Ultimate Collectors' Forums

Ah, the legend himself. I've seen him twice now and both times I missed the opportunity to meet him, have something signed, or take a photo with him. I know it costs money, but whatever. I heard his last convention appearance ever was in Toronto just a couple of weeks ago so I likely won't get a third chance now.

I hadn't heard he was no longer going to do conventions.

Hmm.. I just saw him on Saturday... Maybe he's slowing down?

Yeah, I heard Toronto was his last one. Maybe for Canada at least? He's gotta stop at some point. What is he now, 80? BC, what event was that?

Valkrist wrote:Ah, the legend himself. I've seen him twice now and both times I missed the opportunity to meet him, have something signed, or take a photo with him. I know it costs money, but whatever. I heard his last convention appearance ever was in Toronto just a couple of weeks ago so I likely won't get a third chance now.

Never say never Val,you never know right.

He is 85.

The event was Wizard World Austin. He's pretty active with Wizard World, their next show is in Tulsa and he's scheduled to be there.

So he's not appearing at any more cons in Canuck-land but he's still scheduling appearances at ones in the US?

Hmmm...maybe after Tulsa his next appearance will be at a naturalization ceremony

He did his one man show here in Mesa at the Arts Center maybe --(tryng to recall when I saw the program schedule) -- a couple of years ago.
The Mesa Arts Center is ...oh...about 2 miles from my house (but I didn't go).

Just checked because it was bugging me, but he is coming back to Canada, at least twice more this year, but not Vancouver... for now.

The person I got him mixed up with was Stan Lee. Pretty sure he's hanging up his convention hat, at least north of the border.

Yea. Stan Lee is retiring from conventions after this year. I think he will still appear at California cons near where he lives, but he is 93', I'm sure traveling the con circuit is getting hard

Speaking of Stan Lee...

Geez, BC, you are a regular celebrity photo hog!

I shouldn't talk though, I got to take selfies with Penn and Teller last night after their show in Vegas.

I'd love to see Penn and Teller!

Yea... since I started going to cons... photo ops have been a regular thing. I guess this isn't star trek related anymore but so far I've had photo ops with:

1. Cobie Smulders (Avengers/SHIELD/How I met You Mother)
2. Stephen Amell, John Barrowman, David Ramsay (Arrow)
3. Chloe Bennett (Agents of Shield)
4. Stan Lee
5. Katie Cassidy (Arrow-verse)
6. Eliza Dushku
7. Kate Beckinsale
8. William Shatner
9. Becky Lynch (WWE Wrestler)
10. Marina Sirtis

Maybe all these photo ops and cons is the reason I havent been buying new weapons!

BladeCollector wrote:I'd love to see Penn and Teller!

Yea... since I started going to cons... photo ops have been a regular thing. I guess this isn't star trek related anymore but so far I've had photo ops with:

1. Cobie Smulders (Avengers/SHIELD/How I met You Mother)
2. Stephen Amell, John Barrowman, David Ramsay (Arrow)
3. Chloe Bennett (Agents of Shield)
4. Stan Lee
5. Katie Cassidy (Arrow-verse)
6. Eliza Dushku
7. Kate Beckinsale
8. William Shatner
9. Becky Lynch (WWE Wrestler)
10. Marina Sirtis

Maybe all these photo ops and cons is the reason I havent been buying new weapons!

Where did you meet K. Beckinsale?

I met Kate back in June at comicpalooza in Houston, Texas

I haven't seen very many of her movies, but the ones I did see, I enjoyed very much, and thought (and still think) she is a very fine actress.

http://trekmovie.com/2016/11/28/gene-ro ... m-concept/

Some interesting ideas in there and some bad ones; probably you could call it a typical Roddenberry throw everything on the wall and see what sticks approach.

Lots going on in that story...kind of makes me dizzy.
But that one guy got it...if Spock was to be the JFK assassin, I'm outta there.

I'm not sure what to think of the whole JFK tie-in idea. Some parts of the story may have been interesting, but others were silly (being at warp shielded them from the timeline change) or gratuitous (Amanda raped by Klingons). The Enterprise mistaken for a UFO bit has been done before in TOS, which brings to mind how many plot elements ST:TMP copied from old episodes. And no explanation of how JFK's failure to be assassinated changed history would have been frustrating (though maybe the movie would have explained it; the outline on TrekMovie is brief). All that said, once the crew realizes Kennedy has to die to restore the timeline, then they would have to see that he died (and this element steals from The City on the Edge of Forever). That being the case, I can totally see it being Spock on the grassy knoll.

However, I think movies made for entertainment should stay away from tragic or totally weighty historical events...like X-Men writing themselves into the Cuban Missile Crisis, a real event that almost resulted in a nuclear war. In the case of Roddenberry's everything-but-the-kitchen-sink JFK tie-in, it diminishes a real event that was a tragic, tragic day in American history, with consequences that echo on down our timeline to this day.

I had not planned on getting "The Roddenberry Vault" but now I fear I must.

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/item/star ... y-vault-bd

Here's an interview with the Okudas about the Vault set.

http://trekmovie.com/2016/12/12/intervi ... rry-vault/

I've put this on my Amazon wish list and if the friend who buys from that list for me doesn't get it for me for Christmas or my birthday (about 2 weeks later), I'll be getting it for myself.

So, I received "For the Love of Spock" and "The Roddenberry Vault" for Christmas. FTLOS was a touching and worthwhile look at Nimoy both in and out of Star Trek. I've so far just watched the first of three discs of The Roddenberry Vault and I'm sorry to say it's not as mind-boggling as it was built up to be. Basically, they found all the dailies from the production of TOS. Dailies are a sort of quick and dirty film that's shot at the same time as the primary film and is developed very quickly so they can see what they're getting. Therefore, the image quality is not that great. And what you get here is not an extensive set of clips from the featured episodes, but rather a 3-part documentary with talking heads discussing the footage and showing you snippets of it. Some of it is just alternate angles and blown takes, but there are also a few deleted scenes (which thus far deserved to be deleted). Like I say I've only watched 1/3 of the set so far, but I think it's accurate to say I'm glad I received it as a gift, vs having spent my own money to get it. Maybe the remaining two discs will be more worthwhile; I guess I'll see!

Here's a detailed discussion of why we'll probably never see DS9 or Voyager on BluRay. http://www.treknews.net/2017/02/02/why- ... lu-ray-hd/

I'm currently rewatching Enterprise (nearly done with the 3rd season) and it looks just stunning on BD. Anyone who hasn't picked it up yet, should.

That's a real shame, but definitely understandable given the monumental task and expense. It saddens me that TNG did not do well enough in sales but as the article notes, it's not so much that the fans aren't out there, but the double and triple dipping does get to be a bit much, and the move to digital media is sinking home video sales faster than the Titanic.

As I don't currently own any versions of DS9 or Voy, maybe I will spring for these new DVD versions and console myself with that.

Getting TAS on BD this Christmas and being surprised by how much I enjoyed it (it was better than I remembered) has inspired me to rewatch all the Trek TV series. I just finished the 3rd season of Enterprise. Once I finish it, it's on to TOS. TOS and TNG will be easy, as they will look great. In some ways I'm dreading DS9 and Yoyager, as I have a sense my old DVDs are going to look like crap.

The article did indeed make sad sense, but one thing doesn't make sense to me. If they are going to offer DS9 and Voyager for streaming, they are going to have to do some sort of HD upgrade, or they will look like crap. Are they just going to put them out looking like crap, or do they not plan to stream these?

I suspect they will do one of those upscale hack jobs, kinda like some Blu-ray players upscale your DVDs, but that's just a guess. Either way, the end product will be a far cry from the 1080p that we now consider the bottom line of what's tolerable. Just stock up on Visine before watching and you should be ok.

I am guilty of not owning many of the seasons of Trek on DVD or BD. I do own TOS and started buying TNG, but got side tracked and bought other things. I do want to own all Trek seasons on DVD/BD sooner or later.

I rewatched Enterprise on Netflix a while back and it was upsetting that it got canned after season 4... it was getting really good too!

Well you missed the boat about a year ago when Amazon had a screamer deal on the next-generation Blu-ray sets. They were offering all seven of them for a really low price.

My take on Enterprise is this: the first two seasons were good, better than most of voyager; the third season was really good, like good DS9 or TNG quality; and the last season was fantastic. It was a tragedy that they canceled it and wouldn't let Netflix or anybody else pick it up.

Anyone who wants Enterprise and doesn't have it, now's the time: Amazon has it for $66 for the complete series.

That's Blu-ray of course; the DVD set is $52.

Olorin wrote:Well you missed the boat about a year ago when Amazon had a screamer deal on the next-generation Blu-ray sets. They were offering all seven of them for a really low price.

Rub it why don't ya!

My anticipation for Discovery just increased an order of magnitude: can you say, Captain Lucius Malfoy? http://trekmovie.com/2017/03/07/star-tr ... discovery/

Score! Ace in the hole right there for this series. Now, if only it was about moving forward with the Star Trek universe and not backward...

In honor of International Woman's Day:

I am a horrible Trek fan... since I haven't before now, but I just watched Star Trek Voyager from beginning to end for the first time. Took me about 6 weeks of Netflix binging!

BladeCollector wrote: Wed Aug 02, 2017 3:23 am I am a horrible Trek fan... since I haven't before now, but I just watched Star Trek Voyager from beginning to end for the first time. Took me about 6 weeks of Netflix binging!

And pray tell, what did you think of it?

lol... no kidding! Huge revelation and then he doesn't deign to type a few more words to tell us what he thought overall?!?

Isn't that a sign of a good story teller, keep them wanting more??

Overall I enjoyed it, I personally would rank it behind TNG and DS9, not because it was bad, but to me, those were much better.

The crew grew on me more and more as the seasons went on and I really liked the edition of 7 of 9, although at first I was like, that must suck for Kes to be fired to make room in the budget for a more attractive woman, but I thought the Kes storyline fizzled out quickly, but it would have been an interesting dynamic to deal with her species short lifespan after really becoming attached to a character that lives only 7 years.

At first I thought they were going to over use the holodecks. They used them quite a bit, but some of the weakest TNG episodes, for me at least, were those holodeck based episodes. Some were cheesy, Tom's sci-fi fantasy etc. I was worried we would get a lot of Janeway's holo novel, but that ended up being only a couple of episodes overall.

I think the series could have been more serialized. It started off sort of that way with the Kazon, the first 2 seasons, but naturally they left their space, as well as the Vidiians. But after that you had the Hunter species and a few here and there, but there weren't really any later DS9 era season long or multi season long arcs that I think, really made DS9 great.

I think they used time travel paradoxes a few too many times, but they did mention that with the temporal investigation units having to deal with Janeway a lot. Not that I am against the time travel episodes, but I don’t like the paradox episodes. Even with the finale, old Janeway goes back to help Voyager get home sooner… so if that happens, then old Janeway would have never gone back in time to help Voyager get home sooner??

I don’t know why I haven’t seen it fully until now, I guess I just put it off and put other shows ahead in my “to watch” list.

You've pretty much ranked it as the majority of fandom does, which is behind TNG and DS9.

For me it had a few too many characters I didn't care about (Kim, Neelix, Chakotay,) and yes, there was an overreliance on holodeck filler episodes. I get that on a voyage that long there is going to be a lot of boredom and the tech is there so why not use it, but do we need to see it every time? I think it also suffered from weak villains. The Kazon were stupid; the Hirogen felt like Klingon stereotype knockoffs; and even the Borg became pushovers after a while.

Still, overall I did enjoy Voyager, and they gave me some of the best Trek episodes of all time like Year of Hell, Scorpion, Timeless, Hope & Fear, and Message in a Bottle. The one where the crew lands on that planet with the goo and gets duplicated was also well written and very touching.

Chakotay grew on me after a while, but I don't think Voyager would have suffered with a different first officer. Neelix was okay-ish. I thought that episode with Tuvok and Neelix joining into another sentient person was rather well done with the morality background.

Year of Hell and Scorpion were fantastic episodes. Message in a bottle was a good one too. With any series they had some really good episodes and some DUDS!

https://trekmovie.com/2017/12/07/report ... e-r-rated/

All hands, prepare for tirade!

Not really a tirade; just my way of saying how little I care:

I was already aware of this, and my reaction amounted to little more than a single raised eyebrow, Spock-style. The push for the R-rating is unsurprising given the source, but Paramount's agreement to it is.

Anyway, I like Tarantino as a director and many of his movies, but I don't think he's the right fit for Star Trek, despite rumours he's a huge fan. Both oil and water have many beneficial uses; doesn't mean they mix well. If anything, this reeks of desperation for this franchise as they'll basically try anything at this point to breathe life into something that really doesn't excite many people anymore.

From a personal perspective, I only watched Into Darkness because my wife was curious about it; did it a couple of years after its release; and it was free on the movie channel. What a terrible movie that was.

As for Beyond, again, I watched it for free on my Android box, and only because there was really nothing else to watch that evening. So boring I could barely keep my eyes open.

I don't own the Blurays of either movie, and never will. With that in mind, I could care less about the Tarantino news. The faster this JJ reboot fails even more, the faster we can all start forgetting about it and move on.

Let Star Trek Discovery improve just a tiny bit more, and let Trek thrive on TV where it belongs.

I myself am pretty far from the biggest Tarantino fan around. I thought Pulp Fiction was one of the most overrated flicks I've ever seen, and I blame it for the whole lamentable trend of editing films together out of order.

That disclaimer aside, I'm not sure what to make of this news. I don't intrinsically have a problem with an R-rated Star Trek. I think a few episodes of Discovery would've been R-rated had they been in a theater. The episode with the double F-bomb would have been one; I think PG-13 only allows one F-bomb. Also, the episode where they explore Discovery's sister ship and find the mutilated, twisted bodies...that would have been an R, I think. That one reminded me uncomfortable of John Carpenter's The Thing. So anyway, if it is R for a artistic reason and not just for the sake of being R, I would not have a problem with. I think being R-rated worked and was appropriate for Logan and Deadpool.

There is by now essentially a whole generation who knows Star Trek only through Abrams., so it 's probably about time for some fresh blood in theatrical Star Trek. By the time the next one comes out, JJ will have been holding the reins however tightly or loosely for 10 years. I think he should be planning on wrapping up his involvement with Star Trek. He's obviously much more interested in, and suited to, Star Wars anyway. Perhaps he'll do a final Trek movie that ends with some anomaly folding the Kelvin Universe back into the Prime Universe, and the current cast sails into the sunset on an Enterprise that looks much more like the original TOS ship than the Abrams behemoth.

Tarantino...I just think his sensibilities are wrong for Star Trek. Maybe somebody could convince Denis Villeneuve to do Star Trek. He could make it cerebral and artistic, yet not lacking in action. Hey, a guy can dream, right?

I don't think I have formed an opinion yet.... I am not excited about Tarantino nor am I "*** are they thinking??," right now I am indifferent. I would say I like Tarantino more than I don't but I am definitely not a Tarantino fan boy.

I guess we will just have to wait and see..

Things that a Tarantino-led Trek are sure to include:

- Both Samuel L. Jackson and Christoph Waltz somewhere in the cast
- The career revival of some long-forgotten 80s or 90s movie star
- An F-bomb ratio to other words spoken of about 1 to 8
- Lots of people calling each other "Mother-effer!"
- A scene in which all the major characters have a 15-minute long, polite, urbane, sophisticated, and convoluted conversation about identities and motives before it all explodes into an orgy of violence, leaving all present dead, mortally wounded, or horribly mutilated
- A fight involving katanas (or barring that, Klingon bat'leths) with multiple gratuitous dismemberments
- Clever one-liners
- Someone using a tribble as a toupee
- An unexpected cameo by a former action movie star (my money is on Bruce Willis)
- A masked gimp has replaced Chekov on the bridge of the Enterprise

...and many more hilarious hijinks from the twisted mind of Mr. Tarantino, " 'Dis ain't yo daddy's Stah Trek, b***!!!"

Well, we may be at best ambivalent about a Tarantino Trek, but Patrick Stewart likes the idea: https://trekmovie.com/2017/12/08/patric ... star-trek/

Since he already dropped F-bombs in Logan, we know he can do it.

I'll say this much: if bringing Tarantino in meant a course correction and return to the prime Trek timeline, I would personally erect a statue in honor of the man in front of my house!

You know, I never thought about the possibility of him doing a prime universe story. For some reason, I just don’t see that happening, probably because Abrams still has his thumb in it.

I've read more than one article speculating on that very same thing. Seems that the current cast contracts are done and technically they can go in any direction they wish. Like you said, it's unlikely as Paramount execs would probably deem that as going backwards, but at least the possibility is there. As JJ would probably be around only in an executive producer capacity, I doubt he would have much to do with it creatively.

What I'm sure I don't want (even more than another JJ-verse movie) is a third reality opening up. It's enough that Discovery already has people wondering about that possibility.

Prior to the Tarantino story breaking, Patrick Stewart had said the only thing that would lure him back to Trek would be some sort of multi-cast thing: a few people from TNG, a few from FD9, that sort of thing. Maybe the next movie could take that sort of format, and we could give the TOS era a rest ( though I do like the cast).