So ... Anyone else been to Vulcan ???

Sort:
cabadenwurt

Thanks for the post CaptainPike.

With the success that the Star Trek Franchise has had over the decades we tend to forget that the original idea goes back to the imagination of one man. Mind you it was a close thing as to whether the series would get produced at all when NBC rejected the first pilot episode of Star Trek. However then a very very rare event took place, NBC ordered s 2cnd pilot to be made. When I read about that event I thought that since this was the time when the " Lost In Space " series was on the air NBC decided to give Roddenberry another chance at producing a Sci-Fi TV series, that was a close call with disaster I would say. 

cabadenwurt

Another important factor in keeping the interest in Star Trek going were the conventions which started in 1972. I would guess that the success of those conventions helped persuade Paramount Studios to make the first film in 1979.  

cabadenwurt

--- Thanks for the very interesting clip Steve212000 ( that is a quote from Mr.Spock  lol ).

We have all heard the expression " Beware The Ides of March ". However we are in August now so I will say " Beware The Return of Q " ( yes that fellow ). Recently I bought a copy of: Star Trek, Q Fan Collective. It is a 4 disc set with 12 episodes featuring the mean Mister Q.     

cabadenwurt

Thanks for the clip Steve212000. " Q " is a very interesting character but he does remind me a bit of the lead in the old " Squire Of Gothos " episode. 

cabadenwurt
Steve212000 wrote:
cabadenwurt wrote:

Thanks for the clip Steve212000. " Q " is a very interesting character but he does remind me a bit of the lead in the old " Squire Of Gothos " episode. 

In one of the books,it was revealed that the Squire Of Gothos was a baby Q. lol

--- Thanks for the info Steve212000. That seems to make sense because of the way that particular episode ended. The parents come to collect their little " squire " and they apologize for all of the mayham that the youngster had caused.

 

cabadenwurt
cabadenwurt wrote:
Steve212000 wrote:
cabadenwurt wrote:

Thanks for the clip Steve212000. " Q " is a very interesting character but he does remind me a bit of the lead in the old " Squire Of Gothos " episode. 

In one of the books,it was revealed that the Squire Of Gothos was a baby Q. lol

--- Thanks for the info Steve212000. That seems to make sense because of the way that particular episode ended. The parents come to collect their little " squire " and they apologize for all of the mayham that the youngster had caused.

--- Well I've watched all of the episodes on the " Star Trek Q Fan Collective " and that was quite enjoyable. Of course a key part in the success of the Q character was the casting of John de Lancie in that role. Being Q requires a strong presence on the screen but without overpowering everything and thereby chewing up the scenery. John de Lancie seems to be the perfect person for the role. 

 

cabadenwurt
Steve212000 wrote:

He cetainly knows how to make an impression. lol

Thanks for the very funny photo Steve212000, that episode is in the DVD set that I bought recently. 

cabadenwurt

Thanks for the post Steve212000.

I've just found out that I'm missing an important item in my collection of " stuff " here ( Star Trek - The Visual Dictionary ).   

CaptainPike

(Sorry ... I tried to refrain, but I just couldn't resist any longer ... )

Javan64
CaptainPike wrote:

 

(Sorry ... I tried to refrain, but I just couldn't resist any longer ... )

Because ... "Resistance is Futile!"

cabadenwurt
Javan64 wrote:
CaptainPike wrote:

 

(Sorry ... I tried to refrain, but I just couldn't resist any longer ... )

Because ... "Resistance is Futile!"

--- Thanks for the new posts.

As far as any physical stimulus is concerned we must remember that " Q " is not human but is far more evolved. If we go back to the Organians in the old TV series we see that " Q " would be right at home on Organia ( and exist as pure thought and pure energy only, without need for a physical body ). 

cabadenwurt

So what has Captain Picard's alter-ego ( aka Patrick Steward ) been doing since ST:TNG left the air ? Well he has been making movies but he has also been courting 35 year old lass. Now the 73 year old actor has married this lady, sneaky old fellow. 

CaptainPike

He played a gay man, but that doesn't make him gay. He's been accused of being gay, but I am unaware of any time when he stated that he was. Presently, I am unconvinced that he is gay.

cabadenwurt
Steve212000 wrote:

I thought he gave an interview to someone and said he was gay. Maybe I'm wrong. Oh well. lol I guess you're right. I just googled it,and it said that was rumour that went around about 15 years ago. My bad.

Thanks for the new posts.

Speaking of captains I quite liked the Romulan Commander in the first series episode " The Enterprise Incident ". She and Mr.Spock seemed to get along quite well.

cabadenwurt

Thanks for the post Steve212000, I'm going to watch that episode here tonight ( Space, the final frontier ... ).

cabadenwurt
Steve212000 wrote:

Too cool.

Thanks for the post. A very enjoyable episode, btw the Romulan commander was very well played by Joanne Linville ( I don't know much about her I'm afraid ).

cabadenwurt

There has been the news that we can expect a new " Star Wars " movie in late 2015. At the risk of upsetting a few people let me ask WHY ??? Couldn't they use that money for some more " Star Trek " films ? I for one would like to see some more films based on ST-TNG or ST-DS9, or pehaps combine the two casts into one film and have visits from the first series too ?

Javan64
cabadenwurt wrote:

There has been the news that we can expect a new " Star Wars " movie in late 2015. At the risk of upsetting a few people let me ask WHY ??? Couldn't they use that money for some more " Star Trek " films ?.....

Better yet, get rid of that Star Trek garbage & just go with Star Wars.

cabadenwurt
Javan64 wrote:
cabadenwurt wrote:

There has been the news that we can expect a new " Star Wars " movie in late 2015. At the risk of upsetting a few people let me ask WHY ??? Couldn't they use that money for some more " Star Trek " films ?.....

Better yet, get rid of that Star Trek garbage & just go with Star Wars

--- Thanks for the new posts.

Paramount used to own " Star Trek " I think and they still might. However I was just making a joke about the money for the movies. On the other hand having been a fan of " Star Trek " going way back to when the original series first aired on TV I must say that " Star Wars " is only in 2cnd place. I did enjoy the very first " Star Wars " film but with the destruction of the Death Star the plot-lines seemed to go downhill.

cabadenwurt
Steve212000 wrote:

I'm sure there will be a new trek film soon.

--- Thanks for the post Steve212000.

I was trying to needle the " Star Wars " fans a bit by mentioning the new film. At least the " Star Wars " movies are better than the " Dune " film ( I've seen adventure cartoons that were better than that  lol ).