BootDigest Such a frustrating disappointment

Protraph Lack of good storyline.

ShangLuda Admirable film.

Guillelmina The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

Faena What we have here is an extended, unbearable New Voyages episode, complete with James Cawley (AKA Elvis Kirk), who evidently bartered use of his sets for a cameo appearance as Captain Kirk's nephew and a comfy seat at the conn for pal Jeffery Quinn. Too bad he didn't farm out his CG team either, because the outer space visuals in this production would make the "Space Rangers" (1993) effects crew snicker. Fidelity to Trek vessels aside, these shots are the computer age equivalent of a third grader with A.D.D. nearly puncturing the margins of notebook paper with ballpoint blue lasers and whirly explosions to depict spaceship wars.Here's what happens when the typical fanboy script with hackneyed dialogue is actually produced, but somehow attracts an array of Star Trek luminaries: Nichelle Nichols and Walter Koenig must have realized this could be their last stab at committing their iconic characters to the screen. Tuvok directs and brings on Voyager chums Ethan Phillips and Garrett Wang. Alan Ruck is the one I felt the worst for; he's the canon likeness of the USS Enterprise-B captain with one on-screen appearance to his credit, but a clear grasp of Paramount's non-existent desire to produce new Captain Harriman material. As such it's easy to figure why he would volunteer his time to a fan production; an opportunity to insert himself once more, however unofficial, into Trek lore. Unfortunately instead of a straight Enterprise-B adventure (which this should have been with his participation, period), he's mired in a barely watchable stageplay with no character development whatsoever. By the end of the movie, we have no clearer impression of who Captain Harriman is than we did at the end of his scenes in STAR TREK: GENERATIONS. What a waste. I really thought it was going to be something special to rival the official Star Trek movies as "the one just for the fans" that Paramount never quite pulled off. Not the case. In fact now I understand why this sorta "came and went" with barely a whisper. All the ship drama occurs on the New Voyages Constitution-class Enterprise. One scene even drags out in the transporter room for what seemed like twenty full minutes! The wooden direction casts professional actors like Walter Koenig and Alan Ruck in an amateurish flare, akin to deer in headlights. To its credit, there are some nice location shoots like Vazquez Rocks and a couple of gardens that serve as the planet Vulcan. Initially I was impressed when Charlie X showed up and I thought they'd gotten the original actor, but he isn't. The DVD case is interesting. One quote describes this as the "... most intelligent and thought provoking Star Trek movie ever created." I don't know about intelligent, but it definitely provoked my thoughts, as evidenced by this review. I suppose if the only Star Trek one has ever seen is the TNG eps where Ro and Guinan turn into kids and quell a Ferengi takeover of the ship, and the one where Dr. Crusher's dead grandmother's Scottish boyfriend's ghost shows up, OGaM could seem like the most intelligent Trek ever, but sadly this is one disc that will sit on my shelf for years until I feel the urge to punish myself for being a fan, or whenever I want to make my friends stare at my TV in horror... before getting their MST3K on.

rgcustomer I had high hopes for this film, but they were pretty quickly dashed. Reading Calk's plot summary that IMDb currently has for this movie, I wonder if I even saw the same one. I must have dozed off in the beginning, because I don't remember most of that stuff happening.What I do remember is that one of the moments that was supposed to be one of the big climaxes of the film, when Gary dies, was a laugh-out-loud cliché to me. "KITTRICK!!!!!" ROFL.Again, maybe I missed it, but no reason seemed to be given for Gary suddenly losing his powers. Or why he seemingly couldn't kill people, despite all the electro-rific effects. And what about Charlie's sudden change of heart? We didn't even see that happen. Why wouldn't that have been a key scene in the movie? AND, on reading this, do YOU even know who Gary and Charlie are? They were referred to by name so infrequently and their backstory was so weak that I had to look it up online.Star Trek isn't supposed to be about the effects. First and foremost, it's about the story and the characters. But that seems to have been forgotten here, as you see fancy ships randomly shooting each other out of space with new weapons. None of the characters are particularly interesting, and the plot just sort of happens for no reason at all. And of course it all happens in an alternative timeline. As usual.Anyway, this is the last fan film I'll be wasting my time on. I've learned my lesson.

dmkalman When you get right down to it, Star Trek is about characters. Not CGI. This production offers downright primitive FX, but the characterizations are riveting. Walter Koenig gives a devastating performance -- his best ever -- that actually made me irate when I considered how his immense talent was squandered for so long in corporate Trek. Likewise with Garrett Wang. In Voyager, his Harry Kim was, like many corporate Star Trek characters, bland and generally uninteresting. (That's why alternate time line/universe Trek stories are always superior.) Nichelle Nichols' performance here outshines anything she's done in any of the TOS feature films. Alan Ruck as Harriman oscillates between menacing and hysterical. And JG Hertzler as Koval sets a new standard for menacing Klingons. Chase Masterson (call me!) as the Orion slave girl continues to be the hottest flame in the Star Trek universe. It was great to see Lawrence Montaigne reprise the role of the Vulcan Stonn, and Gary Graham rounds out a truly professional acting ensemble. I'd rather watch cheap productions like this one -- with twisty plots and interesting, passionate characters -- over the slick, simplistic, corporate dreck. Let's see if the upcoming Star Trek prequel -- with its $150 MILLION budget -- can deliver this kind of intense, emotionally engaging adventure. I doubt it.**UPDATE** OK. I enjoyed Star Trek (2009). It was slick, fast, and fun...and it had two great Spock performances. But I also found the story strained (lacking a coherent plot-line) and derivative (in a bad way). It echoed (strangely) the abysmal Star Trek: Nemesis with its monstrous death-ship and Romulan bad-a$$ baldy. (Maybe in the next film the young Kirk and Spock will go back in time and save some whales.) So, I'd give the big budget flick a 7.9 on its flash and on the strength of Zachary Quinto's performance, but the movie as a whole doesn't hold up well under multiple viewings. I still enjoyed Of Gods and Men more.

XweAponX I'm surprised that the premise behind this thing never occurred to the producers of any recent Star Trek series. Nevertheless, I'm pleased to see actors from The Original Series, The Movies, Deep Space 9, Voyager, and Enterprise.I am also pleased to see William Wellman, Jr. take over the character created by Robert Walker, Jr in the Original Series Episode "Charley X" Although the acting is kind of wooden, the story holds up to any DC Fontana standards, although elements of the story are heavily borrowed from episodes of The Original Series and Star Trek: Generations.Scotty is mentioned as being "Missing" - Which is in continuity with the Next Generation episode "Relics" where Scotty is rescued from a Dyson Sphere. Spock is mentioned as if he is readily available - A nice trick in case Leonard Nimoy decides to make any cameos in parts II or III of this little production.This story uses elements from the original series stories "Charlie X," "Mirror, Mirror" and "The City on the Edge of Forever" - Including a clever reproduction of the Guardian of Forever.The set pieces in this thing all look great, but where this fan film staggers is that the special effects all look like Effects from Pre-Windows computer games- The Enterprise "M" starts and stops in the establishing shots of "Synchronous Orbit" - As if the rendering had defects in it.This is unforgivable since Star Wars episode III used store-bought A.M.D. Opteron computers to do some of post production, and that work was done in some living room right at Skywalker Ranch. So I will accept no excuses about the special effects and CGI shots, I have seen much better work from people who have much less. These are incredibly lousy shots. The computer models are alright, but the movement and rendering is just horrible- I am hoping that the project gains a technician that can re-create the vomitably horrendous outer space and effects shots- And while they are at it, they can work on the colour palette and make it more consistent. Vulcan looks like any East LA Backyard!Finally, as far as continuity, I accept most of the story like I would accept any Next Generation story, except for the Guardian of Forever would have kept the three principals on the planet instead of ejecting them into the alternate universe.But even with this huge continuity flaw, the story moves fine, and I can't wait to see the next II episodes.I like this film a lot more than "The New Voyages" - Which have hardly any redeeming value beyond the costumes and sets that were recreated with great detail: Making Trek is much more than how good the set looks or how well the costumes fit the principals... The trick of Trek is to make the viewer BELIEVE in this future. I believe this story, whereas "The New Voyages" were only good for a belly laugh.