawley is in the new film
Maybe since James has made a couple of reworked special editions before, He could next year make BAF the Special Straight Edition: A Night with a Woman. ?
I wish they’d tone down with the “Hey look! We have gay characters aren’t we so open-minded!!!
No one cares. IMO.
Is there really a need to shove the gay relationship down the throat of the viewers and try to preach to the viewers that such a relationship is ok?
while i’m all for tolerance, i’m very disturbed at the notion that anyone who doesnt approve of homosexuality, even if they do so kindly, logically, respectfully, towards gays etc…they get labeled ‘homophobic’… which is a symptom of certain misguided and bigoted factions of the gay rights movement who don’t want equality, but rather homosexuality replacing heterosexuality as the dominant sexual orientation on earth and perhaps even wanting gays to be viewed as superior to heteros…
for those hating genuinely here on gays i say this: ‘Blood and Fire’ shows that homosexuality isn’t just sex but actual love involved…i suspect this story was reworked in part as a tribute to george and brad…i’m not gay but i will not take the narrowminded approach in denying that homosexuals love each other as well either…
i think its funny that alot of trekkies are homophobes. Its nice to know in the future, you will all die off.
Once again it’s the acting that hurts these fan make episodes, real actors make it look easy, watching this we see it isn’t! I think the directing is also a weak in this episode. The last one was so good mainly because of the real actors in it. I will still check the rest of the episode.
That was a great review Anthony, you really nailed the episode.
I think this was the first new voyage that just works through and through. It doesn’t have to be looked at as a handicapped fan production. I had a feeling it would be as well, they were getting better and better.
#72, There’s no way you can kindly, logically, or respectfully oppress people. A bigot is a bigot even if they’re in denial.
Steve,
Racists hated the way Star Trek shoved ethnic diversity down their throats, too. Luckily, society has progressed at least so much as to acknowledge that having blacks and Asians amongst a crew didn’t threaten the white people aboard.
Seeking acceptance isn’t an agenda in a zero-sum game. It’s possible for homosexuals to be a part of the story without straight people and their relationships being harmed on iota.
Regards,
/carlos
Mr. Cawley –
FANTASTIC JOB!!!! Each episode gets better and better. Just hearing the TOS music sends chills down my spine!!! Your commitment and passion towards TOS is to be commended. I am 47 years old and remember watching the TOS with my dad back in the 60’s on NBC. You and your team have done an amazing job in capturing and for the most part maintaing the spirit of TOS. If Mr. Abrams and crew can accomplish half of that I think the new movie will be okay. I also commend you for maintaining (not so much canon) but the continuity of the TOS, which apparently we will not see in the movie. I also look forward to seeing more fedaration ships in your series — perhaps a TOS era Akira class?
Merry Christmas, Happy New Year and KEEP UP THE GREAT WORK!!!!
Just for the fun of it, have you thought about a prequel WNMHGB era episode featuring Gary Mitchell, Lee Kelso etc..????
New Voyages/Phase II is the one and only thing that has renewed my interest in Star Trek in recent years, so I’m anxious to see this (torrenting it now), but I’m also torn between watching Part I and waiting (who knows how long) for the conclusion, and just burning it to a disc, setting it aside, and waiting patiently for the whole thing :)
once again I implore you all to move on from the whole gay thing. It is just one element of the episode and yet it seems like it is ‘everything’ when it is not. And this is not the place to debate gay issues and people’s lifestyles, no matter how polite you think you are being
I haven’t seen this one yet but I’m hoping Kirk and Freeman in that one scene are have a discussion regarding their girl friends. Otherwise…
Star Trek has always taught acceptance and open mindedness…are you sure that some of you aren’t actually Star Wars fans?
God I’m glad I’m Canadian…here, all of our citizens are trully equal.
Peace and long life.
#79 – I agree completely.
If this were a scene that included Uhura, Troi, 7 of 9 or T’Pol we wouldn’t be hearing any complaints because all of these basement-dwelling bachelors wouldn’t have their zippers up yet in order to respond.
To all who have any problem with this ep. I have been involved with New Voyages/Phase 2 since “Come What May”. I started as a fan then became part of the production crew for WEAT and then BAF. I took my then 15 year old son to the filming of BAF and he was the personal assistant for Bobby Rice who played Peter Kirk. My son ( Joey Mack) was proud and excited to be a part of this. He watched all scenes being filmed and was on set for a week. Did i think he saw anything wrong? No. Did he see anything wrong? No. He was adopted by David Gerrold for a week. He learned what it is like to work HARD! And be a part of a great family. In TOS we saw Kirk with a great many women….and my mother would cringe when I watched it as a child. She felt that I was seeing something I should not see at my age. Times change……things change. I do not look at this any different than two people that are in love. Is it ok for Kirk to bed an alien as oppossed to peter Kirk Bedding another man? Look in your Mirror my friends. You claim to be the high and mighty “Star Trek Fans”. Do you stand against love? Would you have the guts to stand against George and tell him he is wrong with the choice he has made in his life? Tell me? Are you the same people who stand against people who have black on one side and white on the other?
The review sez: “[...] the effects are outstanding and in line with work you see from the ‘Remastered’ Star Trek [...]”
Or just a _tiny_ bit better, depending on how you feel about planets looking mod and groovy in their far-out go-go colors. Phase II doesn’t seem eager to turn its back on this (IMO) very important Trek tradition, and so I say it’s Phase II for the win!
Nice SFX in this segment. Kudos !
thanks Anthony. As a gay Trek fan, pretty upsetting to read all this here — especially the bizarre complaint that one should have the right to disapprove of homosexuality without being labeled a homophobe. And it does mean a lot to gay fans (and the many gay actors, writers, crew etc. who’ve all contributed to Star Trek) to finally see just two characters ‘like’ us.
By the way, the cringing when seeing “gay” romance forced on you is how many of us could feel when “forced” to watch all the straight racy scenes in 99.95% of entertainment. Believe me, you get used to it.
idic, baby.
Carlos and James (and David, if he’s lurking):
First of all, Phase II continues to outdo itself in terms of capturing the aesthetic of TOS, and bringing it into 2008. The story had me at the edge of my seat.
The “love scene” distracts a little, but once the story kicks in, it’s of no importance. The fact that Peter and Alex are betrothed is significant just as it was in “Balance of Terror,” when those officers were ready to be married, only to meet a tragic end.
Also, your ensemble is acting better! And your new Spock seems to get it.
My only question is, what happened to the impassioned blurb from Mr. Gerrold about those who have died from AIDS due to mass ignorance? It was a dedication in the initial trailer, and I missed it here. It was supposed to be the point of the ep. Not tolerance.
HIV/AIDS is still rampant on our planet, and medications exist to keep those who are infected, and their kids, alive.
But Africa, Eastern Europe and countries of the former Soviet Union, to name a few places, due to lack of money, focus and education, will continue to see this disease ravage their populations. In 2009, AIDS is no longer about homosexuality in developed countries. It’s about free medicine, education/condoms, and adequate management of those who use needle-borne narcotics.
i don’t suppose Part 2 will address all of this allegorically. If it does, call me surprised.
BTW, Peter and Stonn need to get regulation haircuts, STAT.
Those blood worms remind me of the movie Slither, and it equally gave me the heebee-jeebees. Thanks for that!
Is it me, or do all of NV/P2 episodes seem so much more dramatic and suspenseful than any TOS episode I’ve ever watched?
From the SFX to keeping the overall look and feel of a TOS episode, we’re really getting more than we bargained for. Thanks so much, Cawley, Pedraza, and crew. It’s 1:30 in the morning and while I’m a bit bleary-eyed, I had to watch the whole thing and now I’m so looking forward to Part II.
The FX were pretty good. All else, yawn, save for the Bloodworm attack. If it were me getting eaten by them, I’d be yelling every obscenity.
At 48, I’ve watched thousands of movies and thousands of hours of TV shows, but that doesn’t qualify me to either direct or act or write scripts.
Re: #87 –
AJ, Phase II’s version of “Blood and Fire” is an adaptation of David’s original TNG script. It’s an adaptation that is twice as long as the original and that was written for an audience of the 21st Century, where the tragedy of AIDS isn’t about awareness so much as it is about opening our minds to recognize that our enemies aren’t always The Other. As Pogo put it so well, “We have met the enemy and he is us.”
In my rewrite, it became clear to me that an allegory tied to current events in the 1980s wouldn’t serve as well as a story that parallels today’s challenges about prejudice, terrorism and a paranoid state willing to sacrifice freedom for security.
Regards,
/carlos
Definitely the best episode yet, congrats to Mr. Cawley and the rest of the crew. The only problem I had with the romance scene was that, like Anthony said, the actors seemed a bit uncomfortable. Also, why has no one yet mentioned that Phil Koegen was in this episode?! I didn’t even know he was trekkie. Anyways, great job, I’m looking forward to part 2!
“25. James Cawley – December 20, 2008
First off, they are not “Dry Humping” if that is what you see, then you must be doing something wrong in your own bedroom. I do not need or want your respect. I believe in complete EQUALITY for people regardless of who they sleep with , what God they believe in, or what color they are, or anything else. THAT is the future Gene Roddenberry envisioned, and that is the one I want to be a part of. If I upset you with the content of this episode and I even for a moment made you think, I did my job.
James Cawley”
Mr. Cawley,
I am a fan of TOS as well as your shows, I have seen all of them, and they are good (though, you are to shatnerish sometimes!LOL!) Anyway, what made TOS work is that the ENTIRE family could watch it, I dont know one episode where the entire family could not watch the show from 0-100. And though there is the future that Roddenberry envisioned, I do not think that he envisioned blatant sexuality in any form, and people, almost bragging about their sexuality, either way. I think he envisioned everyone being equal, whether, white, black, gay ,straight, etc. and everyone realising this, did not have to talk about it in the 23rd or 24th century . But, this blatent statement of homosexuality is going a little to far, you dont need to have a big sexual scene, you could have had a scene like the scene in the episode with the Scholosians where you see Kirk make out with the woman, then cuts to commercial, then comes back with Kirk sitting on the bed pulling up his boots. That gave us the idea w/o being all blatant and grotesque with some long (pardon the pun! LOL!) scene! I think it is unnecessary, and it would have been more creative to do it the other way. I also think that you could have answered that guy in a little more logical/cool fashion, than what you said in your first sentence above. And as for all the gay people who think that this is some kind of a liberation or a great thing, it isnt, it is the collapse of family values, which everyone gay and straight hold, and you will not understand that until you have a family. (I would be saying these same things if it was a straight liason)
“81. Bradley1701 – December 20, 2008
Star Trek has always taught acceptance and open mindedness…are you sure that some of you aren’t actually Star Wars fans?
God I’m glad I’m Canadian…here, all of our citizens are trully equal.
Peace and long life.”
Equal in Canada! LOL! Are you equal when you wait in line for needed medical treatment? Or do you view French Canadians as Equal with the British Canadians or vice Versa? NO! I have been there, and your citizens are not equal in any way shape or form! You stuck up Canadians still suffer from what the rest of the world suffers, intolerance, so, get off your high horse.
This is the first time I’ve watched NV/PII and I was really very impressed! I found the scene in the bedroom between Kirk and his boyfriend very touching (I especially liked the music in certain parts). I would also be concerned about showing this episode to young children because the bloodworms are pretty scary.
The tribute to Majel brought a tear to my eye… I felt unexpectedly emotional when I read about her death and I think dedicating this episode to her was just the perfect touch. I didn’t know her personally, but I think she would be very happy and proud knowing that finally Trek had gone beyond the “final frontier” and included the last minority.
Btw… if women are allowed to have long hair, why not the men? What happened to equality? :P
On a completely different note: the acting. . .
Ben Toplin – a much better Spock than I thought he was
going to be, kudos! And of course the rest of the cast.
ALL of you have improved and improved. Obviously more
comfortable in your roles. Keep up the good work and
keep up the dream.
AnotherQ
Anthony, it is very difficult to steer clear of the gay issue because of the damage it does to this episode. It is a personal statement by David Gerrold that not only alienates many viewers but seriously detracts from the story being told (by your own words, in fact). Look no further than the complaints about part one on this board. This angle was not only unnecessary but a hindrance. One does not have to have a pro or con stance on this matter to perceive how badly it mars this episode.
And Mr. Cawley, I have to point out Kirk’s speech from “Who Mourns For Adonis” where he told the supposed Olympian Apollo that, “Mankind has no use for gods. We find the one quite sufficient.” And the one who was worshipped by the men who founded this country made His view of homosexuality quite clear in the Scriptures when he referred to it as an abomination. I agree with the concept of equality but not is acceptance of all behaviors.
By looking at what has happened thi this country in the last 50 years, we must realize the fact that Star Trek’s future will never be ours as long as we embrace those things which the Bible warns against. We as a society are going the wrong way. The more we accept and even praise unGodly things, the more our hope for such a future world slips away.
@93:
“81. Bradley1701 – December 20, 2008
…
God I’m glad I’m Canadian…here, all of our citizens are trully equal.”
I think he meant equal under the law. Of course every country has their bigots; the US just doesn’t offer protection from them under the law. Hopefully that will change soon enough.
And in my opinion it’s the US that doesn’t want to get off it’s high horse. For some reason they think they are the moral authority of the West just because they’re a “global superpower”…
96
There is a difference between discussing the episode and discussion ‘the lifestyle’
I don not want any more people going into the morality, rightness, wrongness, agendas, etc of any group of people. This is not the place for that and I am getting tired of saying it. I do not want to lock this thread.
#92: Have you ever counted the number of times Kirk had some relationship with a woman IN TOS? Or noticed the episode where they alluded to him having sex with a certain yeoman (and he’s shirtless and sweaty when she leaves)? Or the same intimacy alluded to between him and the captain’s woman in Mirror, Mirror?
I see the scene in the same light – just updated to 21st century TV standards. It’s, if anything, less racy than many straight love scenes I have seen on primetime TV or in rated PG movies.
90: Carlos:
Well, if that’s the revised message, then, bring it on.
And get those boys a haircut! Great job, and Kudos, as usual, to the team.
Looking forward to watching the episode. Thanks for all you do, James and co., to keep the spirit and flavor of the original show alive.
96: Captain Dunsel:
The statement in “Who Mourns for Adonais” may or may not refer to the Christian God. In “Bread and Circuses” McCoy says “we represent many beliefs!” So tracking TOS scripts for adherence to the Bible is a lost cause. In fact, that episode seems to refer to Chrisitanity.
From what I know, GR was Jewish with secular humanist beliefs. Hence, Star Trek has been welcome to many potential beliefs. The Bajorans believed in the prophets and those pesky orbs. They weren’t in the Bible either.
I believe GR’s parents were Baptist.
#96 –
I’ll try keep this from veering too far off from what Anthony has asked. I can understand if your moral compass doesn’t allow you to steer through the waters of reality in which gay people are part of the same world you inhabit. I just question how objective you can be about whether the Peter Kirk storyline “mars” the episode. It is an intrinsic part of the episode David and I wrote. How can it “mar” something with which it is inextricably linked?
I think it’s disingenuous to claim that it interferes with the story when you’ve made it quite clear that there is no way in your belief system that *any* storyline featuring gay characters would “get in the way” of the story. I’m not gonna try to convince you you’re wrong in your beliefs, but I think it’s fair to ask that you simply own them. Don’t say “the gay thing gets in the way of the story,” when you really mean “I can get accept any Star Trek story as legitimate if it features gay characters.”
If you’re going to espouse those beliefs, at least stand up for them in black and white; don’t try to dress it up as objective criticism.
Regards,
/carlos
It seems curious to me that some would cry, “Won’t somebody please think of the children?” in regards to what would be considered a very tame sex scene were it a male and a female, yet no one has commented on the appropriateness of exposing the kids to a scene of a man being eaten alive by ravenous worms.
The worm scene shocked me a bit, but I bought into it and it certainly established the terror and fear in the episode. But that scene would be what would give me pause in showing it to kids. You can critique the love scene on the direction, the acting, the pacing, whatever, but come on, thousands and thousands of straight love scenes have shown far more in the 50 plus years of television, not to mention movies.
I just find it strange that some are offended by acts of love and not acts of violence.
As the years have gone by, Star Trek continues to push the envelope with regards to social equality. TNG gave us the old bald captain, DS9 the black captain, Voyager the woman captain, and now this trend has reached its logical conclusion with New Voyages – gay sex!
How truly brave and progressive of all parties involved to show gay man-on-man love. Yeah, space opera adventure is ok, speculative science fiction elements are ok too, but Star Trek has always been about progressive social issues….more and more so as the decades have gone by, and with this episode we can unreservedly declare that Star Trek is GAY!
Isn’t is wonderful? Sure, the hamfisted, in-your-face politically correct ethnic diversity of Voyager was condescending, and it was kind of gay, but man….that weren’t the real gay sauce. THIS episode of New Voyages has crystallized and solidified the the ever-increasing preachiness of Star Trek into pure, undiluted, unambiguous GAY SAUCE.
Good job everyone!
One wonders though…now that Star Trek is Officially And Fully Gay, where can it go from here?
What kind of preachy PC stunt is left?
anthony i understand your hatred of the homosexuality topic and i want you to know my earlier comment about it was merely to help tame the raging tides created by others’ less than tolerant comments…
anyways if you look closely everyone aside from the copernicus having 2 nacelles instead of one, and the coordinating nacelle struts, the copernicus’s design is very similar to the kelvin’s in the new movie..no doubt cawley threw in some input from phase II :D
and is it my imagination or does the new phaser rifle look a lot like the MACO rifle from ST: Enterprise?
they should mix in some section 31 and some ST: Enterprise species…Denobulans, Suliban, Xyrilllians, Axanar, Xindi, etc…or at least mention them in here…in future stories…
JAMES CAWLEY: speaking of ‘what God they believe in’ could you please venture into new ground in future stories and show various religions being practiced on The Enterprise? just to show there IS human religion in the 23rd Century, ya know…i mean its never a good thing when such things override the plotline of a given story, but it would be nice to integrate religion intermittently in much the same way as ‘movie night’ was done on ST: Enterprise…:)
This story has many, many very nice moments which are reminiscent of Star Trek (1966-69). Mr. Cawley has the advantage of using the third season music to work with as well as previous seasons. The musical cues are used most effectively in combination with the story as it unfolds.
The visualizations are characteristic of what might have been done in a fourth season. The bit with the Admiral on the viewscreen was enjoyable, being so much like what was done in the original shows.
The corridor sets look even more accurate than before. There were great character moments with the central players that felt just right.
The two extra guest characters, not so much. Too many, “Let That Be Your Last Battlefield” moments in this one. The costumes for each character were quite awful in their ‘future adolescent’ boy type style.
And really, just because the costume designer for Phase II designed a short sleeve shirt for Kirk, it didn’t have to be used. That stuff was preproduction for Phase II. Some of it never would or should have seen the light of day. The Captain really doesn’t look all that great wearing it, he looks like he should be working in sickbay during the summer. And the haircuts… I can see what they are going for, in context to the show being a transition to a production done in the 70’s, but it really doesn’t work. Xon looks like he just came back from a road trip with Dr. Sevrin’s space hippy cult.
The phaser rifle looks completely out of place in this show. I’m sure the idea is that it’s something new, depicting he evolution of the Starfleet hand weapons, but it just looks silly with all its transitional details gleaned from the original props. Adding the lights doesn’t help. It isn’t an interesting prop. I contend that a Star Trek production in keeping to the original style should use the original rifle, because it fits into the design motif of the original show. When you step out of that in pursuit of an advance for the production, to create something new, you have to be careful and covertly creative. Otherwise the details become something else and not add believability to a true fourth season. Besides, a pistol phaser can vaporize a human and barely mess up the deck. What more do you need in the close confines of a ship, anyway?
Love the fact that the episode opens using the NBC logo to introduce the show, that’s something the DVD’s could use, it really sets the mood. But, you had to be there, I guess…
I enjoyed it overall, but there were scenes I could do without because of my many beliefs. I have to think that the elimination of many of these moments wouldn’t have hurt the story, either. I’ll look forward to seeing the resolution of the episode in the second part.
I’m a Trekkie to the death but I just can’t get into these fan-made films.
#102…heres a clue as to the real religious/political structure of the federation…in Star Trek: Voyager episode ‘Dark Frontier’, Tom Paris referred to the New World Economy…
and look at the Copernicus above in the pic of it and the Enterprise…look at the design of the nacelle struts with the drive section and the deflector above the saucer with the struts continuing under the saucer in a widening arc…looks a lot like a Masonic Pyramid with the deflector serving as the all-seeing eye, even when you can clearly see said design actually detracts from the stability of the ship in combat (all an enemy would have to do is sever the struts above the saucer with torpedo fire to sever the drive section from the ship)…hmmmmm….
Re: #106 –
Didn’t you know that GAY SAUCE is the Official Condiment of the Gay Agenda™? It’s all part of an insidious plot to portray people in mainstream media of types that actually exist in real life.
I’m totally down with where you’re going here, though. I believe the world is a better place when we only offer stories and characters completely in line with your beliefs of who are the “right” people to depict. If we can simply control the way people should think about the world by promulgating only One Approved (and Naturally Heterosexual) Worldview™ then we could dispense with all the trouble caused by those rabblerousers who dare to look different, act different, and believe differently than you do. What a lovely world we’d have indeed.
Cheers,
/carlos
My personal revulsion aside, I think this was a pretty good episode. Probably their 2nd best after “World Enough and Time”.
If the homosexuality doesn’t serve the plot, then it’s gratuitously irritating to a significant portion of the audience. Whether the writer likes that or not is irrelevant. I guess a benefit of being a non-commercial project is that they can afford to alienate viewers over something irrelevant to the story they are trying to tell. Gratuitous preaching tends to irritate people, no matter what the subject of the preaching. Clearly, this is just something Gerrold has been trying to push at people since the 80’s, and it shows.
Before they go whole-hog into the Phase II stuff, I hope they reconsider some of the misguided ’70’s ideas before they “canonize” them. I don’t think Kirk needs another style of casual tunic. Those romper-playsuit costumes with the shoulder straps look ridiculous. The Phaser rifles are a throwback to The Cage and were rightly abandoned.
I didn’t think I’d like Ben Tolpin as Spock, but his acting grew on me. Very droll. But that is absolutely the worst Spock wig ever. It looks like an Adam Rich or Mary Lou Retton bowl cut. For God’s sake give Spock his distinctly-angled bangs!
Lastly, Kirk came off badly. He said he had good reasons for excluding Peter from the mission. Why didn’t he tell Peter what they were, instead of changing his mind, proving he acted arbitrarily to begin with? When his command crew refused his orders, he was proud? Eventually SOMEONE in the crew will assume command of the ship. He’s proud that they are passing their responsibility on to someone with less qualifications?
Anyway, good cliffhanger though. Will definitely watch part 2.
“I don not want any more people going into the morality, rightness, wrongness, agendas, etc of any group of people. This is not the place for that and I am getting tired of saying it. I do not want to lock this thread.”
But it’s in the episode so it will be discussed. Having it there, approving of it and then saying “Let’s not discuss it” is already making a statement saying, “It’s acceptable and you’re going to like it.”
James Cawley -
What you’re doing is pretty great, even though it isn’t professional enough for my tastes. It is, however, too well done to be termed just a fan film. You skirt the area between the two.
Anthony, the gay issue is controversial, and it’s just plain silly and unrealistic not to expect debate over it. I personally wish it weren’t controversial, but that isn’t the world we live in now, is it?
I’m saddened by the intolerance and ignorance demonstrated by many of the fans here, and it is those people who continually drive me away from this site. And just so you all know, I’m a straight man with gay friends who finds gay male scenes in movies to be quite uncomfortable. That is a prejudice and conditioning within myself that I realize I must overcome. And so I will.
There was a time in movies where a black man and woman could not be shown romantically. I think we all can recognize this as bigotry and we’ve gone beyond that. Obviously we still have a ways to go.
Wishing you all enlightenment,
Me
Perhaps there will be a non gay edit?
I have been a STNV fan for a couple of years now, and have greatly enjoyed all of the episodes, but I feel Blood and Fire part 1 was ‘off kilter’.
The sound was not as good as WEaT with voices seemingly at whispers or cracking sometimes. Charles Root (one of my favorites) just didn’t seem right this time around, and John Kelley was like Mr. Angry Cranky Guy. I know McCoy has his moments, but dang, he was slamming his medical staff like crazy in this episode. James Cawley, for me anyway, may as well *be* James Kirk, but he got a little too ‘Shatner’ when he asked Spock if he was the only one who didn’t know about Peter Kirk’s relationship. James seemed like he was going through something personally or was really tired…which was distressing for me because I enjoy his work. Ben Tolpin just didn’t do it for me…I guess I’m just used to Jeff Quinn and Ben’s portrayal of Spock was a little whiny at times. I’m sure Ben is a fine actor, but I just don’t think he’s a good fit for Spock. It’s a moot point as Brandon Stacy will be taking over anyway. Overall, the teaser and the remainder of Part 1 seemed incongruous and almost anticlimactic. You felt like at least some of the rest of the episode would be Kirk and Kargh trading barbs and weapons fire, but not so. We’ll have to see how Part 2 pans out.
Kim Stinger does a great Uhura and is a knock-out to boot. Julienne Irons was okay, but Kim seems more comfortable in the role. Andy Bray kicks tail, as usual. He can throw that humor out there and perpetuates the ‘Russian is better’ thread. The special effects (except for the nearly silly ‘blood-worm waterfall’) and CGI stuff were absolutely wonderful. The external shots of the Enterprise and the research vessel were very well done.
WHY I HAD TO EDIT MY COPY
I have a four-year-old daughter that I watch all my Trek with, including NV/P2. We can watch all of the previous New Voyages / Phase II episodes without a problem, but there is NO way in heck I could allow her to see this one unedited. I’m sorry James, but I differ on your view of ‘if we offended you and made you think, we did our job’. I am not homophobic, and I believe that every person makes their own choices in how they live their lives, but to me and my household, such ‘in your face’ gay action is just too over the top. I have gay friends and have adopted a ‘live and let live’ attitude about them, but they respect me and my family enough not to sit there and make out in front of us.
I had to edit a fair portion of this episode so it would be okay for my girl to watch, which included some rough language too. Shoot, I had to edit it just so *I* could comfortably watch it!
I really think this episode overextended itself in trying to send its message about gay relationships being okay in Star Trek’s future vision. Ramming very uncomfortable and inappropriate images down my throat is not going to make me get all cerebral and think about the underlying message, it’s just going to make me fire up iMovie and edit those scenes out.
James, if you read this, I truly appreciate and admire you and all of the Phase II family’s work. I think you’ve taken your love of Star Trek and brought it to life for everyone to enjoy, but if future episodes venture into the same ‘over the top’ territory that Blood and Fire did, my enjoyment, and my four-year-old’s enjoyment will be diminished if not eliminated. If we have to stop watching Phase II, so be it, but I hope that doesn’t happen…we both love you guys way too much.
117. Two Year STP2 Fan
Would you have edited the scenes if they were between a man and a woman? Truthfully.
There was nothing between the two men that I wouldn’t have shown a young child, as there is nothing there that I couldn’t have answered if they had questions about it. Children are far more open to learning things than we ‘learned’ adults are.
Ramming inappropriate images down your throat? Have you watched the news lately? Violence galore, but yet a moment of sensitivity between two caring individuals is offencive? Meh.
@118 “Would you have edited the scenes if they were between a man and a woman? Truthfully.”
If it was a man and woman and it was too over the top, yeah, I would have probably edited it too. But I will be honest and say that viewing a man and woman in similar situations onscreen would be far more tolerable, to me, than two men. That’s who I am, those are my beliefs, and I’m cool with feeling that way.
Again, I’m not homophobic, but my personal beliefs are such that I am not ready to comfortably watch, or allow my children to watch those scenes. Don’t I have just as much right to decide what is appropriate or not? I’m not trying to censor anyone else here, nor am I trying to dissuade anyone here from watching this or any similar subject matter. As the leader of my family, this is what I feel is best. You may feel different, and that’s fine with me.
I don’t personally watch TV or news online because there is just too much crazy nonsense. Why fill myself up with all that negativity and harshness when the world around me provides plenty of that already? When I watch something like Phase II, I want to escape from the harshness of this world and be entertained. To me, watching two men sharing a ‘moment of sensitivity’ is not entertainment…to me it’s downright uncomfortable. I’m not here for ‘uncomfortable’, I’m here for entertainment and to leave ‘uncomfortable’ outside my home.
#12 – perhaps in part 2 it turns out that gay blood kills those worms, and Alex will sacrifice himself to be made into vaccine for the rest of the crew. :D
Well, I’d have no problem showing it to my kids. It’s no worse than anything they can see in TV these days. I’m no friend of “gay worship” that seems to penetrate the media these days, but well, gays are here to stay (at least until WW III, I suppose) and there’s no point hiding them from our kids.
#119 –
I can truly respect your desire to monitor what you think your 4-year-old child should watch. Honestly, I do.
But I must also be honest and tell you that we do not produce this show for 4-year-olds. I wouldn’t want to. Not because I don’t like children, but because I want to produce shows for adults, with themes that make people question their assumptions. I can’t do that by making them “feel comfortable.” If that’s the kind of entertainment you want, you’re entitled to it, but I don’t think that’s Star Trek.
One last thing: Implicit in the “I must protect my children” messages I’ve sometimes read about “Blood and Fire” is the notion that somehow watching two men in a loving relationship (let’s set aside the details of the depiction of that, because that can be a matter of simple taste) somehow harms these children. If you’re afraid your children will turn gay because they see Bobby Rice and Evan Fowler kiss on the Internet, that’s now how being homosexual works.
But if you send the message to your children that there’s something “not right” about gay relationships, what other messages of intolerance are you transmitting along with that? I’ve never found a prejudiced person who was intolerant of only one type of person. When you teach a child, or set an example to them that demonstrates your own intolerance, you’re not just disagreeing with something, you are making them intolerant, too. Is that the kind of child you want to send into the world? It’s from such fertile that the seeds of hatred find purchase.
Regards,
/carlos
And well, yes, I don’t understand how Peter Kirk grew so old. This is not 15 years old boy. He’s 11 at best.
http://memory-alpha.org/de/wiki/Bild:Peter_Kirk%2C_deleted_scene.jpg
Seems he was assimilated by gay propaganda: “Look, Kirk’s nephew is gay! It’s completely normal to be gay. Resistance is futile.” :P
#122 –
Now you know why the scene was deleted ;-)
TV has a long tradition of instant aging of child characters. We merely subscribed to it.
Also, if propaganda were as powerful as you accuse, there would be no homosexuals. Take a critical look at the heterosexual propaganda that abounds in our culture; *you* take it for granted and that’s why it’s so powerful. Anti-gay propaganda is so powerful, no kid tormented for even appearing to be gay would choose it as a “lifestyle.” So Peter Kirk’s in the clear, Paul.
Regards,
/carlos
#123 – I used the “propaganda” half-jokingly. Appearance of Peter Kirk seems way too convenient. The story makes him way older than he is supposed to be, just in order to show there is a gay in Kirk’s family.
Would the story make less sense if it was love between two common ensigns? Isn’t it just an attempt to make the character (and thus, subconsciously, gays as a whole) more important by making him Kirk’s nephew?
So yes, it reminds me of ways of propaganda: slight bending of reality here, adding a few words here, removing a few words there in order to make some idea more prominent than other. But well, it’s completely legitimate, and it’s your movie. :-)
And it’s a damn good movie, which is what matters.
I thought it was very good. They are getting better and better at this all the time. If I had one complaint it would be Spock was too touchy. A couple of time he touched people, which seemed out of character for Spock.
@12 Mark Anton
“I know that anyone can get AIDS, but it’s typically transmitted through gay sex or needles.”
You have just exposed yourself as someone who doesn’t have much clue. I cannot believe that no one has commented on this.
Homosexuals were over-represented in the beginning of the AIDS-epidemic since they had sex with more partners and mostly unprotected (for the obvious the reason – no risk of making the receiver pregnant). This is the only reason.
I’m ashamed to see all the bigotry on this thread. The way all of these posters are trying to hide their prejudice is really… interesting.
It’s the same thing as “Well… I’m no racist but…”.
A lot of posters have already made really great counter-points about this so there’s not much more to add.
Regarding that particular scene itself, I agree with Anthony’s comment. I definitely felt too long and a bit forced. I certainly don’t think it should have been cut OUT, just cut DOWN.
The episode as a whole, for a free-to-watch fan-made production – amazing! I’m really looking forward to part II too! A big thank you for all the work you put down, just so we can watch it. It’s nothing but admirable (being a filmmaker myself, I know how much work this is).
#126 – I think you’re overreacting by likening this to racism. Skin color is visible, gayness is hidden. Nobody can discriminate you for gayness if you keep it in your bedroom. Colored people can’t leave their skin in their bedroom, tho’.
I believe colored people have every right to feel insulted for being likened to gays. It’s not like gays -have- to show off their deviation, unlike colored, who have no choice at all.
Guys/Gals
You all need to remember you have seen half an episode and you are in the character development section of the story
That scene is no more than a KISS between 2 men anything else is YOUR IMAGINATION reading in what you think happens
and it is no more RACY than any daytine Soap Opera
More Importantly it has established these people love each other and want to be married….This is VERY IMPORTANT to the story
also Peter Kirk is a character that we have decided to bring to life for the purpose of enhancing the original ensemble of KIrk Spock Mccoy
There is nothing known about him that is canon with the exeption of
” Operation Anniahlate”
Not 1 Frame of PHASE II was shot in the 70’s “There is no canon”
to violate
Canon for Phase II is as we write it…
We are taking the series forward and establishing characters that you will know in the future..You will also know why they are the way they are and what scars make them the people they turn out to be…
If you don’t CARE about a charater than why watch?
77 Sam Belil to James Cawley: “Just for the fun of it, have you thought about a prequel WNMHGB era episode featuring Gary Mitchell, Lee Kelso etc..????”
I would love to watch such an episode, too. Doesn’t quite fit into the Phase II setting, though.
A lot of people are making a big deal about the two guys making out in this film. Um…. sorry… but have you guys seen the new TREK MOVIE TRAILER? We have young Kirk, in his underwear, jumping on top of and making out with a green orion woman! Sex has always been part of Trek, and if you say otherwise, you are just kidding yourselves.
Really impressed with this episode. The new ship designs look great!
Well done James and company!
Each episode of NV/Phase II is better than the last. Below are my thoughts on what I have seen so far.
1) I admit the love scene between Peter Kirk and Alex Freeman made me squirm. Not my cup of tea but at least it was not beaten to death. I disagree with those saying it was over the top but I do agree it could have been tightened up a bit.
2) McCoy seemed angrier than usual in the beginning. Did I miss something?
3) Why was the Enterprise fighting the Klingons in the beginning? Kirk mentions making a big mistake but I am not clear what that meant. As it stands the battle just seems like a plot contrivance to reduce the functionality of the Enterprise rendering it unable to simply pull the USS Copernicus out of its death spiral.
4) I loved Ben Tolpin as Spock! He did an excellent job capturing Spock logical, no nonsense approach. Well done sir!
5) I liked how ships felt more “functional” then how they were typically treated in TOS. Access panel leading into the bridge, workstations with graphical information, a few more “doo-dads” on the walls, it all helped to make the sets a more believable without breaking from the original designs.
6) External scenes were fantastic! Nuff said!
7) Uhuru gets some serious respect in this episode and I was happy to see it!
8) Every cast member has improved in their roles but Mr. Stinger’s portrayal of Chekov stood out for me and was top notch…
9) James, it took me some time to get used to it but I am enjoying your portrayal of Kirk more with each passing episode.
Looking forward to the next part!
Thinking about it, there’s one plot issue I don’t quite get. The Copernicus is already on its way into the star, as Scotty has pointed out. So it seems very harsh of Starfleet Command to order the Code 9 and make Kirk kill his crewmembers and friends. The explanation was that Starfleet needs visual confirmation of the Copernicus’ destruction, but this explanation seems a bit weak to me. Wouldn’t a sensor record of the Copernicus’ destruction in the star suffice?
I guess the best way to interpret this is that Regulan Bloodworms are so extremely hazardous that the quarantine regulations are absolutely severe and allow for nothing else than immediate destruction of an infected vessel, no exceptions.
Another issue. Wouldn’t it be very much in Spock’s nature to blow up the Copernicus himself in order to relieve Kirk from having to kill his friends?
134 The story is not over yet….HAve you noticed what happens to the blood worms when hit by phaser fire ?
Fanmate or not, it’s truly star trek !
Oh heck, I meant to say it was Mr. Bray’s performance as Chekov that I liked. Sorry! Still getting comfortable with the names of the actors!
I couldn’t be happier that the love scene made people uncomfortable–it’s a step in the right direction. It’s very easy to vote away the rights of people you never see. Sometimes people need to be reminded that a gay couple isn’t so different from a straight one.
I wonder how many people were made uncomfortable by Kirk and Uhura kissing 30 years ago…
Haven’t read the review yet, haven’t seen the episode yet, but I just want to say I’m really glad streaming isn’t mandatory this time.
136 Falvoant: … I’m looking forward to part 2, for sure.
It’s not the introduction of gay characters (big deal) that bothered me….but the scene went on a bit longer than needing to establish the fact. but that’s just me
Wow, what an interesting, and somewhat disconcerting, thread. As a big Bruce Springsteen fan, it reminds me of how a portion of fans reacted when Bruce ‘came out’ openly for John Kerry four years ago and worked with MoveOn.org to get people to register to vote (democrat.) A lot of fans were flabbergasted that Bruce held such ‘leftist’ political views and could not believe he was not, like they, more conservative or even an actual Republican.
To which many OTHER fans responded “WHOSE MUSIC have you been listening to all this time? WHOSE lyrics have you (evidently not) been reading”
They may not have presented it too smoothly all the time (’one god is enough,’ ‘not the sun in the sky, but the son of God,’ etc) but Star Trek has ALWAYS been about the philosophy of IDIC.
There are many things many people are uncomfortable with; I have a roomate whose religious beliefs are the diametric opposite of mine – we accept each other as inhabitants of the same universe who each have something to offer to it. And we avoid and ignore any thoughts of who is right and who is wrong in their opinion; we each exist in this universe and will continue to.
While I can understand a parent’s concern about exposing their child to more ‘adult’ subject matter, to base that concern with the gender(s) of the adults is a form of prejudice. We can accept human/android, human/evil Scottish ghost, human/half-Betazoid, half-Betazoid/Klingon, but not human/same-gender human? That’s just… silly.
But, back to ‘Trek – thank you, Cawley, Gerrold, et al, for offering a bit of counterbalance to the years of gratuitous female ‘eye candy’ from Kirk’s women to Seven of Nine in her (OH PUH-LEEZE!) ‘uniform’ and T’Pol in her skivvies in every other episode of Enterprise. As a straight woman, that crap’s annoyed me since forever (but not to a ridiculous extreme.) It’s nice to see adult sexuality in Star Trek showing more diversity and reflecting the IDIC concept and for once not pandering to the straight male part of the fanbase.
Another point: the two characters in B&F actually LOVE each other. Exactly how many of those quote/unquote ‘normal’ sexual relationships throughout Star Trek had THAT aspect?
I can’t wait to actually see the ep – unfortunately, my system & internet speed won’t allow for streaming.
Sorry Anthony if I haven’t honored your request; I hope I made my opinions Trek enough to not incur your annoyance. (no sarcasm intended, though it might read that way.)
@141 NoRez:
Well said!
Gene Roddenberry wanted his episodes to invite discussion and debate, and challenge us to think, and aspire to be better people, as well as entertain. I absolutely LOVE all the discussion. The episode has indeed done it’s job, and I can’t help but think that somewhere Mr. Roddenberry is sitting back with a smile on his face because this discussion is taking place!
Best Wishes and Happy Holiday’s to all,
James Cawley
It would be interesting to compare this discussion and those who are against the gay scene of this episode to the discussion and those who were against the first inter-ratial kiss on tv by Capt. Kirk and Lt. Uhura. Today, that is heralded and celebrated…maybe we just have to wait 40 more years for this scene to be truly appreciated for what it is and that is love between two individuals.
Regarding all the people who wouldn’t show this to their child -
I’m amazed that people think children don’t already know about gay people.
I knew about gay people when I was a child. Nobody “taught” me about gay people. At 5 I asked my mom if our family friend and his “friend” were married to each other, and years and years later – when I was 22 – my dad came to me with the “shocking” news that this person was gay!! He was genuinely surprised!
I know plenty of kids who are smarter than most people think. Most children are not fools!
I think that people are afraid that if they show this to their children, it’ll provoke a discussion that the parents are not ready to have, and their children might ask questions that they aren’t willing to answer. But then again the children might not ask questions at all, kids just are not as dumb as people think.
If the kids have been watching the normal stuff on TV then they might ask “are they really a couple? because those two aren’t butt naked, and boys and girls always are”.
Hey James cawley. You and your Familt have a Very Merry christmas and again thank you for giving us all new Trek to Watch.
Hey Anthony you are your family and to all of those at Trek Movie have a very Merry christmas and thank you for this great Website.
I’m honestly surprised that comments haven’t been locked here, as with almost all previous news-stories involving “Blood and Fire”.
I totally agree with Anthony’s review, I think many of his points were objectively presented and spot-on, so kudos to you for that, Anthony!
One thing I especially enjoyed was the whole ‘horror’ feel to the episode. The excellent FX didn’t detract, and my only gripe perhaps, was that the reactions of the cast wasn’t as emphatic as the FX deserved. After all, these are creatures that are QUARANTINED from Federation space for a reason. They’re supposed to be unknown, never-before-seen entities. Let’s have a little more shock and fear, people!
Dear BAF producers,
By making a rather provocative artistic statement, which you yourselves say was intended to provoke “discussion”, you have indeed provoked! And yet, as so often happens, those you provoke are dismissed with ugly names and perhaps worse, contempt.
Many of us took to task the producers and writers of Star Trek (2009) on this very forum for the relatively benign groping of Uhura by twenty-something Kirk, and the subsequent sex acts as shown in the trailer and reported to be in the 20min clips. I believe this ought to be sufficient proof of the legitimacy of our belief system and our personal sincerity for us to be treated with the respect you yourselves wish to receive from the larger society.
Many invoke the IDIC philosophy in defense of this upsetting of the status quo. This is not based on the facts of IDIC. IDIC was a latecomer to the Star Trek series, and it was also openly designed to generate cash-flow for Gene Roddenberry’s mail-order company, Star Trek Enterprises (later Lincoln Enterprises). Whilst “retconning” is common in fandom, it has no place in history — to do so is a species of lie, and no one here approves lying I trust!
BAF, intentionally provocative in service of an agenda, suceeded in provoking a negative response even in the very open-minded fanbase of Star Trek.
It seems to me the BAF team must accept the ill with the good. In fact, it may be possible to learn from those that disagree with you for, in this day and age, it takes a certain amount of courage and integrity to oppose the controversy such as presented in BAF and one might suppose they have good, legitimate, and depply-held reasons for maintaining those beliefs in the face of such oppression. (I refer as case studies those Californians now suffering open retribution for participating in the most basic civil duty of voicing their political will — even to the loss of their ability to support their families).
Star Trek worked because it discussed controversial ideas without ramming the politically correct answer down the throats of viewers, who were regarded as perfectly capable of drawing their own conclusions! The response of the BAF team, and some of their more vocal supporters, seems to indicate only one acceptable conclusion is permitted.
This is not IDIC and the diversity permitted is extremely limited – acceptance only. It is not Star Trek because Star Trek was a form of exploration, not rigid dogma. It is not American because it runs contrary to the ideals of a republican government (and no, I do not mean by this the eponymous political party).
In fine, I wish I saw more of the Golden Rule from those whose desire was to provoke, and less of their (hypocritical) demand for uncritical acceptance. It seems to me any accomplishment worth the effort must be purchased at true cost as a costless victory is no victory at all. And to that, perhaps your adversaries are the victors as the cost seems, at this moment, to be borne by them alone.
I write this with all respect and sincerity in the spirit of the exploration of truth,
C.S. Lewis
Saw the gay-bashers coming from a mile away. Don’t think anyone thought they wouldn’t show up.
Why even give a sh*t? It was good episode and I had fun watching it. The bloodworm CGI wasn’t that good though but what can you expect from a fanproduction.
In Act IV, the briefing room scene I was actually looking at Walter Koenig doing Chekov. Great actor they found for that part.
It seems the comments on this well written review have developed into a debate. How exciting! I’d like to weigh in as well– and perhaps the best way to do that is to share with you all the short letter I wrote to the Phase II team:
To Mr. Cawley & the rest of the Phase II team,
Thank you. As a Star Trek fan and as a gay man, I’ve waited for years to see what you have so eloquently presented in Blood & Fire. It warmed my heart (blood worm pun unintended) to see gay characters brought to life in the Star Trek universe so simply and honestly. I’m certainly not surprised at the quality of the episode as I’ve been a fan of yours for years. I admire your standard of excellence and find it especially inspiring that the future of Star Trek lies in the capable hands of fans like you who are infused with Gene’s spirit. Keep up the good work!
James and Carlos
Your work on-screen speaks for itself – it requires no defense.
(Though I must point out that the dead Captains arm DOES move.)
Sometimes silence is the only response a stupid remark deserves.
As Robert Heinelein wrote …
“Stupidity cannot be cured with money, or through education, or by legislation. Stupidity is not a sin, the victim can’t help being stupid. But stupidity is the only universal capital crime: the sentence is death, there is no appeal, and the execution is carried out automatically and without pity.”
As a society we are changing and growing. Intolerance is fading away, all we need is time to realize Gene’s dream.
Keep up the good work guys. The fact there is such a debate shows you are doing something right.
I just was able to download this episode so I haven’t watched it yet. I am going to now.
I’m going through these comments, and I am trying to understand. Is the main complaint about the love scene that it is too “gay”; or that it is too “sexual”; or both?
I think the distinction should be made by those who are so vocal about it. And, in either case, my opinion is that Star Trek is many things, many statements about humanity. If the complaint is that canon trek would not allow such strong sexual content – whatever the orientation – I would say that Star Trek is much bigger than 1960s network TV standards and practices – even though those serve mostly to frame Star Trek’s wholesome and idealistic idea of the future. If it is used as a vehicle to make a statement then I would say let’s explore that.
For those saying that it’s too “gay”, I would suggest you visit some of the K/S fansites out there and see what you think. The fact of the matter is that gay is gay – there is nothing that is “too gay”; gay by definition is what it is. I would hope that if this bothers folks that they would take notice around them that gay is a part of the human experience that has always existed. Whether we choose that lifestyle of not, is irrelevant and to deny its existence is disrespectful. To say that homosexuality is or should be eradicted in the 23rd century is just unintelligent and ignorant of not only what is happening now but what has been a constant throughout mankind. Whether one “likes” it or not is not the question. Its a prominent enough pattern in human behavior that it should be acknowledged and not ostracized. In short, realize and accept.
The question about whether it is appriopriate for children is totally insulting to children. I havent seen it, but I trust in the Phase II folk enough to know there’s not going to be nudity or overtly sexual content again – no matter what the orientation. SO BIG DEAL. Children should be sheltered from the “concept” of gay? Again, an insult to children and a strong indicator of a disrailment in parenting philosophy. In this scenario as presented, children are innocents that require sheltering from the concept, what about the kids that see gay behavior from birth when they are raised by a gay couple? Are these children not as good as the sheltered children? This whole line of argument amazes me. As a parent, I find it counterproductive to the task. Let your children watch this and talk to them about it. What you tell them, is up to you – I won’t go into that for obvious reasons.
I agree with JC and the team in what they are trying to do with this episode in regards to that aspect of the storyline.
THE WOMEN!!
=h=
That was an extraordinary episode! Great job! I pretty much agree with the review, but what I didn’t expect was how chilling it would be. Not since the Denevan parasites suddenly jumped off the walls and started hurtling at the camera has a TOS-era story been quite so disturbing!
As for the romantic scene in Act 1; I think it is worth thinking about for a moment. This kind of intimate scene would not cause any comment at all on TV today if it were between a man and a woman. But between two men — you just don’t see that on primetime and so I think it retains some power to shock.
But that is why it’s good that it is in the episode – it forces the audience to examine their own reactions and prejudices. I like to think I’m a pretty liberal guy, but I was still ashamed to find I was a bit unsettled watching that scene. But that is *exactly* what the sight of non-whites in officers’ positions on the Bridge must have felt like to some in the audience in the 1960s, or seeing women in positions of authority, and that is why it is so right that Star Trek takes this issue on in the 2000s. Because the insidious prejudices we’re brought up with can run very deep and can only be knocked down when someone challenges them like this.
Again, Thank You all for the discussion and debate, and let me re-iterate from an earlier post, I do not want to, nor do I have the right to force my beliefs on anyone. Nor, would I. Everyone is entitled to their own. I simply believe in All inclusion. That is my belief, and that is the world I look forward to living in. I never believed we would elect am African-American as President in my lifetime, I am thrilled we have! We have come along way as a race, yet we have so far to go….
James Cawley
All marketing ploys should be as well-rooted in theory and practice as Gene Roddenberry’s IDIC. Does the fact it started as a money-maker make it any less valid? Does the fact it has been embraced and employed in a story line make it, somehow, toothless? Does the fact that it has taken on a historical half-life of its own mean we should discard it because it is some how not wothwhile?
IDIC says we all belong. It says there is a future for all of us. An in Roddenberry’s universe, it is one where we all have value, and all contribute and no matter the race, species, orientation, sex or eye color is no less important than another. Even living rocks have a place in the future, and the future of Roddenberry is one that I would like to live in because it is a positive one that has meaning and depth.
As for homosexuality, what a contribution has been made to society and mankind by those who love within their sex. Just like those who love the opposite sex–wow–I guess that means we’re all just people. You could no more have your television, stages, theaters or movie houses with any content without homosexuals behind the scenes and, in many instances, in front of the scenes too, than you could if you tried to make them without heterosexuals. It means we, as people, hetero or homosexual all have a contribution to make.
The depiction of the crewmen who love each other in this episode shows this–that they contribute to the mission of the Enterprise just like everyone else. That they do so with no second thoughts by their crewmates means the future is truly an enlightened place.
We are lucky to be seeing this. As I’ve read the heartfelt responses here the thing that baffles me the most is that there are several who don’t think that they are prejudiced, and use many contrivances to try to prove that to us, and, I think, to themselves. It just can’t be.
As for family values, it might be valuable to compare this positive message of inclusion of a future world/place/universe where we are all valued vs. what you may be afraid of your children learning. The future can start today if we are teaching our children that we all have value, that none of us is any better or worse than another and that love is a powerful positive influence in our lives and those of the rest of the world.
That is the strenght of the future and what Infinite Diversity in Infinte Combinations means to me.
I have a question…
Chekov reports a lifesign moving toward the bridge which the landing party mistakes for the crewman that bursts into the room. Chekov corrects that assumtion and then the crewman kills himself and releases his infection.
What happened to the second entity that was approaching the bridge?
Controversial bit?! What controversial bit? I don’t get it? What is controversial? What? Oh come on people!!! We are living in the 21st Century! Isn’t it about time we gave this knee-jerk fear reaction toward homosexuality a rest?
In the real world it is truly difficult to find the concept of “true love” between lovers, between friends, between couples of any sexuality. All this episode shows is two people who have found that connection we hold most dear.
To those who say, “oh I’m not showing my son/daughter that”. It doesn’t matter, if your son/daughter is gay then that is what they are going to be whether you like it or not. Your doing more harm by not accepting them for who they are and underestimating them.
To those who say, “oh Star Trek is about Kirk, Spock & McCoy not about the guest cast and other regulars”. Then perhaps we should call it “Kirk, Spock & McCoy Trek” — Star Trek has far far more meaning than just 3 characters, else it would never had lasted for as long as it has.
I also think the episode hits the AIDS allegory like a nail on the head. Think about it – people are told if they don’t act on a virus, then millions of people will die. And because of fear, ignorance, superstition surrounding the virus and those who carry it – people refuse to act – and millions of people die.
Holy Blazing Asteroids!!! That’s Nick Cook from Star Trek Interpid and a redshirt!!! Ach! Nooo…eew, no redshirt should ever have to go like that! I think he deserve the “Most grusome death on Star Trek” award!
By the way, I loved the music throughout the picture. It was timed just right making it feel like you were acutally there.
Oh and finally the acting in all the fan films are perfect. Take no notice of those who say it isn’t. I’d like to see them give it a go. Hehe!!!!
Just finished watching this episode, and enjoyed it quite a bit. There are a few critiques/comments that I have on the episode:
1) Editing and pacing; could’ve been tighter in some places (the conversation in Peter Kirk’s quarters) and longer in others (Kirk alone in the briefing room; it cuts away to quickly and doesn’t dwell on the weight of Kirk’s decision — i.e. the camera should have continued panning across Kirk as he sat, shoulders slumped, on the briefing room table.
2) James Cawley has really made Kirk his own in the last few adventures, but here he slips back into Shatner impersonation, especially, as noted, in the scene where Peter asks him to perform the wedding ceremony.
3) John Kelly continues to impress me as Doctor McCoy. He and Cawley, by far, are my favorites of the series. Kelly brings something to the character of McCoy that I can’t quite put my finger on that I enjoy watching.
4) Lots of good one-liners in this episode.
5) Direction — Some of the camera angles used weren’t dynamic enough to convey the horror or the drama of the situation. There were the standard, stately manor in which ModTrek was usually shot in. TOS seemed much more daring its its use of angles and shots. The scene with Hodel was grotesque for certain, but the shot wasn’t energetic and horrific. The right camera angle would’ve done much more than the CGI effect could have. Horror works best when it’s implied and not overtly direct. In other words, the scariest monster is the one you imagine and can’t fully see. The lighting, however, was dynamic and evocative of many of the first-season episodes of TOS. It was a little too dark in the teaser though.
6) While storywise, I understand the need to introduce the character of Peter and his relationship with Alex, I too long for Phase II to focus more on Kirk, Spock and McCoy in future outings. They have been overshadowed by the guest story too often in the fan series. That and I like Kelly and Cawley as their respective characters.
7) Xon seemed a bit “too cold” here. I hope that over the course of the next outings he develops the characteristics as outlined in the aborted PII series; trying to emulate human behavior and emotions.
8) The relationship was handled well. It was treated as it should be treated; as another relationship between two people who love each other and not “highlighted” by some overt political statement like many shows of the early 90s. To show an effective gay relationship is just to do that show the relationship without comment from other characters. I thought the dialog was also very much in keeping with the “cheesy” stuff we all say to our partners regardless of sexual orientation. It had a naturalistic feeling to it, even though the quarter scene ran a bit too long. Congrats to Phase II for giving us an all too-human relationship.
I look forward to part two and the next two adventures.
I’VE BEEN A STAR TREK FAN FROM THE VERY BEGINNING. I WAS 12 YEARS OLD IN 1966. ALL I HAVE TO SAY ABOUT “BLOOD AND FIRE” IS…..THIS IS STAR TREK AT IT’S VERY BEST!!!!!!!!!
THANK YOU JAMES CAWLEY AND COMPANY!!!!!!!!!!
Steve
2) James Cawley has really made Kirk his own in the last few adventures, but here he slips back into Shatner impersonation, especially, as noted, in the scene where Peter asks him to perform the wedding ceremony.
Are you kidding me?
That was on purpose …He didn’t slip into anything..That was a NOD to Bill
and to all fans of Bill…and it was the perfect line …
You do not hear Cawley do Shatner anywhere else in the episode
and it says ..Here is to you Bil
“97. Willow – December 21, 2008
@93:
“81. Bradley1701 – December 20, 2008
…
God I’m glad I’m Canadian…here, all of our citizens are trully equal.”
I think he meant equal under the law. Of course every country has their bigots; the US just doesn’t offer protection from them under the law. Hopefully that will change soon enough.
And in my opinion it’s the US that doesn’t want to get off it’s high horse. For some reason they think they are the moral authority of the West just because they’re a “global superpower”…”
Oh, you canadians have always been envious of our system, you bash us, yet, all of your people come here to make a living, then they take the $$$ home. I have noticed what you said as well as what the other guy said coming out of a lot of canadians, you know, to add to your inferiority complex, in the Revolution, we were one town away from capturing your country! But, we took pity and didnt, maybe that is where the inferiority complex started? LOL!
“155. James Cawley – December 21, 2008
Again, Thank You all for the discussion and debate, and let me re-iterate from an earlier post, I do not want to, nor do I have the right to force my beliefs on anyone. Nor, would I. Everyone is entitled to their own. I simply believe in All inclusion. That is my belief, and that is the world I look forward to living in. I never believed we would elect am African-American as President in my lifetime, I am thrilled we have! We have come along way as a race, yet we have so far to go….
James Cawley”
“I never believed we would elect am African-American as President in my lifetime, I am thrilled we have!”
And you said you were not going to force your beliefs on anyone?! LOL!
92. And as for all the gay people who think that this is some kind of a liberation or a great thing, it isnt, it is the collapse of family values, which everyone gay and straight hold, and you will not understand that until you have a family. (I would be saying these same things if it was a straight liason).
Did you notice that Kirk and Freeman intend to marry and said there was noone else in their lives? So much about the destruction of conservative values like family and a live-long realtionship,
for what it’s worth. this is Roddenberry himself speaking on the topic of religion:
Religion seems to be largely absent from the futuristic and secular world of the Federation and in particular from human society. Star Trek’s takes on religious topics are often critical, and they almost routinely close with a victory of science over faith. This is anything but a surprise, knowing that Gene Roddenberry was an active atheist who struggled against any form of religion:
“I condemn false prophets, I condemn the effort to take away the power of rational decision, to drain people of their free will — and a hell of a lot of money in the bargain. Religions vary in their degree of idiocy, but I reject them all. For most people, religion is nothing more than a substitute for a malfunctioning brain.” (Gene Roddenberry)
Great episode
Thought Ben Toplin made an excellent Spock, especially in the throaty voice dept. best fanfilm Spock yet by far.
Also thought Scotty has improved greatly, once a glaring cringe inducing weak link in the acting dept. Now one of the best!!! Great job, now a couple more toothy smiles next time and you’ll have it nailed!!
Dirty Darren’s effects were perfect of course. Every bit as good if not better as the best of the remastered efforts and certainly far better than most of it. Best nacelles ever!!!
Cawley – Thanks for a fun epsiode. Now lift some damn weights!!! I know you have to fit into the 68 comeback special leather suit and the Matador but for god sakes when McCoy has bigger pipes than you there is a problem. I recommend 4 days of moderate to intense weight training per week. Two body parts per session with legs getting their own day. Workout two days and take a day off for rest. 10-15 pounds of lean muscle will make all the difference. Won’t look bulky but with your frame gymnist fit. Since you obviously have a fast metabolism you should consume more protein each day. Musclemilk Malt flavored shakes taste good and will do the trick.
You have your assignment
161:
I understand that it was on purpose as it set up the humorous bit on the Copernicus between Peter and Alex. But I felt that it was overcooked and too much of “breaking the fourth wall.” Regardless of intent, it didn’t mesh with the rest of his performance in the episode and bounced me right out of the “dream.” A bit too metatextual, I suppose, than I prefer. Cawely, nevertheless, remains one of my two favorite performers on the series. John Kelly the other.
99. RobertMfromLI – December 21, 2008
” #92: Have you ever counted the number of times Kirk had some relationship with a woman IN TOS? Or noticed the episode where they alluded to him having sex with a certain yeoman (and he’s shirtless and sweaty when she leaves)? Or the same intimacy alluded to between him and the captain’s woman in Mirror, Mirror?
I see the scene in the same light – just updated to 21st century TV standards. It’s, if anything, less racy than many straight love scenes I have seen on primetime TV or in rated PG movies.”
Did I or did I not say that in my post? THEY ALLUDED TO IT! NOT SOME GROTESQUE SEX SCENE! (gay or straight, I dont care, some things do not belong in a film)
“119. Two Year STP2 Fan – December 21, 2008
- Again, I’m not homophobic, but my personal beliefs are such that I am not ready to comfortably watch, or allow my children to watch those scenes.”
lol That’s still a form of Homophobia. ;) Homophobia is ‘an irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination’. So it covers a lot of things…you obviously don’t fear it, or discriminate, but you do have an aversion towards it. Being homophobic doesn’t mean you have to hate people who are homosexual, that’s the automatic assumption, but if you’re not comfortable watching two men snuggle or kiss…there is some homophobia at play….’the aversion’. Nothing to be ashamed about, we’re a product of the times and environment we have grown up in. Cheers.
167. Ryan T. Riddle – December 21, 2008
Yes, I felt the same Ryan. I said something similar on the Phase 2 forums. Sure, it’s always nice to have a nod to the source, but why do we really need it? The entire production is a nod to the original actors and material. This gang has clawed its way to a position of respect amongst the fans, we accept this crew as the characters. I personally don’t want to see James channeling Shatner. James performance as Kirk is strongest when it is James as Kirk, not James channeling Shatner playing Kirk. That’s a compliment, for anyone who is in doubt. :) I already said my peace on that over on the P2 forums, so I’ll leave it at that.
Ok so what you are saying is youv’e come to see Cawley as Kirk without seeing Shatner ..OK I can buy that….but Bill is such a Part of Captn Kirk
we ant to show him they we will never forget that..and at the same time add a little Trekie Humor…I LMAOF when I saw him do it for the first time
and I knew it would draw attention…and it shows you just how different Cawley’s Kirk is from Bill’s…
You probably such a nod to Bill Once in every episode…
It reminds us as to why we are doing this today..becuase 40 years ago
The SHAT created this character and he will always be KIrk so you will see SHAT in our KIRK….from time to time…
controversies aside, I was impressed, as ever by this recent production from the Phase II team. ‘Blood and Fire’ has clearly shown the ambition and skills of those involved with impressive effects and, for the most part, a well written script. Although I also did have some issue with Kirk’s acceptance of Code 9, not that I couldn’t accept its implementation by Kirk, I just would have preferred to see some more emotional background to his decision.
It is my feeling that while the acting is good and much improved from previous episodes the nature of the production resulting in a very ‘fluid’ cast. Where cast members that have been with the show longer settling in to their roles and giving stronger more established performances, other newer cast members, while perfectly competent, seem to lack the same confidence with their roles.
The direction was on the whole also good, the scene in the briefing room being worthy of special note, I did however have some issue with ‘the scene’ between Kirk and Freeman, I have no issue with the content, but I did feel that it could have been much stronger than it was, in that it was more of a spectacle than a grown up display of affection. That said, I enjoyed ‘Blood and Fire’, and very much look forward to it’s concluding part, as well as future episodes of Phase II in general. My thanks and congratulations to Cawley and crew.
Very good! This is the episode (part 1) that proves the show works without stunt casting. Bray and Tolpin are so good JJ Abrams could have used them — maybe should have, we’ll see! I felt Cawley’s acting choices were a little off — he seems like Kirk in TMP, like he’s back from a long break, defensive and prickly, rather than the easygoing confidence Kirk would have after years of continuous command both later in the original series and later in the movies. Kirk by the 4th or 5th year of the mission ought to be relaxed enough and have the trust of his crew enough that he doesn’t need to wear a mask of tough determination over every emotion all the time. Technically, the show is almost flawless except I thought there wasn’t enough lighting in most of the scenes, and Uhura’s station seemed lost in the shadows with even her computer displays were inexplicably dim (maybe the blinky lights were better than the LCDs).
I think Xon bears a certain resemblance to Lennier from Babylon 5.
Just watched the episode a little while ago! Overall, I liked it. It’s a thriller that forces our heroes to make some tough choices while still portraying them as human beings with feelings and flaws and who have personal lives outside of their jobs.
I felt that the weakest part of the episode was Peter’s conversation with Xon. The acting just didn’t seem natural at all in this part of the scene. And as a heterosexual man, the following part with Peter and Alex showing physical intimacy made me a little uncomfortable, but that’s okay. Good science fiction is supposed to make you confront and question your own ideas about things. (I strongly believe that homosexuals should have the same rights as heterosexuals, but to be honest, it can still be awkward for me to bear witness to the physical side of their relationships.) In terms of portraying two men having a romantic relationship, I think they did a pretty good job. Then, the part where Captain Kirk reacts to Peter Kirk’s engagement to Alex was rather amusing to me. :)
The relation between the wavicle sparkelies and the bloodworms was confusing, but I guess it will be made more clear in Part 2. Also, I understand that the bloodworms are deadly, but I think it’s going too far to make them virtually invincible. Why should they be impervious to phaser fire and be able to quickly burn through metal doors? Being numerous, fast, and able to work themselves into ventilation ducts and crawl spaces should be enough to create the kind of peril that the Phase II team was looking for.
Last, I thought that the preview for the next episode was too much. A preview should be kept brief and not give away a lot of details. It’s supposed to make you want to see the next episode, not give an outline of the plot. Already, we know that Peter will make it back to the Enterprise and that they will be getting help from experts on bloodworms.
So, kudos to the Phase II team for an overall good episode! :) I look forward to the next one.
“I condemn false prophets, I condemn the effort to take away the power of rational decision, to drain people of their free will — and a hell of a lot of money in the bargain. Religions vary in their degree of idiocy, but I reject them all. For most people, religion is nothing more than a substitute for a malfunctioning brain.” (Gene Roddenberry)
Well, I have heard of this being Genes opinion. Interesting that when people see a wonderful, open, tolerant future, religion seems to have no place. For me personally, I am not a very religious person at all. But I do believe in a GOD and if we had first contact tomorrow, it wouldnt change that belief. I think the ‘death of religion’ in much of sci-fi is more wishful thinking of the elites of our world, than any possible reality. Strangely, religions of other worlds are usually portrayed with much respect.
Now this being said, I have no problem with the gay aspect of this or any other episode. I do see it as just another part of the story.
As for the comment about religion being a substitute for a malfunctionaing brain….well thats just stupid. People look to all sorts of sources for many reasons. I know so many people whose lives have been saved by a strong belief in a GOD.
I read GR as comparing the faithful to brainless cult members. In some cases, sure it’s true. But do we always have to condemn all for the actions of a few? Hearing comments like this from GR have definately lowered my respect for him as a man. I will always appreciate the great gift of Star Trek that he gave us, but outside of that, I dont think all that much of him.
Ok, it’s been said before, but let’s go again:
1) If you find depicition of gay relationships offensive, it’s your problem, just as if you would be offended by seeing interracial relationships. Being a straight guy, brought up in a less tolerant time, I involuntarily cringe when seeing it. I don’t want my kids to be like that.
2) This is not some quirky personal statement from the Phase II people. Roddenberry would have wanted to do a gay scene, and I’m pretty sure that ambition (or at least approval) is documented. Implying that Trek’s stance of equality and tolerance is somehow unclear is just plain silly. So is implying that it’s “un-Trek” to push the boundaries of what is depicted towards greater tolerance.
3) A racist, homophobe or similar has no business calling him-/herself a Trek fan. Really. We can have TOS fans, TNG fans, “canonistas” etc – we can disagree on loads of things, but we can’t disagree about the philosophical foundation of the “Roddenberry vision” (as an umbrella term for all the writers that helped form and flesh it out). It’s really not open for debate.
However, the child screening argument can still be valid, if it’s the explicitness of the scene rather than the sexual orientation that’s debated.
Trek has always (well, mostly…) done a great job at producing episodes that work on multiple levels of perception. When there’s adult-oriented stuff going on, it’s designed so that it goes right over your head when you’re a kid. I watched TNG as a kid, enjoyed it and never felt that I didn’t understand what was going on. However, watching all the episodes as an adult, it’s very clear that I missed out on a _lot_.
That’s good storytelling, and saying that you “have to” be in your face and that making stories “kid-friendly” is too limiting is something of a bad excuse.
With a wee bit of effort, you can package your message in an adult-only spectrum of perception, and it will be recieved by adults as clearly as Geordi can see infrared, while leaving kids unexposed.
I liked it a lot.
FX where great, the sets where great, the lightning was great, the music was great and the actors played a LOT better the first nw episode (especially Mr. Bray’s Chekov,… it was awesome!)
There are some bad points to the episode that i personally didnt like:
1. The Love scene was too long (regardless of what gender it was, it was stretched…. )
2. The horror like bloodworms (c’mon eating a guy from the feet to the head?! and then having to kill him… its to much… )
3. Some bad jokes ( like: “HA HA… you owe me 20″ pls /:I )
4. Some heavy language…
Still i cant wait for the next episode, its gona be awesome. :)
But dont try to make it a sope in space or a horror sci-fi or a more realistic Trek for the 21st century audience…. we have bsg for that.
P.S. Is there going to be a HQ 1280×720 version of this episode,.. or dare i say a 1080i version :)
TY again for the great episode!
173 and Uhura’s station seemed lost in the shadows with even her computer displays were inexplicably dim (maybe the blinky lights were better than the LCDs).
Thats being adressed…..
171. Falvoant – December 21, 2008
Yes, William Shatner helped to create the iconic Captain Kirk and is responsible for making so much of TOS what it is. In fact, I am among the biggest Shatner fans having had the opportunity to meet him twice (although for only a few seconds each time) and getting an autographed copy of his latest book Up Til Now.
I think it’s great that the Phase II team want to honor that, but I just wanted to offer up a critique that can be taken into consideration in order to further grow and improve the show, especially since its longevity is something that I am interested in — check the Night in ‘69 program book and you’ll see my name among the “friends.” I was also at the event to show my support and have also joined the producer’s club.
Moreover, we are moving to a point where Captain Kirk, as a icon of Americana, is moving beyond the actor playing the part. Cawely paved the way for that with New Voyages/Phase II.
In any case, it’s up to Cawely to make the acting choices he wants to make. And that’s his choice. Offering up another perspective doesn’t slam or take a dig at the performer, or the production, but gives him/her another option to consider.
In the long run, it doesn’t hinder my enjoyment of Cawely’s Kirk or the episodes.
180 Thank you for your support…Im in there too!!
We always welcome opinions
I never said you were wrong ..I just wanted you to know why we did it..
I’ve said it for this production and especially the new movie… you can’t play Kirk without invoking Shatner. Otherwise, it JUST ISN’T KIRK.
Okay, the whole romantic scene was a bit too creepy for me, but even creepier was Copernicus’ dead captain moving his arms about behind Enterprise’s crew, when he’s supposed to be D-E-A-D. Now that’s weven way Freakier!!!!
183 Must have been one of those worms in his arm
Im apologise for David Gerrold not being actually dead HA HA HA
I don’t understand all the bashing of people that find gayness unacceptable. It does not make you a hateful religious fanatic or a fearful “homophobe” to think that homosexuality is either a) a psychological defect or b) a genetic malfunction. I don’t know which one it is, and I don’t care. I don’t hate or fear people that have the problem, any more than I hate or fear people with diabetes.
Being as all biological existence revolves around reproduction, homosexuality is by definition “wrong”, as it precludes an family’s genetically continued existence.
And before anyone throws the word “homophobic” around, let’s recognize that word for the twisted insult that it is. It is a media-created phrase invoking a non-existent psychological pathology merely for disagreeing with you. It’s Orwellian and sick.
#175:
“Return of the Archons” is clearly a thinly-veiled sneer at organized religion and robotic blind-faith-followers.
“For the World is Hollow…” has a closed-knit group whose ‘religion’ is shattered by their actual reality and the science that ultimately delivers them.
etc. etc.
deleted by admin
#184
not ‘wrong’ since science is not judgmental; rather, not the norm – rare, even. maybe you ought to consider the thought that homosexuality exists as an intended function of evolution to keep reproduction in check, and therefore serves a useful purpose.
and i love the fact that those who “don’t have a problem” with homosexuality “don’t have a problem” denying them the basic civil rights everyone else enjoys. there’s a ‘psychological pathology’ for you, Odkin.
Guys… there’s gay people. Get over it. If it offends you, fast forward.
Overall, pretty fantastic episode. Not gonna lie… the teaser absolutely blew my mind! It was like seeing something you make up in your mind when you play with the star trek toys. When I was a kid.
Oh the memories.
Funny that some people blame others for bashing and labeling them pathological when they are the ones doing it. I think it is called projecting your own problems upon others.
Anyway, terrific job and perhaps it makes some people reconsider their prejudices like all ‘homosexual people are promiscuous’.
I forgot to say – I hate waiting for second parts – so I hope they release Part 2, urm, like now! :D
Funny thing that some people label homosexuality pathological and then protest when being called homophobic.
Anyway, terrific show and perhaps it makes some people reconsider their prejudices like ‘all homosexual people are promiscuous’.
I just watched it, and it was really pretty good.
Peter Kirk’s gay relationship: Not too bad, a little soap-opera like in places, but the idea works. Good commentary on the 23rd Century’s attitude with Kirk’s reaction. You think at first that maybe he’s reacting to the fact that it is a Gay relationship, but as it progresses, he’s simply taken back by the fact that he’s the only one who didn’t know that Peter was getting married. Nicely done.
Regulan bloodworms: Not sure what this has to do with the AIDS epidemic, beyond the fact that nobody really knew what to do about it at first, and nobody really understood it. Oh, and it involves blood.
They do seem to be really nasty, and well realized.
The death scenes in this are actually very effective and well realized.
The D.A.V.E. School really did a superb job here.
Also, it was good that there was no preaching monologue at the beginning.
If the allegory holds up, it should not be needed.
Well done guys !!!
for the people who think being gay is wrong — you’re free to do so, and good thing you’re not gay.
but really, as has been said here, gay people exist. Gay presence in films, gay rights, gay marriage, gay pride — it’s not about you straight folks, we’re pursuing these things for ourselves. Nobody accuses the Irish of an Irish agenda of trying to make everybody else Irish on St. Patrick’s day.
Nobody is trying to make anybody gay (because it’s not possible) or convince you that being gay is okay. And if you don’t understand gay attraction and find it disgusting, it’s likely because you’re not gay. Nobody’s going to make you fool around with some dude. I don’t get how our relationships affect you. If you don’t like it, don’t watch.
As for the romance, I only found it ‘awkward’ because it was so cute, sweet and puppydoggish because both actors are like 11 years old. And young love is pretty darned awkward. And I loved Kirk’s reaction. Good stuff, James!
ps. the special effects and the graphics were awesome. So are those jumpsuits from Phase II? They actually look pretty gay :).
Some of my fellow ST fans on this board need to take a deep breath and think before labeling people and offering parental advice.
There are several people in my family who are gay (including my brother) and in committed loving relationships. Not my thing but I’m pretty sure that doesn’t make me homophobic.
If I am not attracted to a scene involving two men making out, again I don’t believe that makes me homophobic. It’s just not my cup of tea.
If I choose when and where I discuss the issue of sexuality with my children, again I think I am within my rights as a parent. Last time I checked nobody outside the four walls of my house has the right to dictate that timing. Again, it’s a choice not homophobia.
So while I loved this episode and eagerly await the second part and fully endorse your right to speak your mind I also suggest getting down off your high horses before judging others…
Well entertained!
I thought the episode was terrific and delivered some really effective moments. The bloodworm scene was morbid, but had me squirming. Special effects were far better than I expected! Chekov is very well played, I’d agree.
I look forward to part 2.
This was an awesome episode of Trek, in any of it’s incarnations. I’m so impressed with Cawley and his team’s work. Not only is this episode better than any fan-made out there, it’s better than many of the “real” trek episodes from any series.
I think the anti-gay people above are boobs and make fools of themselves with their ignorance.
The acting as improved by light-years on this show to the point where it is in most cases better than TOS. I’m not so sure that “World Enough And Time” is better than this newest episode, I’d have to re-watch it.
As for Kirk’s hair…James is doing the best he can and still keep the hair he needs for his day job, an Elvis tribute artist. The two biggest things in my life has been Star Trek and Elvis, so of course James is probably number one on my list of who I’d like to have a few beers with….
Great Job! A++
Oh, and thank you so much for the tribute to Majel…..
Downloaded it, burnt it to DVD and watched it on my television. Once again, as close to watching an original Star Trek episode, but with better FX and dare I say it, more up to date acting.
I did a double take at JC doing what appeared to be a Shatner/Kirk impersonation, but that has been explained in previous posts. LMAO now.
Best thing? Andy Bray as Chekov. Absolutely perfect. Especially in the briefing room. Got goosebumps.
Worst thing? Love scene was just too long. Not bothered that it was two guys, just went on too long.
Looking forward to part two. Oh if only I had the strength of will to wait for the second part to be released before watching the first…
To James Cawley,
Please pass on my sincere congratulations to the entire team on a top notch installment. I think Paramount/CBS should give you guys a ton of money to keep the original Trek alive for years to come.
My own discovery of Phase II was about the time of “To Serve All My Days” release. I had no idea what a fan film was, so I went searching around the net. There are lots of examples, but none compare to these.
Blood and Fire Pt 1 does leave us hanging, waiting for the release of Pt 2 – exactly what a you’d expect of a season closing episode that leads into the next season. Just the fact so many of us are waiting, impatiently, for Pt 2 is a demonstration of the quality of the work.
I actually swelled with tears toward the end of “World Enough and Time” – seeing Sulu performed so well, and looking simply perfect for the story – it still ranks as the best of all fan film episodes in my own opinion, and quite superior in overall effect than a great many of the “real” episodes, if you’ll pardon the term.
So, please, toss a few more CPU cores into the rendering and post production of Pt 2 if you can – you’ve got a lot of fans seated closer to the CRT, waiting to download…oh, and I’m still seeding the Pt 1 torrent.
Your episodes are one of the best reasons to support net neutrality online right now!
Having watched this episode and read many of the posts above has brought back memories of a time, while watching a certain “Seinfeld” episode when my mother let snap a remark of, “Well there certainly isn’t anything right about it either.” When I pushed her further on the matter, she ended the discussion with the statement, “I have to tolerate gay people, that doesn’t mean I have to accept them.”
To me, this is the fundamental issue and why I get frustrated with people who say “I’m very tolerant,” or “I teach a message of tolerance.” Wonderful, you’re tolerant, which means that you still despise them, but you know that it’s not “correct” behavior to vocalize and act on those feelings anymore. That’s a first step…now you need to move further down the path, a path of logical steps that leave you not seeing a person of different sexuality, of different religion, different nationality, different skin color, and a whole host of things that we humans love to subdivide ourselves down by. To where you merely see, another person, with all the same basic frailities, wants and needs of any other person…anywhere.
As far as whether or not this episode is suitable viewing for children. It is definiately more adult oriented, blood worms and cuddling both, but that is for each individual parent to decide upon.
Seeing as I’ll get raked over the coals if I mention anything about the ‘romance’ by the Gay Mafia, I’ll just let that go for now. I am not the board administrator and I wouldn’t win that battle on here anyway.
Kudos to the production design team for pulling a not-for-profit production together so successfully. The sets, costumes, props and CGI effects were spot on.
The downside, in my opinion and without seeing part two, is that this could easily have been pared down into a single hour-long episode. The scenes drug on forever and could have been tightened up quite a bit in the editing bay.
For example, not even including the endless love scene, consider when the crew gained access to the Copernicus’ bridge. Phasers twisting and turning every which way, when all the time the crew is looking at an empty bridge with a lotta stiffs. I could go on, but ya git thuh point.
However, a valiant effort in this endeavor and I found it interesting how elements of TMP are slowly being introduced.
Merry Christmas, all!
I find it deplorable that none of the pro-Gay folks on this thread can be tolerant to accept that some people don’t approve of their lifestyle choice. Grow up!
Tolerance doesn’t equal approval, and being insulting to people with different viewpoints is wrong.
As humans, we all have to allow for each others differences. You don’t have to like it… But insulting people with traditional mainstream beliefs is not a way to get people to respect your own position.
Using the term homophobe in every context is wrong and robs the word of power and meaning.
I don’t like anchovies, but I’m not afraid of them.
I don’t like mint, but I’m not afraid of it.
You can’t say that people have no right to interfere in your choice of sexual partners and then insist they must approve of it. You can’t have it both ways.
Every person has sovereignity of thought and preferences, and those of you condemning the folks that won’t approve of gay sexual relations are as bigotted and backwards as you claim they are.
Not everyone is going to approve of your life choices. Grow up! Be an adult! Stop whining and live with it!
There’s no thought police in Trekdom, and if there were… our crew of stalwarts would be the first to take them down.
Al:
“lifestyle choice?” – you’re so convinced you had to say it three times, kind of like repeating will ‘make it so.’ no such thing. the science is nearly overwhelming that there is a biological cause of homosexuality. therefore, an immutable characteristic, like race. did you see the ‘60 Minutes’ piece on the clear, emerging scientific consensus last year? trust me, 20 years from now you’re going to look back and feel a fool.
the science is coming IN. not only logical, but flawlessly logical.
so let’s paraphrase it, #204:
“There’s no bigots in Trekdom, and if there were… our crew of stalwarts would be the first to take them down.”
In case Mr Cawley’s still lurking, I want to give props to some supporting players.
Evan Fowler is terrific as Freeman. He’s lifelike and sympathetic, and now I’m invested in the character and worried what will happen in part two. Well done.
Also, Kim Stinger has a great presence with her few lines. Any chance we’ll see a bigger Uhura story in an upcoming episode?
That whole sleep / sparkle dancer conversation was priceless. Andy Bray has really mastered Chekov.
Congratulations to James Cawley and his crew for not only braving the waters of controversy, but delivering increasingly high-quality fan films. Making even a short film is an exercise in frustration and struggle, so my hat is off to them.
Not to break any rules, Anthony, but I do want to point out a few things in the spirit of IDIC, and scientific fact.
AIDS (acquired immune deficiency syndrome) is a failure of the human immune system, caused by HIV (human immunodeficiency virus). There are several strains of HIV, and currently there is no vaccine. Some people apparently have a natural resistance to it, and continue to live perfectly healthy lives even while HIV-positive; in others, it attacks more swiftly, breaking down the body’s own defenses. Currently, the only treatments shown to be effective are drug cocktails that boost the immune system, though not without a toll on the body.
HIV is borne by human bodily fluids. It can be contracted through unprotected sexual intercourse or exposure to infected blood. Disease vector research has traced it back to a cross-species immunodeficiency virus that probably originated in monkeys, and was transmitted to humans by bite.
There is a great deal of misinformation about HIV/AIDS and gay men. There is nothing about this disease that is related to the carrier’s sexual orientation; as with other STDs, it will naturally spread among people who have frequent unprotected sex with multiple partners. The disease, already somewhat widespread in Africa by the 1980s but mis-diagnosed as many different things, first became visible in the West as the so-called “gay cancer” (Kaposi’s sarcoma), which the CDC traced back among a network of gay men who had all had relationships with the so-called Patient Zero, a Canadian flight attendant who, presumably, first contracted the disease in Africa. (See the movie ‘And the Band Played On’ for a dramatic account of these events)
As another poster stated, the disease is currently incredibly prevalent in sub-Saharan Africa due to unprotected heterosexual sex. The virus doesn’t care what your orientation is!
To another poster who stated that only reproduction is the “right” natural function — if I’m straight and my wife and I don’t want kids of our own, does that make us somehow “wrong,” in your view?
I’m not saying anyone here is a homophobe but I will say this and this is something for all of you to think about:
If one of the boys was a girl or this was a romantic scene that included Uhura, Troi, Crusher, Yar, 7 of 9 or T’Pol, would we have heard any complaints or criticisms of the scene? I doubt it. People would have been perfectly fine. Would we have heard complaints or criticisms from the gay community? Very unlikely.
The gay community has not been nearly as vocal about the amount of straight sexual content within Trek or that some of the women were clearly objectified for male viewers (Troi, 7 of 9, T’Pol) so I’m wondering why when we have one episode that features gay content why all of a sudden the criticism is coming out of the wood work. Is the criticism educated? Is it an artistic criticism? No, it is just that all of the male viewers that are generally used to watching male Trek characters sleep with green chicks or Starfleet women wearing spandex painted-on uniforms aren’t getting what they want and are crying like spoiled babies.
You had your day, not let the gay community have theirs.
oh, and just to clarify, not all gay men are necessarily promiscuous, just as not all straight people are, either. It merely stands to reason that a disease that takes advantage of these transmission vectors would appear faster among networks of promiscuous partners, no matter their orientation.
#208 – You’re completely right. I and my husband have been together for 8 years and married for 3 years and are completely monogomous. We are both highly educated, live in a gated community and about to adopt our first child….it is amazing what people think of gay people based on watching tv and the media.
What are you guys bringing to the gay mafia/liberal elite solstice party? I agree with the comment on editing and pacing (and perhaps a few too many reaction shots) – there could be a few tweaks without losing the suspense and the story..
Hey everyone,
Great discussion! I just wanted to clarify that the DAVE School didn’t participate in BaF 1’s f/x, although there are plans for them to assist with some aspects of Part 2. In addition to yours truly, the visual effects for “Blood and Fire, Part 1″ were provided by:
Matt Jolly – Modeling / 3D Animation / Compositing
Pony Horton – Compositing / 3D Animation
Jon Carling – Compositing
Alexander Ibrahim – Compositing
Cynthia Lin – Matte Painting
Spencer Lindsay – Compositing
Ben Alpi – Compositing
Scott Ogren – Compositing
Jeff Hayes – 2D Animation
and, of course, the gorgeous opening title sequence is all Daren.
Thanks for all the great feedback!
Joel
#203: (and others)
It’s not about approval or even so much about acceptance. It’s about being allowed to live their lives as consenting adults free of bigotry. There is a big difference – as you pointed out with your analogies. With more than 10% (and growing every census) of the population in this country identifying as gay, and near a thousand episodes of Trek, one scene in one episode is creating quite a stir. Oddly, the same type of debates that happened during the Kirk/Uhura kiss.
Did you know that that particular episode was banned in various places? Heck, it was banned in various places in THIS country for years. Now, it’s a non-issue.
I think you are reading into the “pro-gay” messages on this forum (which aren’t so much pro-gay as they are “why arent ____ being tolerant?” Besides, acceptance IS part of the issue. You dont have to accept the “lifestyle” to accept the fact that it is my “lifestyle” or Billy-Bob’s “lifestyle” and leave it at that.
So for once (as #210 pointed out), a gay couple is “promoted” as a couple instead of as the stereotype we normally see on TV, and people are up in arms.
There is no pro-gay agenda to simply wanting to be able to live one’s life as a consenting adult in a way that does not in any way effect other’s ways of life. Nor is there a pro-gay agenda in being happy that for once, a gay couple is being represented as nothing more than a loving couple (who happens to be gay).
And, contrary to popular belief, this is the FIRST Star Trek episode that shows such a relationship. No trills or other plot devices to make it “ok” for the (less tolerant portion of the) straight audience.
And a final note, if you read through the comments above, you will find many of the comments certain people have been claiming are “endorsing “the “pro-gay agenda” (as if such a thing existed) are actually being made by *STRAIGHT* people.
As Gorkon said: “It seems we have a long way to go”
I am not sure why people keep ignoring what I have asked you to do, which is to stop labeling and diverting into discussions about homosexuality in general. Next person to label someone a ‘homophobe’ gets banned. Next person to go on about the ‘gay agenda’ etc…banned
This site is about star trek, you can talk about the gay characters within the context of this episode, but these larger issues are not for this site and i dont want it here.
last warning
@213 Anthony Pascale:
I definitely understand that you want to keep your site ‘clean’, and having it be only about Star Trek. Even though I have total respect for that wish, I’m afraid that you are asking the impossible.
This theme was a large part of the episode, and being a touchy subject for some, this discussion is simply… inevitable.
I encourage anyone here to discuss the larger issues over at My forum at http://www.startrekphase2.com. I Thank you all for having a quite frank and civil debate.
James
James,
For the first time in a long time, someone–you–made a Star Trek episode that…made a difference.
Nicely done.
Michael Isbell
Michael,
Thank You,
that is the nicest compliment I could ever be given.
James
Maybe they should have called it “To Serve All My Gays” haha.
I thought it felt padded. There didn’t seem to be enough happen to justify an entire episode of a two parter, not enough story. The good points: Tolpin has Spock’s vocal manner to a tee, though visually he still looks a bit too much like Chevy Chase, though I’m sure that’ll pass. The new Uhura is great (not that there was anything wrong with her predecessor). McCoy is much improved (I actually liked the ratty writing of him at the start) and Root’s Scotty grows on me more with every episode. He’s become someone I look forward to seeing on screen.
On the other hand, as I watched I kept hoping the next scene would be the one where our head-over-heels B-Plot couple would be die a horrible death by Bloodworm. Peter came across as frankly incredibly irritating, especially in his toddler dungarees (note to Mr. Cawley: just become a costume design is authentic doesn’t mean it can’t be a costume crime againt humanity). And Xon needs a haircut.
As to the gay thing… first a disclaimer. I worked in theatre for years, with lots of gays and lesbians. After that, by an unusual chain of circumstances I worked with a gay building firm, with gay clients, including two London gay “scene” venues, socialised much of my time on the gay scene and have happily supped a beer while just a few feet from people doing things that would make Jerry Falwell implode. So I’m saying this as some kind of way of saying I really don’t have a problem with gayness. I’ve known hundreds of gays, worked with them, socialised with them, been close friends and all that.
But it’s really not “homophobic” (a word which is far too much overused to stifle criticism) to not want to have gayness jammed down one’s throat, so to speak, just as, come to that, a lot of people don’t want straight sex jammed down their throats either. And for me, as I was sitting through the interminable romantic scene in Act I, I was just thinking “Oh for crying out loud, we’ve got the damned message. Get on with the story”.
It’s exhibitionistic, it’s that thing of not just being gay, it’s having to march down the street wearing tiny hotpants and nipple clamps, taking pleasure in anyone you can manage to upset. It’s that having to bring a*al s*x into every conversation, being gay gay gay all the time thing. It’s irritating. You’re gay, get over it. Did we really need medical gay grinding his crotch into Peter gay’s plump buns? Some people, many people, who have no specific problem with people having a same-sex paraphilia really don’t want to dwell too much on the mechanics of it, just like they don’t want to dwell on what old people look like naked or the fine details of having a poo.
So, for me personally, it just overdid the gayness on the gay-o-meter. Sorry. Too gay.
Wonderfull episode Mr Cawley and the rest of the team. I found the episode the beest yet produced and carn’t wait to see the final. I loved everything from FX to the acting to the “B Story”. As a gay person I was so happy to see Captain Kirk reaction to hi nephews coming out.
One thing that I would say to the naysayers on the board about the gay scene, if it was a straight couple would you have a proble showing it to your children.
Ps Mr cawley how can I become and extra on the show
#219 email me at cawleyent@yahoo.com
I haven’t seen the whole episode but it looks good so far. :)
However, I think the scene with Peter Kirk and his partner was a bit too much for Star Trek… now, I’m a member of the LGBT community myself, and I did think they were cute together, but it just seemed out of place… I felt like I was watching ‘Queer as Folk’ one moment and then snapped back to Trek when the scene finally cut to the bridge… it just seemed a bit long, a bit too blatant, and didn’t seem to flow well with everything else…
anyway, that aside it looks good so far! though, no offense to Ben Tolpin, I’m looking forward to Brandon Stacy taking over. ^_^
Hey, Anthony…
I have to agree with #214
I seriously admire the way you administrate this site, but I think you’re asking for major frustration trying to mediate the topic of homosexuality when the media being discussed is very much concentrated on it.
The major problem with this is that the line of distaste will naturally differ from person to person.
Post #218 makes excellent points about the notion that some of us don’t particularly want *any* graphic sexuality overemphasized in our fiction. (Personally I have never felt it to be a spectator sport… it can be quite disgusting to watch when done properly ! )
I have had and currently have a number of gay friends., in case anyone gives a flyin’ _______, and think that our world needs to mature up a bit and stay out of people’s personal choices up to the point where harm is caused. Then there’s reason for intervention.
( Or quoting Frank Zappa from the 80’s, “Hey it’s the 20th century, whatever you need to do to have a good time, get on with it as long as it doesn’t cause a murder.” could it be even more relevant in the 21st century –or 23rd? )
Your Mileage May Vary.
Wow, are these still available for download? I thought I read that starting with this one it would be streaming only.
Maybe I WILL get a chance to see it!
I sort of wish this episode could have a completely new talkback that can be about everything but the gay couple.
The opening scenes of Act 4, before the bloodworm attack, nearly brought me to tears. Powerfully affecting scenes with characters we know so well are a major accomplishment. Thanks Cawley and crew for doing such justice to Trek.
Mr Cawley
I applaud you.
I have been a supporter and promoter of your work since I discovered it ( during the “second pilot” period) and will continue to tell anyone about it who wants to listen.
I agree 100% with your assessment of Mr Roddenberry’s vision, including everything you have said in this thread about broad equality.
I still credit you with helping me see the characters as classic characters who can be portrayed by any competent actor providing they understand the essence of the character. I believe that history will credit you with this achievement.
One of these days I would love to get involved in a production. I know you have no shortage of offers for this, but I must add my voice to the din.
Emory Moody
So do I understand this right? The wavicles are regulan blood worms in a, for lack of a better term, larval stage?
2ndly Once again, why is the boarding party beaming over to a ship in distress, with no life signs, and apparently no battle damage, w/o EV suits. I mean, based upon past experience, space-based version of ebola would be high on my possibility list.
#212 – smart post.
By the way, is the romance scene that graphic? Kirk’s nephew has his shirt off, but wasn’t half the cast of Enterprise nearly naked most of the time? I must admit that the Troi/Riker bubble bath and bed scenes in the last two movies grossed me out a bit, mainly because it was like watching my parents about to do it. Shudder.
#226 Equipping an entire landing party with EV suits is probably beyond the budget right now. And there were many episodes of the series where the crew beamed into bio-hazardous situations without ev suits.
For the same reason. (budgetary concerns)
Whatever the relationship between the wavicles and the blood worms, an EV suit isn’t going to be much of a barrier. Maybe the animated series Life Support belt would be.
#226 Remember that the blood worms chewed through a door in the last act, and a door is much thicker than an EV suit.
I have no problem with same-sex marriages/relationships and all that, but as a film maker and Trek fan, I have to say, the scene seemed rather gratuitous and “Hey, look, we’re edgy!” in nature. I don’t think it needs to be removed in its entirety, but it just seems to last longer than a scene of that nature should.
Actually, I guess my real comment on that is that the pacing of the scene just drags the show down and seems to be, as I said, for the sake of being “edgy” and not much more.
#218: Right on. Couldn’t agree more. The gayness really was wholly gratuitous and gratingly irritating in it’s heavy-handed preachiness.
Not only that, but let’s be real here. MOST Star Trek fans are straight males, and MOST straight males are (involuntarily) viscerally grossed out by the sight of man-on-man love. That being so, if they had to show gayness of the future, why couldn’t they have shown us some hot girl-on-girl action!?
Lesbian action would have been better for everyone:
1. It would’ve gotten across the same message of tolerance and diversity.
2. The people who aren’t bothered by man-on-man clearly wouldn’t be bothered by lesbianism.
3. Those of us who find the man-on-man stuff yucky have actual ENTHUSIASM for girl-on-girl.
Lesbianism is the way to. If, in the future you guys have to go out of your way to show homosexual relationships for whatever reason, make said homosexuals some smokin’ hot lipstick lesbians.
Hey Anthony: Yes, this site is about Star Trek, and this episode of Star Trek is obviously INTENDED to provoke discussion on gay issues, so why on Earth are you worried about people talking about it?
James Cawley – Thank you for giving us a place to discuss the issues without fear of Anthony deleting or banning us.
Anthony – I find your attitude ridiculously unrealistic. You were really expecting something else? Unfortunately homosexuality is a controversial issue. I wish it were not.
Personally, I think this has been mostly a constructive conversation. I’m sorry you don’t see ti that way. Go ahead and ban me. I don’t plan to come back. It’s your site and you make the rules, but I don’t care for them in this case, so I’m leaving.
^^^ Where is the rolleyes icon when you need it?
I will say that the actor playing Peter Kirk looked like he didn’t want to kiss his cute co-star, which unfortunately “took me out of the moment” during the cabin scene. A pity… but I won’t let it spoil my enjoyment of the episode… especially the bloodworm attack, which was both realistic and quite horrifying to watch (in other words, good job!)
#219 – One thing that I would say to the naysayers on the board about the gay scene, if it was a straight couple would you have a proble showing it to your children.
******************************
I’m sorry but I don’t agree with you. There was too much groin on groin contact to show my kids, and that would apply to gay or straight. It was too explicit and too much innuendo for my tastes or IMHO for a ST episode.
I’ve been conflicted about expressing my initial reaction to the episode. I am a very open minded individual and have many gay clients. What two people do in the confines of their bedroom is their business and I have no opinion.
I’ve watched all the New Voyages episodes with great enthusiasm, and my 8 year old has seen them all up until this point. I’ll admit I was put off from the start of the scene when Freeman enters Kirk’s quarters and lies on top of him. While probably realistic between lovers of any persuasion, is that something we need to see in ST? I mean, if it was a straight couple with the woman on the bottom, would it be appropriate to see her spread her legs while the man lies on top?
I salute Mr. Cawley and all his volunteers for their phenomenal work; in fact, I have toyed with the idea of volunteering for a production. I love their work and will continue to be a fan. I just felt I had to be honest that I found aspects of the scene too explicit and they seemed designed not to further the story, but only to shock the audience. I think that they could have shown us their love and affection for each other in another way.
“231. Will – December 21, 2008
Actually, I guess my real comment on that is that the pacing of the scene just drags the show down and seems to be, as I said, for the sake of being “edgy” and not much more.”
I don’t know about the ‘being edgy’ bit, it was pretty low key stuff…but the scene’s between those two boys were really drawn out. There were overly long pauses between them…that I’m sure were meant to convey something, but whatever it was, it didn’t work…it just drug the pacing down…and then when the show caught up with the rest of the characters, pacing returned to normal. I think that’s what is making it feel gratuitous to a lot of people….it was all the lingering. Felt a bit too surreal to be taken as seriously as it was meant to be taken.
Dear JC and the Phase II team,
After having watched part one, I want to tell you that this is one of the most compelling star trek episodes ever made.
Whoa. Just….. whoa.
Where to start?
To say that the production mirrors that of TOS is inadequate, it far surpasses. The care that is being put into the entire “New Voyages” to “Phase 2″ transition – the incorporation of the unis, etc – just so natural and right. Chaz Root, JC… everyone….. taking these characters from the end of season 3 up to TMP, providing that “transition”… I am just SO satisfied from every angle. Not a complaint at all. Just perfect.
Nick “C is for Cookie”, ha! AWESOME seeing you in this episode. Took me a minute, but yes. THE FX when you get reshirted – heck, ALL the FX – just top notch, not to mention the redress of the Ent bridge for Capernicus, etc. The Phase 2 costumes, the makeup, everything!
The story – each act, very well put together. I think that the teaser alone – and i saw this a few weeks ago on the YouTube – just inspirational. I can’t even describe. THIS IS THE REAL DEAL, and better than some of them.
No disrespect to The OrcSter and Sir JJ intended, but this new movie should have easily gone to Cawley Entertainment and this team who are doing it better on the web for free.
thank you all SO MUCH for your time and effort on this. OUT OF THE BALLPARK, times like effing infinity.
THE WOMEN!!
=h=
Well,
With all these discussions going back and forth, we must have done something right at Phase II. After all, Star Trek is about life and the issues of present day woven into the future. I am proud to be part of James Cawley’s crew and proud to be able to help keep Star Trek right on track.
Blood and Fire was a kick butt episode with all the typical issues Trek talks about.
Bottom line: Cawley made Star Trek return in a way it should have been years ago. Thanks, James, and thanks for letting me into the family
Dear Mr. Cawley and crew:
I can’t thank you enough for this absolutely wonderful entertainment you provide us. When I was a 13 year old nerdy boy, I “borrowed” my mom’s Super-8 movie camera and made my own 2-minute Star Trek film. Like you, I had to play Kirk. When I was 14 I made a better one, and when I was 15 made an even better one. When I was 28 I made a film called “Trekkie,” about a 12yo boy so obsessed with Star Trek he loses sight of reality and slips into a fantasy world where he doesn’t know whether or not Trek is real.
My combined love of Star Trek and making films led me to the prestigious USC Film School, from where I graduated with my degree. I guess my point is that YOU are continuing to live in a world I dabbled with as an impressionable teenager, and you do it in a way that makes me laugh, cry, smile, and think. I have no complaints about your actors. I enjoy seeing them in repeat performances. The special effects are just as good if not better than what we were given during TNG and DS9.
For many years I’d held out hope that Paramount would come to their senses and return to the world of TOS. The closest they ever came was a momentary passing thought about a Sulu/Excelsior series. But things being what they are, you have brought my dream to life. You include the original series music, which is a Star Trek character unto itself. Why Paramount doesn’t put you under contract and pay you to make these episodes is a mystery to me.
Your latest episode has me entralled with the Peter story and what will happen. I enjoy your little nods to the TNG era with uniforms and the like.
James, thank you for giving so many of us your gift. Your determination to do these is appreciated by so many, more than you will ever know. When I look back at my little cheesy Super-8 films and then watch what you and your team have created, I just shake my head. God bless you, and if you ever film anything in Arizona look me up!
Let me clarify, a post like 218 is fine because it discusses within the context of the episode.
It is the right v. wrong, good v. bad and ‘This group shouldnt be able to x’, and ‘poster y is a z because he doesnt believe what I believe’ stuff I want to stop.
People here havent seen some of the hate filled missives posted that had to be deleted. Plus I am tried of getting emails from people demanding I ban this person or that person from either side. I have got emails today from one side accusing me of being a ‘tool of the gay propagandists’ and the other side accusing me of of being a ‘purveyor of hate’ just because of the posts being made here by other people…and I am tired of it.
this is a star trek site. I really dont like having to police these things, after asking and asking and asking people ignore it, leaving me no choice
talk about trek, about the episode, about stp2, about the scenes…but we will never solve the issues here and some people need to understand how insulting their views can be to others, on both sides…so just avoid it as I am trying to be inclusive and not divisive.
As always, it is your choice to visit any site you like, but every time this issue comes up, it seems to bring the worst out in some people and turns into an ugly flame/troll war…I am just trying to stop that.
#239
Anthony, I do not envy you this job.
^^^ Nor do I–and I think you’re doing a great job. For that matter, I agree with the poster above–the fact that there is so much discussion about this episode means that the Phase II crew has done ITS job, too… a great episode that people are still talking about! :)
hey gammans, when is your doomsday opus due?
i’m rather looking forward.
=h=
239. Anthony Pascale – December 21, 2008
I have got emails today from one side accusing me of being a ‘tool of the gay propagandists’
Wow, seriously? I’m constantly disappointed by the hate filled world we live in. :(
…Two points:
1) “I don’t know why people always cite Spock’s Brain as the worst episode of TOS, when it was clearly “The Omega Glory”.”
…Over the past four decades of hearing this, I’ve also found that those who hate Omega Glory also are the types who hate any sort of pro-US patriotism. They’re the types who feel America is totally in the wrong in any sort of agression issue, especially if the US did *NOT* start it. Which is why I take the view it’s one of the *better* episodes for its era, and has a lot of depth to it despite the gaping plot hole regarding how the Preamble wound up on a planet light years away from Earth in the first place.
2) IMO, the whole issue of Peter being gay could have been avoided had they used one of Peter’s two brothers, who were mentioned in What Are Little Girls Made Of? but never used in Operation: Kill The Cosmic Space Boogers or mentioned in any of the novels save for one comic book story that contradicted another story in the same issue! The question here, James, is was that option considered by either you or Jon Povill?
….Still, looking forward to watching this when someone caps the stream and makes it available for download somewhere. Regardless of what the Mafi…er…”Unions” would like, I prefer to watch programs as I see fit :-P
“…Over the past four decades of hearing this, I’ve also found that those who hate Omega Glory also are the types who hate any sort of pro-US patriotism.”
Nope. I dislike episodes of Star Trek which contain too many coincidences but aren’t executed well. I don’t like Miri, either. But I guess there’s an anti-US sentiment there too!! Haha…
It was a crapisode. Ruffles aside, it wasn’t compelling. I’m pretty sure either Justman or Solow (or both? been a while since I read the book) didn’t think much of the episode either.
OM,
re: 244
this episode is downloadable at the new voyages mirror site in medium res .mp4 format
thanks again to JC and the team for the change of heart.
=h=
^^^
Like my site says, “Winter 2009″. Definitely before the big screen “Star Trek”. Hopefully before part II of “Blood and Fire”. :D
@223
Actually, Blood and Fire has been first offered to the public via downloads and torrents. It will be on the Dragonfly video service soon as well.
We had several discussions about the delivery choices. We decided to offer this in three ways: regular downloads, torrent downloads as well as the video service. The two primary factors were: the wide diversity of internet access and computer equipment our fans have access to, and the fact that Phase II desires to make all episodes widely available.
If this combination works well for Blood and Fire Parts 1 and 2 it will likely continue. Part 2 will be released at teh same sites as Part 1.
We still prefer keeping this on our designated mirrors and Dragonfly so that if we re-edit or make changes we can quickly replace the copies being distributed.
Another point: Someone asked in these comments about a H-Res version or 1080i version. The 1080i is not likely simply because the source is 720p.
We do not yet have part 2 in release so any answer about a Hi-Res version or DVD is premature and not fully decided. Much the same as with cinematic releases.
However, I will say that December 17th the DVD quality ISO for World Enough and Time was released via torrent and download sites for the fans. Jeff Hayes’ fine cover and label artwork is also available.
Please visit http://www.startrekphase2.com going to the downloads and episode pages for the latest mirror sites as well as Dragonfly access.
Additionally, consider registering and viewing/posting at our forum located at the above URL. Guest viewing of sleected topics is also available. Consider an RSS feed as well.
As for Blood and Fire criticisms I suggest most hold a final judgement until you see the concluding part. Just like reading only half-a-book, it is NOT always possible to link all the preceding events until the final chapter(s) are reached. I believe most will find Part 2 very interesting; it will tie together the events seen in Part 1.
I just re-watched “Come What May” the pilot episode.
Havent seen it for a few years. WOW. Can definitely see the growth in production value, however, still blown away by what you put together in 2003.
the montage scenes where you re-create the movie scenes… all of it. Just so so so AWESOME.
I love all the fan movies but Phase 2 has created something very special.
I’m sitting down to re-watch “In Harms Way” again now. Man, how I loved that episode. If anything strikes me, of course I will post again. YOU know that I will post again. This is magical.
I remember the first time that I laid down with a promiscuous woman. Star Trek New Voyages recreates those butterflies in me.
=h=
Do we need “Gayness” in classic TREK – fan made or otherwise?
I don’t mind it in “Hidden Frontier” ’s 24th Century universe,but it really,really seems out of place in the contect of Classic TREK.
EDITING CRITIQUE:
I have no problem with the Gay issue.
The problem lies in the lenght of the scene. From the moment Peter enters his quarters (3.02) and begins speaking with Zon, to the end of his scene with his lover (7.55), the cameras have been in the quarters for nearly 5min. From a story telling point of view the show stalls. Most directors would not let an editor stay that long in the scene (ST: NV editing tends to range from compitent to great) because the ‘A’ story line needs to be moving forward.
I think what most people are reacting to (the negative posts), could have been solved by splitting that scene up into two parts. After Alex comes in the quarters and looks at Peters burn wound, a cut should happen.
TWO REASONS: (1) A whole second set of information comes forward after Alex says he will be on the Away Team,and (2) The entrance scene that aquaints us with the couple has just finished. For pacing there should be a cut before Alex discusses his status on the Away Team. This scene should be cut back to “after” the scene that shows the Enterprise zipping through space and Spock commenting on the Gas Giant.
A restructuring of the scene would accomplish three things: (1) If we went back to Alex after Chekovs scan of the Copernicus, we would feel more anticipation in the Away Team conversation now coming from Alex and some anxiety as the viewer…good ol tension, (2) It would give the viewer a moment to reflect on the couples relationship and (3) Keeps the action moving forward more.
So I don’t feel a single “reel” of footage needs to be taken out so much as the scene needs to be edited to keep the drama moving forward.
Anywho, you guys in ST:NV are awesome! Keep up the fab work!!
BTW James, your cuter than Shatner! Winkz ;-P
Mia B.
I’m 100 percent for gay marriage and equality, Cawley is a hero of mine, David Gerrold is awesome and I applaud their courageous experiment here.
But for me the openly gay attitude has a problematic relationship with the ’60s sexuality of Trek, which is all about the interstellar closet. Thus the K/S slash and the funny sexual tension when our favorite Vulcan grabs Shatner’s arm after encountering V’Ger. From Gary Mitchell’s lusty leering to the “Turnabout Intruder”’s glass ceiling, TOS gave us a pre-women’s lib world for Kirk and his old boys’ club to prowl around.
Into this traditionally homophobic setting comes Pete Kirk, sauntering around like he’s in the Bay Area, 2008. It’s either awkward or challenging, as the language of film has traditionally sort of resisted open expression of male-male sexuality by coding it in different hetero ways.
I guess I’m saying it’s jarring next to what we are used to seeing; they say we’ve been trained to watch movies as an expression of the “male gaze,” and maybe some film studies type can do a better job explaining what I mean about why yeoman-on-yeoman action would somehow be less threatening.
By the way, I’m not sure if this is relevant, but if you watch Gene Roddenberry’s Rock Hudson sexploitation film “Pretty Maids In A Row,” you’ll see the work of a very old-fashioned breast man–who reportedly wanted Counselor Troi to have four of them, according to biographer Joel Engel.
Well said #148, very well said.
Wow, can’t figure out what the big deal is. Then again I am a little biased. Guess I’ll have to wait until I see both parts of this episode to figure it out. Whatever! ;-)
PS: Congrats and thanks, Mr. Cawley and everyone over at Phase II !!!
OM, #244 wrote:
“2) IMO, the whole issue of Peter being gay could have been avoided had they used one of Peter’s two brothers, who were mentioned in What Are Little Girls Made Of? but never used in Operation: Kill The Cosmic Space Boogers or mentioned in any of the novels save for one comic book story that contradicted another story in the same issue! The question here, James, is was that option considered by either you or Jon Povill?”
Why should Peter being gay have been avoided, OM? I’m sorry that it makes you squeamish that gay people are real, and the world is now at a place where they’re not easily hidden and kept from mainstream media, but that is the case. And it’s not going to change.
James Cawley,
Does your company accept donations for your work? I feel a tinge of guilt watching this high quality production for free. This episode stands as a worthy addition to the episodes of the Original Series, in many ways.
What’s more, the compelling episodes you have created thus far have been a welcome, great relief to this Trek fan, born in 1966 and watching Trek ever since–but suffering greatly through the desert of the last two movies and especially most of Enterprise. After a long trek through the wilderness, I have found the REAL Star Trek again, as it was meant to be done, restored to its creative greatness.
Thank you sir and Happy Holidays!
MrRegular, you speak the truth.
I’ve just re-watched “In Harm’s Way”.
“This episode stands as a worthy addition to the episodes of the Original Series, in many ways.
What’s more, the compelling episodes you have created thus far have been a welcome, great relief to this Trek fan, born in 1969 and watching Trek ever since–but suffering greatly through the desert of the last two movies and especially most of Enterprise. After a long trek through the wilderness, I have found the REAL Star Trek again, as it was meant to be done, restored to its creative greatness.”
enjoy Phase2, my friend. IT IS AWESOME.
=h=
re #116 “Perhaps there will be a non-gay edit.”
Over my dead body.
David Gerrold
Okay, I have not read all the messages yet. There are far too many to read in one sitting. But I want to take a moment to address several points.
First, in November of 1986, shortly after TNG was announced, Gene (and I) attended a Star Trek convention in Boston, In response to a fan’s question whether there would be gay characters on the new series, Gene said yes, there would be. He believed that Trek’s philosophy of inclusion demanded that we include all members of the human family in the crew of the Enterprise. He repeated this promise several times over the next few years. (Why at promise was not kept is not germane to this discussion.)
“Blood And Fire” was originally written for TNG as an allegory about the *fear* of disease. A line written for the episode which unfortunately did not make it into the final edit has Kirk saying, “We will not throw away half the human race because the other half is scared.”
The script for this episode was a labor of love for Carlos Pedraza, James Cawley, and myself, with at least three months of daily phone calls back and forth as we discussed, debated, and occasionally argued about every line, tossed ideas back and forth, and eventually came to realize that the real drama of this story is the relationship between James T. Kirk and his nephew, Peter.
Very early on, we realized that times have changed greatly since 1987, when the script was written, and that we had to be more honest and direct with the gay relationship. We decided two key points — the first was that gay relationships would be totally matter-of-fact in the Star Trek universe, because every other diverse ethnicity and culture in the Trek universe was taken for granted. Second, the best way to demonstrate the depth of this relationship was for Peter to ask Alex to marry him. (This was long before the CA supreme court made same-sex marriage legal in CA, long before the Prop 8 battle. We are very proud of the political resonance of this script because it’s the kind of thing Gene would have loved.)
Generally, after a marriage proposal, the two lovers hug and kiss. We discussed this too. We felt that it was a necessary plot point — and besides, Peter is a Kirk. That some people find the scene uncomfortable can be read many ways. But we felt then, and I still feel the same way today, that Peter and Alex deserved that moment together because of what we were about to put them through and the audience needed to understand the depth of that relationship.
On a more personal level, before we went into production, I remember googling the web to see what various fans had said about gay characters on Trek and one of the most poignant remarks came from a gay teen who said, “I hate you, Star Trek, for making me invisible.” So James and I (and others) felt that it was long overdue to acknowledge the gay fans, as well as the many gay people who had contributed to Trek, with a scene that ended the invisibility.
@ 258 David Gerrold
HAHA!!! Right on sir!
continuing:
Now let me talk about the production. We had only 14 days to shoot 96 pages of script. I spent three weeks very carefully breaking down the script and setting out a shooting schedule that would let us accomplish everything we needed. We had to shoot 8 pages a day. We started as early as 8 in the morning and often worked till midnight. The camera and sound crews worked hardest of anybody, having to be there first in the morning, on set all day long, and not being able to leave until they had locked up all the equipment at the end. They continue to have my undying respect and gratitude.
The very first day of the shoot was with a reduced crew and we worked solely on the love scene. Both of the actors arrived with their lines well-learned, with a great deal of enthusiasm for the scene, and an incredible amount of patience as we worked out the physical details. Personally, I wish we could have shot the scene much later in the production schedule, but the first day was the only day we would have a full day for that scene.
My concerns with the scene were simple. I needed the audience to believe that these two characters were in love. I needed the audience to accept this relationship, because if this scene failed, much of the drama to follow wouldn’t have any impact.
I was also very much aware that Trek has a large and varied audience, including a lot of parents and children. As a parent, I personally feel that I’d rather have my son watching two human beings being affectionate with each other rather than see two human beings beating the crap out of each other. (My son is 24 now, and based on the evidence of his personal maturity, I think he turned out okay.)
But back to the scene — we knew going in that we were walking a tightrope, because we would be dealing with a vast and diverse audience, with a lot of people bringing a lot of different expectations to the episode. But after all of the considerations were weighed and discussed — even on the set, even during the shoot, even with some of the cast and crewmembers who had their own reservations at the time (at least until they saw the dailies) — after all that, we always came back to something Gene Roddenberry used to tell the writers who came in to pitch stories for TNG: “Tell me the story that you most want and need to tell, the story that sticks in your craw, the story that you can’t tell anywhere else. Tell me the story that you’d die to tell.”
One last point on this. One of my best friends in the Trek world was Bob Justman, a truly joyous man. For the last twenty years, he kept telling me how much he regretted that we never got to shoot “Blood And Fire” on TNG. I knew he was sick this last year. It was my great hope we’d have a cut of the episode finished in time for him to see it. Like Gene, Bob believed that it was long past time for Trek to include gay people on the Enterprise.
okay finally saw the whole thing, and I liked it, it’s good. :) A few comments:
-Peter Kirk (Bobby Rice) is pretty hot! :D …Needs a bit of a haircut though. :P
-Still not convinced with Tolpin. There were only one or two brief moments where he seemed a bit like Nimoy’s Spock but, the rest of the time he just seemed bored rather than stoic and reserved.
-Chekov is great! :D I don’t know who the actor is but I think he’s got Chekov spot on! Well done!
-Bones had some good moments too. “Go heal something.” xD
-The ‘pew pewing’ phaser rifle bothered me a bit… it’s too Star Warsy. :/
-The Copernicus is pretty rad.
-And back to the first scene with Peter and Alex, I agree with #251 (mia) that the scene is just too long and it takes away from the pacing of the rest of the episode. The lingering on some parts seemed like they were putting too much emphasis on it and some other parts just seemed contrived. The pacing, though my biggest issue with that scene, isn’t the only thing. I also thought Alex crawling on Peter was a bit inappropriate for Star Trek TOS. I think it could’ve been done just as well if they had pulled in tighter on their upper bodies. I don’t recall Kirk EVER crawling onto a woman and pressing his crotch against her ass like that. While I personally don’t have a problem with it, and regardless of gender and sexual orientation, I think it’s just inappropriate for TOS. …For the overdue portrayal of homosexuality in Star Trek, I give an ‘A’ for effort, but as for the execution,..ehh more like a ‘B- to C+’ :/
Okay, now that’s out of the way, let me acknowledge the hard work and incredible contributions of everyone involved in the production of “Blood And Fire.”
Carlos Pedraza did a great translation of the original TNG script into a Phase II script. When it was handed to me, I was delighted that he had so tuned into the spirit of the original series. During my own polish of his draft, I found it very easy (and a lot of fun) to revisit Kirk, Spock, and McCoy in my mind. I could hear Shatner, Nimoy, and Kelley speaking each line on the page. DC Fontana reviewed the next-to-final draft and made some additional notes and corrections. (To me, DC Fontana will always be the final authority on what is Star Trek and what isn’t.)
When we handed the script to the Phase II actors, they made the characters their own, and before the end of the third day of shooting, I was no longer hearing Shatner, Nimoy, and Kelly, I was hearing Cawley, Tolpin, and … uh, Kelley. They owned their characters totally, thyey were all a delight to work with. (Special Kudos to John Kelley who is a marvelous McCoy.)
Indeed, the entire cast were remarkable, even down to the extras. The depth of passion, enthusiasm, and professionalism throughout was astonishing; these people outdid many so-called professional productions. Bobby Quinn Rice and Evan Fowler as Peter and Alex gave remarkable performances. Charles Root as Scotty was great fun. Kim Stinger as Uhura is tied with Nichelle Nichols for the title of best Uhura ever and her on-set jokes had me rolling on the floor. Andy Bray is such a great Chekov, I’d have cast him in the new movie. I could list every single member of the cast with the same affection and admiration.
Also special mentions go to Nick Cook who played Hodel (named after Mike Hodel, a fixture of LA area SF fandom for many many years) and Paul Siebert who scared hell out of us on the bridge of the Copernicus. And also Meghan who did a great Rand and Debbie who stepped in at the last moment to play Dr. Fontana.
Our guest stars, Bill Blair and Denise Crosby (who you will see in Part II) were also wonderful. Bill’s role required him to get increasingly crazier and crazier, so we let him go over the top for some old-fashioned scenery chewing in the tradition of the original Trek and he proved to be a great villain. Denise Crosby brought genuine pathos to her part. She had a very difficult role and she did great. I also want to acknowledge John and Anne Carrigan who played our Klingons, directed by second-unit director, Ben Alpi. Just great.
Behind the cameras, there are just too many people to name. Props, costumes, sets, painters, carpenters, set dressing, art direction, lighting, makeup, hair, general gophering of all kinds, a small army of dedicated committed wonderful people who came together as an instant family for two weeks. Let me acknowledge Ralph Miller and “Sarge” Andy Grieb for all their hard work on sound, and Dave Berry (DP) and his lighting team for being the hardest working crew I’ve ever met.
Joel Belluci (and his colleagues) have done incredible work on the SPFX, and Brian Kelly (editor) put all the thousands of separate pieces together to make it look all like a real Star Trek episode. I’m sure there are many more people I should acknowledge and thank here, but it’s late and my brain is fried, so I apologize to anyone whose name I should have mentioned and forgot. You guys know who you are and you know how much I appreciate your hard work.
In particular, of course, we all have to thank James Cawley, whose singular dedication and passion and commitment gave us this chance to have one more adventure on the starship Enterprise.
I personally appreciate all the thoughtful comments made here by so many people. But now it’s time to invite all of you to take a step back and stop being critics for a moment and just enjoy the opportunity to have one more good old-fashioned opportunity to seek out new life, new civilizations, explore strange new worlds, and boldly go where no human has gone before.
Thanks.
David Gerrold
#259
Mr Gerrold,
To start, I can’t believe that we are getting so many wonderful Star Trek people on this site. Your “Troubles with Tribbles” episode is one of my favourites. I also bought your book many years ago about the making of said episode and thoroughly enjoyed it.
Had to get that out of the way first…. :)
I also enjoyed your latest ST endeavour “Blood and Fire” part 1, eagerly await part 2.
My only criticism is that the love scene lasted too long and could have been just as effective if it was edited differently. I am not a filmmaker but I think it could have been improved, by perhaps breaking it up a bit. Actually looking back a few messages, poster #251 mia gives a much more detailed breakdown which pretty much goes with what I felt about that particular scene and how it might have been improved upon.
All in all though, a great episode. And I must add my (non gay) voice to the opinion that by the 23rd century if we have really grown up as a race and ventured into space and met such a diversity of life out there, You must by any definition of logic, accept that humanity has to have become tolerant, no wrong word, accepting of the fact that not everyone is the same and some people prefer the love, both physical and emotionally of someone as the same gender as them.
But as an implied interracial kiss, remember we never actually saw their lips meet did we, caused such a stir only 40 years ago. We have made some good progress.
I think that if Star Trek can once more be socially relevant as well as entertaining, this can only be a good thing. One again my congratulations to JC and his team.
David Gerrold™.
May I ask you what exactly compelled you to post on this site as you did?
I appreciate your insight, commentary, opinions. But if i am THE David Gerrold™, no disrespect to any of us – but – I wouldnt waste my time.
Obv. you are the real deal, so what was it? DID the comments irk you so? Didn’t you expect this sort of response? (and as I understand it, AP had deleted quite a few posts as is typical of any Star Trek thread with “gay” implications)
Not to get lost on what is a great story – and this isnt to you, DG™ – why is the gay storyine SO… whatever it is? who even cares? why is it important? why so SORE THUMB?
I think that it’s THE QUESTION that defines the answer. You said that “one of the most poignant remarks came from a gay teen who said, “I hate you, Star Trek, for making me invisible.”
DID we?
Anyone could have been homosexual in Star Trek back in the day, for all we could have known, Kirk was BISEXUAL. The show was never about sexuality, per se – although it had sexual implications. What WAS presented in TOS was universal acceptance and alot of the F’d up things like poverty and racism had been cured. AN absence of what we have seen in this episode didn’t preclude it by any means.
SO why I agree with this… even if it’s over the top – because Star Trek isnt real today. Its a reflection of who we are and what we can say about ourselves, idealized how we want it to be. How we BILLieve it should be.
For anyone complaining again that its “too gay” or “gay too long” – maybe thats the point. Maybe it wouldnt be necessary if gay were a little more acknowledged and accepted human behavior.
ANYHOODLES.
=h=
Still reading through the discussion, I want to add several points.
1) re: canon.
Pfeh.
On the second or third day of shooting, one of the new arrivals to the team interrupted a shot setup to point out that the “Regulan bloodworms” as portrayed in this script weren’t canon. The set fell instantly silent as everyone waited to see what my response would be. I turned around and grinned, “I invented Regulan bloodworms. They’ll do whatever I write. It’s the other guys who violated MY canon.”
During the early production of TNG, more than once I (and other staff members) pointed out things to Gene Roddenberry that went against things we’d already established. He said, and I quote word for word: “Allow me the consistency of my inconsistencies.” As annoying as that phrase might have been at the time, that was Gene’s gentle way of reminding us all that the story is always more important than the details.
2) IDIC.
It was not invented for GR’s company. It was invented as a plot point in a third season episode (if I remember correctly. Here’s a chance for some fan to correct my memory.) GR did not start selling scripts and merchandise until several years later.
3) People being uncomfortable with the gay scene.
At a preview screening at the Los Angeles Science Fantasy Society, four people walked out during that scene. Four men in their fifties or later. A generation gap? A few weeks later, after a preview screening at LosCon, we held a short discussion and question-and-answer period. An audience of at least five hundred (apparently) had no problem with the gay scene. But one gay fan said afterward it made him uncomfortable — not because he didn’t want to see it, but because he wasn’t used to seeing gay characters be so emotionally intimate on screen, and certainly not in a mainstream environment, and he was worried what they might be feeling about what they were seeing. He pointed out that many gay people are uncomfortable with having this discussion in public — BECAUSE every time the issue comes up, gay men and lesbians end up having to defend themselves, explain themselves, justify their claim to equal rights against a variety of arguments, some of them incredibly ill-informed, and others which pretend to be enlightened but are ultlimately much more damaging.
4) In response to what one poster said about African Americans not liking the comparison of the gay civil rights movement to the black civil rights movement — MLK was in favor of civil rights for gay people, so was Coretta Scott King. It wasn’t that gay and black are equal, they’re not. And it’s not that the oppression of gays is equal to that of blacks, it isn’t. But the prejudice, the discrimination, the use of the law to deny equal rights to any group is wrong. It’s the prejudice and the discrimination that’s wrong, and that’s something that every American needs to understand.
It is interesting that many people are characterizing the gay protestors as a violent mob, worrying about the restaurant owner who is being boycotted or the music director of a theatre who was forced to resign his position, because they donated money to Prop 8 — but where is the outrage on behalf of the 18,000 couples who just had their marriages annulled by an initiative that is nothing more than the tyranny of the majority? Where is the outrage on behalf of our own George Takei and Brad Altman who have been partners for twenty years, and who have now had their marriage revoked?
To those who are uncomfortable with this issue — how would you feel if the people in your state all voted to revoke YOUR marriage?
Careful, David Gerrold. To AP, these comments may be “the right v. wrong, good v. bad and ‘This group shouldnt be able to x’, and ‘poster y is a z because he doesnt believe what I believe’ stuff I want to stop. ”
Your comments may be deleted.
ahhh, who am I kidding? It’s just us THE REGULAR FOLKS that these rules apply to.
You are HOLLYWOOD, baybeeeee. AP loves hollywood.
=h=
“Being as all biological existence revolves around reproduction, homosexuality is by definition “wrong”, as it precludes an family’s genetically continued existence.”
Um, actually, that’s a common misunderstanding. Biological survival isn’t about individuals surviving, it’s about populations of individuals. It’s about gene pools. (I refer you to Richard Dawkins ‘The Selfish Gene’) Dawkins’ hypothesized that successful populations often produce large numbers of non-breeding members who serve the breeding members of the population in a variety of ways. For instance, non-breeding siblings in primates function as additional caregivers for their breeding sisters and brothers’ offspring. (Gay aunts and uncles make great baby-sitters.)
In another example, Dawkins points out that the “altruistic” behavior of those members of the antelope herd who station themselves as lookouts for predators might be dangerous to the lookouts, but preserves the rest of the herd, including the offspring.
So to presume that an individual who doesn’t reproduce is a non-contributing member of the herd, flock, species, pack, society is a simplistic error. In human culture, we know that 25% of all gay couples are raising children. Many gay couples have adopted special needs children who otherwise would never have had loving parents at all. So biological reproduction cannot be the sole measure of an individual’s contribution — otherwise we might have to say that Beethoven and DaVinci and Michelangelo and other childless geniuses were wasting their time too.
268. David Gerrold
— otherwise we might have to say that Beethoven and DaVinci and Michelangelo and other childless geniuses were wasting their time too.
Beethoven raised his nephew. He was such a disapointment for him.
Beethoven was not made to be a father.
Such a sad story
poor Ludwig
“Not only that, but let’s be real here. MOST Star Trek fans are straight males, and MOST straight males are (involuntarily) viscerally grossed out by the sight of man-on-man love. That being so, if they had to show gayness of the future, why couldn’t they have shown us some hot girl-on-girl action!?”
Thanks for the laugh. The demographics we looked at in the 80s and 90s showed that Star Trek’s audience included a surprisingly large percentage of women, (including many who do like hot man-on-man action.) Nearly 45% if I remember correctly.
270. David Gerrold
Thanks for the laugh. The demographics we looked at in the 80s and 90s showed that Star Trek’s audience included a surprisingly large percentage of women, (including many who do like hot man-on-man action.) Nearly 45% if I remember correctly.
Ah, you referring to those K/S stories, aren’t you ? :)
For the record, I agree that the love scene plays too slow. But Brian and I still haven’t had the time to go through and re-edit it to speed it up. Mostly I think it just needs a little tightening here and there.
Eventually, I hope that we will be able to do a special “director’s cut” with a few little surprises in it.
dg
Hey, I don’t want to take the conversation back a few steps, but can anyone tell me if there’s an official explanation of how Chekov is alive and well after “To Serve…?”
Last I saw he was aged and walking into oblivion with his younger self.
“I appreciate your insight, commentary, opinions. But if i am THE David Gerrold™, no disrespect to any of us – but – I wouldnt waste my time.”
I guess, that’s the difference between you and I. I’ve been a trekkie since September 8, 1966. Just because I write and sell the occasional book, doesn’t mean I’ve stopped being a trekkie. Neither has DC Fontana stopped. Bob Justman never stopped. Those of us who worked on the show loved it at least as much as the audience. I’d guess I’ve been to more Star Trek conventions than most people. And I eagerly joined the Phase II team specifically for the chance to create more Star Trek.
So why am I participating on this message board? Several reasons.
First of all, because this episode has generated so much discussion, I feel it necessary to provide some hard information about what really happened so folks won’t make stuff up. And second, because so many Star Trek fans have been so kind to me over the past 40 years (okay, except for that one who was really really rude) I feel that this is a good way to say thanks — by being accessible to answer a few questions.
But most importantly, I really do want to acknowledge the incredible hard work and commitment and passion of James Cawley and all the rest of the Phase II people. As soneone who has been involved with multiple incarnations of Star Trek, I can personally attest that the Phase II team has come closest to capturing the spirit of the original series than anybody else since then.
@ 273. Gigshaft
there was an tongue in cheek explanation in the reedited version, that it was a drunken dream. But that was more a kind of a joke than an official explanation, I belive
For me, he died in that episode
DC Fontana also joked that the new Checkov is a cousin.
David Gerrold, it is people like you and James Cawley that makes me proud to be a Star Trek fan. Because ultimately, it is that vision of yours (and of course of Gene Roddenberry) which is the reason why I’m watching it all.
/DJ Neelix of Sweden.
274. David Gerrold – December 22, 2008 -
David, thanks so much for coming here to comment. I felt the episode was wonderful, as did my wife. Happy to hear it wasn’t our imaginations, and that those scenes play out a bit too slow for you too. :) I would welcome a directors edition for sure.
Along with World Enough and Time, this episode made me feel real emotions, and is the among best Trek I have seen in a long time.
Thanks so much for the wonderful gift.
Re: #263
David wrote: >>Carlos Pedraza did a great translation of the original TNG script into a Phase II script. When it was handed to me, I was delighted that he had so tuned into the spirit of the original series.<<
Thank you, David, for the collaboration in bringing this story from concept to life. Interestingly, I had the opposite perspective as you, having cut my screenwriting teeth on TNG-era Trek writing for Star Trek: Hidden Frontier for four seasons. “Blood and Fire” was my first-ever TOS-era script, and I wasn’t sure how well I’d handle the iconic characters of my childhood. And, of course, I wanted to do justice to your original TNG story.
It’s been a long road from writing “Blood and Fire” more than two years ago and seeing it finally presented before an audience. It’s great that we’re finally there, and that the work has been as thought-provoking as we’d hoped.
To those who believe I don’t respect their right to disagree with me, I can only say this: I’ve said more than once that I do respect their choice as audience members and as parents to determine what’s appropriate. What I have trouble is when your tone crosses the line from criticism to condemnation.
I also have trouble with the notion that by *expressing* a point of view about human relationships in “Blood and Fire” I am somehow *forcing* it on you. James, David, all of us on the cast and crew of P2 created this with blood, sweat, tears and a whole lot of our own time and money. We’ve earned the right to express our views. You have the right to critique — and please do; Lord knows I want to improve my own craft — but to condemn our work as “forcing” anything on anyone is utterly unfair. It’s your finger that pressed the Play button.
One last thing. Let’s give credit where it’s due. Daren Dochterman and the DAVE School have been and continue to be wonderful supporters of P2 and did contribute bits of what you see in “Blood and Fire,” but virtually all of the VFX were done by fan volunteers, led by my dear friend and colleague, Joel Bellucci. And like the rest of P2, their work is a testament to the fact that regular folk, driven by their talent and fierce dedication, can produce work that rivals and even surpasses what a studio or a network could churn out for a network TV drama.
Best regards,
/carlos
I thought this episode was brilliant, definitely the best so far, it felt like a “proper” episode when I was watching it, not buckling under the contrivences of having old Chekov/old Sulu, or having lots of fan-fodder alluding to tons and tons of TOS episodes.
The acting was better, Peter Kirk particularly shined, and the effects with the bloodworms etc were truly horrific and exciting. The music was great too.
I don’t know why everyone is getting their knickers into such a twist of the gay stuff, I found it really touching. Quite funny how many homophobic people are in denial.
WON’T SOMEBODY THINK OF THE CHILDREN?
They don’t care you know. Love is love, better to let them know it’s not just man + woman earlier on so there’s no chance of confusion later.
Anyway, roll on Part 2, I really can’t wait.
In this discussion, there’s this notion that gays are, somehow, being denied their basic civil rights. May I ask why? What rights exactly are gays being robbed of?
I mean, gays can work and get paid. Gays can own a property. Gays have right to have a home. Gays can marry a woman and reproduce their genes that way. Gays have freedom of religion. So -what- basic civil rights are they being denied?
From what I can understand, they are demanding -extra- rights. They are demanding special treatment because of their sexuality. Yet they are pretending they are perfectly normal. So… how is it? Are they normal or aren’t they? If they are, why they are demanding extra rights?
I read the original TNG “Blood and Fire” script about 15 years ago. My memories of it are a bit fuzzy over time, but there are two things about it I specifically remember:
1 – the ‘gay couple’ were never expressly addressed as a gay couple. It was implied in the script that they were an item, but it was never overtly stated, and there was nothing in the screenplay that couldn’t also have been interpreted as simply close heterosexual friends. Yes, they were gay, but Gerrold evidently decided to allow this to remain nebulous.
2 – The principle TNG cast weren’t used much in the script. This was basically a story about two guest stars who were never seen nor heard of before and never would have turned up again. Though the cast was there, they were peripheral to this story, as I recall. (Though my memory may be faulty, and I’ll gladly bow to Cawley et al who obviously must have read it more recently).
If you want my opinion, I think that this probably had more to do with the episode not getting filmed than the gay angle: It had not much of anything to do with the main cast. If they had turned one of the ‘gay couple’ in to Geordie or Wes or someone like that, and the other member of the couple in to a guest star, then it would have likely been picked up.
#280 – You talk like everyone is American….not everyone here is. I am Canadian and everyone here enjoys equal rights under the law.
Imagine if you had a majority group who wanted to now take away womens right to vote or take away rights from black people. At the time, there were those who were against such civil rights and didn’t think it was normal but now you would never dream of talking about being against such rights.
As a Canadian citizen, I realize your questions are towards American readers, but I find it completely insulting.
So let me get this straight, is it illegal to give James Cawley money? because i want to this project of his
I commend James Cawley and his staff and crew for keeping the original “Star Trek” alive in our hearts and minds. There is most definitely a place for “Trek” in this world, and if it were not here, it would be up to us to create it.
I read with a small amount of dismay the back-and-forth bickering going on on this board. I am frequently reminded of William Shatner’s SNL skit – “Get a life! It’s just a little TV show that I did on a lark for three years!” – and in the grand scheme of things, it probably doesn’t really amount to much, unless it can get people thinking. That’s what the original Trek did (in many cases, quite well) and it appears that this new episode is doing the same.
I am a happily married (for more than 25 years) heterosexual, and in my judgement, what people do in the bedroom is their own business and I don’t want to see it or hear about it. However, in order to ensure the viability of the human race, it is necessary for man and woman to procreate. Same-sex marriages or liasons do not produce children. And no matter how badly same-sex couples want to adopt, without the simple biological process of man-woman sex, there will be no children to adopt.
I believe that those who argue on one side or the other are missing the point. Children are our future. The lack of children is, I believe, part of the “abomination” spoken of in the Scriptures. I’m not trying to be preachy, just realistic. Granted, there are over six billion humans on this planet now, and more on the way every second, but I believe a conscious decision to threaten the human race is wrong.
That’s my opinion – I’m sure yours is different.
I really enjoyed this episode. For a low-budget production it is delivering a fantastic and amazing quality. If I didn´t know better, I would think it is the “REAL” STAR TREK. Great Job. Thanks to all the members of the project.
I find the whole think about the homasexual relationship rediculous.
We are Star Trek Fans. We are tolerant. We are optimistic. We believe in a better future… But please, no Homosexuality. LOL. (Of course the bed-scene was a bit to long, but only because of the reasons Anthony described before).
Of course one can argue if a child should watch this episode.
If I had a 5 year old child, I would not allow it to watch this episode, too. But first of all because of the blood worms, there are really scary for a kid.
I have to admit that I – as a European – maybe have another view on the whole thing. Let me be a bit provocative. I do not not understand, why on the one hand there is so much crime and violence in American TV-Shows. And on the other hand there is such a big deal because of things like the “Nipplegate”-affair. (I mean you hardly could see something of her boobs).
Does it mean love and sexuality (both hetero and homosexuality) are worse than crime and violence?
#274 David Gerrold:
Thanks for your participation in this message board. Also, thanks for your responses to many of the comments, criticisms, and rants about the episode.
Having said that, I have a question. Science fiction makes allegorical tales about today’s world much easier to tell, especially if they’re set in alien surroundings or future times. However, (and I think I know the answer to this, and I’ll probably get rapped in the mouth to boot) the Trek demographic being what it is, would it not have been a little less political to have featured two different characters – possibly humanoid aliens – in the roles of Peter and Alex? It seems to me a bit over-the-top from a dramatic standpoint to make James T. Kirk’s only surviving relative gay.
And if Regulan bloodworms are the bad-ass creatures you say they are, why didn’t you just have Kirk beam over a few to take care of the tribbles? Problem solved.
#282 The point is what you define as “rights”. Rights were orginally what are now called “negative rights” which are protections from government power, effectively. In the 20th century people started pushing “positive rights”, which are entitlements from government, effectively. A negative right is, for instance, the right to speak freely- the government cannot stop you speaking your mind. A positive right is the right to an education, which is translated as the governmnet must *provide* an education for you. These are different things.
The issue is presented that gays are prevented from getting married. But they aren’t. There is no law saying gays cannot marry. There is however a definition of what a marriage is, which is one man and one woman and always has been, and that’s because it’s what the word marriage means. One might imagine a spinster who wished to “marry” her cat. Is she being denied rights because the law doesn’t recognise spinster/cat marriages? No. She has the same rights as everyone else. Nobody is allowed to marry a cat. Spinsters aren’t being victimised because it so happens that perhaps spinsters are more likely to want to marry their cats. It simply isn’t what marriage is.
So why is this an issue? Well, because under the Big Paternal State, marriage has become a route to entitlements- tax breaks, property transferral rights, the right to bunk off work for various reasons, and so on. So gays feel they aren’t getting these entitlements, just because they don’t like girls. But again we note that *nobody* is allowed to marry the same sex as themselves. Everyone already *is* equal under the law. And marriage simply isn’t two guys dressed as Judy Garland, it never has been and so when gays ask for gay “marriage” they are asking to redefine what a word actually means. But then we must note that language is the property of the people, not the government. The government simply doesn’t have the authority to change dictionary definitions and impose them on the populace.
The question instead then becomes one of contract. There is no reason that gays should not be able to write contracts with each other. But we note that there are other categories of people who may wish similar contracts. For instance, back with spinsters, two women living together in a non-sexual relationship might like to contract for the other to be their default “partner” in legal terms- e.g. if next of kin decisions need to be made (I had an aunt and a friend who lived together in this manner, for instance). Or an aging brother and sister living together, unmarried and childless, in the same home (again, I had some neighbours like this). Neither would want such contracts to be called “marriage” and at least in the latter case that would be rather repugnant.
So, we’re down to, should people be able to write such contracts? The answer clearly is yes. But should they be called “marriage”? I don’t think so. That just isn’t what marriage is- the word has never meant such things. To try to forcibly reinvent the language is not what free societies are supposed to be about.
Excellent episode.
I’ve seen the rough cut of part II of this show – it’s just as good if not better. “World Enough And Time” remains my favorite STNV show so far, but that’s a matter of personal preference – the whole production continues to improve from show to show. :-)
“Marriage” has changed as societies have changed — in the Bible, men had multiple wives and concubines; marriage contracts came about to establish paternity of children and the inheritance of property and it’s only in recent history IN THIS COUNTY that women had any rights in marriage. In many other countries, women remain chattlel. In a not so distant past, people of different races were not allowed to marry or people of different faiths. Divorce also almost impossible. Marriage has constantly reinvented itself.
Additionally, it isn’t requesting “extra” rights to want to marry. Marriage conveys very real rights — 1100 of them including hospital visitation rights, inheritance rights, and parental rights for children. No contract drafted by 2 folks can every cover all the rights that are conveyed when 2 folks marry.
272 David Gerrold: “Eventually, I hope that we will be able to do a special “director’s cut” with a few little surprises in it.”
Looking forward to that!
Oh, and one more compliment to James Cawley, the Phase II crew and particularly the VFX crew:
Thank you so much for bringing on the first starship-size non-Constitution-Class Starfleet vessel of the TOS era!! I love the Copernicus!
“I find the whole think about the homasexual relationship rediculous.
We are Star Trek Fans. We are tolerant. We are optimistic.”
Actually, that is not true. We are no more tolerant or optimistic than our neighbors who disagree with us; we merely trade 1 set of bigotries for another, that’s all.
errr… OK, sorry, I forgot that you already had a Federation Class ship, but it was barely visible.
289-
Taking one of those things there, I’m not quite clear why one needs a government adminstered “right” to hospital visitations. Here in England, there’s a lot of things wrong with society, but when somebody I know is in hospital I just walk in, ask which bed they’re in at the desk, and say “hi”. Presumably the hospital could bar some particular person from its premises, but is there a general policy in America of not letting gays into hospitals? I’m a bit mystified as to why any group needs a specific right to visit patients. What of my hypothetical spinsters? They have no special right to visit each other presumably.
But who will stop them?
Under what circumstances is this “no gays” policy being enforced? How do they know who is gay anyway?
“It is interesting that many people are characterizing the gay protestors as a violent mob, worrying about the restaurant owner who is being boycotted or the music director of a theatre who was forced to resign his position, because they donated money to Prop 8 — but where is the outrage on behalf of the 18,000 couples who just had their marriages annulled by an initiative that is nothing more than the tyranny of the majority?”
Because that’s not what happened.
What really happened was that people were fighting back for their freedoms of speech and belief against an element that set out to impose themselves oven them.
passing Prop 8 was an act of self defense.
@284 falcon:
“believe that those who argue on one side or the other are missing the point. Children are our future. The lack of children is, I believe, part of the “abomination” spoken of in the Scriptures. I’m not trying to be preachy, just realistic. Granted, there are over six billion humans on this planet now, and more on the way every second, but I believe a conscious decision to threaten the human race is wrong.”
Oh puh-lease. In case you haven’t notice, the earth is largely OVER-populated. So, having less children would be the least of our concerns. There aren’t more homosexuals (in percentage) now than there were a thousand years ago. It’s not like everyone suddenly is going to become homosexual just because two of the same sex are aloud to marry each other. That’s just preposterous.
“That’s my opinion – I’m sure yours is different.”
No, that’s your way of twisting pure facts and logic.
“but is there a general policy in America of not letting gays into hospitals? I’m a bit mystified as to why any group needs a specific right to visit patients. What of my hypothetical spinsters? They have no special right to visit each other presumably.
But who will stop them?”
Family members are next of kin and can and do stop partners from visiting in the hospital. Next of kin status is everything. My mother remarried my father so she could visit him (his sister would have prevented this) and fulfill his wishes in re his terminal cancer because his family was not going to follow them. Marriage conveys powerful rights for the parties in the marriage.
297-
Well, there’s your problem there. The error is in having a strange policy of nexts of kin deciding who can visit. Go after that, instead of trying to pile another amendment on top of a bad policy.
One should seek a general solution to a problem, rather than piling on entitlements to specific groups. it would seem pretty obvious here that the answer is for individuals to be able to specify their next of kin, which they could do if they suspect their default kin are going to act against their wishes- as a gay with a homophobic family might.
How exactly is having the same right as millions of others an ENTITLEMENT???
And sorry, the law is clear in regards to next of kin, it’s clearly delineated by law. Oh sure, you can have powers of attorney and living wills but again, no contract or contracts can substitute for all that comes with marriage — 1100 rights. Some can never be duplicated by any private contract such a tax laws.
287. Ian B
Meh, weak argument.
I’m all for gay rights in every way. I just think it’s gross seeing 2 dudes get it on. It’s gross to me.
‘Ramming very uncomfortable and inappropriate images down my throat …..’ etc etc etc ad nauseum;
just what is it with the male homphobes on here that they always have to resort to this rather tired cliche? Am only asking……………………………… ;)
Ian B -
Next of kin traditionally includes the spouse, which is why homosexual couples run into so many problems when it comes to hospitals, inheretince issuses, ect. If something where to happen to me 3 minutes from now, and I am unable to make my own wishes known, all decisions are automatically referred to my wife, as presumably she is the person that knows me best. Here in America, if the same thing happens to a gay couple, it then falls on the Hospital’s policy, which may allow for life-partners to make decisions or it may not. In places where they specifically state next of kin, since the life partner is not recognized as a “spouse” they are at best, treated as a friend of the patient, which means in a lot of cases, they can’t get the information about the patients condition that they deserve. If you throw in family members that are opposed to homosexuality, thats where you run into the problems. If the person dies, especially without a will, then the couple could have been “steady” for 40+ years and suddenly the surviving partner is not allowed to stay in the house, keep any of the belongings that aren’t clearly theirs, ect. Even with a will, family members can and have successfully challenged.
It’s a screwed up system that needs fixed, regardless of how it gets done.
Re: Message 120: ‘but well, gays are here to stay (at least until WW III, I suppose) ‘
That ’s beyond offensive and I’m surprised the message and the poster have been allowed to remain here.
301
Well, be that as it may, has it ever occured to you that two “gay” men may find it grosse to watch a male and female “get it on”??
Funny how most heterosexual males like the idea of two women “getting it on” but not two men. Its the exact same thing. This is merely a reflection of the naive sexual nature of our culture and how far we still have to go as a world.
Not too long ago:
1. A white woman could not have married a black man,
2. A white man could not have married a black woman,
3. Women could not vote,
4. Women were the property of men,
5. Black men were slaves,
6. Women had no legal birth control rights yet men could whatever they wanted with their bodies,
7. People of color could not vote,
8. A person of color could not have become president,
9. Women of abuse were not taken seriously,
Just because something makes people or a person uncomfortable does not mean there is something wrong with it. If society stuck to the ways it has always done things, then none of the above items would changed. History shows us that a society that grows and changes, is a society that prospers. Societies that do not grow and change…die away…Tolerance is the moniker for the 21st Century. Diversity in nature insures survival of the species.
mia
ps: ST:NV is a beautiful project, great work guys!
Anyways, my personal review of BaF Pt 1 is pretty much in line with what had been said before.
The Teaser blew my socks off. To quote another somewhat famous captain, “Stop putting holes in my ship!”
Act 1 did drag for quite a bit, and unfortunately, my wife, said it best during Peter’s little tantrum. “I’m acting my butt off!” I’m sure he’s a talented actor, but he did push it a tad over the top there.
Acts 2-4 is where the episode really started to shine for me. In the conference room where Kirk is asking each senior officer to accept his command after he resigns and they each refuse, I was taken back (or would that be forward) to the scene in Star Trek III, where Kirk says “McCoy and I have to do this, the rest of you, do not.”; and the crew on the Enterprise just smiles and make their replies.
Good job to Cawley and the rest of the NV/P2 team. Looking forward to seeing how, (and who?) gets away from the leeches of death.
301. – “I’m all for gay rights in every way. I just think it’s gross seeing 2 dudes get it on. It’s gross to me.”
Get a grip, they were hardly going at it. Just a bit of a cuddle and a little kiss, for goodness sake.
I think the appropriateness of the scene on the bed should be judged by one criteria, which is would it be blocked, shot, and edited the same way — in Star Trek — if the characters were a heterosexual couple. I’m pretty sure standard practice would have been that if lovers, even if clothed, got on top of each other like that, you cut to a closeup with the pelvises out of frame. It sounds silly when you spell it out like that but there were all kinds of rules like that in TV.
#305
“Funny how most heterosexual males like the idea of two women “getting it on” but not two men. Its the exact same thing. This is merely a reflection of the naive sexual nature of our culture and how far we still have to go as a world.”
Guilty! Speaking as a heterosexual male your are correct, if that scene had been between two women I would not have blinked twice. But two men just does nothing for me. However I still think B&F is the best effort to date and cannot wait for Part Two!
Here is my question back. If that scene had been between two women how would the typical heterosexual female react? I am not trying to be a wiseguy but I am curious if there is any parity in the viewing audience…
What a wonderful representation of IDIC. Congrats to James, David, Carlos and the rest of the cast and crew.
Magic_Al hit the nail on the head.
It is not that the scene contains 2 men, but rather that the way that it was written and staged was such that it seemed awkward and out-of-sync with the original series. Similarly some might argue that the blood worms devouring the crewman was also a little too long/graphic. (It was not so long ago that TNG got too graphic with an exploding head and heard it from parents etc….)
I don’t see anything wrong with adding gay/bi/tri(?) characters to the series. They just need to be well written. Personally I had a problem with the way the scene was written because opening the scene with Freeman seemingly on the prowl . This makes the transition the role of a sympathetic partner to be very difficult. Reverse this and the transition from sympathetic partner to lover is more easily realized.
James, I think you should put Anthony P. into the next one. He didn’t get a casting call for the Abrams film. : (
Yes, Anthony should get a cameo!!!
This site continues to amaze me.
With Bjo Trimble popping in to express condolences to dear Majel, and now detailed discussions with David Gerrold about this fine fan project, I feel I should be printing it all out and wrapping it in plastic as a collectible.
I still think the best male-to-male relationship in Hollywood is Kirk and Spock. Say what you will, but the two kids in B&F twitter on about marriage, which means today they have a 70% chance of getting divorced. Marriage is irrelevant.
What is relevant is how two people can love each other. Kirk and Spock in “Amok Time” trumps everything in terms of showing how one man can care for another. They don’t kiss or screw, but that one scene in sickbay simply shows that love can exist between two individuals, regardless of sex. It’s been fodder for K/S stories for decades.
“Blood and Fire,” in its wholehearted desire to show that a gay couple can be “mainstream” in the 23rd century, to me, is a step backwards for Trek. The couple, Peter and Alex, is isolated from the crew in its intimacy. Then, there is a distinct effort to show that the “relationship” is real through dialogue, which says to me “We’re gay! We really are! We’re different!”
Trek’s ultimate answer should be “So, what? Get back to your post!”
As a Spaniard and Trek aficionado, just to say that this episode is gorgeus!! It’s a fanfilm with a high quality in its story and sfx. You have capturated as well the look and feel of a golden era for Star Trek. For me BAF encarnates too an IDIC spirit for being dedicated to all that people affected by AIDS and other deseases, for being differents in their sexual condition and especially because in that shooting was the first Spaniard ever in a Trek production (pro or amateur) working here. Thanks to Trekminal for being a great NV mirror translating into Spanish these episodes and especially, to Siki (she came from Spain to shot this!!) for beeing a pioneer working in that wonderful episode as your Continuity Supervisor and all to the Cast and Crew to bring us back the essence of Star Trek in this medieval times of darkness, intolerance and crisis.
New Voyages-Phase II must continue being the flag of the authentic Gene Roddenberry’s ideals and of course my humble congratulations to Mr Cawley, to Mr Gerrold and all the team for make possible a brilliant future for us.
Greetings from España!
Alvarez
Cameo for Anthony! Yeah!
‘301: Well, be that as it may, has it ever occured to you that two “gay” men may find it grosse to watch a male and female “get it on”??’
As a well-adjusted, self-aware and mature homosexual adult male my answer would have to be ‘no, never, not at all’. I have a sneaking suspicion that many other well-adjusted, self-aware and mature homosexual adults, male or female, feel the same. The same could equally apply to well-adjusted, self-aware and mature heterosexual adult Starfleet Officers.
Hmmmm……. I wonder where I’m leading to on this one…….
For Mr. James Cawley:
Sir, any chance that your character, Captain Kirk, will wear Captain Archer’s uniform? You look m-m-m-m-m-marvelous (as Billy Crystal say in Fernando Lamas voice on Saturday Night Live).
I had this idea that Captain Kirk was beaming up from a planet and there was trouble. His uniform was dissolving, while beaming up, and Mr. Spock was unable to find the solution. So he push a button in the library files on the transporter console, select a uniform in the past and viola!
Finally, Captain Kirk finally materialised and saw his new uniform unexpectally. Boy, Mr. Spock has better give a good explanation to Captain Kirk.
Wishful thinking, Mr. Cawley.
Anyway, sir. Thank you for your time. I wish you and your family plus the people at New Voyages/Phase 2 — Peace, Long Life and Happiness.
Live Long and Prosper.
P.S.: Any chance of an Animated Episode of Phase Two in the near future? This is to honour the Animated Series of Star Trek that fans wanted more Star Trek (when the original series was cancelled in the sixities) during the seventies.
317
I think you misunderstood the point I was making concerning the comment the other person made about percieving the couple making out as “grosse”.
The point I am making is: Just because something is “uncomfortable” for someone does not mean it is wrong. I was trying to get that person to see it from another perspective. Ergo: There is nothing wrong with couplings between any combination of folk in all shades of gender variations between male-female.
I am not entimating that gay couples have problems with watching heterosexual couples make out. Merely trying to point out the very point I stated above. Just because something is uncomfortable even for the masses of folk in the world…does not make it wrong. It simply reflects the current development of our world and that one should attempt to see the world thru anothers eyes.
mia
I must say that I continue to be impressed by the NV/PII crew. To this point every new episode has been an improvement on the previous in the way of storytelling, acting, pacing, visuals, sound, and editing.
This episode certainly had its flaw in all of those areas but I am very happy to see the continued advancements being made. I am eagerly looking forward to the second half!
317
My brother is gay. I think its gross seeing him snuggle with his partner. And do I enjoy seeing 2 woman get it on? Sure if they are both hot. I don’t find any guy “hot”. Therefore it’s a little gross to me. Just an opinion not right and wrong. I could easily say blood wine is gross too.
I don’t think it’s wrong in any way. I shouldn’t have posted it. It really was pointless. My apologies.
305
I’m with you. I just find the thought of 2 men being romantic gross. It’s something I would rather not see if I could avoid. I don’t think it’s wrong at all. Some people find nudity gross, others hate seeing blood and gore. Just an opinion of mine.
309 -”Here is my question back. If that scene had been between two women how would the typical heterosexual female react? I am not trying to be a wiseguy but I am curious if there is any parity in the viewing audience…”
That is a fair question. As a female I would not have found it disturbing to see two women making out. It would not do anything for me personaly as I am attracted to males. I have nothing against women and do not “rule them” so to speak. I just prefer men, thads all.
Tha being said, I do have female friends that would find a paring of women to be grosse. Not all of my friends are as liberal ( is “tolerant” becoming the new politcal word for liberal?) as myself. Some of them would surely go “eww”, but thats the nature of the beast. Mark Twain said it best” You can please some of the people some of the time, but never all of the people all of the time”…same goes with a great Movie, Fanfilm, Music CD and Artwork. I am sure someone out there thinks Micheal Angelo sucks…sigh, thats just the world.
Art is at its best when it provokes thought and contemplation. Mr. Cawley and Gerold have done so with this episode. So in the truest since they have created a work of art. Very rare in our current world I would say.
Good point though!
mia
Re: #287 – “And marriage simply isn’t two guys dressed as Judy Garland ”
What a breathtakingly ignorant, ugly, and bigoted remark. Do you actually know any gay people? And FYI, as you seem to be hung up on “two guys” who “don’t like girls”, there are a lot of gay women in this country who also want the right to legally marry each other. I assume you only mention men because they’re the ones who creep you out the most.
Hello All,
This ep is a real mixed bag for me. I found the opening teaser to be one of the best choreographed Trek batttles of all time, it was fantastic.
The “bedroom” scene unfortunately felt really forced to me. I support gay rights entirely, however this scene went on waaay too long. I don’t think they spent nearly as much time on the first inter-racial kiss on network tv as was spent here, not to mention these are minor players in the larger scheme.
With only 1 or 2 eps per year, I’d much rather see the main crew explored more. “World enough and Time” managed the guest cast/ regular cast mix better.
I also agree wiht Anthony that Dr. McCoy came off mean spirited in some scenes, which left a bad taste in my mouth for the character.
Other than that. I’m truly impressed with the production values, and some of the regular cast are doing a fine job. Particularly Chekov who not only looks the part, but nails many of the mannerisms and accent.
Hopefully my two cents are constructive. Happy holidays to all
Doug L.
AJ –Amok time is such a wonderful episode. I know it’s my favorite hand’s down because of the depth of the Kirk & SPock friendship. That smile at the end….
Denise!!!1 There you are! I wish I had access to FB here at work. I’ll have to email you.
I saw a rough cut of both parts at Loscon a few weeks ago. The bloodworm FX are far more impressive than I expected, but problems with some of Gerrold’s staging and his direction of the actors unfortunately remain. I admire the willingness of Cawley and the other producers to take on controversial subject matter, and if good intentions meant everything I would rate “Blood and Fire” as stellar–but this may have been a case of a writer/director getting too close to the subject matter to keep his perspective on the story being told. As Mr. Pascale indicates, the romance as depicted actually doesn’t really add all that much to “Blood and Fire” or its themes.
Part 2 appeared to hew more closely to Gerrold’s original script for TNG and is thus far more heavy in the AIDS-allegory department; I’ll leave it for Trekmovie posters to decide if it’s good drama. (And yes–spoiler alert!–the Klingons do have a much larger role in the second half, though I’m not sure that was in retrospect a good idea, either.) In a Q & A after the screening I voiced my opinion that a particular scene required tightening in the interest of story logic, and Gerrold agreed; he also indicated that some lines of dialogue which had been cut were in the process of being put back in, so we’ll see. But all in all, while I thought “Blood and Fire” is well worth seeing and has much to recommend it, I would join Mr. Pascale in rating it behind (though well ahead of other New Voyages outings) the triumph of “World Enough and Time.”
I have been waiting to read this review until I could see the episode. Mr. Pascale I think offers a pretty spot-on analysis of a great episode with some flaws keeping it from matching WEAT. Fine job on the part of the Phase II gang however. Regardless of any quantum reimagining, glad to see some honest to God classic Trek!
David Gerrold,
Wow! Took your Tribbles book, about writing your first script for Trek, with me to an evangelical church camp I was forced to go to when I was a kid. It let me ignore the Jesus-is-my-invisible-buddy loony tunes, and I took away the line “THE GOLDEN OPPORTUNITY ISN’T WORTH A DAMN UNLESS YOU’RE READY FOR IT.” I’m 50 now and I have carried that with me my whole life, and quote it often. Lasted longer than my belief in fairy tales about omnipresent sky gods and their virgin girlfriends. “Hey–that’s the BOOK.!”
Damn right about canon, btw — Star Trek is best WHEN it plays fast and loose with the canon and serves the story. I’ll go so far as to say that Harlan Ellison really missed the point when he dismissed episodic television, and Star Trek in particular, because they mini-rebooted each week — that was one of the best things about it! That’s why, now, each story stands out like a perfect little jewel. Where would Court Martial have been without that little button for jettisoning the pod? :-) And who cares that nobody comes up with the idea of using a shuttlecraft in Galileo 7?
So anyway, thanks for posting here — this place really is the home away from home for TOS Trek fans. And I’m not even interested in the new movie with full-lipped, lovely Girlkirk in it.
Misbell
“I mean, gays can work and get paid. Gays can own a property. Gays have right to have a home. Gays can marry a woman and reproduce their genes that way. Gays have freedom of religion. So -what- basic civil rights are they being denied?
From what I can understand, they are demanding -extra- rights. They are demanding special treatment because of their sexuality. Yet they are pretending they are perfectly normal. So… how is it? Are they normal or aren’t they? If they are, why they are demanding extra rights?”
So your argument is that a gay man has the same right to marry a woman as a straight man? Do you realize how pathetically silly that sounds? That’s like saying the rich have the same right to sleep under a bridge as the poor.
Your misstatement of the issue would be amusing if it weren’t so ignorant of the real facts in the matter.
The Federal government has identified 1138 separate rights, benefits, privileges, and obligations attendant to the legal recognition of marriage. These include inheritance, kinship, child custody, hospital visitation, deathbed decisions, joint tax returns, community property, and so on. These are not minor matters. The denial of marriage equality for same-sex couples is a denial of access to equal protection under the law.
On the issue of ‘extra-rights’ or ’special rights’ — that implies that gay people are asking for a privilege that straight people do not have. This is not so. Gay people are asking for the same rights as straight people. The right to marry the person they love.
Would you tell George Takei that he cannot marry his partner of twenty years? Would you vote to have the state automatically dissolve the legality of that relationship? Why?
One of the reasons for the existence of prejudice against any group is ignorance of who they are, a lack of understanding. The only way prejudice can be dispelled is with information and experience so that fear is replaced with empathy. The portrayal of gay people in any TV show, especially Star Trek is an opportunity for all of us to increase the boundaries of the human community, so that it’s about including all of us, not just some of us.
And who cares that nobody comes up with the idea of using a shuttlecraft in The Enemy Within, sorry.
>>And I’m not even interested in the new movie with full-lipped, lovely Girlkirk in it.
Urrrmmm, not that there’s anything wrong with that.
“If you want my opinion, I think that this probably had more to do with the episode not getting filmed than the gay angle: It had not much of anything to do with the main cast. If they had turned one of the ‘gay couple’ in to Geordie or Wes or someone like that, and the other member of the couple in to a guest star, then it would have likely been picked up.”
Nope. That’s not the reason it was shelved. In the first of several rewrites, one of the gay characters was dropped and all of his lines were given to Tasha Yar. Even after that, the script was still shelved for reasons that had nothing to do with the content. History has forgotten some of the details and blurred the rest.
But as a personal observation, I’ve noticed that when there is an information vacuum, some people will fill that vacuum with whatever explanation they like, whether it’s accurate or not. Please, you can google a lot of information on the web, and on this forum, you even have the opportunity to ask if anyone knows the real story.
David Gerrold,
Also got my Mormon Spanish teacher to read When Harlie Was One and The Man Who Folded Himself in hardcover bookclub editions, when they first came out. Heh –Folded really blew his mind. He didn’t like the guy frakkin himself, then he claimed that his dislike stemmed from it being a poorly done story. I remember thinking, “this guy is intellectually dishonest–” first time I think I identified that.
So, you were kinda a big deal for me. Shuffle shuffle. ‘S all I’m sayin.
Misbell
Mr. Cawley, from one TOS purest to another, I like it… thanks… My only observation would be that the actors that played Peter Kirk and his significant other should have switched roles, seems like the other guy would have looked more like Peter Kirk…
#284 – “I am a happily married (for more than 25 years) heterosexual, and in my judgement, what people do in the bedroom is their own business and I don’t want to see it or hear about it. However, in order to ensure the viability of the human race, it is necessary for man and woman to procreate. Same-sex marriages or liasons do not produce children. And no matter how badly same-sex couples want to adopt, without the simple biological process of man-woman sex, there will be no children to adopt.”
Many gay people have children of their own. A person’s sexual orientation does not automatically disconnect his or her ability to make a baby. It only takes a few minutes to make a baby, it takes a whole lifetime to raise one into a compassionate independent joyous creative generous adult. The latter is a far more important skill and far more necessary to the survival of society than simply being fertile. Lots of people can be fertile, not everybody can be a good parent.
But it’s worth pointing out that a lot of heterosexual commentators on this issue see it as an issue of sex, who’s doing what and with which and to who. Most gay people do not see the issue as being about sex. It’s about relationships, bonding, partnership, emotional connection. It’s about building a family together, sharing dreams, being playmates and yes, lovers too.
Straight couples don’t get married only for sex. Neither do gay couples. This isn’t about sex and it isn’t only about children. It’s about being able to be who you really are — and having the law recognize and acknowledge that. It’s about life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It’s not only about the dream of a future that works for all of us with no one left out, it’s about the essential promise at the heart and soul of the American charter. Liberty and justice for all. Do we really need to explain the word “all?”
“Having said that, I have a question. Science fiction makes allegorical tales about today’s world much easier to tell, especially if they’re set in alien surroundings or future times. However, (and I think I know the answer to this, and I’ll probably get rapped in the mouth to boot) the Trek demographic being what it is, would it not have been a little less political to have featured two different characters – possibly humanoid aliens – in the roles of Peter and Alex? It seems to me a bit over-the-top from a dramatic standpoint to make James T. Kirk’s only surviving relative gay.”
Don’t you think that would have defeated the point of the episode?
Gene Roddenberry promised the gay fans of the show that we would see gay crewmembers aboard the Enterprise. He said, “It’s time.” I felt an obligation to keep that promise. So did James Cawley.
Based on the length and depth of this thread, the great number of comments, it was not only appropriate — but necessary. This conversation here, this thread, is part of the process of building a future that works for all of us, with NOBODY left out.
Thanks also to Mr. Gerrold for this episode…
“Because that’s not what happened.
What really happened was that people were fighting back for their freedoms of speech and belief against an element that set out to impose themselves oven them.
passing Prop 8 was an act of self defense.”
How were you harmed before Prop 8 was passed? What specific danger were you in?
Do you think it’s right for people to vote on other people’s marriages?
Although I did kind of fast forward thorugh the cabin scene…. I applaud everyhting Mr. Gerrold and Mr. Cawley are saying. As a Californian, I was really offended at the Prop Hate (8) campaign that the “moral majority” pitched before the election. Now that was very ugly and forced IMHO…
In a few hunderd years, our descendants will look upon us as close minded primitives, much like someone today would look upon slavery, racism, etc. with disgust. This all remainds of the scene in “Let This Be Your Last Battlefield”, where it appeared to be beyond Kirk’s ability to comprehend that hate/racism that was displayed from the ’superior” beings point of view.
Again a great episode. Thank you very much.
A lot of tension was built up. I’m looking forward to how it resolves in Part 2.
I feel however, that the couple got more screen time than a straight couple might have gotten. It slows down the pace of the episode a bit and serves only as a very clear (political) statement for the equal status of homosexual relationships.
At least in Europe, it is not completely uncommon to see a gay couple on television.
Thanks again to David Gerrold and James Cawley for taking the time to post here and respond to the various posts.
Very much looking forward to part II.
Not to drift off topic too much, but what I would really like to see in an episode is a hot tranny. Some of those dudes really pull that off well. I’ve seen their erotica, some of it is fascinating to me.
Even as a hetero dude, I don’t get these dudes who freak out when they’ve unwittingly played the crying game. I guess call me an optimist. I see the glass 2/3 full rather than 1/3 empty. I say that if you’re a hetero dude, and a tranny can pull it off THAT well on you up until the time is right, you’ve got to unlearn your discovery and appreciate the illusion. Love is fleeting; make it or break it.
I think it is Meatloaf that tells us, in his grate wisdom, “Now don’t be sad, cause 2 out of 3 ain’t bad”.
Thats my story and I am sticking to it.
THE WOMEN!!
=h=
Mr. Gerrold…brilliant and educated words. Thank you!
To you and Mr. Cawley…thank you for an entertaining and thought provoking episode! This will go down in Trek history equal to the Kirk-Uhura kiss I think!
Mr Gerrold– I’ve been a fan of your writing for decades. But now I am also a fan of the man. Thank you, sir.
“Lots of people can be fertile, not everybody can be a good parent.”
I work in a Family Violence Bureau. No truer words.
Hi David! So very good to see you here!
For the record, when I nervously came out as a young gay man as a long standing fan and conventioneer in the mid-80’s, I got a pretty lousy reception (to say the least) from a few fans who I really thought were my buddies no matter what.
David was around for that and although I wasn’t that teenager that he mentioned above anymore – more a scared but honest bloke in his mid-20’s – I’ve never forgotten his words and support from then till now.
Ta David; and whatever happenned to that giant yellow banana?
‘344: This will go down in Trek history equal to the Kirk-Uhura kiss I think!’
Given that it’s 40 years between the two, isn’t it a crying shame that it might be seen as having to? And it isn’t as though this is breakthrough stuff – anyone watching HBO or BBC America or even the Sci Fi Channel knows this. The pity is that it took what was THE thinking SF show of it’s time forever to NOT honestly depict same sex relationships, and got left behind by Buffy, by Galactica, and by – and this is the interesting bit – a family-orientated TV show that kicked off 4 years before TOS in the UK called Doctor Who. The funny thing is that the kids seem to love Captain Jack to bits despite what he does with his bits; they really aren’t bothered. It seems that you can’t ‘ram’ stuff ‘down throats’ to seven year old, it’s only the adults who see it as such.
All the commentary on this thread on being gay? The way I see it, its commentary on the episode. No offense, because it is doing what Trek is supposed to do: get us to examine ourselves and the human condition.
Not too mention that we (and I wonder if its just in the U.S. really) have a long way to go.
#347 brings up a great point. Sometimes it sure seems like its the adults and not kids who make a big deal of things. If only we adults would sometimes just turn the other cheek, treat others the way we like to be treated and add a dose of childhood innocence, then who knows where we would be as a people.
Looking forward to Part II and the dialogue it will surely generate!!
Part II holds a whole new set of things to get riled up about–isn’t Trek great?!?!?!!!
Cheers–
–R
“How were you harmed before Prop 8 was passed? What specific danger were you in?
Your kidding, right? Imagine being a fertility doctor who was sued because she didn’t want to inseminate a lesbian because it went against her beliefs, even tho she recommended a qualified doctor down the street.
If you think that was o.k., then you don’t believe in freedom, my friend.
Then considered all the people who have been arrested for “hate crimes” and “hate speech” crimes because they have dared to say that they think that homosexuality is immoral.
If you think that people should be arrested based upon their belief, then that’s tyrranical.
“Do you think it’s right for people to vote on other people’s marriages?”
We’ve been doing it for decades; and even continue to do it today. Many religions and cultures have to check their beliefs at the door and only limit themselves to 1 marriage partner.
Besides, marriage has never been between any man and any woman- certain criteris must be met- even to this day and going into tomorrow.
Eliminate ALL marriage laws- allow poligimay, and even lift freedom-restrictions from close cousins- even if it repels you. Otherwise, gays who want to restrict others of their rights are just as bad as Prop 8.
Then there is the brutal treatment and hatred of ex-gays at the hands of the gay community. I bet that irony would never make it to Star Trek- those wanting tolerance and acceptance denying it of others.
Sorry- if people’s rights weren’t violated by the gay rights movement, then most people wouldn’t care. However, claiming minority status for no other reason than who you want to have sex with is wrong and unfair. People should have equality, not more equality because they want to have sex with those of the sam egender.
This is the 1st time I’ve seen any of these Star Trek New Voyages and now Phase 2. I like them–wow what an effort to put this thing together. The only I didn’t like was episode with the doomsday machines. All the ships move through space like cartoons from the WB. Rearing up like an animal before flying off–silly.
Now this episode is really good–the love theme, it’s new and challenging but hardly worth the worry about the hate that is spewed out. I still see that even though this episode is online now, the world is still here and straight people and our marriages are still safe.
Kudos to the creators of this show for the guts and their love of the original series, their hard work shows well.
Forgetting all the controversy…a very well made production. It’s funny though, there is something I can’t quite put my finger on that always reminds me that I’m not watching a “professional” production (and, please, JC – that’s not meant as a slight)…
I’m not talking about the acting, it’s something technical. My guess is that it’s a combination of two things.
1. The video – I know the production is shot on video (HD? HDV?) and not sure if it’s 24p or not, but there is something about the image that still feels like video, rather than film – perhaps a combination of contrast ratio and the inevitable lack of film grain(!). TOS was always a bit more flooded and New Voyages seems to go for more dramatic lighting…
2. The audio – there is a sense of “place” for lack of a better term, a presence in the audio that sounds like it’s captured on camera mics (I know it isn’t – I’ve seen the production stills). Maybe they’re mic’d too closely? Maybe some sort of compression? Not sure what it is – noticed it particularly in sickbay, when it sounds like you can hear the dialog “bouncing” off the scenery.
James Cawley – would love to hear your take on this. I know your goal has always been to get as close to the “real thing” as possible – and while I know that shooting on 35mm is not practical, and of course that you’re doing amazing things on an incredibly tight budget, for some reason, these two things always keep me from the needed “suspension of disbelief.”
Anyone else ever feel this way?
All around, a great job, JC.
(And, I’ll chime in with only one thought on the gay character debate – there should be no debate on whether or not a gay character belongs in star trek, any more than any debate about a black character, white character russian character, disabled character or ANY character. What matters is if he/she is a GOOD character. If a character only exists to be gay, straight, black, white, whatever – if their sole reason is to make a singular point, and not have a life outside of that one trait, then he/she is not a good character.
It’s a problem often found in many television shows which try to seem “enlightened” by having a gay character – and then only have plot lines for that character that ONLY involve being gay – as if being gay was the only attribute of their personality. (”Brothers and SIsters”, “Six Feet Under”, etc.) With many gay friends, I know that their lives don’t center around being gay – they go to work, get parking tickets, have conflicts, and all of the ups, downs, trials and tribulations of any other person – being gay is only ONE part of their personality, as being straight is only ONE part of mine.
So forget whether or not the character is GAY. It’s not a valid criticism. Criticize them if it’s not a GOOD character. (Not saying whether they are or are not, just making a point.)
#283: It’s not illegal, but part of the Paramount agreement is that Phase II can’t make any money off their episodes. So straight out cash is not okay, but something the crew can use like a Home Depot gift card is happily accepted.
I saw a preview of this episode a while back. When the scene in Peter’s quarters started three thoughts started at once: 1. This makes me a little uncomfortable, I should examine why, it’s cool that this is provoking such a reaction in me. 2. There sure was a lot of sexual innuendo in TOS. 3. Is there a Kirk in the universe that doesn’t have a libido going at warp factor nine?
I believe I may actually have learned a bit more about how I approach other people and issues (I know this is extremely corny but in my case it at least is honest).Thanks Phase II for doing something that film doesn’t do often enough: make us think.
350. REDBELLPEPPERS – December 22, 2008
“Then there is the brutal treatment and hatred of ex-gays at the hands of the gay community. I bet that irony would never make it to Star Trek- those wanting tolerance and acceptance denying it of others.”
What ex-gays? There’s no such thing, unless of course you count those botn again Christian types who claim they’re “ex gays.” Homosexuals can no more choose to be straight, than a straight person can choose to be gay.
“Sorry- if people’s rights weren’t violated by the gay rights movement, then most people wouldn’t care. However, claiming minority status for no other reason than who you want to have sex with is wrong and unfair. People should have equality, not more equality because they want to have sex with those of the sam egender.”
Homosexuals don’t want marriage rights so they can have sex. They want those rights for the exact same reason you would expect the right to marry who you choose. It’s not about sex, it never was. It’s about one consenting adult having the right to love another. Nothing more, nothing less.
Then again, you’re clearly determined to hang on to your fear and loathing, so I’m sure the truth of the matter will be lost on you.
What’s with Kirk in an ENT era uniform in the credits?
“Why should Peter being gay have been avoided, OM? I’m sorry that it makes you squeamish that gay people are real, and the world is now at a place where they’re not easily hidden and kept from mainstream media, but that is the case. And it’s not going to change.”
…Sorry, you’re not going to lable me as a homophobe on this, no matter how much you might get your own rocks off in the attempt. The point made was the in previous writings Peter had been portrayed as a heterosexual, which is where about half of the complaints are centered on, with the other half, of course, being based solely on homophobia. The latter half I can’t do jack s’hit about, but the former “canon” issue could have been avoided by selecting one of the other two Kirk nephews.
…On the other hand, Cawley and Gerrold – yeah, I said Povill earlier, mea culprit – could have *REALLY* thrown a spitter at the homophobes by introducing Peter’s love interest as being none other than Peter Preston. Then you’d have everyone getting “petered out” over the canon confusion and all hell breaking loose in the forums to a level which makes most of the petty little tirades around here seem limpwristed by comparison.
Anyway, enough of you. Go bait someone else who *is* a homophobe.
————-
Actually, Blood and Fire has been first offered to the public via downloads and torrents. It will be on the Dragonfly video service soon as well.
…This is in MP4/Quicktime, right? I avoid those formats, and eventually someone’ll do a decent port to an AVI codec such as DiVX/XViD. AVI suits my purposes far better than the mess that (cr)Apple likes people to think is better but really isn’t. Still, the torrent distribution on STNV’s part is a good idea, and I support such efforts.
————-
DG: “Okay, now that’s out of the way…”
…Big mistake here, David. Anthony needed to post your entire comment set as a separate article. Something that good deserves its own thread and not be broken up like that.
————-
” I’ll go so far as to say that Harlan Ellison really missed the point when he dismissed episodic television”
…That’s otay. A lot of us dismiss Li’l Harlie these days anyway. :-P
————-
“Your comments may be deleted.
ahhh, who am I kidding? It’s just us THE REGULAR FOLKS that these rules apply to.
You are HOLLYWOOD, baybeeeee. AP loves hollywood.”
…Actually, after the initial mistake of purging everything negative, Anthony’s apparently realized he was doing far more harm than good by censoring anything related to the debate. Like it or not, people are going to be divided about homosexuality, and the only way any sort of acceptance and/or compromise is going to occur is if we as a people are allowed to discuss it as each individual sees fit. Granted, there *is* a line that shouldn’t be crossed, but if you’ve got an opinion/belief/view on one side or the other, then at least express it rationally as possible. The only way the fear and hatred on both sides – and yes, both sides exhibit these traits, alas – will be eliminated is for them to be exposed and embraced as existing, and then dissected so that some sort of cure can be determined and applied. I think Anthony realizes this now…otherwise about 240 of the 300+ posts on here would have been purged by now. And he *is* to be commended for his coming to terms with this.
…Oh, and on a side note, the old excuse of “it’s my house, my rules” when applied to a public, online forum in far more cases than not results in the forum dying off, as people will not post where their time posting will be wasted due to a moderator’s caustic whim. For a great example of this, check out Media BLVD’s Battlestar Galactica forum for an example of how moderator abuse will kill an active forum quicker than a loss of hosting service.
——————–
….And I’ll close my long reply with this humorous observation:
3. Women could not vote,
…And when they got the vote, the first thing they did was lobby for prohibition, and look at the mess that caused. :-) :-) ;-)
#350–you are mixing apples and oranges.
The doctor being sued has nothing to do with marriage.. Pharmacists have been sued for refusing to fill birth control prescriptions. It would be a very scary thing if doctors could pick and choose who they were going to treat based on their own personal criteria. What’s to stop a doctor from deciding they don’t want to inseminate mixed race couples due to their belief that it’s wrong? It’s a slippery slope.
No one is arrested for having a belief or exercising their Freedom of Speech (unless it crosses over into slander or you yell “FIre!” in a theatre). It’s only when belief and speech become action, that hate crimes occur.
As for deciding the rules for other people’s marriages…. Yes, we have done it for decades and longer — badly. The majority is often wrong. In the not too distant past, my parents’ marriage would have been illegal because they were from two different ethnic groups. That would have sucked for me.
“Forgetting all the controversy…a very well made production. It’s funny though, there is something I can’t quite put my finger on that always reminds me that I’m not watching a “professional” production”
…It’s Cawley’s hair! :-) :-)
RedBellPeppers,
it is amazing to me hear the statements of you and others on this board regarding a, uhm, straight-forward subplot of Phase 2 that is totally in keeping with Roddenberry’s vision. seriously, think of all the thought-provoking episodes of TOS that were intended to challenge societal norms.
Cawley & Company wisely have their eye on episodes like these:
‘Cloud Minders’ – elite vs. working class, workplace conditions, etc.
‘ A Private Little War’ – superpowers arming civil wars
‘Return of the Archons’ – blindly following religious tenants
‘Court Martial’ – the balance between technology and humanity
‘A Taste of Armageddon’ – the futility of war
‘Plato’s Stepchildren’ – the arrogance of intellectual power
the fact that you can’t even acknowledge ‘Blood and Fire’ as at least an honest attempt to join this tradition is telling. they’ve obviously touched a nerve with people like you that needs to be touched, especially considering statements from you like:
“Your kidding, right? Imagine being a fertility doctor who was sued because she didn’t want to inseminate a lesbian because it went against her beliefs, even tho she recommended a qualified doctor down the street. If you think that was o.k., then you don’t believe in freedom, my friend.”
so let’s time-travel a bit. see that Big Donut on the wiped-out horizon? jump right in.
if a physician has a moral problem with artificial insemination under any circumsances, that’s one thing. but for that physician to offer the service to some but not, ahem, others, is and always be illegal in the 21st century, as it should. it would be EXACTLY the same if a renter offered an apartment to Christians only and refused to a Jew, based on their beliefs (which is conceivable).
and take this as a telling tidbit, RedBell: the California Supreme Court overturned Proposition 11 in the early 1960s. it was a voter-approved initiative that (briefly) vacated a state law that prohibited just such racist/profiling practices in housing. The court threw it out just as they will throw out Prop 8.
the tyranny of the majority cannot be allowed to take away basic civil rights from a protected minority class.
you’ve learned from history. now the Big Donut will spit you back out.
>>Your kidding, right? Imagine being a fertility doctor who was sued because she didn’t want to inseminate a lesbian because it went against her beliefs, even tho she recommended a qualified doctor down the street.«
While that doesn’t have anything to do with the Proposition 8 question, it does speak to the issue of equal treatment under the law. Do you think that you should be bound by law to follow the beliefs of someone else’s religion? Forbidden to eat cheeseburgers, drink alcohol, eat pork or shrimp, wear clothes of mixed fibers, etc.? Because someone else’s religious beliefs are held to be more important than secular law?
I know the case you’re referring to, it’s one of a body of cases where people are claiming their religion gives them the right to withhold services from gay people.
What you believe is your business. And your business alone. It does not grant you the right to set aside secular law.
>>If you think that was o.k., then you don’t believe in freedom, my friend.<>Then considered all the people who have been arrested for “hate crimes” and “hate speech” crimes because they have dared to say that they think that homosexuality is immoral.«
Name six. Nobody has been arrested for speaking their opinion. For someone to be arrested for the commission of a hate crime, they have to commit a criminal act of violence where it can be proven in court that the act was motivated by hatred of a specific group or class of people.
>>If you think that people should be arrested based upon their belief, then that’s tyrranical. «
Nowhere have I said that. If that’s what you’re hearing, you need to read more carefully.
>>Eliminate ALL marriage laws- allow poligimay, and even lift freedom-restrictions from close cousins- even if it repels you. Otherwise, gays who want to restrict others of their rights are just as bad as Prop 8.«
Now, you are making things up. Nowhere has any spokesperson for the LGBT community or any gay activist ever said they want to take away the rights of any other group of people. In fact, the gay rights leaders have said more than once that they are committed to equal rights for ALL people and that there is no justice if any group, gay or straight, is denied equality in the eyes of the law.
>>Then there is the brutal treatment and hatred of ex-gays at the hands of the gay community. I bet that irony would never make it to Star Trek- those wanting tolerance and acceptance denying it of others.«
The ex-gay movement is a sham. It doesn’t work. Every survivor of the movement who I’ve met has been clear about what a failure it is. The conventions of the various ex-gay organizations often turn into orgies. The two men who founded the ex-gay movement quit to become lovers. The British arm of the ex-gay movement disbanded because it simply didn’t work. Speaking specifically to your point, there have been no cases of brutal treatment or hatred of so-called ex-gays. There has been public disagreement with them, but no one from the gay community has beaten them or vandalized their property.
>>Sorry- if people’s rights weren’t violated by the gay rights movement, then most people wouldn’t care. However, claiming minority status for no other reason than who you want to have sex with is wrong and unfair. People should have equality, not more equality because they want to have sex with those of the sam egender.«
Based on what you have written, I don’t think you understand the movement at all. Nowhere has the gay rights movement violated anyone else’s rights. That some people are whining that their rights are being violated — upon closer examination — reveals not only an ignorance of the law, but a pernicious whiny victim racket, the same kind of whiny victim racket we heard in the sixties from ardent segregationists who made silly and outrageous claims that MLK and all his commie militant uppity activists were infringing on their civil rights by demanding equality in the eyes of the law.
I’ve been a civil rights activist since I was a teenager. I’ve studied these issues in depth. I’ve had the privilege of meeting Harvey Milk, Cesar Chavez, Bayard Rustin, and many others who helped design the civil rights campaigns for blacks, Latinos, immigrants, women, children, the disabled, as well as for LGBT people. I also learned about a public commitment to civil rights from men like Harlan Ellison and Gene Roddenberry, not to mention my own African-American cousins. The first lesson — no matter which side of the argument you choose, do your research. Learn the other side’s issues as well as your own. Based on what you have written here, you have repeated the talking points of the anti-gay movement without ever once asking to see the evidence or researching the issues. I recommend that you do some serious googling because all of your arguments have been addressed in much greater depth than this forum allows.
I am going to add one point. I do love this controversy. I love this argument. I love this thread. Gene Roddenberry would have loved it too. Because this is exactly the kind of discussion that he wanted Star Trek to create among the audience — where we start looking at issues with compassion, with rationality, with depth, with insight, with genuine caring, and a mutual respect and willinghness to consider each other’s viewpoints. Thank you for listening.
Mr Gerrold
Bless you for these contributions here. And kudos on writing what seems to be one bang-up good story in B.A.F.
One more person here that read your book ( It was the very first book I ever bought, I was quite young!) on the making of the Trouble With Tribbles. It influenced me on many levels.
I would like your permission to collate and reprint your posts on this subject on my website which focuses on social commentary. A link is above, click on my avatar if you wish.
( http://flaminghand.com )
Secondarily, I have to also ask Anthony Pascale if he objects to this.
I’ll be patiently awaiting a response :)
E.T. Moody III
352. bmar
I really do not understand the low production qualtiy. I know it’s Fanmade but I agree, the New Voyages should look much better by now – all around.
With the time they have for post-production, I think it would be wise to re-record all audio (voiceovers) and mix in post. And the light always seems to be a problem with NV.
I guess I will have to stop and get them a gift card.
Can we get Part II a little faster?
Seems like the only REAL attention to casting has been with Checkov. ; ) Sorry, being honest. But that actor is a real standout.
Barring this week’s plotline, this is precisely what Parmaount should have done! Recast with care and market a new online prodution made by interested fans who care for the genre. We need more STAR TREK!!! There is a market here Paramount!!!
For instance, I’d easily spend ten bucks a month if I could see 6 new GOOD episodes a year online. Anyone else?
352 . The audio – there is a sense of “place” for lack of a better term, a presence in the audio that sounds like it’s captured on camera mics (I know it isn’t – I’ve seen the production stills). Maybe they’re mic’d too closely? Maybe some sort of compression? Not sure what it is – noticed it particularly in sickbay, when it sounds like you can hear the dialog “bouncing” off the scenery
You have NO IDEA what we deal with when it comes to auido .We do not have a Holltwood Soundstage..
We have Trains ,Trucks, Airplanes, Motorcycles, RAIN, creeks in the floor Transformers humming, Ground loops, you name it ..we deal with it.
Ralph Miller is our Sound Engineer and If you heard the original takes
you would know how good he is ..The audio is crystal clear and under the circumstances we shoot under its downright Amazing!!
We shoot in 24 Frame 720P VIDEO there are many productions shooting this way bolth proffesional and non….of course film is best but we cant afford roles of 35mm and a panavision camera and to throw away film thats a bad take cost money!!!
If we had 150 million dollar budget than maybe ………….
We do the best we can with what we have ….
It looks better than what Im watching on network tv right now
please ixnay on the oneymay alktay, okay-ay?
its a very sensitive subject with JC. Mainly because he spends his money to make these for us, and is not allowed to charge. Then to make matters worse you’ve got people selling these at conventions behind his back – which burns him twice because they make money off his thing, and it sours relations with paramount. Because they see it being turned for profit.
I never talk about the money with JC. Its like going up to someone who just lost their dad from cancer and making cancer jokes and then asking them “how’s your dad”? without a clue in the world
someday – someone in paramount (and it could be the next regime, or the next) will wise up and see that there is, um, you know… to be made from Phase II and they will come to their senses and release them on dvd to your favorite best buys and whatnot, all at a reasonable price. the beauty in that is they are already produced.
It’s going to make JC’s Elvis money look like spare change. THAT is when it will be cool to talk – you know – with JC.
=h=
362, ETMoody.
Sure, go ahead. Email me a link when it’s done.
Mr. Gerrold,
Could you send me your email addy to
webmaster@flaminghand.com ?
yo, Tribbleman™… me too!
supermodeldoug@aol.com
gracias.
#261 David Gerrold said:
“and often till midnight”
Fact is folks, David is understating. We often shot till 2AM, 3AM and occassionally till 4AM. With David there from beginning to end. Occassionally, we’d get to “sleep in” and arrive on set at 10AM or so.
I think it was quite amazing that we accomplished what we did in such short time – both during shooting, and during post-production.
Thank you David for all the kind comments – and thank you for working at least as hard to make this episode a reality!!!!
And thank you and the rest of the team for a story that means so much to so many people!
Robert
STP2 Gaffer (ES, TC, Kitumba)
STP2 Key Grip (BaF)
#370 Robert
Thanks!
All the comments here have given me much to think about. We made a lot of decisions that seemed right at the time, and most of them turned out to work well when all the pieces were put together. But as with any complex production of this scale, we also made a few miscalculations here and there. The trick with any kind of production is to get within shouting distance of your vision. I’m certain we did that. I’m very proud of how hard everyone worked and how good their work looks onscreen.
Mr. Gerrold,
Thank you so much for your patience with the intolerant, your intelligent responses, and insight into these worldly matters. I hope a light goes on for some people and they begin to see the bigger picture, beyond the years of hatred bred into the human race.
To James Cawley –
Who exemplifies the brave, bold and bright future that Gene Roddenberry hoped for all of us…
Thank you for bringing David Gerrold’s script into production.
Thank you for honoring the original Star Trek series.
Thank you for tackling relevant topics.
Btw, I’m not gay (not that there’s anything wrong with that… ;-) ). While the visuals between the two male partners aren’t my cup o’ tea, I imagine it’s one of the first times in over 40 years that homosexual Trekkies/Trekkers can actually enjoy the romance they’re witnessing onscreen.
That’s pretty amazing to think about…
Stop complaining, folks. I.D.I.C. = the soul of Star Trek, regardless of which incarnation it is. ‘Nuff said.
Just had to say I’ve been a fan of David Gerrold the WRITER for many years.
Having just gone through the majority of the discussion here, I can now safely say I’m a fan of David Gerrold the human.
Bravo Mr. Gerrold. Nice to see someone who is not only passionate about equality for all, but is INFORMED and knowledgeable about the topic at hand.
Kudos!
CK
Mr. Gerrold- I admire your patience and eloquence.
Mr. Cawley- I admire your resolve and dignity.
You guys both embody the spirit for which Star Trek stands. Rock on.
I’ll go out on a limb here and predict that nothing in the new, upcoming, Paramount-approved, J.J. Abrams’ “Star Trek” will generate this kind of discussion, about a real issue that is actually relevent to our society. Quantum mechanics and alternate universes and driving cars off of cliffs and “buckle up” and whatever, “Phase II” is digging into the heart of mankind with “Blood and Fire”, and they’re doing it without $150 million. We should be so lucky as to have a studio backed “Star Trek” that was half as brave as this fan production.
Misters Gerrold and Cawley and company, you are doing fine work. Keep stirring things up.
As eluded to in this thread, Mr Gerrold’s comments have been collated at this url:
http://flaminghand.com/issue/node/29
If your comments are quoted and you object to their reprint, please let me know as I wish to hold this community in the utmost of respect, all viewpoints included…
There is also a comment thread at that url
Thanks to all involved…
AP: if you object to this, you hold veto power.
In rereading through the thread, there’s one more comment I feel compelled to add in response to this comment:
>>Sorry- if people’s rights weren’t violated by the gay rights movement, then most people wouldn’t care. However, claiming minority status for no other reason than who you want to have sex with is wrong and unfair. People should have equality, not more equality because they want to have sex with those of the sam egender.«
While I’m not going to argue the historical facts of the line that has been drawn between the gay and straight communities, it’s important to acknowledge that this line was drawn by straight people. Straight theologians defined gay as sinful, straight philosophers defined it as amoral, straight legislators defined it as criminal, straight psychiatrists defined it as a behavioral disorder, straight sociologists defined it as a dysfunction. Notice the common denominator here? All of the previous definitions of homosexuality were self-serving definitions. But in the last fifty years, a redefinition of the nature of homosexuality has occurred simultaneous with a much more independent and open minded approach to scientific and biological inquiries on the subject. The scientific communities as well as the sociological and psychiatric communities are coming to a realization that homosexuality occurs as a normative expression of human sexuality. Homosexual behavior has been observed and documented in over 500 different animal species (even republicans!) and an evolutionary model of primate behavior suggests that there are biological and evolutionary advantages to having non-breeding members supporting the success of a gene pool.
The point here is that gay people did not self-define themselves as a minority. Our culture has, for generations, defined homosexuality as a detestable minority. The gay rights movement is a response to that. It did not occur magically like Athena springing from the forehead of Zeus full grown. Many of the leaders of the gay movement, like Morris Kight and Bayard Rustin started in the African-American civil rights movement of the forties and fifties.
And the movement is not about the right to have sex, as the quoted poster above seems to think, it is about ending the arbitrary and unfair discrimination against homosexuality which cannot be justified in the eyes of the law. The poster quoted above also seems to think that there are different levels of equality, that (per George Orwell) some animals are more equal than others. No. Two plus two always EQUALS four, even for especially large values of two. Equality seems to be a difficult concept for some folks.
The key issue before the courts is a very simple one. What is the compelling interest on the part of the state in upholding discriminatory measures against LGBT people? (Lawyers will understand what I mean when I say “suspect class” requires “strict scrutiny.”) So far, no court in the land has found a compelling reason on the part of the government to uphold anti-gay discrimination.
This is why the Blood And Fire episode is not only timely, but necessary. Because equal rights for gay people has become this decade’s civil rights issue, the episode gives all of us a chance to discuss the issues. Silence is not part of the process. Ignoring the issue is not part of the process. Denying the issue is not part of the process. Bringing light into the dark room is part of the process, bringing facts and research and logic, as well as compassion and empathy and understanding, will allow both sides to heal from the terrible wounds of history, will allow families to restore relationships, will allow gay teens the opportunity to find their identities free of fear, will allow all of us to reach a much healthier understanding of human diversity and sexuality.
Discussing the episode lets us examine the issue and challenge our own selves so we can move through all the stages from ignorance to fear to anger to boredom to interest to understanding to mutual community.
Thank you, Anthony for allowing this discussion to be so candid.
Amen David.
…and once again.. I must applaud Mr. Gerrold.
Eloquently stated sir.
One of the things that always makes me buggy is this ever-present viewpoint that the LGBT community wants MORE rights, or MORE EQUAL rights, or EXTRA something-or-other.
As if there were different levels of equality. Thank you for making a succinct and well-thought out statement that covers the Orwellian nature of that viewpoint. (I hadn’t thought of the Orwell connection… works like a charm!)
Hey, I’d just like to know what happened to Miss Sherman.
On a different topic, what about the NBC logo? As the show evolves beyond TOS maybe it should “switch networks” and use the 1970s logo of PMTS::
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkB0tkotnWE
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paramount_Television_Service
Mr. Gerrold,
When you said “Canon: pheh” in post #266, you caused me to spray Merlot all over the place. Please click the hyperlink on this post and leave your billing address at my website so that I may send you an invoice for a new Macintosh keyboard.
Signed,
Scott Gammans
” 378. David Gerrold – December 22, 2008
Thank you, Anthony for allowing this discussion to be so candid.”
Thank YOU David, for having the patience to wade through all this and deliver a fair and balanced message. Your thoughtfulness, and intelligence shines through. I really can’t fathom where people are getting this idea that people who are gay and lesbian want ‘more’ rights. It’s a ridiculous argument. Sometimes I’m ashamed that we haven’t come further as a race.
# 378 – David Gerrold
Speaking as a heterosexual male who was uncomfortable watching the love scene, I must admit while reading this entire thread, I went from wishing the scene was not in the episode, to now being glad the scene *is* in the episode. I think # 378 is one of the best ever posted here, and I’ve been lurking here for over a year. Mr. Gerrold, I’ve been a fan of yours since I first saw “The Trouble With Tribbles” in the early 70’s. I snapped up the “Making of…” book as soon as it hit the shelves. “World of Star Trek” too. I enjoyed your work on the original “Land of the Lost”, as a kid, and again when I watched the DVD sets last year. With what you guys had to work with, I think you all did a great job for a Saturday morning TV show. I still do the “Sleestak hiss” when bright sunlight hits me in the eyes. Anthony, thank you so much for allowing this thread to stay open and for all the posts (for and against). James Cawley, what can I say? Without you none of this would be happening. Congratulations, well done! For those of you who posted your thoughts here in the hope that you would change someone’s mind about the gay scene in this episode, you succeeded.
Seems that the episode has been doing what it is supposed to – getting people to discuss sexuality and open a dialogue regarding it in the world of Star Trek (besides the Jadzia Dax scene).
Chris H, re your post #317: This well-adjusted gay man has absolutely zero problem with depictions of male/female and female/female romance.
Dr. Diehard, I applaud your introspective post #354. Same goes for tlh1138 in post #385. I would imagine that Messrs. Gerrold, Cawley et al would be delighted to know that “Blood and Fire” made both of you pause to reflect.
And finally, David Gerrold… what more can be said that has not already been said? Thank you. Thank you for writing “The Trouble with Tribbles” back in 1967. Thank you for revisiting that wonderful episode with the “making of” book which gave us fans an in-depth glimpse behind the scenes. Thank you for giving me the Chtorr and Star Wolf universes to immerse myself in. And finally, thank you for FINALLY getting “Blood and Fire” made. It’s way, way past damn time. Thank you. THANK YOU.
I am no homo-phobe but I was very put off by the overly long and gratitous love scene. I recall back many years ago when I first met a gay co-worker at a company I worked for. I walked into his office and he had calendars and pictures of “sexy” men all over his office. This episode hit me as overly in-your-face in the same sort of way as my gay co-worker. I am not allowed to have sexy women pics in my office. That would be politically incorrect but it was “okay” for this guy to have pics of men in office. Why?
If gays want to be accepted as normal then why not act “normal” with equal level of discreetness as hetro’s. You don’t have to hide it but you also don’t have to stick it in my face. Relationships, hetro or gay are just a normal part of life.
This series appears to want to stick to the aura of TOS. Well, aside from passonate kising the furthest we got to a sex scene was Kirk in the final pull of putting his second boot on in the episode with the sped-up last survivors of a race (the ones that sounded like buzzing insects to the normal speed enterprise crew). This phase 2 episode would have been much better served to have the same level of class instead of the in-your-face scene with the actors in a missonary position lying on each other. Most of act 1 was wasted on this when the idea could have been brought across with a much shorter and smarter scene.
This aside enjoyed the rest of the episode. Loved the excellent fx.
I have been a Star Trek for 25 years or more. I don’t mind that the episode had a “gay” angle, after all Star Trek has certainly blurred the lines of gender within other species and life forms for years.
However…
I found the early scene with a gay couple in their quarters to be a little too “As the World Turns”. Like another reviewer stated, I felt like I was invading private space. 3 minutes and 45 seconds (the episode is only 43 minutes long) of two men holding and touching and kissing while talking about the duty roster was entirely too much.
There was too much sexual reference in the dialogue too… Peter Kirk; You just wanted to take my shirt off. Freeman; That’s not all. The entire scene could have been cut from the episode without any damage to the plot.
I don’t like that Star Trek has become a gay tolerance mission. The rest of the episode was just another “how do we stop the creepy creatures from killing everyone” exercise. Gay love scenes and gratuitous effects shots do not make a good episode. Dr McCoy will work the unworkable miracle in Part 2 and Captain Kirk and Mr Spock will save the day again, careers in tact. Predictable. Sorry.
For me it wasn’t the content of the Kirk/Freeman relationship, but the extended scene. Dry humping it was not, but the examination of their relationship could have been handled in a different way- not on top of each other where it looks like it was pulled from a soap opera. My daughter doesn’t watch heterosexuals on top of each other on those shows, and she won’t be watching the homosexuals on this show – however to expand on that, she wouldn’t be watching this episode for the bloodworms and suicide content either.
The piece that bothered me about the Kirk/Freeman relationship really had to do with these two people not being able to work together without Freeman showing a preference for Peter. J.T.Kirk also should not be putting lovers on the same away mission, especially one which looks to be a dangerous one. At one point one of these people may have to be in command and the proper decision may require the sacrifice of the other, and that is the wrong situation to make possible when there are 424 other crewmembers who could go on the ship. (Plus if J.T.K. wants to protect Peter, why is Peter wearing red?)
The new Spock may grow on me, but right now, I am liking the old Spock a little better (and by old spock, I don’t mean Nimoy, but the Phase II guy in the previous episodes). However, that judgement may be getting a little influenced by the exposure to Quinto’s Spock and the real/old/prime Spock in the new trailer.
And Cawley- I am wondering will you possibly start to blend TOS and TOSv2 (ne-Trek XI) in later episodes?
And that re-mastered Cage review is…where?
TO: NEW VOYAGES
That was fantastic. You guys should be proud.
The story is a perfect trek scenario. The acting is great overall. The visuals were perfect. The music was perfect. The guest actors were fantastic and should be considered as recurring characters, assuming they live.
The second part looks like it really expands the scope of the story, which I think is a fantastic idea. Thank you for bringing more thought to the piece than it would have taken to create yet another arbitrary rescue mission, which we have all seen many times. Don’t worry about what anybody says about B stories being too big, this is your Trek and it’s not the 60’s. Adding more story elements is ambitious, but that’s where good television format material is these days. It’s more complicated and involves more characters.
The Copernicus in particular deserves special praise for recreating the original series ship I always assumed had to have existed but had never seen on screen, until now. Amazing design work.
As a life long Trek fan with discriminating taste, it’s my opinion that your work on this episode is far better than many, if not most, of the iterations of Trek I have seen over the years. Honestly, it’s that good.
Can’t wait for second half!
Here is some on BAF and Phase II
http://cnyhomepage.com/content/fulltext/?cid=21361
http://cnyhomepage.com/content/fulltext/?cid=21481
http://cnyhomepage.com/content/fulltext/?cid=21371&shr=addthis
James Cawley-
The USS Copernicus is an amazing addition to the fleet. I hope we see more of her class in future episodes. Now if only the guys at Federation Models or one of the other aftermarket companies will make parts to mod the Polar Lights 1/1000 scale Enterprise into this ship… (hint hint)
Episode review: I want more. Darn you for making this a two-parter! ;-)
David Gerrold
I and a friend attended Film Con 1 years ago at the Ambassador Hotel. We returned to you your 16mm copy of The Trouble With Tribbles that one the go-fers had left in one of the gaming rooms. I have always been a huge fan of your work. I’ve admired you as a writer and as just being you. After reading your posts my admiration for you has grown ten fold. You are making people do something with their minds…to actually think before reacting, then discuss their thoughts in an almost civilized manner. Keep up the fine work. By the way we still have the tribbles you sent as a thank you for the episodes return, they are a most cherished mementos of that convention.
Mr. Cawley and Mr. Gerrold,
Just wanted to add my nod of appreciation for the work you have done. I consider myself to be a pretty “high-level” Trekkie, and STPII has really taken me back to that feeling I had watching TOS back in the 60s.
Mr. Cawley, the work you and your team have done on STPII is nothing short of incredible, and I am so impressed at the way it keeps growing and looking better and better. You have my undying admiration.
Mr. Gerrold, I have been a fan of your work since Tribbles first aired. I read all of your books (absolutely loved “The Making of Tribbles” and “Galactic Whirlpool”), and always felt you had a great perspective on Star Trek. And it’s been a delight reading your words here, and I hope to see you bring more to STPII.
Mr. Cawley, again, awesome work, keep it coming!!
PS: I believe that every human being (regardless of the contents of their individuality) has the right to live as they choose, provided it is not done to hurt others. Homosexual people do not hurt me, and I’m not sure how they “hurt” anyone, really. Everyone has the ability to give something their attention or not. If homosexuality bothers you, then you are free to turn your attention elsewhere… Meanwhile, those who are not bothered should be free to give it their attention. I am a 51 yr old straight guy, and I’ve had several gay and lesbian friends, and never gave it a second thought, and never sat around with them discussing the matter. In any case, I believe we are all MORE than just the contents of our individuality, so to judge someone on the basis of their “contents” is extraordinarily narrow-minded.
I watched it again last night. Much better after a second viewing.
You have all passed the Dark Knight test!
Still had to FF> a few times. ; )
The male on male thing is still a bit too much for me. Sorry.
the blogs are taking notice:
http://www.towleroad.com/2008/12/kirks-nephew-is.html
test
hey what happened to my longer message???
One more time: I’ve tried to post it twice. What the f*** happened to my longer message.
@12 why can’t you show it to your kids when the couple is gay but you could show it to them if it were a streight couple?
IF you want to see some serious kind of Prop 8 opression, just visit the trekmovie chatroom. if they dont approve of your lifestyle, they ask AP to make up a reason to ban someone – and the guy DOES IT.
ay caramba.
Are these real star trek fans or what? If so, is the message of this episode totally lost on them? I just think this relevant to the topic, because i see some of them posting their rantings here, which essentially defend a poor cat like moi against their members only club.
=h=
One more time:what happened to Whitman Stone’s longer message???
krutzitürken, heiligerbimbam and froheweihnachten nochmal, damnit
More than 40 years after the Star Trek revolution, exploring and seeking out new civilisations, to boldly go where no one has gone before, some fans are still stuck up with old 20th century Terran phobias.
All because of a 4 minute scene of tenderness between two people in over more than a 21 million + minutes time-spand since the beginning of the series.
And they call themselves civilised and evolved.
So sad…
To the Folks who don’t like gay scenes. You have a remote. Use it to fast forward and don’t watch it.. Im open mineded and i have gay frends and such. When i watched Phase 2 and it came to the gay scene i simply fast forwarded it. it is realy that simple. I think Phase 2 is keeping with the times. remember in the tos time that the first Interracial Kiss of a black and a whits was Kirk and Uhura. That was the First Show of any kind that did that and it broke so many Barriers and Phase 2 is simply keeping with the tradition of Genes Vision. I am very proud of James Cawley for keeping with that Vision. keep it up james. Good Job.
C’mon. WE ALL KNOW Shatner did not really Kiss Uhura in that episode.
Plus, according to the plotline, he was being forced into it.
IMO They should have REALLY showed us that kiss.
Still a good effort by the early Trek writers and production.
Next time I watch NV – Blood and Fire, I will watch the new risky scenes.
I know I should not be hiding my eyes from it. But there is still something (in my mind at least) that makes me wince at those scenes.
I’ll try and get over it and report back.
2 points….
1) Thank god this isn’t canon but a Fan Film that a few years from now, no one will care about.
2) I can see now why GR decided not to use it.
It’s a shame you have to fast forward through any gay scenes. It is a depiction of life as it is. In the time this show is portrayed, gay couples will be as blended in with the fabric of life as any other couple. There needs to be a recurring role for these two characters…how will their marriage work out in deep space?
For the guy who was disgusted….grow up.
#409. Hey i have no problem with gay people and there lifestyle. I have several frends who are gay. I just don’t want to watch it thats all. It is still a great story and a great Episode and i love the cliff hanger. Those effects with the worms was grusome and kool at the same time. I hope they do have Peter Kirk and his soon to be Husband on there as i think it would be a great continuing story.
All of the comments from straight guys saying that the gay scene made them uncomfortable should be seen as evidence why the scene should be there. If you turn off the picture and just listen to the dialog, it’s a very innocent conversation. The pictures, however, are there to show you that these two are *intimate.*
I think it was Harvey Fierstein who said that straight people are afraid that gay people will tell them what they do in bed. (Actually, gay people don’t do anything that straight people don’t also do.)
Back in the sixties, there was a magazine publisher who got himself in deep doodoo because he had an artistic photo-spread of a black man and a white woman hugging. Today, we don’t even blink when we see a black/white couple on TV, or any other mixed-race pair. That’s how far we’ve come on racial issues. Maybe in a few years, we’ll be the same way about gay issues and we’ll look back at this episode and see the big love scene in a whole other context.
Maybe that’s why Cawley wanted it in there, to push the envelope a little bit. Maybe being uncomfortable is part of what you’re supposed to feel at the beginning of this story. I saw a rough cut of Part II at DragonCon (no spoilers) and when you get to the end you realize how important the beginning is.
#408
>> I can see now why GR decided not to use it.<<
GR wanted to do it. It was Rick Berman who scuttled it.
people keep defending that scene in the first act as being ‘important’ and saying people wouldnt complain if it was with a man and a woman. People are even called homophobes for thinking it was a bad scene. Well I would think it was a bad scene even if it was between a man and a woman because the scene was way too long, it was dull, it was with characters we don’t know and dont care about and the acting was poor at best. From the comments from the film makers above i can see that it was more important for them to make a statement than make an entertaining star trek story.
oh and by the way, I am as pro-gay as they come, voted against prop 8, do not consider it a ‘choice.’ been to a gay wedding, gay friends, gay sister, etc. The problems with this episode have nothing to do with the gay thing, it has to do with killing off the flow to make some kind of point that (for me) is irrelevent since I already assume plenty of the characters on the ship are gay, just like life. The only thiing I am intollerant of is bad pacing and bad acting, and that is what you got in that scene
Re: #413
You make some fair criticisms, but also muddy the waters by appearing to defend the people who have actually posted homophobic messages on this thread.
The scene is important to the story, even if it does suffer from storytelling problems like the ones you mention. However, the people who some are labeling homophobic are not the ones who, like you, think the scene was too long or badly paced (hell, *I* thought it was too long and badly paced!). The homophobes are the ones who openly claim to be disgusted by what they see, or who believe that a love story between two men shouldn’t be depicted on screen at all.
Based on your comment, I would never label you a homophobe. I accept your criticism of the scene as written, staged, shot and edited without needing to resort to name-calling.
And I’m really impressed by those who can own their homophobia but recognize it and actively work to understand where it comes from and how to overcome it, as you appear to have. That’s the kind of critical thinking we were hoping to promote with “Blood and Fire.” Whether we always succeed from a technical standpoint — maybe not. But we’re trying. And I honor the viewers who are trying to do the same thing.
Regards,
/carlos
WTF.
I need to ‘own my homophobia’…You guys need to stop throwing that word aroudn to everyone who critiques this thing. The above reviewer from this site said the scene was ‘gratuitous’ and ‘overley-long’…you going to call out the owner of this site as a homophobe too?
That catch all does not fix the problems. The scene was just bad, face up to it and fix it for next time. You can set up the drama of these two lovers quickly and easily and not in the giant time suck you did with act 1…it was there just to be there…it was there to incite people, which it appears is what you all wanted to happen.
To me gay issues are non issues, there is no controversey it is like debating if the earth is round. To me gays are just like people with green eyes, just other people.
The issue is that this episode was turned into ‘all about gay’ instead of ‘all about Kirk, spock, klingons, and star Trek’…so this is no longer star trek and it just becomes a filmed version of some gay fanfic. You writers were so concerned with bringing gay into trek and ‘getting people to think’ that you forgot to make the episode hold together
…and no i am not defending hateful poeple and no (thank you) I am not a homophobe. You want me to come to your house and watch some gay porn with you to prove it?
so was my longer post not put up for some reason, or am I just going to piss away here and be ignored?
“>>Eliminate ALL marriage laws- allow poligimay, and even lift freedom-restrictions from close cousins- even if it repels you”
…Hey, two out of three there ain’t bad. The close cousins thing has a valid medical reason, but I’m all for having six wives. Considering how much of a mess we guys like to make, we need at least five wives to clean up the mess while the sixth is keeping us entertained!
” so was my longer post not put up for some reason, or am I just going to piss away here and be ignored?”
…Lesson One about writing long, rational and possibly controversial posts in a supposedly public forum: C&P your post to a .txt file, and each time it gets purged just repost it and point out that it’s been purged. Even if the moderator decides to be a prick and bans you from the forum, by the time it happens enough people will have seen your post and the mod’s irrational reaction to realize the forum isnt a fairly moderated place where freedom of rational expression is guaranteed, and said forum mod will either have to change his/her/its ways or watch their forum die a rather quick death.
…So again, people, if you’ve got a rational, logical point to make and you’re willing to type a lot of words to express it, make sure you save it somewhere just in case it gets deleted for any reason. For all we know, Whitman’s post might have gotten posted fine, but the forum software may have burped, and Anthony didn’t purge it at all.
“I need to ‘own my homophobia’…You guys need to stop throwing that word aroudn to everyone who critiques this thing. The above reviewer from this site said the scene was ‘gratuitous’ and ‘overley-long’…you going to call out the owner of this site as a homophobe too? “
…That’s the problem with this topic. If watching two guys get it on isn’t your cup of tea, even if you’re a supporter of gay rights if you express any sort of discomfort whatsoever you’re automatically branded a homophobe. Doesn’t matter if your sense of morality also precludes watching a guy and a girl get it on, if you don’t like seeing two gay people expressing their affection then *you* are in the wrong without exception. That’s a double-standard on the part of those who cry “homophobe!”, and it’s hurting their cause far more than the actual homophobes contribute to the hatred and bigotry.
Bottom Line: You can’t have your cake and sleep with it too, kids.
#415
I don’t understand which part of “I would never label you a homophobe” you didn’t get.
My reference to “those who can own their own homophobia” wasn’t about you; it was about others on this thread who have done that and are working to get past it.
Also, there’s a difference between inciting (encouraging violent or unlawful behavior) and provoking (as in “thought-provoking”). Is the scene provocative? Yes. Did it suffer from length/pacing problems? Yes. That doesn’t mean it didn’t have a valid place in this story. And while I applaud the fact you don’t have an issue with gay portrayals in Trek, the length and tenor of this thread testifies to the fact that a lot of other people continue to feel disgust and revulsion about it.
I’m not sure how much more I can agree with you without still hearing from you that you’re taking my comments personally when I’m clearly referring to others on the thread.
Regards,
/carlos
Pedrazza
you wrote
“I’m really impressed by those who can own their homophobia but recognize it and actively work to understand where it comes from and how to overcome it, as you appear to have.”
that clearly states that I have ‘overcome’ my homophobia. I dont have any to overcome. My problems with this episode are the same as the Koenig episode, which is diverting the show to be all about the guest star and not being all about Star Trek. There is more Peter Kirk in this episode than James T. Kirk…and that is not star trek.
and here is more proof that the gay angle is what this episode is all about. The last episode had an exclusive preview at Roddenberry.com. This time it was at a gay website:
http://www.afterelton.com/TV/2008/12/startrekgay
The marketing of this by the Phase 2 team was ‘hey look we have a gay trek episode’….again making gay the focus instead of Star Trek the focus.
You create this teaser full of klingons and then totally ignore them. This is just not good Trek I am sorry. I think It is time for Phase II to just stop with the stunts and start making good ol’ Kirk and Spock Star Trek
With all due respect You have seen 1/2 of an episode the story is not over and the klingons will be back…the story is realy about the relationship between Peter and Jim Kirk you will see that in part 2
but I don’t want to give any spoilers away to elaborate any further
Good. So we all agree. Kirk did not kiss Uhura.
“Good. So we all agree. Kirk did not kiss Uhura.”
…Nope. There was a finger inbetween their lips to prevent contact.
[shakes head in utter dismay]
420. In case you have not noticed, now is not the time to be bothering the Roddenberry Family or Team. If things could have been arranged with them they would have. My team was also racing around the clock to meet a deadline, The After Elton folks profiled this episode more than a year ago when it first entered production, so I gave them the courtesy of the first look. You really have NO idea as to the direction of this story because You have not seen Part Two, nor have you read it. The Klingons are important, Peter Kirk and his relationship is important, The sparkles in the corridor are important , and thier is PLENTY of Kirk & Spock etc.etc…
I and many others work our collective $$#@ off to do this. Ultimately, I make these for myself, and I must stay true to my beliefs and what I feel Gene Roddenberry would do. You do not have to watch them or like them, just like official Trek! Hell, if you do not like it, Please by all means do one of two things, don’t watch or Better yet,
Spend several thousand dollars of your own money and make your own Episode.
James Cawley
James Cawley
Well I for one loved this episode. These episodes just keep getting better with each one. And man did Daren hit a home run with the special effects. And watching part four of that episode I swear i heard some music from TMP. Am I right? That is so cool that your conductor is blending the two styles together.
This is the best Christmas present I’ll probably receive this year in this hard economic time. Well that and a Blu-Ray player. Now if we could only get these episodes on Blu-Ray. Great job James and keep up the awesome work!!
By the way James I see in the ending credits you are wearing a uniform from Enterprise. What future episode is that from and when can we look forward to seeing that?
James, the episode was fantastic. I can’t begin to tell you how much I am in love with your production that you’ve begun here, as it’s exactly what I have always wanted in a Star Trek show. When I heard that you were essentially attempting to go where the Seventies aborted series Phase II never even got a chance to go in the first place, I literally pointed my finger and went, “Yes, that’s exactly how I would have done my own Star Trek series!”
And when I heard about the idea of portraying homosexuality as something not to be feared or even made an issue of in the future Star Trek universe, I got excited. It’s never been done yet to this degree, and I definitely felt it was time. And the episode was fantastic. Absolutely brilliant. I can’t wait for the new episodes.
As a man who isn’t straight, but first and foremost a devout Star Trek fan who has seen every minute of every piece of Star Trek ever displayed on a television and movie screen, I have to say that “Blood and Fire, Pt. 1″ *IS* Star Trek. There’s so much potential in this. The human adventure is truly just beginning!
James Cawley and STP2 Crew,
I’ve been watching your show since the first one came out, and have been blown away by each one. My girlfriend who just recently got into trek (which I attribute to World Enough and Time and the Experience) was equally impressed and we both are eagerly awaiting part 2.
I am simply amazed by how a scene that was less than four minutes could garner this much anger, nobody even mentions Jadzia’s lesbian makeout session.
Anyway good show, good luck and keep up the awesome new trek.
PS
Whatever happened to the Harry Mudd episode?
I would be surprised if this was intentional, but the controversial scene starts at exactly 4:00 minutes and ends at exactly 8:00 minutes. In addtion, the sound goes completely silent right after Xon leaves Peter’s room, and is also silent at the beginning of the exterior shot that follows the scene. Out of curiosity, I did a simple cut from Xon leaving the room to the exterior shot, then replayed Act One. The jump is so clean I can’t tell the scene was ever there. Before I get flamed, I was just doing this as an experiment. No disrespect to James Cawley, David Gerrold, or anyone else is intended.
#424 James C… If I had the several thousand dollars to spend on an episode, I’d be turning it into Home Depot (and electric/water/gas company) gift cards and sending them your way.
The only thing I found offensive in this episode was Enterprise having holes blown in her. OUCH!!! I thought how she looked in the remastered “Court Martial” was bad, but sheesh–right through her main section?
Keep on Trekkin’!
And please- now I’m curious- tell us about that still from the closing credits with you in the “Enterprise” uniform. :)
429 Thats an interesting experiment for sure….but please be aware that those images and scenes belong to RFS and CENT and like the FBI warning in front of dvd’s you have no right to do so..
Howvever as long as you are not POSTING the version to YOUTUBE or any other site what you do in the privacy of your home (or BEDROOM) is your business….
and I think you will find that by removing it what happens later on will not have the same impact…
Think about TOS Ill bet there was alot of stuff we would have edited if we could ….
Thank God noone could….
Thank God the producers DIDNOT have internet the episodes would have never been what we have now!
please ixnay the alktay on the editing-ay of the episode-ay.
Please – first bringing up the oney-may subject and now the uttingcay of the episode-ay stuff – please, no more negative stuff. Don’t re-edit the episodes. Don’t talk about the monetary aspect of the episodes.
I know some folks dont realize how sensitive these subjects are so thats why i am asking so nicely the way that i am. The fact of the matter is that we need more Phase II episodes. The internet needs them. They are massively mac in the pants and lettuce not lose this. please.
THE WOMEN!!
=h=
I wonder would a straight couple have been all worried about each other throughout the episode? For Starfleet graduates these two young homosexual males look more like teenagers in over their head on a dangerous mission in love. Where is the professionalism of a Starfleet graduate?
Does the scene in the quarters shock? Yes. Why was it put there? To shock; to say hey look, Star Trek is gay, it must be okay! I didn’t like the Dax “gay” kiss and I didn’t like the gender neutral episode that NextGen put out years ago. Do I feel like someone is trying to teach me a lesson by homosexuality appearing in Star Trek ? Do I like that? No.
Just by the appearance of Kirk having family is out of sync as well. James T Kirk was always the guy without a family, whose family were in fact, his friends. I even felt that Kirk telling Spock in the transporter room (in Blood and Fire) to “be careful” had a “gay” undertone to it that it never would have had in the original series.
If Trek simply puts forth gay characters, that’s one thing. Personally, I felt this episode was pushy and agenda driven. (And the writing lacked something as well.)
And since when would James T Kirk ever stay on the Enterprise while Spock and company beem over into danger? Since never! And what’s with Kirk’s short pants? Kirk would never wear those pants!
In the “Trouble with Tribbles” Scotty and Chekov and company get into a fight with the Klingons because they call the Enterprise a cow. In the start of Blood and Fire, Chekov himself promptly calls the Enterprise a cow. Character continuity issues? Maybe David Gerrold should have re-watched “Tribbles”, since he was the principle writer in both episodes.
I am glad that I have my old episodes on DVD so that I can sponge this episode from my memory.
WronG!!
He called it a Garbage Scow Big Difference
Maybe YOU should rewatch the episode ..Im quite sure David Gerrold knows more about TREK Canon than you..
The uniforms you see are Original Phase II
You have never seen them before becuase they were never on screen
They are however Original William ware Theiss uniforms and therfore CANON.
#411: Here’s the funny thing. There are a LARGE number of straight people who have posted in support of that scene and what it means and how it can affect the larger world and make people think. They just simply didnt start the message with “I’m not a homophobe” or “I am straight” – I just happen to know they are because I either know some of them or have been talking with them on our forums for years and know many are straight and some also happily married.
I’m not trying to denigrate anyone or anything similar. I am just pointing out to everyone, that MUCH of the support for the scene and/or it’s reasons, that you are reading in this comments section is coming from straight people. It’s something to think about.
I can see people thinking the scene is too long. But here’s one thing: doesnt seem that many people actually listened to the words being spoken. They are vital to both character development and the story itself.
And one other thing. Those of you who are Enterprise fans or fans of the other series who never complained about an intimate scene being too long but are complaining about this one should go re-watch those series and time those scenes. hate to break it to you, but this scene is shorter than a lot of them. There’s only one difference I noted (other than this scene being shorter)… this scene contains two guys. A couple people on the STP2 forum have actually stopped to consider that, and re-evaluated (and been honest about) their reasons for thinking this scene is too long – some of them have concluded it’s the gender of the participants, and not actually the scene length. Your mileage may vary of course… but I dont understand how such a scene in Enterprise between T’Pol and Archer, even though longer, isnt too long, and this one (being shorter) IS too long if length is the only criteria that some people are complaining about (whom I suspect didnt and wouldnt complain about such longer scenes in other series).
Just something to think about. It may not apply to anyone here or it may. No one has to respond, such honesty is only needed with oneself I guess.
#430:
“The only thing I found offensive in this episode was Enterprise having holes blown in her. OUCH!!! I thought how she looked in the remastered “Court Martial” was bad, but sheesh–right through her main section?”
That was my reaction as well the first time James showed me the Teaser footage. I kept switching between cringing with each weapon hit on Enterprise and glaring at him. :-)
But of course, as we’ve come to expect from her, she held together and kept her crew safe, and the voyage continues…
#433:
“I wonder would a straight couple have been all worried about each other throughout the episode? For Starfleet graduates these two young homosexual males look more like teenagers in over their head on a dangerous mission in love. Where is the professionalism of a Starfleet graduate?”
Funny, I’ve seen Kirk, or McCoy, or even Spock, be as worried about each other in various episodes of TOS – to the point where Spock acted on a “hunch” and stayed in Tholian space to try to retrieve the Captain even though logic should have forbid it, McCoy tried sacrificing himself for them on various occassions – one of which, when McCoy was severely injured and on death’s doorstep, Spock (you know, the Vulcan) was the one to cradle him and try to comfort him (The Empath)… I’ve seen Kirk break down to McCoy over his fears, look to Spock for his strength.
I didnt see their reactions (in BaF) anything out of the ordinary – especially, since the one worrying the most was fresh out of the academy, and they are (as you pointed out) both still young and on their first assignments.
Fantastic! Can’t wait for the conclusion. The NV/PII films just keep getting better and better. Hats off to Cawley & Company. Fine work, folks. :)
Dear David Gerold
Dear James Cawley
Dear Phase II Team
Thank you for doing what you are doing!
We all know that the internet’s anonymity has a certain tendency to make the mean and narrowminded shout out their negative attitudes even louder into the world, as they do not need to fear the direct reactions of a face to face discussion.
This phenomenon always gets even worse when it comes to issues around peoples fundamental beliefs and philosophies of life, as it is the case here.
Some of the negative posters in this pretty long and partly very ugly discussion thread have adopted the strategy to bitch around film making stuff like editing issues, length of scenes blablabla … don’t let them fool all of us. That’s not what they mean. Fortunately the truth always finds its way through – and between the lines you cleary see what it really is about. So don’t let them spoil your projects. Don’t let them annoy you.
Dear Phase II people, please do not stop! Go on like this. You are one of the spearheads of enlightenment and civilization in the trekkers universe. And that’s what Star Trek really is about. Phasers and klingons and all that is not the content, it’s the fun wrapping around the messages that really matter.
David, you can be satisfied. With your episode and with your elaborate and intelligent comments here you have convinced a lof of people, many posts here show that clearly.
James, you can be satisfied. By making this episode real, you proved to be a true Trekker, a true human being, one who knows what is important in this world. As somebody already said here, it is a contribution to the Trek universe that makes a real difference.
Respect and regards from the snowy mountains of Switzerland/Europe! Keep up the spirit!
Here is a compromise. Why not an episode that focuses on a Hasidic Jewish crewman or a devote Catholic or Muslim struggling with his/her belief in the Bible/Koran about God making man in his own image and having a hard time dealing with multitude of various alien creatures that don’t even remotely look like humans. You can focus on a truly “alien” species that isn’t by any stretch of the imagination closely human. How the religious crewman relates to others around him, and how they relate to him/her.
In the end the crewman discovers that the soul is how we are created in God’s image, and not our outer physical appearance.
Just an idea.
I had no idea so many Star Trek fans were so ignorant. Star Trek has been chockablock with sexual innuendos throughout the years. How short were those skirts in TOG??? How tight was 7of9’s onesie??? Captain Kirk was more promiscuous than James Bond in TOG!
Let’s also not forget that the whole idea of the Federattion is the coming together of hundreds of different species to unite and share their different cultures and traditions etc. The whole concept is strength in diversity. It’s hardly an everyone welcome club (but no gays!)
The romance element in this episode was well done and long overdue. It should also be noted that it’s not a gay element, it’s a romance element (which happens to be between two men).
Guess what people, gay people exist! They are your neighbours, your postmen, your teachers, your civil servants, your friends, and your family!
I understand peoples comments of the scene going on…for me, it wasn’t as bad as scenes of Riker and Troi together, Picard and Crusher having breakfast or of the officers playing poker…or any scene that had Neelix in it.
People comment that the scene was soap operaish but really, TNG, DS9 and VOY were nothing but space soap operas with a lot of drawn out scenes involving character development and sometimes even intimacy.
That being said, all of those scenes do add to the realism of the characters and our attachment to them and I think that is exactly what this scene was trying to do and what it did do for me. If you cut out that scene, suddenly you don’t feel the greater sense of danger with having Kirk and Freeman trapped on this ship with the bloodworms right after they decide to get married. If there was no romantic scene, they would seem like nothing more than a couple of redshirts in the future scenes and you would feel as badly for them.
Saw it. In my opinion it could have had another pass in post production with a folio artist, and some audio re-dubbing. But the FX was good. Acting getting better. Love scene made me a bit squirmy but that’s just me.
“92. Wes – I do not think that he envisioned blatant sexuality in any form, and people, almost bragging about their sexuality, either way.”
As many others have said… Have you seen any of the ST from the time they began??? There has been WAY too many times you have seen much more than rubbing and kissing from a heterosexual couple, and much longer on screen. What was he supposed to do, quietly behind closed doors ask the Capt to marry them? The scene is actually well written and executed. If that was a woman, and you change the personal pronouns would it still be “bragging” about their sexuality?
I for one commend the Phase II people and James in producing this on a Fan based film. Since it has been time and again that the “retail” has went to do this and then backed out.
For those yelling about kids seeing, and such. Would you still have let your kids watch it if the other was a female? Did you let your kids watch most of ST eps from TOS threw DS9, VOY, etc? This is just two men kissing. How is that being shoved down your throats? Ask many homosexuals about heterosexual encounters on screen, do they yell and scream about having heterosexually shoved down their throat???
441. Ciaran – well said.
James and the Phase II crew – great job, and look forward to seeing more eps from you.
#433:
“Just by the appearance of Kirk having family is out of sync as well. James T Kirk was always the guy without a family, whose family were in fact, his friends. I even felt that Kirk telling Spock in the transporter room (in Blood and Fire) to “be careful” had a “gay” undertone to it that it never would have had in the original series.”
You joke, right? We’ve had even SPOCK say that to Kirk, in a VERY non-Vulcan way.
Spock: (With concern and obvious worry on his face) “Jim, be careful”
McCoy: “WE will”
Kirk: (that smile we’ve seen him give Spock or McCoy numerous times)
I am always amazed that people only see what they want to see. But that aside, it is quite normal for best friends to love each other and care that much for each other and express it in such ways. I feel very sad for anyone that doesnt realize it. I thus just hope you have missed the numerous episodes in question.
#440: Because you mentioned it – and thus it is a story idea we can now never use. But, there is a Jewish crewman on the Enterprise, and I believe his first appearance is in BaF (maybe Part 2? I cant remember which part).
#439, 441 and #442: Excellently put and thank you!
#439 (GRooVe): Dont worry, there’s a lot more planned!!! BaF Part 2, and two more episodes in post production – with yet another starting filming in June!!!
Anthony: Thanks again from all of us at STP2!
David: Great seeing you again here and on our forums! It’s always a pleasure!!!
I love it 445, since I mention an idea it can no longer be used? That is priceless and such a convinient way of now having an excuse to not explore a religious theme.
So here, I’ll make it easy. I void all claims I have to such idea, I will not pursue any copyright over the idea, nor will I enforce any such injunction. In front of the Trekmovie crowd I give the idea to the Phase II crew freely and openly.
I’ll sign anything you want legally so as to make this enforceable..
So when will you start work on the religious themed episode?
446,
445 is not using this as a conveniant way of not exploring a religious theme. Phase2 keeps thier scripts top secret. Keeping this in mind, If you want to sumit a script to Phase 2 you need to go through the loops like everyone else. Go to http://www.startrek phase2.com for more information on script submission.
Thank you.
‘Fire and Blood’ is the first Phase II episode I’ve seen. I was so excited to finally see it. I was blown away by how good it was.
I applaud James Cawley and his crew, with their progressive attitudes toward the LGBT community, who have waited a long time to see themselves represented in the Federation. Hearing Mr. Cawley defend the ideas in the show, make me believe he has a better handle on the ideas of the Federation, then some of the latter Trek shows had. I think there is finally a worth while successor to Roddenberry’s ideas.
I can’t wait for the next episode.
LOL, 447. Nope, I’ve given them free pass on the idea. So they can do with it what they will, or not. It they think it’s a worth while idea to use, then they will. If not they won’t. And I stand by my opinion that the way my idea was regulated to the dust bin, because it was my idea, was rather cavelier. I have removed that impediment by placing my idea in the public domain.
As to their scripts being secret. I don’t buy that. We have known about the current episode for over a year. We known that Jon Povil’s episode “The Child” has just finished principal shooting. We know about Enemy: Starfleet, and tht D.C. Fontana is writing an episode. We also know about the quasi Kizinti episode that is in pre, thought I hear that episode is in trouble because Larry Niven wasn’t consulted about it. Their is also the ill fated John Meredyth Lucas episode, Kitumba. So I’m not so sure where all the super secret episodes are. So if all these episodes see the light of day, estimating one episode a year, that is over 4 years of programs.
#447: Howard
Thanks for the clarification and response! Merry Christmas my friend! Hope to see you and the rest of the gang in January.
#449: Jim Durdan:
I dont write the stories. I dont approve the stories. I dont select the stories. I rarely provide any input into the stories except where it overlaps my responsibilities. I only light the stories. Though, when it comes to what Phase 2 can and cannot do, will or will not do; I am one of the authorities (goes along with my other job titles), and I can tell you a story idea posted on a website for all to read is not the method of ever entertaining we will consider it, and just may invalidate such a story idea. Also, permission given in such a format (this site) is not binding, nor provable that it was given by the poster in #440 (heck, anyone could have decided to post #446 using that name).
Howard is indeed 100% correct. We do have a method for submitting story ideas. It has been in place for years. If it is not followed, then a story idea will not even be considered. It isn’t anything personal. It is the way we operate.
As for scripts being secret, they are. We may announce what we have shot, or announce what we are shooting, but we dont release the scripts, and we dont post the core story synopsis for them. We have… a dozen (if memory serves)… scripts that I know of awaiting filming time. Nor are they necessarily the ones you may think they are from reading Wikipedia or IMDB. They are… secret…
Also, speculation as to the reasons we do or do not shoot a certain script is just that… speculation. Many factors are involved in determining which script we shoot. This has been mentioned in our forums as well. Some factors include actor availability, completion of a final script in time, director availability, budget required/available for necessary sets and costumes, availability (and ability to afford) any second location that we may need for certain scenes, availability of key personnel required for the shoot (as a for instance, we could not shoot Kitumba this past June or October because a couple required key personnel were not available… that doesnt mean we even considered it, but it does mean we couldnt even consider it).
Anthony: Sorry for the tangent.
#449: More info and contact info is available on our website and forums.
#448: Very glad you enjoyed it! We hope you enjoy Part 2 and our future episodes as much!!!
Everyone: Have a Great Holiday Season!!!!
Robert
James, David and Carlos (and the rest of this fine crew):
I just got to see your Star Trek Phase II episode of “Blood and Fire.” my Christmas present, no doubt!
Bravo! It took two days to download over here, but it was entirely worth the wait!!! I don’t normally feel a need to include my life in these pages, however seeing this episode AND reading some of the comments compel me to say something of how important this episode is to some of us.
I give the episode an A-!!! My enjoyment is much akin to something one of my African American friends felt when Barack Obama was elected.
I finally feel recognized and included in the TREK universe… not portrayed as a metaphor as in earlier TREK episodes, but as a truly represented flesh and blood gay man… personally, I felt the metapor episodes were cowardly ways out of portraying an honest to goodness reality of life.
I love it! It is about time we get our turn on a Star Trek episode, even if it is a webisode. David, I hope your crew is happy with the results, especially since you directed it (your directorial debut?).
(possible spoiler ahead)
I have to tell you I felt the characters Peter and Alex were well executed. I like the way the issue is handed so matter-of-factly, with no gasps–no pointing of fingers, no cries of anguish, yet I fear one of the two is going to die… along the lines of your book of the same title.
I hope I am wrong, but also like the idea of a noble gay character sacrificing him (or her) self for the … well, you know the needs of the many outweighing the needs of the one.
Oddly enough, some will find episode to be too gay.
I think it is a good balance… the gay aspect of the story, to me, is so miniscule but for those on opposite sides of the fence, they will see that aspect and nothing else, and find it objectionable (sadly)…
And then there are those of us who see it as a milestone… and finally perhaps we can all take a sigh of relief and say, “there, we finally did it… now let’s move on (I am in that camp).”
AND I might add can’t we all get along? I see some of the hostile words in here and think Gene Roddenberry would be shaking his head wondering how his beliefs in infinite diversity could be so easily dismissed.
On other notes, the special effects are getting better with each outing. The Regelian Blood Worms creeped me out beyond compare! The tension embodied in this story is mounting… I cannot wait to see part II, even though I have trepidations about what is probably going to happen.
I respect your courage in tackling what seems like a homophobic audience, reading some of the postings here. AND yes, thankfully, more of the posts seem genuinely appreciative of what you guys were doing with this episode.
I have been discussing this episode with one of my colleagues serving here in Afghanistan with me.. we’re both anomalies… liberal-minded democrats–maybe humanist better describes us both– serving in a military not well known for liberality…
We both are amused to a degree how people betray themselves on this issue… but it is also sad. I would have liked to have thought our TREK audience was far more enlightened than they seem to be… (for those of you who worry about letting your kids see this I have to say, please join the real world… shielding kids from certain realities will do them no harm nor is it likely to play any influence in their future development) but like Mr. Cawley I do appreciate and applaud that you screen what your children watch… sexuality and violence, to me, is not for young childrens’ eyes.
Anyway, it is time a gay character is finally and unapologetically included in the TREK universe.
I guess the more things change the more they stay the same.
Happy Hanukkah to you and yours! and again, thanks for your perseverance seeing this story FINALLY filmed.
First of all, Merry Xmas to all!
Now- The Good:
Effects top-notch. Hats off to Daren & Co. Too bad we’ll only get to see the TOS-E in only part 2 before the refit. Looks better than TOS-R (but we knew it would.) Love the Copernicus. The sets, props, lighting, all great. (No Brad Nelson phasers yet?) And bloodworms? Cool!
Andy Bray- breath of fresh air. The guy is perfect.
The rest- better this time out, except for Rice and Fowler who sadly drag (no pun intended) the episode into high-school play territory.
The Bad: Tolpin. Sorry, He invokes Chevy Chase, not Nimoy.
Can’t wait for the new Spock.
The Ugly: The editing. I kept screaming, “CUT! CUT!!” at the screen.
Overall though, a landmark episode.
Congrats, James.
A few things I would like to add about this episode.
I think the 4-6 minutes devoted to Peter and Alex in this episode serve a number of purposes:
1) setting up their relationship as one as a loving monogamous couple lends credence to their love for one another… it could have easily have been a Riker-Troi story, but thankfully not.
2) if Peter and Alex don’t care for each other, why should we? We now have a reason to watch as we are wondering if they are going to make it.
3) making this character the Captain’s nephew provides a true crisis for our hero of the story and he has a compelling and vested interest in what happens to this boarding party… at least more than we are used to.
Interestingly, I think in the short scenes we have seen here Gerrold, Pedraza, Cawley and crew have done more with less than any past attempt TREK has made in portraying gays.
Let me explain. In the numerous episodes on NG and DS9 where the producers made such a big to-do fuss about “we’re doing our gay story, but we’re not going to call them ‘that.’ We’ll do it as a metaphor story cause we can’t talk about gays up front.” Wouldn’t want to offend somebody, ya know?
To me, that was disingenuous, dishonest and I never quite bought those stories… Gays and lesbians have never asked for a hit you over the head story, just simple inclusion or acknowledgement.
B&F did just that. Simply, cleanly… and while the love scene had a few problems, B&F far more honestly showed a gay character(s) than any other depicted in TREK history. It’s about time!
Yes, I know some of you feel this was a hit you over the head portrayal. But to respond to that I would say it is four minutes out of 40 years of TREK… where we’ve had countless kisses and bedroom scenes between Kirk, Picard, McCoy, Riker, Troi, Worf… dare I go on?
Heck, even Wesley Crusher has had a love story! So give us this one moment, please.
As someone pointed out earlier, this episode is far more than most, about something that truly matters… isn’t it ironic this story, one planned for quite some time, would come out on the heels of that shameful proposition 8 disaster?
Finally even Star Trek realizes that homosexuality DOES exist and is just something normal. God knows this show has shoved heterosexuality down it´s viewers throats for many decades so this was very appropriate – even though it´s at least 20 years too late and only hapens online.
And to the homophobes who are scared about their children´s wellbeing (because homosexuality is EVIL!) and the scared fanboys who want more big-breasted females in skintight dresses and can´t deal with two men kissing: talk to your children (or in the fanboys case: talk to your parents) about the evils of homophobia, racism and so on and GET OVER the fact that many people are gay.
German “review”:
http://www.zukunftia.de/artikel/1363/star-trek-phase-2-blood-and-fire-teil-1/
I want to see a gay Klingon musical burlesque show. Or are there no gay Klingons?
“I want to see a gay Klingon musical burlesque show. Or are there no gay Klingons?”
…Who knows? They have a “Don’t ask, don’t kill” policy in effect :-P
“Star Trek has been chockablock with sexual innuendos throughout the years.”
…Yes, but the issue appears to be gay innuendo. On the other hand, Mudd’s Women actually had a bit of commentary that could have been interpreted as such. When Kirk gives the speech about female pulchitrude coming from within, Mudd pops in to make it clear that applies to guys as well. “Or men, for that matter”, sayeth Harry. Interpret as you see fit, which is what Gene would have wanted anyway.
“I am no homo-phobe but I was very put off by the overly long and gratitous love scene.”
…Which is the “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” aspect of the debate. If you fail to blindly accept it for any reason whatsoever, you’re either branded as a homophobe and/or a prude. Even if the reason for not liking it had AbZero to do with it being two people of the same gender, but that the scene just wasn’t tastefully executed in such a way that it seemed realistic. It’s that sort of attitude that has me believing that the only safe way to handly *any* sort of sex scenes on Star Trek without causing any flame fests is to simply have Kirk be the only member of Starfleet allowed to get laid :-P
#431: Falvoant
I have no intention of uploading an edited version anywhere at anytime. Ever. I have way too much respect to everyone involved to ever do that. I only did the cut myself to see how easy it was and how it would play out, for my curiousity only. It struck me as odd how the scene started at exactly 4 minutes and ended at exactly 8 minutes, so it prompted me to see what it would look like without it.
I decided to view this episode again without the fast forward button.
A friend had also stopped over and I decided to play it on the big screen just to get his views on the episode too. The teaser was good. The first act intro was ok. Bones kind of ruined ithat for me, Why is he so pissed? Get the job done man. Where is your bedside manner?
I am still impressed on how the general design of the production is so faithfull to the original spirit of TOS. So much so that it is a bit of a distraction when Cawley does not ‘do’ Kirk like I would like to see it done. Close. I support his effort. But still a slight distraction.
The new Spock was OK. But if I were the actor I would really practice the Nimoy impersonation more. Just a suggestion. Too much emotion is sill showing.
Then the ep gets bogged down in the emotional scenes between Pete and Freeman. It was a bit painful for me to watch, and my friend who was watching got really upset, called me a fag lover and stormed out. I thought that was the most amusing part! LOL! Sorry, but it really happened.
So as the story goes, I understand why it was important to show the relationship. And it seemed no different than how Trek has depicted the mostly hetero episodes. So, not too bad. It worked. I liked the reaction of Kirk, He seemed to be taken aback by the whole affair. But was quick enough to deflect the whole topic until “after the mission”. Then he myteriously changes his mind on landing party personell? Hmmmm.
By the way, throughout that scene, the corridor set look pretty bad. When the characters exit that scene, the walls looked horrible. Plywood indeed. Say what you want about TOS and the plywood sets, but I DO NOT REMEMBER EVER SEEING ACTUAL PLYWOOD. In fact, I am always impressed with TOS’s Enterprsie sets. I know it’s still very high quality to match in any production. I’m not complaining. Just saying. You gotta address the little details in the secondary sets AND the overall.lighting throughout the production. The lighting needs to go up about 50% throughout.
The flyby into the orbit of the red star was cool. And the live action bridge scene worked perfectly. It’s my clear favorite in any New Voyages production. My only critique is the view screen. That blue ine around the screen looked terrible. I know the original used blue around an insert shot because it it was a product of the film process. It made it easier to do.
Enterprise handled this well. I’d lose the blue line fellas. Or tone it down to a slight glow on the edges. The tactical display looked low end too and needed to be more fully animated.
The beam down to the Copernicus and the discovery of the wavicle was very cool.
The blood worms where pretty imposing when first shown. Somehow they are not truly affected by phaser fire. That makes it tough for the crew left onboard. Where is the shuttle bay? Can’t they get out on a shuttle?
Unfortunately they showed “Next Time” clips that ruined the suspense for Part II. Now I know who survives.
Kirk’s relinquishing command scene was kind of cheesy too. But I could see that type of plotline existing in an episode. The scene just seemed to be missing that strong Kirk authority. Cawley, you gotta OWN IT! A sense of arrogance is truly needed. And I gotta say it, the hair is a big distraction if you are going to tie the performance so closely to Shatners’, I think a new blonder and closs-cropped hairdo would look much better. And military. Star Fleet is suppossed to be military right? The new do would make your face stand out to be more noticable than your hair. But I see you are really trying, so I give you big credit.
The E’s crewmen when on the Copernicus’s bridge seemed untrained when parading around with their phasers. That ooked hokey to me. Nimoy knew how to carry a phaser. Relax guys.
The effect of the suicide-by phaser was GREAT. However the effect of the phaser welding the door shut was pretty cheesey. Why did the beam juggle around and speed ahead of the aim? Is there a weld setting? K.I.S.
So overall, Cawley’s Kirk still needs major work. My suggestion would be for him to TRULY OWN that character. I think Cawleys face is a bit too expressive and his voice is a little soft in most scenes. Shatner always seems to place so much more power behind his words. Like they MUST BE SAID! Cawley seems to be misinterperating that portion of his portrayal. The gay angle worked (for the story). But I still cringed and I probaby won’t see it again. And I seemed to have lost a ‘friend’ in the mix. Hmmm. Funny. the impact some things can have on people. The special effects were great thoughout, but the fan aspect of some set designs hurts the production. Cant you guys address some of the set problmes in post? Or perhaps find a few good digital artists and bring them on board too. I know some real good ones who would jump at the chance! Good work on the costumes. They looked great. And again, Andy Bray was THE BEST as Checkov. He looked perfect in every scene. Surely he will be in TREK 12!!!!!!!!!
That’s all! Kudos on your new Trek.
4 of 5 Stars..
458…. there are actually 4 cuts to do I thought, and if done properly it can look like Kirk has a problem with Peter joining the landing party and is just being over protected. 1)Cut the 4 minute grind scene. 2) cut so Peter is just mad about not joining the landing party. 3)Cut the access panel Peter/Freeman so they are just opening the panel. 4)Cut out the dialogue of Nick C and Peter talking about how they met. Of course a radial cut of Peter just being a member of the crew could happen also. Until part 2 it will be hard to see just how the edit holds up and my cut takes the episode to about 36 minutes. But much more enjoyable;) Gotta love Windows Movie Maker
Do you realize just how insulting and completely wrong it is to edit someone else’s work?
Jmaes Cawley
460: All those cuts remove the character story, of why the audience must care about Peter, his relationship with Alex and his relationship with Kirk.
429/458 & 460:
Moreover, James Cawely is right — cutting someone’s creative work and intellectual property is wrong regardless if it’s done for yourself. It’s censorship by any other name that stinks the same. And if you showcase that to anyone besides yourself, even in the privacy of your own home, you are showing a censored product and violating Cawely and Gerrold’s right to free speech and expression.
It’s akin to taking a black marker and covering the text you find offensive in any literary work. Why not just black out the scene in James Baldwin’s “Another Country” between Vivaldo and Eric or any mention of Vivaldo’s feelings towards Rufus? Because in essence that’s what you’ve done with the removal of the Alex and Peter scene. Doing so cuts the very heart of the story out — the pathos and leaves nothing. If fiction, books or film or television, doesn’t make you feel than what’s the point?
Indeed, what’s the point of cutting/editing for your own “comfort?”
There’s a much easier solution that doesn’t piss on the fine work of Cawley’s intrepid crew — don’t watch it at all. In other words, change the channel.
I have been a Star Trek fan for 41 years. I have worked on TOS, TAS, TMP, TNG, and DS9. I was consulted by Paramount at various times throughout the early days of the fan phenomenon, and I have probably attended more Star Trek and science fiction conventions than 99% of the people who call themselves Trek fans. I have given of my time freely and generously to my fellow fans because I recognize that it is their enthusiasm that keeps the whole thing going.
Today, this is the first time in 41 years that I am honestly pissed off at the behavior of some fans — specifically those who are talking about reediting Blood And Fire to remove the gay scenes. I am appalled. I am offended. I am insulted. I feel as violated as if you had gone to a bookstore and sliced pages out of my books. What you have done (brady) is wrong. What is even more offensive is that you do not seem to realize just how wrong it is.
In the writing, the planning, the directing of this episode, I expected and hoped that the great majority of the Trek audience would appreciate and celebrate something that has been long overdue in Star Trek, a promise that was made and never kept until now.
Yes, I knew that some people would be uncomfortable — THAT WAS THE DAMN POINT. To have you look at your own biases in the matter and possibly reexamine them. In that regard, we got our job done.
In the last few days, I’ve read hundreds of messages about this episode, possibly thousands, but who’s counting. I am personally astonished and a little bit appalled that the great majority of these messages have been about one scene that attempts to honestly portray two homosexual men declaring their affection for each other — while at the same time ignoring that this episode also has two very violent deaths: one suicide, and one assisted suicide. We also see gory dead bodies in the corridors and in the Captain’s chair. We see more blood and gore in this episode than in most episodes of TOS — but what are people focusing on? One man-to-man kiss. Oh, good grief!
What does this say about us as a culture, fergosh sakes? It says that our culture is sick, repressed, hurting, and emotionally retarded on a level that would be enormously embarrassing if we only had the courage to admit it. We see nothing wrong with hundred-million dollar investments in widescreen car chases, serial killers, slasher films, chainsaw massacres, and all other forms of human-on-human violence. People take young children to the movies and expose them to scenes of such incredible gore, you have to wonder what they’re thinking. But let two men kiss and you’d think we’d hit New York with an asteroid. Good grief!
To all those of you who are having a problem with two men kissing on screen, GROW UP. GET OVER YOURSELVES!
Here’s a clue. Gay people are part of Star Trek.
All of the costumes designed for Star Trek and Star Trek Phase II were designed by William Ware Theiss. The art direction for The Wrath Of Khan and subsequent films was done by Mike Minor, a gay man. Mr. Sulu is played by a gay actors. Several of Star Trek’s best episodes were written by gay or bisexual writers. The contributions to Star Trek by lesbians and gay men are too lengthy to list here. They are part of the Star Trek family.
Next, there are tens of thousands of gay fans of the series. Many of them have made enormous contributions to the Star Trek fan community. They too are part of the Star Trek family.
Gene Roddenberry was very clear, ON MORE THAN ONE OCCASION, that there will be openly gay crewmembers on the starship Enterprise and that by the 23rd century, we’re going to be a lot more mature on this issue.
In the past fifty years, as a society we have learned to welcome African-Americans, Latinos, Asians of all ethnicities into the national community. We’ve learned to recognize the contributions of women, the elderly, the disabled. We are learning now to recognize and include Muslims as well. And gosh, even the occasional atheist. The original Star Trek took a big chance putting an African-American woman, and an Asian, and even a Russian on the bridge of the Enterprise.
So to those who think they can coopt Gene Roddenberry’s vision of inclusion into a much more restrictive view that excludes one part of the human family, I say — No! Enough! Stop! Stop making things up! I was there. I know what Gene said. You do not get to redefine Gene’s commitment to a future that works for all of us with no one left out. You do not get to reinvent and continue the perpetrations against others that create divisions in the human family. That’s not Gene Roddenberry’s Star Trek. That’s not the Star Trek that has inspired hundreds of millions of fans of all faiths, all ethnicities, all cultures, all societies, all possible diversities.
In the long history of the human race, gay men and lesbians have made profound contributions to the advancement of arts, science, medicine, math, and all other areas of human endeavor. Alan Turing was the man who broke the German codes, enabling us to win WWII. Michelangelo painted the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel. Tchaikovsky wrote the Nutcracker Ballet and the Romeo and Juliet ballet and Swan Lake. Leonardo daVinci gave us The Last Supper and the Mona Lisa. Florence Nightengale changed the face of modern nursing. Dr. Tom Dooley was one of the great medical visionaries of the sixties. Samuel R. Delaney transformed what was possible in science fiction with only 8 stories and four novels. And so on and so on.
Gay people have earned their place at the American table. Gay people have earned their place in Star Trek. To those of you who have a problem with it, the problem is YOURS.
Grow up.
That’s the real message in Blood And Fire. Grow up.
We live in a day and age where ANYONE can cut, slice, chop any video clip on the internet. Thats the fact. 41 years ago this was only a dream, hell 15 years ago it was still a dream for most people. I of course would never do that to one of your productions James, but that doesn’t change the fact that it happens. Every day. With every type of video media on the internet. Copyrighted or not. Where I can understand your frustrations regarding someone editing your work…. buuuut, once its on their computer, what do you care? I mean that, so what? The fact that the files were downloaded in the first place say’s that the interest is there in what you have to put out. You can’t force people to open their eyes if they do not want to. And saying “If you don’t like it, don’t watch it” only goes so far. I really enjoyed the episode. The Whole episode. As you know from the NV/ P:II forum, I am perfectly ok with Gay people and the scene was very well done. Bravo. But when you start cutting, slicing and chopping what people say about it be it ON TOPIC or not…. makes me wonder if you have sunk to the same level as the fun spoilers?
Verg you are living dangerously
He has edited the topic to keep things on track and removed the post that he does not want on HIS website He has the perfect right to do so…
Just as Anthony has the right to police his site as he sees fit
Now is not the time to even joke about ths subject with James I hav e told James in person if there was anything I wrote that he felt needed removal to go ahead and remove it …I don’t even need a PM as to why
Its his Sandbox!
re: david’s # 463 comment…
that is precisely what i was saying (in not so many eloquently used words, i must admit!) in the post that was deleted from this site! i have seen a few of tos episodes that made my skin crawl… because of the attitudes that were present back then (ie: capt. pike’s view of women… esp. number one… kirk, spock and mccoy’s sometimes patriarchal views of women in many episodes… most notably: ’spock’s brain’)… but the great thing about star trek is that it rises above itself and forces us to think at times when we don’t want to!
bravo!
ken
(and please don’t delete this one either!)
#457
“…Who knows? They have a “Don’t ask, don’t kill” policy in effect :-P”
Good Humor!
463. David Gerrold
I ‘think’ I understand your frustration. My approach to this episode was to view it in a neutral fashion. I tried to judge it on it’s own merits. Your stated your interest in making people think about the topic. But as you said, most of the people are only talking about 10% of the episode. You have to admit, you may have been asking for it. Kind of like what Bob and JJ are in for shortly with ST 11.
By the way, I saw the Day the Earth Stood Still tonight. Its OK. But they showed a preview for the twenty or so people there. There was dead silence. I thinking that trailer was way too fast for most people to take in.
However, T5? Judgement Day looks real good, until they show the Transformer robot at the end.
Since you may still here responding David, I have a question.
What was Kirk supposed to be thinking when Pete told him the news about his marriage?
Seemed to me that Kirk was a bit shocked, and a bit apprehensive. And that he reasoned it out pretty quickly. My two cents are that Kirk had a flashback of every babe from his Enterprise voyages in years 1, 2 and 3. Now that’s alot to foresake – long lasting relationships. True Pete may not have had Jim’s eye for beauty, But I think Kirk may have been thinking, gosh, your too young, kid. Just wondering.
Edit…
Seemed to me that Kirk was a bit shocked, and a bit apprehensive. And that he reasoned it out pretty quickly. My two cents are that Kirk had a flashback of every babe from his Enterprise voyages in years 1, 2 and 3. Now that’s alot to foresake – long lasting relationships – OR NOT. True Pete may not have had Jim’s eye for beauty, But I think Kirk may have been thinking, gosh, your too young, kid. Just wondering.
#469
Kirk’s reaction?
First, he was a little bit amused by Peter demanding to be respected as a crewmember.
Second, as you surmised, he was surprised to find that Peter’s relationship was with another man — surprised because of his own specific experience with so many women.
My thinking was that in the 23rd century, although gay relationships will be matter-of-fact, it’s likely that they will still be a relatively small percentage of human marriages — uncommon enough that Kirk would be momentarily caught off balance. Because even though he would be well aware of gay couples, his own expectation would still be heterosexual. I think James did a very good job with that scene.
Let me also acknowledge that we were all well aware of how deeply connected our audience is to the entire Trek ouvre, which is one of the reasons we tossed in so many in-jokes. It was our way of tweaking the nose of some of the cliches we’ve inherited.
Thanks for your kind comments.
Wow, I thought the star trek universe was diverse and free of fear of differences. The gay story line is much less gratuitious than any other short skirted, one night stand, perky breasted female ever introduces in the show. Can we say seven of nine? Why in the hell does she need six inch heels in space.
James before you throw me under the bus a question. Didnt Jack Marshall a friend of yours and part of IHW do a reedit of Star Trek V: In thy Image? Pretty sure since I have a copy and the original. Just how wrong and insulting is that to Willian Shatner? Not to mention your playing in his sandbox ( there was talk about Shatner and Nimoy having the right to deceide if anyone played them, but not really sure how that all worked). I just wish that Gerrold could write a true smart TOS episode. The Originals ,and yes I know his resume, told a story that reflected out times through science fiction ie Battlefield(things that make ya go hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm). I do like what James had done and have been a HUGE supporter of STNV, having brought many fans to his site. However, this whole episode is either another stunt as with the original actors for the sake of marketing or part of the leftist gay agenda to indoctrinate our children way to early in their lives to acceptance and possible conversion. I will tolerate gays, be friends, even hang out, but I will not accept because I don’t have to. Hell I could even care if they get married. But I’m sure I’ll just be considered a homo-phobe just like if I didn’t vote for Obama I must be a racist. Because only the left if right?
But truly a 4 minute scene is just way to long, but since you can’t look at the work objectively or care if the people watching it didn’t care for it then we must be all wrong. Be a director. And James if you are making a statement about a life choice you have I’m fine with that just be the best Kirk you can be and don’t be afraid to tell.
Well then, I read that correctly. I appreciate the balanced view that you have on the way all relationships could possibly be viewed in the far off “future.”
I guess I have a dozen or so other questions too about the production. But I would like to hear also about how this episode compared to your original deallings, early on with your Tribbles episode.
Especially concerning the “limited capabilities” of the New Voyages production and how the pace of the filmmaking capares to the original.
Perhaps there is more to read on your website concerning your impressions on the production.
Thanks for the feedback David! I do appreciate, and I think I understand, this production’s attempt to broaden our minds.
That’s… Because only the left IS right…………there I go editing again. ;)
#472, see #471. I bet that hurts bit.
It’s not what is left and right.
IT’S WHAT IS RIGHT AND WRONG.
Nawwwwwwwwww now if it was a comment about T’pol them-ed be fighting words lol.
You got that right! ; )
Seeeeeeeeeee there is peace in the 23rd century.
Great episode!
472 Jack Marshal has NOTHING to do with PHASE 2
Brady:
Tolerate? Please. With your attitude, don’t bother. I’d rather you not… we are not here just to be merely tolerated… you make it sound as if gays and lesbians exist only as an inconvenience, a moral choice or an annoyance.
Friends? I really doubt it. Based on what I have read, you don’t see gays as people, but as merely activists and troublemakers.
Indoctrination? As David said (and I respectfully add… ‘please’) grow up.
I’ve never yet met a gay person who thought “I am going to go out and convert a child into becoming gay…” if things worked that way, you could just as easily go out and try to convert a gay teen and turn them straight… oh. wait, people have tried that and from all evidence, this just leads to more unhappiness for all involved.
I laugh at your illogical self-serving statements… accept? I don’t have to.
Remember, acceptance goes two ways… but somehow, I don’t recall anyone asking for your acceptance.
I do not exist at your feet asking your acceptance… I exist asking for the same respect you expect for others to afford you, yet…
I do not feel respect reading your post. When David and James called you on the carpet, you resort to name-calling and accuse them of pulling a publicity stunt.
I stand by my earlier posting… Gene Roddenberry would be shaking his head wondering how anyone who seriously follows TREK could miss the point of infinite diversity and how it enriches our lives…
I truly applaud what James and David have done here… finally… a TREK episode that makes us question the staus quo, what we believe (and why), and generate an honest to goodness dialogue, which is what Star Trek has always done best… and far better than most other avenues of popular culture.
Anthony: I apologize if I am out of line here, but Brady struck a raw nerve here that I felt required a response outside of David G or James C’s sphere of influence.
Lastly, happy new year, fellow TREKKERS!
David Gerrold #463:
“Enough! Stop! Stop making things up! I was there. I know what Gene said. You do not get to redefine Gene’s commitment to a future that works for all of us with no one left out.”
Actually, Mr. Gerrold, FWIW no one has to take anyone’s word about how Gene Roddenberry felt about same-sex relationships. Just go back and re-read the opening chapter of his novelization of STAR TREK: THE MOTION PICTURE, where through the character of Admiral Kirk he addresses the “rumor” (i.e. the “slash” fiction of the time) of a gay relationship with Spock by noting the while he has absolutely no problem at all with such expressions of love, his own particular preference was always for women (not to mention the frustration involved in selecting a partner who would only be interested in getting it on every five years).
It’s a constant source of wonder to me, going on twenty years after his death, how Roddenberry’s very-well publicized thoughts about what Trek meant to him are ignored or obscured to suit particular political agendas. While a number unflattering aspects of his character have come to light since then, he remains a hero of mine–for using the celebrity and public forum Trek’s unexpected success lent him not merely for personal aggrandizement, but to encourage his audiences to look beyond their love for a ‘60s space opera to the infinitely more important project of building a better, more inclusive future for everyone. It was a hopeful vision he offered at those college lectures back then, and no blather about “political correctness” or “gay agendas” on an internet forum can make it any less inspiring. After all, as you say, we were there.
For some reason hearing there are folks who would edit out scenes in this webisode (or other productions) because they don’t like them, or feel uncomfortable about the subject matter are not so different than people who say the Holocaust never happened and books that prove it so are just part of “that nasty liberal press.”
I do tire of hearing about the left and the right… but I think such attitudes are best likened to the proverbial “burying one’s head in the sand.”
“If I don’t like it, it doesn’t exist.”
Doug in Kabul,
When you get back home, let me know. I’ll buy you and your whole platoon a beer or six.
David
Hi there! I like your website ;)
If you are looking for Paid Surveys this is the site for you.
Start advancing your paychecks at http://tinyurl.com/9eeaop
481… from wikipedia….Star Trek: Phase II (formerly known as Star Trek: New Voyages) is an award-winning fan-created science fiction series set in the Star Trek universe. The series was created by James Cawley and Jack Marshall in April 2003. The series, released exclusively via the Internet, is designed as a continuation of the original Star Trek (aka ST:TOS or just TOS), beginning in the fourth year of the starship Enterprise’s “five year mission”. The first episode of the series was released in January 2004, with new episodes being released at a rate of about one per year, though producers have expressed their desire to accelerate production……Don’tcha just hate people with facts ;)
Jack Marshall is no longer a part of Star Trek New Voyages/Phase II and has not been a part of the series for quite some time.
That doesn’t change the fact I used about the edit and James feelings about it.
Well, that was… special? My eyebrows won’t come down anymore, I had my childhood memories destroyed and I turned gay. Thanks a lot!
I work to translate the episode to the Portuguese language but i only find subtitles in Germany, if someone have the script in English, please send to me: sunlikesun@hotmail.com
Tanks by now
#489. brady – December 27, 2008
“That doesn’t change the fact I used about the edit and James feelings about it.”
Given that Mr Marshall wasn’t involved with Blood and Fire in any way, his personal choices are utterly irrelevant. But keep grasping at straws if it makes you feel better.
There is a great article written about the homophobic comments you guys make here-
http://www.afterelton.com/blog/michaeljensen/star-trek-fan-boys-react-set-phasers-to-whine?&comment=62099
Start Trek has had plenty of Straight “Lovey Dovey” scenes that have made me want to take a bathroom break…I’m proud of them for having a gay scene.
I don’t understand how anyone to say it was homophobic to say it was “overly long” (did they even, I don’t see it). It’s an reflection of your heterosexual male tastes. (as a straight female I say it wasn’t long enough.:P)
I hope people don’t look at this and think gay sci-fi characters won’t make people tune in…look at Torchwood.
Elena,
Thanks for the link. Interesting article, though the author doesn’t really say much more than you managed to put concisely in three short paragraphs.
I think it’s worth noting that out of almost five hundred postings so far, very few have actually been very critical of the episode’s gay content. (Some others have been frank in expressing their discomfort with it, but that’s not the same thing.) Most professed to have liked “Blood and Fire,” and of those who (like myself) had some qualms, the issue was not in depicting gay characters per se, but was how it was handled in this particular case, along with other problems not related to the story’s gay content at all. Since even the co-writer of the show was gracious enough to post here, and admitted he had some issues with the scene between Freeman and Kirk as it ended up on film, I think we can all agree that the episode is fair game for such critiques, and that making them doesn’t mean you’re a homophobe.
I understand Mr. Gerrold’s frustration at the thought of editing–he invested a fair amount of his time and passion into this project, and the thought of someone who can evidently barely put together a coherent sentence in English taking a pair of digital scissors to it would drive me crazy, too. Nevertheless, I think Gene Roddenberry would be utterly fascinated by the fact that this production could happen at all, and would be mostly pleased with the episode and the reaction to it.
First off, gret episode! Loved the effects, both in the “teaser” and of the blood worms. I really liked the “horror” aspect of the worms and them coming through the door at the end. Seems like there was inspiration from the Lost In Space movie.
AND, really loved the “Amazing” Phil Keoghan cameo! How did that even come about? Please give some background on that, because it was AWESOME!
#495
Trust me on this. There was NO influence from the Lost In Space movie. There wouldn’t have been even if I had seen it.
Hello!
Boring post from me I’m afraid with no discussion / views etc etc – I just thought it was an awesome episode, well done all, can’t wait for the 2nd part.
Enough said! :)
Although I had some nerdy fun amusing myself with ffmpeg concatenating and transcoding the offerings, it would be nice if someone on the Production Team would sort out the downloadable files – encode each episode as a single .avi of around 350meg which is what single TV episodes come off Torrent sites (I’ve got a bunch of the latest `Stargate Atlantis’ from TVTorrents.com that work that way) and then put them on their trackers.
At present they’re encoded with a variety of codecs and split up in a variety of ways for no apparent rhyme or reason – WTF. For someone who has access to the master files surely it would be trivial to fix this.
And the DVD isos – how about some kind of explanation of what these contain and why you might want to download them. Are there extras?
As for the episode, yes it needed a bit of editing to tighten up the pacing but overall it was great. Though I must say I thought `World Enough and Time’ was particularly effective and is my favourite so far.
Just finished part one and have been reading though the comments. I should mention that I’m gay to provide context to my review.
I was extremely impressed by the episode overall and am away this was based upon an unapproved TNG script which Rodenberry approved but other producers did not – as such I commend you, and cannot state this highly enough, for bringing it alive almost two decades later. The opening sequence was brilliantly shot and pulled me right in.
I guessed from the introduction of the gay characters which script was being used, which has dampened the effect, although with Klingons in the mix I am hoping to be surprised.
My major critique, and this is by no means a large one, was the crew quarters scene. During the scene I found myself asking “Would a heterosexual scene on ST be played as long?” and I found myself answering, at first, no but after second thought, probably yes. One of the major differences in this scene is the full body-length shot, which as a result of the small television size would have been impractical during the 90s to frame the characters’ faces and expressions (average screen size being about 14”, or two faces in detail).
Even saying this, I was relieved by the comic relief situations (greatly I might add) – I think a scene like this may have fit well on the later series’, but TOS is a bit too traditional in conception – then again, this meets ST’s remit of finding controversial subjects related to today’s world.
I found the other scenes between the two characters touching and more within the universe keeping – hopefully the quarters scene will the be emphasis on the intimate and physical nature of the relationship, and the remainder will be on the psychological. I for one have always found ST to be perfectly adequate in the latter so perhaps this uncomfortable scene, even for me, is a kick up the ass I didn’t realise I needed.
I liked the new ship design and found it in keeping with my established sense of the ST universe, which is a huge compliment to fan based stuff, where weapons can often override the story (“My gun is bigger then the Sovereign’s”). Sets, props and costumes were also impressive, as were the ever perfect FX and SFX. Special credit is due to the sound team for holding all of this together and to my delight, bettering TOS on several timing and situational levels, helping set the pace.
Acting showed a marked improvement, and with the absence of major cast stars, whom I’ve read many reviewers stating they raised the game (and they certainly did) shows that all involved have the personal ability to do more and do better, something which also (if ironically) embodies ST I love. I would encourage the actors here to relax into the roles a bit more as sometimes it can appear that they are more concerned with the timing of an expression or body movement rather then what it conveys to the audience.
What I am most impressed with, and I can’t stress this enough, is the return to Gene’s ideals and visions of mankind for the future. Phase Two is literally the bridging gap between TOS and TNG, reflecting 24th century – and in that sense, Gene’s last sentimentality to grace our screens – which has been missing for so long.
It truly amazes me and surprises me that there are so many hypocritical Trek fans out there. So, it’s okay if we like episodes and books and games and stories, as long as they don’t include people we don’t approve of?
Here’s a list of all of the television episodes of Trek that did NOT have contributions by gay people:
And, now, here’s a list of the Trek films that did NOT have contributions by gay people:
And, a list of the Trek books that did NOT get published without the contributions of gay people:
Here’s a list of the Trek games that were designed and produced WITHOUT gay contributors:
This is a list of the Trek sound tracks that were produced and played by solely heterosexual people:
Well, they’re pretty exhaustive lists, no? I can’t understand why some Trek fans think it’s okay to be entertained by Trek made by people who are gay, but only if we don’t see them. That’s utterly absurd. Incidentally, if you were to remove the word “Trek” from any of the long, long lists above, the lists would be just as long.
Can you imagine how wrong it would be if you replaced “gay” with “black” or “red haired” or “Venezuelan” or “Episcopalian” or “female” from my statement above: “I can’t understand why some Trek fans think it’s okay to be entertained by Trek made by people who are GAY, but only if we don’t see them.”
So, while you’re at it, if you really want to protect your children from what you see here, you’d better just block them from consuming all the entertainment not listed above–its only logical, and its the only safe way to protect your children. David Gerrold could not have been more on point by saying children should be prepared for a world of ideas, and, I’ll add–people, not shielded from them.
Fact of the matter is no one can live without enjoying the creativity, resourcefulness, skill, endurance, grace, spirituality, wealth, health and industry of our gay neighbors, friends, co-workers, siblings, parents, or total strangers. What does it all prove? Gay people are people. They always have been and they always will be, and your life and mine is much richer for it. Trek should be about people, and how our petty insecurities and prejudices have been left in the past so in the future we can celebrate being people together.
$0.02
–R
Labels suck.
I loved the episode. All of it. Period.
It goes on the shelf with the rest of the Original Series. It IS Star Trek.
I cried – cried! – when I realized how much that ship and her crew could still matter.
My daughter peeked over my shoulder while I was watching it and said, “What’s Spock doing?” She knows these characters already and loves them as much as her favorite cartoons. (In fact, she came to them through the Animated Series.) She’s too young right now for the violence, but when her mother and I decide she’s old enough, she’ll see this episode – uncut.
I have the highest praise for the Phase II crew, they’re doing an amirable job at keeping Trek alive, and I think they’ve done the series proud, (and they’re productions are probably a lot more respectful of our friends than I believe this new movie will ever be. The comments are interesting some are legitimate critique, and others I think tend to lean far left or right depending on what side of the issue one belongs. Myself I think an artist owes nothing to his/her audience other than to put their vision out there as they see it. Those that dig it get it, and those that don’t won’t , and if it bothers me too much then I’ve got the right to go out and try and do it better.
I liked the episode. I don’t think the “scene” was gratuitous although I think it went long past the point that all the necessary info was conveyed. Act 1 was a tad bit slow. The historical lesson from Spock on the star seemed a bit long. I also agree that the “red shirt” joke fit more in line with a GalaxyQuest than Star Trek. Last, and I think this is just funny, a problem that even big budget films make when it comes to exposition. Did Chekov fall asleep during the Order 9 class in Starfleet academy? Why would the away team know what it meant and he didn’t. I don’t agree at all with the ppl who say the acting was bad, nothing bothered me that much, and I’ve seen vast improvement since the first installment. If it continues which I hope it does, it will soon be as good as anything television has to offer. Keep up the good work guys, can’t wait for Pt 2. Just hope it doesn’t take till this time next year.
Order 9:
While Chekov asked what it was, it was just as telling seeing Uhura, Scotty and Chekov’s reaction to Kirk’s statement that the Copernicus, with boarding party remaining aboard, be destroyed.
Yeah, Chekov should have known what it (Order 9) was, but the way it was played out was for us, to explain it to us, the audience what was at stake.
I’ve watched the episode four or five times now and like it more with each viewing as I see new and different things.
I do hope to see a re-edit, but not for all the reasons given thus far. I hope to see the episode tightened up a litle and to see the dead captain blooper removed.
David, Carlos and James, and countless fans are right, the relationship scenes are integral to the premise of this tale and should be preserved. To remove it would be an insult to us, who have remained invisibile in the TREK universe for far too long.
Chekov was only an ensign. You don’t brief ensigns on top secret matters, only Captains and First Officers.
Seems to me that you Americans that are making far too big of a deal about the homo scene. I think it went on too long for reasons of pacing of the episode. Serendipitously enough, they just re-broadcast the DS9 ep `Rejoined’ on UK TV. (And a fairly lengthy exposition speech right at the beginning between Kira and Bashir made it clear that there was no issue with homosexual relationships by the time of DS9.) I definitely go with the `two hot lesbians in action’ school of TV drama – especially when one of them is Terry Farrell.
@# 506. John Pate
“the `two hot lesbians in action’ school of TV drama – especially when one of them is Terry Farrell.”
As the saying goes, I’ll be in my bunk. ;)
Having just about managed to stop myself thinking about Terry Farrell naked, here’s a concrete proposal for a minor edit that would, IMHO, be a start: after Peter says, “you know him better, what do you think he’ll say?” CUT TO KIRK on the bridge and move on. The reply is lame and pointless – of course he doesn’t know – so leave the question hanging and show what Kirk says later. You lose several seconds of filler by doing this and make a dramatic improvement at no cost, I submit.
#508.
No. We gain nothing by your edit and lose a lot.
First, we lose our integrity. Because at this point, after the episode has already been seen by thousands, perhaps tens of thousands of fans, such a cut would be seen by many people as a fearful backing away from an honest representation of the relationship.
Second, Gene Roddenberry promised that we would have openly gay crew members on the Enterprise. Such crew members are entitled to equal representation of their lives.
We’ve had forty years of heterosexual smooching on Star Trek. The gay audience is entitled to one homosexual kiss.
All this talk about cutting pieces out of the episode is about as welcome as a group of Trek fans arguing over how best to carve their initials into my furniture — or perhaps even my child.
We worked on this script for months. After all of our discussions and considerations about cutting and pacing and audience reaction and the debts owed to the fans who have supported the original series as well as Phase II, the ultimate decision was made by James and myself to put this scene into the episode because it’s important to the entire story — including the second half which you have not yet seen.
If you want to talk about how much the scene made you squirm, that’s fine with me. It’s supposed to make you squirm. It’s supposed to make you think. If you squirmed, we got the job done.
The scene was written specifically for all the people in the world who have casually dismissed gay people as second best without giving any thought to the fact that they are dismissing the worthiness of other human beings. If this scene challenges those people to realize that gay people have intense intimate lives of their own, then it works and it deserves a place in the episode.
Talking about cutting the kiss is offensive, not just to me — but also to James Cawley and Carlos Pedraza and the two hundred other people who worked their butts off for 14 grueling days to shoot this thing. We knew what we were doing when we did it. Please give us and our work the respect of viewing the episode as we intended.
Feel free to argue about it afterward, we welcome the discussions. But please — no more talk about cutting. Because several thoughtless people have already made it clear they intend to cut out the parts that offend them, James Cawley has decided that future episodes will not be available for download, only streaming. Because that’s the only way to protect the integrity of the episodes from those who choose to Bowdlerize them.
Sincerely,
David Gerrold
You go too far Mr Gerrold – you just nixed endless “Director’s Cut” and “Special Edition” versions. Personally I prefer to see entertainment rather than polemic. Also, I was making a relevant point – the intarw3bz is international and us European types don’t necessarily have the hang-ups about homosexuality (or male and female nudity, for that matter) that you Americans apparently still labour under.
I judge “Phase II” in its stated terms – as a fan-made homage. A mash-up, if you will, of the Star Trek universe and its impact on popular culture. That’s why an aside like, `We don’t put bullseyes on our security team members nowadays’ is worthwhile and funny, a nod to `Galaxy Quest’ is an amusing conceit. (Personally I’m sorry that Mr Cawley dropped the quality quiff he was sporting in the pilot ep – that was class, I laughed and thought `yes, Capt Kirk should have a quiff like that, genius.’)
If it wants to be judged as a commercial quality product then, whilst the SFX are excellent, the lighting, framing, editing, sound and some of the acting often fall far short.. Compare it against the production values of the much-maligned “Voyager” including the excellent acting of admitted eye-candy “resistance is futile” Jeri Ryan, for starters.
I know how hard it is to write quality material – like many in this comment thread, doubtless, I’m a sort-of-would-be-writer with lame material on the intarw3bz – but you, Mr Gerrold, should be much better than that.
There is a serious danger of this project “disappearing up its own arse” as we would so charmingly phrase such a situation here. Flame me all you like but, even if secretly, you know I’m right.
Yeah, for ppl who because of whatever reasons aren’t afforded a desktop or TSL connection streaming the episodes would be a bit harsh to fans with wireless, or slower connections. I travel and have a laptop 80% of the time. I get annoyed trying to watch youtube vids half the time.
Also, while I would never redit –make that censor any film, –I wouldn’t have a problem with someone who might if it’s for their own reasons, whether because they don’t believe in gratuitous violence, profanity, or sex.The other caveat of being an artist is once you put it out there, you really can’t controll what the public reaction is going to be. You can’t even be certain if they’re interpretation is what you had in mind. So worrying over that is a waste of creative energies.
This next point is concerning Mr Gerrold’s statement (love you dude when I was young, reading about how you sold a script to TOS was an inspiration to all us would be writers and fans.I liked Deathbeast too.) Trying to break into an industry that hasn’t been exactly fair in portrayals of minorities be they Native American, Black, or Asian, I’m always happy to see these groups get some spotlight, as long as it fits the story they’ve been given. (Will Smith in “I Am Legend” works, Smith in “Wild Wild West” has some inherent problems) I add myself to the group that says that the scene is too long as presented, you can keep the kiss, but just like a short story you don’t have time to waste. I’m just offering a critique, I was also a Siskel and Ebert fan, and knowing guys in the biz, it doesn’t make any difference how long a writer works on a script something always gets cut. Only truly independents get the luxury of having all their words untouched and only the occasional genius doesn’t benefit from some minor trimming. In the end I will generally always side with the artist; afterall I’m still bemoaning the fact that the majority of Orson Welles films are not left the way he would have edited them.
Oops , major clarification. My example of Mr. Smith in those two films the way I used it makes it seem as if I was saying that a gay theme in Star Trek was out of place, and I did not. Writing so fast I left out something. My problem is that sometimes instead of serving the story, and playing it straight (no pun intended) the filmmaker wants to bring attention to the fact that “oh look you’ve never seen this before”.
I don’t know about anybody else, but I have always been mystified at the double standard a lot of people have about depictions of lesbian couples as opposed to men. I’m actually rather mystified over the American problem with “honest” sexuality anyway. One sex scene could get a picture an R rating, yet I could kill a dozen people and still come away with a PG13.
This is not about homosexuality, it’s about how the scene was poorly inserted into the episode.
Take a show like “Will and Grace”. It’s about gays. I’d let my kids watch it because it doesn’t shove two people messing around in our face. They talk ABOUT it, and let the viewer fill in the gaps.
Also, shoehorning homosexuality into the 60’s era Trek really makes the whole thing unnerving. Had this been in the TNG era as it was originally intended, I’ll bet dollars to donuts you wouldn’t be getting the kind of negative reaction you’re seeing here.
It’s one thing to allow people to think, but in this case it seems like you threw homosexuality into Trek and then tell people “well…if you don’t like it, you’re not a true Trek fan”. Sorry, but being a Trek fan doesn’t mean I have to like EVERYTHING, and that’s where the script fails.
I think you’ve hit on it. You’ve got two things going here. First the TOS was a 60’s show about a future time in which many of the concerns of that time were no longer an issue. That’s why Uhura could be on the bridge and not have an episode devote one second to it (discount the Abe Lincoln alien ep), because it wasn’t an issue in the world of the stories. Hence you got the reaction that above posters have commented on. The fact she was there was enough. Same goes for a Russian, or an Asian on the crew, remember this was the cold war, and Russians weren’t exactly considered our friends. They did however have episodes about racism and the stupidity of it. To hold a spotlight to any of these issues would be for the benefit of the audience and not for story purposes. That’s fine if you want to preach to people, but it’s lousy storytelling.
The next thing is that you are attempting to write a 60’s style story in 2008 without the benefit of a 60’s era mindset, or the 60’s era censorboard. Remember in “I Love Lucy” even though Ricky and Lucy were married they had to have separate beds. Now given Roddenberry’s vision we can assume that there was homosexual relationships and interracial relationships and everything else, but in 1960 the closest you were going to come to addressing that was that a human could fall for a Vulcan which was an alien species.
Now Roddenberry made TOS as radical as he could get away with at the time. Given the freedom that we have now if he were to do the show it would no doubt look different, and there would be some stories taking place that wouldn’t even be concieved of at the time of TOS. The thing is I don’t know if Phase II is doing stories as Roddenberry might do in 2009, or trying to duplicate the look of the 60’s show as many of the viewers have assumed. I’m not even going to attempt to guess, but depending on how you look at it both sides have a valid point of view on this topic.
>>Flame me all you like but, even if secretly, you know I’m right.<<
No, I won’t flame you. Yes, you believe you are right. That’s your privilege. I don’t agree. (And I like to think that I might know a little bit more about this particular production than you.)
All of us worked for over a year on this two-part episode. Despite the limitations of budget, equipment, time, money, and whatever, we approached it with the same seriousness as if it were a genuine film production. That’s why so many of the aspects of this work so well — the 200 people who worked so hard on this approached it with enormous dedication and commitment and passion and enthusiasm. Most of them worked much harder and much longer hours than I’ve seen many professional crews work.
All of us involved with BAF have been following the comments on this and other boards. I personally have read hundreds of comments from fans. Many have been thoughtful and insightful. I’m grateful for that. I’ve also been amused at the few comments that make inaccurate assumptions.
I’ll give you an example. The dark lighting, that many have written about, was a deliberate decision to create a different mood, as well as to demonstrate that the Enterprise was functioning on reduced power because it had been seriously injured in battle. The dark lighting wasn’t a failure, it was a major effort on behalf of Dave Berry, the DP. Another example is a fan who complained about colored gels over the lights, saying that wasn’t good lighting — but that was EXACTLY the kind of lighting that Gerry Finnerman and Bob Justman designed for the original series and Dave Berry worked very hard to duplicate it.
That’s just one example of the kind of care that each and every crew member put into this production. Now multiply that by at least 200. We had a 96 page script. We shot the bulk of it in 14 days. We couldn’t have done that without a very detailed battle-plan. We didn’t just run in, point the camera, and shoot stuff that we thought was a good idea at the time. We spent long weeks and months ahead of time debating every scene and every line of dialog, asking ourselves if it was the best we could do and if it truly represented the SPIRIT of Star Trek. (While I assumed that I might personally have a pretty good knowledge of Gene Roddenberry’s original intentions, I also took the precaution of running the script past DC Fontana before proceeding.)
Does this mean the final product is perfect? Of course not. James Cawley and I have already had discussions about a director’s version that will be cut together as a feature film, not as two separate episodes. We’ve also talked about tweaking the pacing of one scene, cutting one line in another, restoring a couple lines in a third place, and reshooting one smal piece with Uhura that both of us think could be more dramatic.
But even if we stopped right here today, I can tell you that the entire team is very proud of what we have accomplished so far. All of us are very grateful for the enthusiasm of the audience. We love the feedback, we love the passion — because after everything is said and done, we are YOU. We are Star Trek fans too, just like you — and this episode is our way of showing it.
The ONLY thing we have taken serious issue with is the announcement by a couple of fans that they intend to recut the episode. No. Please don’t. That’s OUR privilege. Nobody else’s. Please.
Thanks for listening.
Just remember folks, you haven’t seen the second half yet.
You might want to wait until you see Part II, or even a director’s cut which has both parts edited together as a feature-length story. All of Part II depends on what we have set up in Part I.
David, I hate to tell you this, but this is the 21st century. People do their own mashups, edits, what have you. You may not like it, but you can’t prevent it. I think you should take a look at http://remix.nin.com and see what amazing things people do with NIN’s music.
One point I’ve been seeing over and over again is that you wanted to make people have a reaction to it. I find that to be borderline with exploiting people’s feelings to push an agenda. Of course people are going to feel squeamish about this, so it seems to me the only reason why you put it in there was to push homosexuality. As someone stated above, people are starting to use Gene’s “vision” for political gains. This is NOT the Star Trek I grew up with (I watched it on NBC as well, David).
I also don’t like the fact that anyone who expresses any kind of negative view on it is immediately labeled a “homophobe”. I don’t like onions, but I’m not AFRAID of onion. Big different there, and I think it’s disrespectful of anyone to use that word simply because they were uncomfortable watching it.
And yes, the scene was TOO LONG. It was. Accept it. Your words were “And some people have said the scene is too long (which is a euphemism for their discomfort with the male-male relationship.) “. As a writer you should know when a scene goes on too long. This one did. It could have easily been trimmed.
Somewhere in the back of my head I see there’s some agenda being pushed, and Star Trek is being used to push it.
to david gerrold and james cawley (and the rest of the ‘crew’)
when an artist paints their picture, they will constantly and forever look at imperfections in their work unless they pick a specific point in time to just walk away from it and say ‘it is finished.’ i can respect how you, as artists, imagining tweeks here and there that you could do for the final product.
when a piece of an artist’s work is compromised by outside forces beyond their control… (as in the studio rushed ’star trek 1′, the studio mishandling of ’star trek 5′ )… it can be rationally justified in revisit