Justin Snead

Senior Member
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Justin Snead

  • Rank
    Klingon Bird-of-Prey

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Jersey City, NJ
  • Marital Status
  • Favorite Trek Movie
    The Wrath of Khan
  • Favorite Trek Captain
    Jean-Luc Picard
  • Favorite Trek Series
    Deep Space Nine

Contact Methods

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Website URL

Recent Profile Visitors

3,072 profile views
  1. Here is co show runner Harberts on Klingons: We are also talking about not only war, but something that is really bubbling up in the United States right now, isolationism. Our country has so many different philosophies. Do we extend a hand? Do we shut it down? And that is also two viewpoints that are being expressed. The Klingons are not necessarily the Russians anymore. The Klingons – I think we will see far more in, frankly, people in the United States and different factions in the United States. And that is not to say they are bad, but what we really wanted to do too is understand two differing points of view and really explore it. And I think when people look at the Klingons – I frankly love what they represent. Not in terms necessarily of all the messaging, but in terms of learning about them and learning why they are who they are and making sure they aren’t just the enemy. And then finding a way to come together. How do we bring everyone back together? What do we do? What does it take? It is a big challenge for us, but that is what season one is all about.
  2. I fully endorse and appreciate this point of view. (though I cannot vouch for ENT contribution since I didn't watch that show very closely) I've seen the diversity issue from multiple sides. While I'm excited abut Burnham as a role model for my black daughter, I also have white relatives from Appalachia--Trump voters no less--who are Trek fans and are equally glad that she will have that role model. I know that people from that part of the world get stereotyped as racists, but they have real grievances that aren't about race. I also know plenty of white people in the costal liberal bubble who are completely unconscious of their own racial biases, and do real harm to people of color without even knowing. So to me the best kind of stories about "diversity" forces us to confront our own biases. TUC was radically political in this way by depicting Kirk and crew as racist, calling them on it and making them face this and deal with it. DSC seems to be in this vein. This is part of the reason I feel like DSC is the kind of prequel I've wanted since I heard ENT was announced: No one says they have to make sets out of cardboard and bolts of fabric, and have props that look like something from Buck Rogers. Just take the original intentionality of the design and use modern craftsmanship to produce it. Thy don't NEED to barter with us: we'll give you a flip top but make the communicator really small. If there are enough notes from the original, our fandom brains will be able to imagine we're in the same universe.
  3. I dont think so. Based on just some of the comments given at SDCC they seem committed to working within the bounds of canon. Give us time to show you how it all fits, they said. Hey they could be blowing smoke, but I don't think so. Ive considered myself a good judge of Trek-producer-smoke-blowing for going on 20 years from B&B to the Bad Robot team. These guys give me a different vibe. I've always believed that the rules of canon can be used creatively to tell good stories, to find work around, or just to find a way to tell good stories within an hour of drama no matter what we know happens in 20 or 100 in-universe years. Producers who say canon is a straight jacket are the hacks. Real writers find a way.
  4. These are the Voyages describes the original script had the shooting be an accident. It was filmed this way. Then they realized the ending did not work. The director used extras in the two guest stars costumes to film the close up of pulling the trigger. So as written there was no proper justification built into the script, foreshadowed and so forth, that would have made the suicide have a big emotional impact becasue the suicide was added in post production. If they'd done another pass at the script (which had already undergone many) they might have added some better character motivation.
  5. Haaa but see your point is why I think they made the Klingons more alien-looking and more monstrous! So many people working on the show say that the main theme os DSC is about accepting difference and finding common ground. That theme will come across more powerfully the more difference there is between the two peoples your story is thrusting together. Undiscovered Country tried to do this--Recall last year when Nick Myer said that movie was a touchstone for DSC?--but it did so in kind of cheesy ways: with comments about how Klingon's smell and don't have good table manners. I think DSC is going to make it's Klingons extremely other (perhaps even Islamic-inspired) and then have characters working to overcome that otherness.
  6. http://io9.gizmodo.com/these-discovery-props-reveal-a-ton-about-star-treks-new-1797102750 Read this great io9 analysis of the Klingon props now on display as SDCC. Here is a quote from io9: "The plaque explains that these aren’t based on TOS-style Klingons, but the “ornate, re-imagined” weapons are based on the films and The Next Generation’s Klingons. Which makes sense, even though Discovery takes place before the original series, Star Trek has always—save a throwaway line in things like Deep Space Nine’s “Trials and Tribble-ations”—just pretended that the ridge-headed Klingons from TNG are what they’ve always looked like." I'm loving the re-imagining! Main reason is this: it's not just about the LOOK, it's becasue the show wants to use the Klingons to further a specific STORY and their look is part of that. By which I mean, they did not start from the premise of "How can we make the Klingon's look in relation to previous Trek." But instead: "we need an alien race that looks to general audience as very alien, but their culture is very medieval/Shakespearean/Game-of-Thronesy--what would that look like?" Also this: a design poster describes the ship as having an "islamic outer shell" and you see a very elaborate metal carving. This is just a design inspiration. However, my pet theory has been that any re-imagined Klingons should be allegorical stand ins for Islamic countries like Saudi Arabia or Iran, etc. My hope is that in building this show Bryan Fuller did this with the Klingons. Not sure but this is an early clue.
  7. Thanks for starting this. Ive never seen Twin Peaks. But I started a few weeks ago. Now in the 2nd season. What strikes me is how MODERN it feels. I do not for a minute feel like Im watching a show from 1990. I can also see why general audience would have gotten sucked into the short first season, but turned away in the 2nd. Not that I don't love it but it is basically a long drawn out creepy mystery. Does anyone remember the reception at the time? Why it was canceled? Also, it's very scary in parts. But more than this it is very funny. I love the small town immersion.
  8. So Im rewatching TOS, so I cant say this is the MOST disappointing overall, but it is of the first half of season one: What are Little Girls Made of. In short: if the mad scientist who turned himself into an android realized in the climax that it was all a horrible mistake, and then killed himself, that would be tragic. It would have made for a deep, well written and very Trekkian Star Trek episode. But because of time limits and hectic rewrites, the death was written as an accident. They realized that sucked, so they reshot the ending with stand ins, but because there was no explanation it still fell flat. I explain more in my pod about this ep: What Are Little Girls Made Of?
  9. Im excited to get to the episode where these are introduced. I'm up to Conscience of the King and Kirk makes a reference to the Star Service. Im curious to know WHY they are introduced. Clearly, adding details about the organization that launched the Enterprise was not seen as important or necessary early in the series. And they were right--exposition about the Federation would have added nothing to those early stories. But eventually the producers must have found the need to have a common understanding of the command structure.
  10. Here is my podcast about this episode: http://www.justinscottsnead.com/st01-009-balance-of-terror/ Highlights from my discussion: this classic is good but by no means perfect If you read the memos in These are the Voyages, Roddenberry explains why NOT to use technobabble and HOW to avoid it. Interesting since this is a typical space battle show that became so common later, esp. VOY, and those later episodes seemed to always have a deus ex machina technobable solution that was anathema on TOS. More world building: still no mention of Starfleet or a Federation in the series up to this point. More on Kirk’s inner conflict and how it explains his deep friendship with Spock Oh, and we get one of the best alien species introductions in all of Star Trek: the Romulans. So much detail about their culture packed into a few scenes.
  11. Named after my husband's grandmother. But when people ask about the pronouncement we say it's like Viola Davis.
  12. Im rewatching now. And by rewatching I mean that I've seen many of them as a kid, not too many since then, and there are quite a lot I have never seen. Im watching them and reviewing on my podcast. (Here is my analysis of trends in the first 7 episodes) I am watching them in production order--to better understand how the writers and producers crafted the series. For example, most of the first half of season 1 was written in the spring and early summer of 66 before any episode was filmed or in the can. The order in which they were written and filmed percolates the creative juices. McCoy is introduced in Corbomite, and you can actually see his relationship develop with Kirk especially up through Balance of Terror. I would not watch Menagerie out or order for this reason. It's a seminal early step in the development of the relationship between Kirk, Spock and McCoy.
  13. This looks way interesting. I will start reading it. Since Ive been re-watching TOS it has hit me our dynamic Kirk was written. He's as complex as Spock with his self-doubt and intentional performance of command for the benefit of the crew. One thought--not to pick on the recent movies, although this criticism is true of Generations and maybe even Trek V and VI--is that the writers of those films dropped or forgot about Kirk's inner conflict. In Naked Time and Balence of Terror he literally wishes he were on a beach or a cruise ship--"Not too much deck tennis"--than on the bridge of the Enterprise. It gave the character weight. In the reboot movies, because Kirk became Captain in his 20s without having to work for it, the character doesn't seem to feel the burden of command in the same way Prime Kirk does. It's treated more like an awesome joyride. And in Beyond, it's almost like that joyride has gotten boring for him, like he's having an identity crisis that 20-somethings go through when they turn 30. Without passing judgement on the new version, the speeding up of his life due to the timeline changes makes him a completely different character than Prime Kirk.
  14. I have not been on the message boards in a month since I became a dad. My husband and I have been on an adoption waiting list since last year and on June 1st we welcomed our baby girl into our lives. Viola is happy and healthy. A couple Trek related points. I never paid any attention to baby related Trek paraphernalia until now. I realize that I now must have a baby Star Fleet uniform. I am looking forward to watching Trek with her. We're going to start her early with Discovery--she'll only be 3 1/2 months old when it starts. I'm more excited than I was before that Sonequa Martin Green is playing Burnham. My daughter is black (I'm not) and will grow up needing strong black female role models in pop culture. I also really hope--SPOILERS--that Burnham turns out to be adopted, and maybe Serek is more than just her mentor. When I was growing up in the 80s there was a lot of great Trek for me to absorb in my formative years. TOS was popular and rerunning on TV all the time. The movies were big. And by the time I was 6 TNG started. Here's hope that Viola and the rest of us have 10 years of great Trek to enjoy.
  15. Wow a lot has gone down in this thread which I will try to get to later. For now, Gus, I get you. I understand the pain. Voyager literally broke my heart, and in its first season no less. I stuck around for a while but eventually stopped watching. It was personally painful for me to feel like my beloved Star Trek was in the hands of people who just did not give a flip. (However, I have to say, after all these years of abuse there is literally nothing that could bring me to heartbreak in 2017 re-Trek. Too much scar tissue.) I also understand the urge for rejection. I only gave Enterprise a couple episodes before I stopped watching. I rejected both shows probably for different reasons than Gus is rejecting Discovery, but all the reasons are valid nonetheless. It is just not for us. That's all. And yet... I KNOW that Discovery is for me. I just feel it. I won't try to push it on other fans. But personally I am excited. I am ready to transport.