Anthony and Laurie start by remembering Discovery actor Ken Mitchell who passed away earlier this week. The podcasters then go over the latest news, including a Paramount business update, a deep dive into the new Discovery season 5 trailer, and Aaron Bossig’s Star Trek: The Cruise logs. Then it’s an extended interview with writer, producer, and podcaster Mark Altman, starting with the Inglorious Treksperts podcast celebrating its 300th episode this week where the Treksperts talk Star Trek III with special guests Picard showrunner Terry Matalas, Fox president Steve Asbell, and Marvel president Kevin Feige. We also cover Mark’s upcoming Star Trek locations documentary (To Boldly Go), his excitement about working with Jonathan Frakes on the new sci-fi show Deathlands, and his thoughts on the future of the Trek franchise. Things wrap up with our bits of the week: Trekkies saving democracy and an analysis of Trek’s horniest episodes.
Links:
‘Star Trek: Discovery’ Actor Kenneth Mitchell Has Passed Away
GoFundMe for Ken Mitchell’s family
Warner Bros. Discovery halts merger talks with Paramount Global, sources say
‘Star Trek: Discovery’ Coming To SkyShowtime In Europe – All 5 Seasons
Watch: It’s The Last Dance Of ‘Star Trek: Discovery’ In New Season 5 Trailer And Photos
Analysis: ‘Star Trek: Discovery’ Season 5 Trailer Reveals Puzzles, Clues And A Visit To [SPOILER]
Daily updates from cruise from Aaron Bossig
The Fifty-Year Mission: The Complete Uncensored, Unauthorized Oral History of Star Trek
Deadlands sci-fi series with Jonathan Frakes
Kids Stay in the Podcast podcast
Bits:
Anthony: Could Swifties or Trekkies Decide the Election? [New York Times]
Laurie: The 10 horniest episodes of Star Trek, ranked by cultural impact [Polygon]
Let us know what you think of the episode in the comments, and should you be so inclined, please review us on Apple.
Subscribe to our podcasts
The All Access Star Trek podcast has joined the long-running Shuttle Pod as part of the TrekMovie.com Podcast Network. If you already subscribe to The Shuttle Pod, your subscription will now include both shows from the TrekMovie Network. If you prefer, you can sign up for only the Shuttle Pod or All Access Star Trek using the links below.
| TrekMovie.com Podcast Network of Shows | ||
|---|---|---|
| TrekMovie.com Podcast Network | All TrekMovie.com podcasts | Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Spotify, Pocket Casts, Stitcher |
| The Shuttle Pod Podcast | The original TrekMovie.com podcast | Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Pocket Casts, Stitcher |
| All Access Star Trek Podcast | All about the Star Trek Universe | Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Pocket Casts, Stitcher |
Keep up with everything to do with the Star Trek Universe at TrekMovie.com.
This will be a great Listen on the way home today can not wait. Laurie and Tony do a great job on the Pod cast and I listened to the Treksperts 300th episode yesterday and it was great with Terry, Kevin, and Steve on their break down of Star Trek III The Search for Spock.
Can you guys please do an episode where Tony defends the creative merits of Into Darkness? I am very skeptical that could be done, but it would be “must hear” podcasting.
It’s really quite simple. STID is a solid sci-fi action adventure movie. The problem is that it was bad Star Trek.
In fact, STID bears some resemblance to the overall set-up in Captain America Winter Solider (which came out the next year).
Yes.
I remember leaving Into Darkness and being like “well that was ok” as it wasn’t boring and it had starships, etc. The cast and crew were awesome.
It was only after you are like:
“Hey, the Enterprise only lasted 2 seconds in combat.. AGAIN”
“Prime Directive… meaningless”
“They made Kahn just the a poor guy trying to get his family back”
“Kirk with magic blood, well that is dumb”
and of course the worst was the dumb analogs to GWB at the time that no one gets anymore. Starfleet firing torpedoes across the neutral zone = drone strikes you see. I mean forget that drones are saving Ukraine right now, GWB, I mean Admiral Marcus is bad, bad, bad. Get it? (Yeah, it’s a dumb analog).
Then you realize good movie (compared to anything TNG for instance), but bad Star Trek TOS.
I feel someone realized they had the ultimate set up and then I blame a bad political analogy for wrecking it. That and I think someone visualizing Gary Mitchell crashing starships into the Earth, which would have been awesome, just merged into the story regardless of actual plot.
Kahn is supposed to be a strategic genius who because he has been engineered to lead, thinks he should lead. The ultimate villain. Instead we got a weak Kahn who is used by Starfleet and just wants his family back. Why? Why would you do that?!? Bad political analog I assume.
Here is what Into Darkness should have been. First off use the Strange New Worlds Enterprise and bridge in 2009.Okay now Vulcan is destroyed.
Starfleet command finds the Botany Bay with a strategic genius, Kahn on board. Starfleet under siege, Vulcan is gone and the Klingons have them surrounded. The Romulans join in the fight and its over. Kahn goes, oh yeah, I can totally use my superior intellect to save the Federation. Admiral Marcus recruits Kahn’s crew to lead a strategic division in Starfleet.
Now you have the Enterprise being asked to do something questionable on the frontier (violating the Prime Directive to fight Robert April or something) that violates the Prime Directive. Little do they know that Kahn is secretly negotiating with the Klingons and preparing to take over the Federation.
Kirk figures out what’s going on but is listed as gone rebel by Kahn over at Starfleet Strategy.
The game is on.
Somewhere in there Kahn eventually ends up with a Connie and a Klingon D-7 take on the Enterprise somewhere in a spectacular final battle around a black hole because WTF… why bring back TOS and not finally have the big E take on a D-7.
Interesting! What are the top three points that made it bad Star Trek?
Cmd Bremmon saved me the time of responding — I agree with his assessment.
Thank you!
Agreed!
I agree with you that it was bad Trek, but not that it was particularly solid as an adventure movie. For me it was an incompetent remake of StarTrek 6 (rogue Starfleet officers conspire to start a war with the Klingons using a secret prototype ship) with chunks of Wrath of Khan nonsensically grafted into it.
I do like Scotty’s subplot, but that was about it for me.
Pretty easy, actually. Creative endeavors are always going to have their pros and cons. The last third of WOK throws a chunk of Trek canon and continuity out the window, but it’s overlooked because Shatner and Montalban really rose above the material. That by itself doesn’t make WOK a horrible movie.
How does it throw that canon and continuity out the window? Not arguing, just curious.
Just as a guess from the gut, I’d figure the character’s statement that Kirk has never faced death before on a personal level pretty much obliterates the importance of and possibly even the events surrounding Edith and Gary and Miramanee, let alone most of Sam’s family. (And that’s assuming Spock’s touch actually removed his crushing grief over Rayna.)
The first night I saw the movie, I pretty much missed or was distracted from the rest of the ending after he admitted that to David, because it seemed so downright dishonest (retcon not yet having entered the vernacular) after seeing so many times Kirk having to deal with huge emotional losses.
Not to single that out in particular, as I actually was a pretty skeptical viewer of the movie the first time through, still gunshy from what I saw in 79 as the massive failings of TMP, and it wasn’t till a second viewing, when I saw the movie alone rather than with friends, that I was able to really enjoy the movie fully; even Spock’s death didn’t really get me till the second time as I recall.
Yes, I totally concur with that, though I think of it less than some kind of dishonest retcon than Nick Meyer being handed a particular pop cultural artifact and interpreting it his way, prior history be damned. Which is why he refers in “A View From the Bridge” to TWOK being a sui generis, pretty much its own thing.
The Enterprise is 20 years old line in III still bothers me. As does decomissioning the A in VI when it was brand new how many years could possibly have been between films 5 and 6 that the crew was too old and the ship to be put out of service.
Even though they had purged most trekfans from the production staff by the time of SFS (I’m thinking Mike Minor was last of this old guard), I’m sure there were still more than a few who knew the enterprise was twice as old as Bennett scripted it to be. Maybe they just didn’t want to lose their jobs by pointing it out.
I like their podcast. I just feel like the only new trek they talk about is Picard season 3, and I would love to hear them share some insights into the behind the scenes world of the new star Trek shows.
They’re not interested in the other shows, so they tend to steer clear of them! I do think they’d like Prodigy.
Lol that’s pretty funny. I never listened to it before. They don’t like any of the other stuff outside of Picard season 3 (and maybe Prodigy)? Not even SNW?
That’s too bad and a loss to the Star Trek fan community. I hope they like Academy!
I know I’m one person, and it doesn’t matter, but that’s the vibe I got and why I don’t listen to their podcast. But good for them!
Ashley Miller watches Lower Decks. He did include characters and episodes from the show on his lists for the Christmas specials.
They did interview the cinematographer for Disco and Picard, Crescenzo, last summer, which was terrific. I’d recommend listening to it if you haven’t.
Crescenzo is a terrific interview, but to be fair and balanced, you should probably read interviews with the other guy, Joffin, as well. My take is that the latter is far more responsible for the ‘way too dark and way way too mushy’ look of Ps3, which is borne out by the fact Ps2 — which Crescenzo also co-shot but with a different DP — even though it has dark scenes, doesn’t look like utter crap, especially with bridge scenes.
They hate Discovery and Strange New Worlds and do not conceal it, even though they always talk about only spreading love about Trek.
OK I GET the hate for Discovery with all the issues the show has (and of course others can disagree with that but they are there regardless) but what are their issues with SNW? That show is the most Trek-y show since Enterprise went off the air and very much a return to the old Roddenberry/Berman format, so what is their main complaint over it?
I guess I’m just shocked Altman doesn’t like it because he grew up a TOS/TNG fan and so I thought it would be up his alley.
And no one rides a motorcycle on that show lol
I thought that they would embrace SNW also, as some of us here have. They hate the design of it. They hate Pike’s casual friendliness and command with his crew. They hate the new Kirk. I vehemently disagree with them.
They thoroughly love Picard season 3.
Ok I agree about Kirk lol, but I don’t think he’s THAT bad. The others I understand it to a POINT but not to just outright disregard the show either. That’s what I’m a little surprised about. Sure they can be critical of it but it sounds like they written it off completely. Because Pike is too nice?? Isn’t that’s why he was such a big hit on Discovery in the first place? But maybe he never liked this version of him.
And I knew how much he loved Picard season 3 because I actually saw him at the IMAX screening finale. I didn’t go up to him but I saw him talking to other fans after it was over and he looked as jolly as a school boy talking to them about it lol.
Of course it’s OK if people don’t like something and I’m not surprised he’s not a LDS fan for example but SNW did surprise me.
I get the criticisms of SNW, even as I still have a fair amount of residual affection for it. But I can’t respect at all the completely un-nuanced gushing for PIC S3, which for all its virtues is as ultimately flawed as any season of serialized Trek yet produced.
You know I agree since I also like Picard season 3 but always said the season was definitely flawed. I just recently watched it again in fact and my view hasn’t changed on those flaws at all.
If I ever get P+ again, I think I might rewatch ps3 ep4 again as a standalone, and maybe the Ro Laren show too, but I don’t think there’s anything else that would make for compelling viewing. That’s a really steep dropoff from my initial response to the season, but the cumulative effect for me after that initial viewing was, there’s way too much of Picard’s kid and Amanda Plummer being wasted and Stewart’s Picard coming off feeble to the point of being cringeworthy, and barely enough of Frakes’ surprisingly compelling Riker to offset all that. And that’s not even getting into the visuals, both the live-action cinematography and the VFX, most of which I found displeasing.
The writing is their issue with it. And I agree. It looks like Roddenberry’s trek but it’s not. It has nothing to say and the dialogue makes them sound like a CW show. It is empty of the allegorical science fiction that made Trek great in the sixties.
I have complained about the way they talk as well. I noticed that drove me up the wall in season 2.
But I have loved most of the episodes overall, but I get the complaints as well. But all I can say is when comparing it to the other two modern live action shows, DIS and PIC (minus season 3 for me) it’s just no contest IMO. The first two seasons of SNW at least strive to be Star Trek of old. The storylines are actually fun and optimistic again. I don’t think it’s perfect and I whined about the canon issues like so many others have here but overall I do think it’s a really solid show.
But it’s just my opinion of course. It’s certainly fine if you and Altman don’t agree with that. I don’t get triggered over this stuff lol.
This couldn’t be farther from the truth. The SNW ratio of allegory episodes to silly fun is significantly higher than TOS. My favorite heavy hitting allegory episode is without a doubt “lift us to where suffering cannot reach,” which is more sophisticated in its social commentary than anything I can think of on TOS.
Mark stated that he won’t talk about Disco or SNW that much since he wants talk about the Good Star Trek. He doesn’t want his podcast to be about bashing Star Trek, but instead he wants to praise the good Trek and the people behind it.
However, he has done some bashing-ish episodes before. A few years ago he had almost an entire episode about how stupid the “Enterprise Has Landed” marketing theme that Paramount did.
That said, I absolutely love Mark, Ashley, and Darren on Inglorious Treksperts. I don’t think I listened to all 300 episodes, but it’s pretty close. I love the fact that I don’t always agree with them, but they absolutely love Star Trek so that is ok.
That’s probably the most positive away to go about it and just focus on what you love about the franchise instead of slagging off the stuff you hate.
He’s a better person than me. 😂
The “good Star Trek”
Thanks for giving my favorite Star Trek podcast some much-needed love!!!
This was a great podcast! I really enjoyed listening to Mark Altman and his views on every thing.
There are two key things I agree with him completely. One are the movies and everything he said I been saying for 5 years now and that the movies will probably stay DOA until they can make them cheaper, MUCH cheaper. I don’t think any of those movies made any real money because the crazy amount that went to the budget and marketing. And they seem to know that obviously.
And maybe movie pitch #1701 with the new prequel movie is probably going to be cheaper and why they seem to be going with that instead. But again I agree Altman, ANOTHER prequel is such a huge eye roll and why no one remotely seems excited about it. That and the fact no one thinks it will probably happen (you have no one else to blame Paramount). They are just throwing crap at the walls at this point. But please GO FORWARD! Start in the 24th century or just post TUC if you don’t want to go too far. But another TOS prequel??? Ugh. Unless it deals with the Enterprise characters and gives them a better ending I just don’t care.
The second agreement is getting the Legacy show. It is a no brainier, but as been said Paramount just doesn’t have the money to even entertain the idea. But I still have faith it will come eventually! But yeah Paramount is in a bind right now on many fronts so it’s probably years away if it happens.
But this was such a great podcast and I have never listened to Glorious Treksperts. I heard of it just never listened. Well as today they one new subscriber so it worked lol.
And can’t wait to listen to him, Kevin Feige and Terry Matalas talk Trek for 2 hours. That sounds glorious!
The general state of movie series seems really dismal, and nobody knows how to turn it around. Multiple Star Wars movies have been announced and cancelled over the last several years. It looks like the Mandalorian movie they announced might actually get made, but who knows. Marvel is faltering. DC is praying that its reboot will work with a new Superman movie. Indiana Jones bombed. Mission Impossible bombed. With even the A-list movie series across the whole movie industry on life support, I guess it isn’t surprising that Paramount has churned through so many failed attempts to make a new Trek movie.
Which is why I can understand if they want to put the movies on the back burner for awhile and (HOPEFULLY) start over later if they just have no confidence with the Kelvin movies and they clearly don’t. Just move it to the side completely for a few years.
But all these silly announcements are not doing them any favors if they can’t fully commit to any of those either. Maybe this prequel idea will come to fruition but I have zero faith it will. It just seems more of the same. And the complete lack of fanfare for it doesn’t inspire confidence either; especially when most of those fans would probably prefer a Legacy TV movie than yet another tired prequel. Like seriously???
This studio has been completely inept for 8 years now when it comes to all things movie Trek and I don’t think it’s going to change anytime soon.
Bro if Trekkies had to choose between another overstuffed $200 million prequel movie no one wants or ever asked for over a $20 million Paramount+ Legacy movie I don’t think it will be anything close to a contest. People want the universe to keep going forward. And especially in the 25th century.
I’m trying to remember the last YouTube video I seen where someone was asking for another prequel. Oh that’s right, never. 🙄
Because people are sick of going backwards. And probably another movie with a villain trying to destroy the Federation for reasons. If the movie focuses on President Archer at the beginning of the Federation that would sound a little more intriguing But if the movie is focusing on Kirk’s grandpa or something then hard pass.for me
Oh yeah I agree I don’t think it would be much of a contest either. This isn’t really much of an argument these days, most fans simply want to see the universe grow and for many prequels don’t really do that when it’s just filling in to things we already know. That’s why the Khan show (ugh) never got a lot of traction with fans and they knew that.
Of course plenty would be excited to have a big movie in the theaters again. I don’t doubt that but going backwards to do it yet again doesn’t spark a lot imagination for many either.
I’ll stay open minded of course but I really don’t see this going anywhere.
Indiana Jones was just okay it was a character piece and Harrison was very good, but it wasn’t anything remotely like the original trilogy except for the deaged segment. The story was not good and the maguffin was the worst in the series. It raised my appreciation for Crystal Skull a film i never liked when i saw it in theaters. Much how the Disney Star Wars trilogy and its failures made people nostalgic for the prequels. Personally i will probably only ever watch the original cuts of the original trilogy only i will never watch the Disney trilogy or the prequels again. Star Wars is dead. I’ve given up on Mark Hamill ever playing Luke in a tv series, its just pretty much a dead series.
DUNE PART 2 may well break that cycle, though I didn’t much care for it myself.
Oh really??? That’s a shame. I’m seeing it today in a few hours. I’ll be very honest I did like the first one but I didn’t think it was the greatest sci fi movie of all time either but I know it’s just part one obviously so I am very curious to see how much I like it as a whole.
For me the first one was also meh; much overpraised. If you liked it better than that, my guess is that you’ll like the second part better than I did as well.
I was seriously underwhelmed by the Dp2 trailer, specifically Chalamet’s performance, but realize it is hard to judge out of context.
What has actually made me angry is reading that Tim Blake Nelson’s character — one of the most interesting characters Herbert ever wrote IMO — got cut completely from the film, after being omitted from the previous theatrical and TV versions as well. I get why they couldn’t do it for the Lynch due to time constraints, but with the new films’ combined runtime far exceeding that of even Lynch’s initial 4hr-plus assembly for the 84, I don’t see why Denis shot and then discarded TBN’s part (which, while only a scene or two, would seem to have serious import in this, a pic I assume without having seen it is going to be remembered as THE GODFATHER II of SF flicks.) I don’t see how they can retcon him into MESSIAH, unless he just shows up to tell Paul how badly he screwed up the universe, which would be after-the-factism given it looks like Chani spends most of this one saying the same thing.
Am also steeling myself against Walken derailing the movie in a Shatner/NicCage way; maybe Denis should have cast Walken in TBN’s role, then cut that, and had Nelson as a sly and low-key emperor. I admire a lot of Walken’s work tremendously, but the impact of seeing and hearing him in certain productions creates ripples in the pond that can cause titters or derision and derail suspension of disbelief.
Most of the critics and Dunatics seem to be quite pleased with Part 2 (including some not all that enthused with Part 1), so my opinion seems to be an outlier. Which is fine. I thought Walken was perfectly okay in a pretty abbreviated role, and did like the film’s take on the Chani character, which for my money led to a better finale than Herbert’s novel and a much better one than the Lynch version. Still, I found the bulk of it to be a grim, unsatisfying slog.
Ok I watched it yesterday and yeah I loved this movie! I’m actually surprised I did because as I said I didn’t find the first one was super amazing but obviously a good movie.
But the way it was shot, the acting, the really compelling storyline just really kept me riveted. I went in expecting to like it since I did the first one but yeah it ended up being fantastic, especially the third act. That’s probably where most of the praise is coming from.
To be honest I have never been interested in Dune. It was always that story about people fighting over a boring sand planet. I never knew anything more than that until very recently. Now I’m pretty amazed at the overall story. I been looking up YouTube videos about the mythology and even started watching an old Syfy miniseries based on the second book on YouTube lol..The Borg Queen herself Alice Krige is in that one.
But it’s a very sprawling story I knew nothing about. I was shocked the story had anything to do with A.I. for example. I didn’t even know this was similar to Foundation and that these are humans from Earth who just went on to colonize other worlds in the future. I thought it was more a Star Wars thing and just in another entire galaxy completely.
Glad you enjoyed it. I did think that Chani’s ultimate feeling of betrayal by Paul’s taking on the role of Messiah to her people was handled very well in the film, which led to a much more interesting and nuanced finale than that in Herbert’s book. But I still found it (aside from the stuff with the sandworms and some well-staged fights) to be a visually dull and emotionally inert spectacle otherwise. I couldn’t wait for it to be over.
Aside from the idea of having a more-than-willing Kevin Feige expound on his love of TSFS for two hours — admittedly, that’s quite a get — I didn’t find the conversation all that enlightening or interesting, frankly. As Nimoy himself said of his directorial debut at the time, “Some really liked it, and others didn’t. Next!”
Okay good to know. I think three hours is probably overkill but I have seen videos where people discuss a single episode for several hours as well.
Oh and BTW Laurie, I been to a TGIFs in Malaysia once in Kuala Lumpur so you’re not alone! 😉
Ha! I spent 4 months in Malaysia for work (many years ago) and the friends I made there loved going to TGIF, Hard Rock, and Chili’s—especially Chili’s. I loved Malaysian food and was always happier at the food stalls where I could get amazing spicy noodle dishes for a few bucks. And for the record, I’ve only EVER been to Chili’s in Malaysia; I’ve never been to one before or since.
Chili’s was a nice place for me to hang out with my late wife…real close to the schools where she taught, and a fun place to go when I’d meet her after her classes. The grub was ok then…
I used to live in Asia and visited Malaysia about 2 and 3 times. I traveled with friends when we went to the TGIFs because they served alcohol lol. For people who may not know it’s a Muslim country and not a place to go if you want to party or get drunk on vacation.
But all the western establishments like TGIFs fortunately aren’t restricted to those laws and whiwe went there mostly. And their burgers are quite tasty! 😊
I lived in Thailand for awhile, even speak the language to a degree. If things go south in November, I may yet return.
My sister lived in Thailand for a while and loved it. I still regret not getting to go either when I was in Malaysia or she was in Thailand. One day! I will never get over Malaysian food, I loved it so much!
If I do return to Thailand I fully intend to visit Kuala Lumpur, as I’ve only been to Penang long enough to turn around and renew my visa. It looks like a great and (for the Muslim world) fairly cosmopolitan city.
Thai food of course is also wonderful, but it’s become so ubiquitous in the U.S. that you hardly need a passport to enjoy it. 😊
That’s where I was based, Kuala Lumpur. I will tell you that I have never had Malaysian food here in the US (and I’m in NY) even close to what I had there. You DO need a passport to enjoy it!
Wow cool! I had two friends who lived there as well at the time. They really loved it.
And please don’t say that lol. I know it’s possible but I can’t imagine what it would be like again.
My friend, it would be far, far worse. I pray nightly that it does not come to pass, and I’m a lifelong agnostic.
Had an occasion to go to Dubai years ago. We’re heading off to the hotel, and of course, the very first restaurant we happen across was….Applebee’s, damn it!!. Fortunately, we were able to keep most of our eating to local cuisine…..
People have been joking about British cuisine for 500 years, yet the only bad meal I recall having in London was at Pizza Hut.
You know I have never been to an Applebee’s in my life and I don’t live too far from one. No particular reason, just never have.
But these diner chain restaurants are everywhere these days. I’m actually shocked I haven’t seen a a Denny’s anywhere outside of Canada and Japan. They are probably in other countries but none I been to outside of those.
There’s always a story. The wife and I stopped into an Applebee’s here in Riverside (CA) a few years back, and I ordered up the cheap steak special. If you cut it up into small pieces, it was digestible. After a bit, the waitress came by, and very effervescently started fishing hard for a compliment on how great the meal was, and I told her the steak wasn’t great. The next thing I know the manager is there, going hard to the mat on why that was literally the best steak I’d ever had. I told her, I wasn’t complaining, but there was no universe where this was a great steak. It was pretty surreal, for a diner chain…..
I laughed out loud reading that story!
Although I always known who this guy’s I’m not sure I ever read anything of his until now. But this was a solid interview and really agreed with so many of his points, especially that Paramount should be greenlighting the Legacy show tomorrow.
This is easily what most fans wants!
NOW GIVE US THE LEGACY SHOW PARAMOUNT!!!
Read the 50-Year-Mission books! All first-hand stuff. I’d love to do a separate interview with him just about gathering all that material.
Hi Laurie. Can I drawn you and Tony’s attention to a major article on the BBC website today (Sunday 3 March) covering the infamous “banned” episode of TNG (at least in Ireland and the UK), “The High Ground”. It’s an interesting read.
I have heard of that book and heard great things about it. But until I heard this podcast I didn’t know he wrote it.
I can’t imagine how long it took to make it interviewing so many people. I actually would love him to do something similar with the new era of Trek from the Kelvin movies through Prodigy but I guess the shows are still a little too new for that kind of deep dive yet.
BTW thank you for you and Anthony’s big support for Legacy. I know it’s still not a real thing but it’s great to hear people like you are really pushing for it too. I’m not giving up and I’m glad you’re not either. 😊🖖
Thanks for a wonderful podcast. I’m a big fan of Treksperts so it was great to hear you chat with Mark.
I had a lol moment when Laurie mentioned that in the horniest episodes listing they forgot about Enterprise. I get a feeling almost everyone forgets about Enterprise! Even the great Trekmovie hasn’t done a podcast that is focused on the show. I get a feeling that I’m in a very small minority that actually enjoyed the show especially when I did a re-watch during lockdown. Never mind each to his or her own…..
It’s not one of my favorites. But it was definitely horny!
I vividly recall Altman’s work writing for the late, great CINEFANTASTIQUE during the heyday of TNG and DS9. His reporting was terrific, but when it came to his opinions about what made the shows or even the individual episodes work, not so much.
I disagreed with Altman’s takes on things some of the time (geez, I think he gave TUC four stars), but other times I concurred. His later partner RMB seemed, for a time, to be channeling exactly what was in my own mind, especially during the SCI-FI UNIVERSE days, though, like the mirror universe, things diverged this century, especially with his should-have-known-better involvement with AXANAR.
I should have known better too, having donated three days of my life and an amount of cash I’d be humiliated to disclose on behalf of the AXANAR project. (I retain the receipt to this day, as a reminder of my stupidity.) Definitely not one of my prouder moments. My excuse is that I felt (and still feel) that PRELUDE TO AXANAR was a pretty cool piece of work, and that the Kelvin films Paramount was bankrolling were a creative disaster.
I did meet RMB during that period, who was gracious and eager to show off the stuff he was working on. My main issue with him in retrospect was his continued defense of Alec Peters’ business model (if not the man himself), which took fan donations and leveraged them to rent and equip a “studio” to be used in developing their own pet projects, all built on someone else’s IP. It was blatantly dishonest, and I sincerely regret my own (albeit minuscule) part in it.
fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice … doesn’t sound like you’d fall for it a 2nd time, at least. But bbth he and that guy Peters later touted, the one who just lost a suit against Peters, had to have known better, seeing things from the inside.
Why doesn’t Peters get nailed over all the prop auction stuff where he seems to have withheld — essentially stolen — money from the sellers, time and again? Is it that his scams haven’t been big enough to matter to TPTB, or is there some other weirdness I just can’t understand?
I remember sitting in Peters’ car during an errand to the local Home Depot and both of us shaking our heads at the news of how Donald Trump was dominating the Republican primaries (this must have been in early 2016). The irony being, of course, that if Trek fandom has produced any figure akin to Trump, it’s Alec Peters.
Gotta agree that the era of 200MM Trek movies is likely over. We wouldn’t be wondering were all the Trek movies are of BR was able to make them for 120-150MM.
Dude I’m starting to think even $200 million dollar Transformer films aren’t happening anymore given they just been making less and less money. I think the last one only made around $400 million and basically broke even. Even when those movies look to be struggling it’s no way anyone with an IQ over 40 should be giving any Star Trek movies those budgets again.
That’s one of the reasons I don’t get too excited when I see that Paramount has Trek movie(s) in development, then in the body of the article it says Bad Robot is involved. JJ’s been pretty firm that he won’t be doing Trek on a budget. I’d love to be wrong, but the two current projects will end up dying on the vine for that reason.
Transformers Bumblebee is the model moving forward. A budget a bit over 100MM, and a bit over 400MM in worldwide box office. I think we wouldn’t have to think too hard over the last three Trek movies to come up with a list of pointless CGI that could have been cut that didn’t diminish the story any….
Love the Treksperts every episode is great and they only talk about real Star Trek