A Station Eight Fan Web Site

Gargoyles

The Phoenix Gate

Search Ask Greg

Search:
Search type:

Displaying 1 record.


Bookmark Link

Entity writes...

Hi,

I'd just like to back Mary Mack's summary/review of The Phantom Menace. It was everything she described it as.

I'd also like to voice my pleasure at the sight of Wrath of Khan in your list of favorite movies. It's in mine, too, but most of the time that film seems to get jipped. Either the person's someone who has an inexplicable (and I venture to say shallow) distaste for Star Trek, or they'd rather claim First Contact as the hands-down best film, ignoring the originals.

Incidentally, I thought First Contact was a travesty. Maybe think "First Knight" for Arthurian Legend, to get an idea.

Greg responds...

I think First Contact was a MUCH better Star Trek film than First Knight was an Arthurian Film. First Knight with Connery as Arthur was a movie I was very looking forward to and wound up being a HUGE disappointment to me. Though perhaps not for the reasons you might think. I was going with it for awhile. But ultimately, I couldn't bear it.

First Contact on the other hand seemed like a great, exciting movie to me. I've heard people bitching about the fact that Cochrane was supposed to be born on Alpha Centauri and not Earth, but a look at any (even pre-First Contact Trek Timeline) reveals that to be impossible. And the original Cochrane Trek episode never said he was BORN on A.C. The time travel, to my tastes, is messy, but I'm used to that vis-a-vis Star Trek. Etc., Etc., I'm not saying the movie is flawless. But Star Trek was never flawless. Wrath of Khan wasn't. (Though it's still my favorite.) And I've been watching Trek for a VERY long time.

So I definitely do NOT get the comparison at all. But all of the above is just my opinion. Nothing more.

Response recorded on September 05, 2000