First, some comments from previous columns . . .
Television Series Cross-Overs
Beginning with Omer Belsky's comments in the 3/20/98 column
Mark Schieber: I am thoroughly enjoying reading about the TV crossovers. Let me put my two cents' in:
Scooby Doo did NOT meet characters from "I Dream of Jeannie". There was a Hanna-Barbera cartoon about a guy who rode a motorcycle and he found a Jeannie in a bottle and they went around solving mysteries (it was the one with "Junior Jeannie Babboo", who did all his magic by saying "Yabble Dabble"). I think the main guy's name was Roger. It was a rip-off of "I Dream of Jeannie".
(This was the year they had "Scooby Doo Guest Stars", which I really loved, and it was a TV crossover fan's dream; they had Josie & The Pussycats, Speed Buggy, Don Knotts, Jonathan Winters, etc....this was when they met Batman & Robin. This was also the year that Josie & The Pussycats went into outer space in the rocket that looked like a big eraser. It was kind of ruined for me, at five years old, how could Josie & The Pussycats meet Scooby Doo when they were supposed to be in outer space? You see, Phil, even then I was nitpicking!)
Bullies on the Playground and the End of the Nitpicker's Guides
Beginning with Phil Farrand's comments at the end of the 5/15/98 column
Don Ferguson: I am outraged at Paramount and Dell right now and at first I wanted to write a long scrolling e-mail, focusing on me rant at them... however I realize that will do you little good so instead I simply wish to lend my sorrows and support for you and your family. though this is not the end of your Writing.. not by a long shot, I am positive your Fiction will get published. Seeing though as right now your main source of income has been blocked, I have decided to re-order one copy of all your guides, true it is a drop in the bucket financially but it is a symbolic gesture that I believe in you and I believe that all the rest of us out there in nitpickdom believe in you. (Note from Phil: I appreciate the gesture! ;-)
Your guides and this website in particular have helped me more then you can know, prior to the guides, I actually became angry when I found so many nits in startrek. I became angry because I saw it as careless writing and an attitude of the writers that viewers were not smart enough to notice. After your guides however I learned to see nit-picking as a lighthearted sport and have thus over the years become a happier person :)
I understand if you have to shut down the site due to time restrictions but I hope you can at least continue to post or e-mail the news letters to keep in touch because over the years I have grown to see you as a good friend and wish to stay in touch and hear how you are doing.
Once again thank you for the guides,and the website. I have found your insight on the matters of trek and sci fi in general... most refreshing.
PS. when your novels come out I will immediately purchase them of course :)
Phil: Thanks for the kind words! They do mean a lot to me. As do the rest of the sentiments that follow in this section. However, if I respond to each one the same way, my thanks will start sounding hollow so I'll save my comments to the end . . . as usual. ;-)
Joe Buss: This makes me mad. Angry, in fact.
Star Trek has been kept alive for 32 years because of spontaneous fan loyalty. We believed in Trek when producers and network executives and even the Great Bird of the Galaxy himself didn't. We kept the flame, with our fan fiction and our trivia books and our role playing games. We endured the taunts of "Trekkie", and jokes about living in our mother's basements. (Hey, I only lived in my mother's basement for about a year, but...)
True, the unauthorized trek has had its low points. (The infamous Gay Kirk and Spock story comes to mind.) But by and large, it was fans of Trek who turned an unsuccessful TV show into a part of the popular culture. Not a studio suit whose greatest paranoia that Phil Farrand might make a few bucks off a fan book that Paramount would never write themselves. Maybe your commentary would better be titled "The Ferengi have taken over the Trek Universe."
It reminds me of the whole "Star Fleet Battles" controversy. Roddenberry liscensed the Franz Josef Company to do the TOS technical manual. FJ then liscensed Task Force Games to do a Star Trek board game. Of course, after Trek became popular again in movies, they tried to yank the lisence to sell it to another game company, called FASA. They produced a game called "Star Trek, the Role Playing Game." In the middle of Star Trek; TNG, they yanked FASA's liscense as well.
Had it not been for the "Let's find the nits", I doubt I would watch Voyager. There is nothing new or exciting about it. It is just a rehash of old stories and old characters who were better done the first time. So, if anything, the Nitpicker Guides have enhanced my enjoyment of Trek. I predict that within Ten years, no one will be talking about Trek anymore, and Babylon 5 will be highly considered.
Rob van Hulst: Regarding the discontinuation of the Nitpickers' Guides, my simple response would be: If Dell is the one making all the fuss because they are afraid of what *might* happen, why don't you just find another publisher? The US is a large country, you should be able to find one who's not that squirmish about what *might* happen. But i don't know anything about book-publishing, for all i know it might be impossible for you, due to legal reasons or something like that, to change publishers.
Brian: About Dell. Man that sucks. Royally. Man, seems like a bad time to ask about you writing a Foreward for my Netpicker's Guide To Mad About You. Couldn't you take the Star Wars, Voyager, Bond, and any future guides through another publisher? There are MANY small independent publishers out there. Stephen King started out with a small publisher (I think). Well, you could always write your own sitcom. Or, maybe you maybe you could do your own independent film. I'm sure you have plenty of ideas.
Vincent Morrone: Sorry its taken me so long to write. I wanted to tell you that I think its horrible for Dell to do what their doing to you. I think if Paramount were going to do anything, it would have done it already. You do have 4 guides out already. I think you should try going to another publisher. Maybe there is a way for everyone in the guild to send a letter or sign a protest to Dell or to another publishing company to show our support. We could keep it positive. Hey just have them look at you page!!!!!
I thought a Guide that had Voyerger, DS9 and Star Trek First Contact and the New Star trek film would make a great guide. If not, maybe you can intice them with a guide about just big films, like ID4 and Men In Black and Jurassic Park. Maybe. Well I hope you page continues. It has been a great insperation to read your guides and page and realize Im not alone. There are others like me who nit pick. Who wonder why noone weres seat belts on the bridge and why left and right directions sem different on the maiden voyage of The Enterprise D. I am sure I speak for everyone when I say that youve made us into Nitpickes now. We're proud We won't be silent anymore. We ARE nitpickers, and noone, not Paramount, Not Dell, can ever take that away from us!!!!!!!!
Let me know if there is anyway I can help.
Aaron Nadler: Again, I'm sorry about Dell's "No Nitpicker" Policy, but I have a quick question about the future of the Guild's correspondence. Are you still going to be compiling newsletters?
Jeff Germann: I receive my morning news via email from InfoBeat. This was in this morning's email. Just thought you might find it interesting.
"U.S. ruling boldly goes against 'Star Trek' book
"In 'Star Trek' an evil alien collective known as the Borg repeatedly warns humans and other life forms: 'Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated.' The author of a humorous guide to dating Trekkers said a federal judge ruled Friday he assimilated too much of the cult American television series. Judge Samuel Conti found Samuel Ramer's use of copyrighted material was no laughing matter and halted further distribution of his $10.95 paperback, the author said. Ramer, a New York assistant district attorney, said the judge issued an injunction against him and the publisher of 'Joy of Trek: How to Enhance Your Relationship With a Star Trek Fan' for violating Paramount Pictures Corp. copyrights. See full story: http://www.infobeat.com/stories/cgi/story.cgi?id=2554494767-c6b
Rob Sayer: I'm really sorry to hear about Dell and everything, but if it's any consolation, the programmers at my company make 10X what I would make as a writer... so you can at least rest easy that you have a profitable 'trade' to fall back on.
Mark Schieber: My thoughts and prayers are with you! I just logged on to the website for the first time and I found out about the end of the Guides. I was SO looking forward to the "Voyager" Guide, too! I hope maybe Dell will reconsider or something. Just hang in there!
Is there someone I can write to to protest the end of the Guides? Meaning someone at Dell, as opposed to Paramount? Has anyone mentioned organizing a boycott, or petition? If so, add my name to the list.
It's hard, Phil, because I understand their position, but I obviously believe they are over-reacting.
Are you going to keep the web-site going, along with the newsletter?
Please let me know anything I can do.
Phil: Again, thanks so much for all the kind words. I'm glad you've enjoyed the work! Now, let's see about address some of the comments.
First, I just want to stress again that Paramount did not force Dell to abandon the Guides. Dell made a decision based on a litigious atmosphere that had been generated, in part, by Paramount's recent tougher stance on copyright infringement. And . . . they may be perfectly correct in their stance. If you read the details of the court case involving "Joy Of Trek" you'll find that the judge does site "fair use" and states that "fair use" only applies to paraody, commentary and review. In the judge's opinion, "Joy of Trek," did not fall in those categories. Having never read the book, I couldn't offer an opinion on that! It is interesting to note, however, that the judge's decision reinforces my belief that the Nitpicker's Guides *ARE* legal and covered by the fair use provision since they are definitely commentary and review! Ah well . . .
Does that mean then that I or my agent could find another big publisher to pick up the Guides? Perhaps. And Steve is still talking with Del Ray about doing an authorized Star Wars Nitpicker's Guide. (They haven't dismissed the idea out of hand and they evidently think enough of it to propose it to the Lucas Film people. Unfortunately, the contact person there will be on vacation for the next months so it will take a while a hear back. Honestly . . . creators never have been fond of nitpickers. So . . . )
What you have to remember about the big publishers is that they tend to react like a herd. One publisher stumbles onto a successful niche in the market and the rest follow. Remember the explosion of actor's biographies last year? From what I've read the publishers, collectively, lost 50-70 million on that debacle because of large advances and poor sales. So, if a few are spooked about the unauthorized market, the rest tend to be skittish as well.
But what about smaller, independantly-minded publishers? The problem here is that the Nitpicker's Guides are a *lot* of work. It takes me at least six months working full-time to put one together (and I like to think that my diligences shows). That means the only way I can do this and put out one a year is if I do it for a job and the only way I can do it for a job is if the publisher can pay me a big enough advance so that I can live while I'm writing. Smaller publishers don't tend to have those kind of pockets.
Finally, concerning all the kind offers to lodge some form of protest, I'm just not sure how or what to do. I've never been one to shove myself foward and beat my own drum--demanding that people appreciate my work. It's just not me. And, I mistakenly labored in the publishing field for years until the notion that quality would triumph eventually. I'm sorry to say that I don't believe that anymore. There seems to be a significantly disproportionate share of dumb luck involved! So . . . I don't know what to tell you all. I suppose if I was smarter about all this stuff I'd be organizing letter writing campaigns and hammering Dell with phone calls--not to get them to chance their decision--but to seed the "atmosphere" before taking the project to another publisher. That's just not my way.
The True Date of the Eugenics War
Beginning with Scott Neugroschl's comments in the 5/30/98 column
John Latchem: You want to know who Ron Moore is? Ron Moore is a member of the pantheon of a mythology postulated by a cult currently living on the Planet Earth. These gods watch over the universe and guide its developments, and believers speak to the gods and study the universe, learning new things about the universe and about where the gods screwed up.
Because they live on Earth, they are, of course, generally shunned as religious fanatics in an age of enlightenment and science.
Phil: [snicker, snicker]
"New" Footage for Classic Trek
Beginning with Donald Carlson's comments in the 5/30/98 column
Al Fix: Re: Kirk picking a nit off his tongue -- OK, so nobody recalls it. Maybe it'll be in the "restored" footage! ;-)
Rob van Hulst: Following up on the questions about the rerun of TOS on the Sci-Fi Channel, i was in stitches when i read Lisa Klink's reply about Leonard Nimoy apologizing for 'Spocks Brain'. As it happens, i just bought a book called 'Trek Navigator', by Mark Altman and Edward Gross, (do you know it), in which they review and rate every episode. Spocks Brain got only one star, and they too said it is one of the worst episodes ever.
Also, there is one episode which doesn't get any stars at all, DS9's 'Meridian'. I would like to know, what are your choices for worst and best episode of every series?
Phil: I personally didn't think that Meridian was that bad just more of the same. Let me think about the "worst and best" stuff this week and I'll try to pick.
Nitpicking the Animated Series
Beginning with Briony Coote's comments in the 6/5/98 column
Harvey Kitzman: On an unrelated note, I have a question for you. I am trying to collect the 11 animated Star Trek tapes, and I have been told that for some reason, tape 8 is out of print. Do you know where I may get one to complete my collection? I would appreciate whatever info you have. Thanks.
Phil: I have *no*information on this! ;-) Anybody.
The Leftmost Seat on Apollo 13
Beginning with John Isakson's comments in the 6/5/98 column
John Latchem: The leftmost seat is the pilot's seat. The Commander sits there because he's the main pilot for liftoff. The commander is usually the most experienced guy up there so mission control wants him handling these things. The Lunar Module Pilot doesn't even pilot the lunar module down to the surface of the moon!
Shane Miller: In response to John Isakson's question regarding "Apollo 13", it was standard practice (for whatever reason - I can't recall at the moment) for the Mission Commander to be in the left seat for the launch, and the trip there. He would then hand over the pilot's seat to the command module pilot when they were ready to extract the LEM. For the rest of the trip, the pilot was the Command Module pilot. For further insights into how things were done for the Apollo missions, I heartily recommend Jim Lovell's book on Apollo 13, 'Lost Moon', later released in paperback as 'Apollo 13'. It goes into more (much more) detail about just why the oxygen tank exploded, and has a few insights as to what the Apollo 1 astronauts REALLY thought about their ship (as an example, after a frustrating day of fighting to get things working properly onboard, Grissom placed a lemon on the top of it, like a hood ornament).
James D. Meader: John Isakson asked about who rode in what seat at what time during Apollo missions. It's a little complicated and generally revolved around what was going on. During launch, the Mission Commander flew left-seat, that's where the abort handle was. During the transposition-and-docking maneuver when the CM/SM seperated from the third stage and docked with the LM, the Command-Module pilot was in the left seat, he flew the maneuver, and of course he was there during seperation of the LM for the descent to the lunar surface, remained in the CM in orbit and again was left-seat for the docking upon the return of the LM. Finally, out of courtesy and respect, the CM pilot again flew left seat during re-entry and splashdown. Other times, during engine burns and whatnot, I suspect the CM pilot was in his own seat where he could monitor the CM systems. The situation with the Lunar-Module pilot in the LM when it was manned was completely different. Despite being named Lunar Module PILOT, the LM pilot NEVER occupied the left position. The Mission Commander always was in the left spot and did all the flying of the LM. The LM pilot monitored spacecraft systems and ran the computer and the radar. The only time that I know of that a LM pilot actually flew the LM was on Apollo 12. Pete Conrad, Mission Commander, let Al Bean, his LM pilot, fly the spacecraft on the backside of the moon for a few minutes after liftoff from the lunar surface and before docking.
One thing is for certain tho. Jack Swigert was fully qualified and fully trusted by his commander. If not, he would not have been in the spacecraft. I think the scenes of conflict among crewmembers in "Apollo 13" were added for dramatic license. We weren't there so we'll really never know, but I seriously doubt that Swigert was ever blamed by anyone for any aspect of the accident, either on the ground or aboard the spacecraft.
(Note to Phil....sorry this is so long. I can talk a Vulcans pointed ear off about the space program. Edit as you see fit.)
Klingon "Houses" and The House of John The Shrubber
Beginning with Mark Schieber's comments in the 6/5/98 column
Andrew Corcoran: I never knew you were a closet Monty Python fan! Anyway, it is usually regarded as "Ni," not "Nee." Interesting ending to the column though - made me laugh!
Phil: Search for the Holy Grail is a *GREAT* movie. I heartily recommend it (all except for the castle of nubiles, that is ;-)!
Alex Otis: I just thought I'd point out that in your comment about Klingon Houses, you called the shrubber from "Monty Python and the Quest for the Holy Grail" John. His name was given as Roger.
On the subject of house names, from what I've seen from Trek roleplaying sims, they use the name of the eldest son for the house. I do agree that this can get rather confusing, but it does tell you who is in power at the time. If you want to see an example of this, you can check out a Klingon sim at http://www.albany.net/~kamikaze/sim/uss.htm
Murray Leeder: Or it's possible that the House of Mogh is (or was, rather) named so just because Worf decided to honour his father. It's possible that the eldest male has some license in this.
Beau Landaiche: Uh, I don't mean to split hairs here but the name of the shrubber in "Holy Grail" was Roger. Sorry, my nitpicking tendencies took over there.
Alex Smith: Technically, it's Roger the Shrubber, unless you're talking about his brother or something. (I've seen the movie *WAY* too many times...I know my Monty Python!) And the quoted line's a little off, but that's OK.
I have to contribute some how, even if they are grungy nits!
Phil: Um . . . yeah . . . that's it! It was his brother! ;-)
Matt Cotnoir: Personally, I'd love to be member of the House of John Jacob Jinglehimer Schmitt. After all, his name is my name too.
On to the questions . . .
Scott McClenny: Have you thought about carrying on with the Guild,but switching the emphasis from Star Trek to something like say The X-Files?Just thought I'd ask.
Phil: Don't really see any need at this point!
Harvey Hawks: I've really enjoyed your web site. I'm hoping you have the time to point toward some more information on the subject of time travel in the Trek universe. I've assembled something of a catalog of the episodes involving time travel, trying to get at the theory (or theories) the writers use when deciding what is plausible or not. If you've written about this, hopefully I'll find it in a back newsletter of yours or one of your books. If not, do you know of any place on the web where this is addressed?
Phil: You might find my review of "Visionary" interesting in the DS9 Guide (p.254). As for other websites, I don't know of any but someone here may! Be sure to check back next week.
Mark Schieber: I know this is an old issue for Trekkers, and it's probably been gone over 1,000 times, but let me put my two cents in:
Everyone knows that in the original series the Klingons were darker-skinned (almost kind of oily-looking) with fu-manchu mustaches. Since the first movie, however, they've had the horseshoe-crab foreheads and in one case even had chest ridges (DS9, "Sons of Mogh").
The question is, what happened? One theory was that there were two different races on Qo'nos: I know in the Nitpickers Guild we're only supposed to used what's considered "canon", but one of the Star Trek novels ("The IDIC Epidemic") named the horseshoe-crabs the "Royal Race". Later on, the smooth-skinned ones all died off. Of course, I don't take this as "canon", but it was an interesting theory.
Kang, Koloth, Kor, and K'Eylar all showed up in BOTH forms, though, and while K'Eylar's appearance could be written off by the fact that his appearance on the original series was as a projection of some sort, the other three "classic" Klingons appeared as both.
It's almost as if the creators wanted us to believe that Klingons have ALWAYS had the ridged foreheads ;-)
The final clue, of course, came during "Trials and Tribble-ations" when Bashir, Odo, and O'Brien expressed confusion at the appearance of the "Classic" Klingons and Worf would only say "We do not discuss it with outsiders".
I think this was meant as a kind-of "inside joke" and while it was a cute little bit of dialog, the creators have only painted themselves in a corner with this, as they failed to take into account how SERIOUSLY the fans would take this!
First of all, consider the following:
1) Whatever happened, and however the Klingons' appearance changed, there have to be those in the Federation (like DAX!) who have seen both kinds of Klingons.
2) Even if the ones who have seen both kinds (like DAX! SPOCK! SCOTTY! TUVOK!) didn't know how or why the change took place, they at least have to be aware that a change did take place. Every schoolkid in the Federation would at least know that much. Maybe it's considered impolite to discuss it among Klingons, like the Pon Farr is not discussed among Vulcans, but everyone in the Federation at least knows that the Pon Farr happens even if they don't discuss it.
3) If there were two different Klingon races, that would explain the appearance of Worf & Kurn, Gowron, B'Ellana, etc., but not the changed appearances of Kor, Kang, and Koloth; if the change takes place at a certain age, that might explain the appearances of Kang, Kor, and Koloth, but not the appearance of Alexander; if a disease or mutation took place, that would explain everyone's appearances but not the fact that no one in the Federation knows about it.
4) Finally, the easiest solution would have been to ignore it. After all, the change really took place in the first movie because they wanted to make "really alien-looking" Klingons, which they couldn't do during the first series because of production costs (too bad for them, "we don't deal in reality"!). Even during "Trials & Tribble-ations", they could have PRETENDED that they all recognized the Klingons and even kept the inside joke by saying something about how the Klingons got more Klingon over the years (or something like that, this is just off the top of my head). But since they made such a big deal out of it, WE CAN'T LET IT GO!
I need an explanation!
Phil: There are some things in life that I have consigned to the "unexplained mysteries" category.
[From Someone Identified Only As "Anomaly"]: [Concerning the story that your paper is doing on you next Friday,] Does your local paper have a website? Even though I'm not a an X-phile, I'd still like to see the interview. If it doesn't have a site, any chance of it appearing on NitCentral?
Phil: Perhaps!
Brandon Turok: I'm assuming that the Voyager season has finished (they cut off UPN here in las vegas). Are the movie files going to be re-opened soon?
Phil: I'm scrambling to get my life back together at this point. We WILL do a Brash Reflection for "Fight the Future" - the X-File movie. As for the rest? We'll have to wait and see.
Matt Greer: I just found out that someone on Ds9 is going to die next week. Does anyone know who it might be because the actor said they were going to quit or something like that?
Phil: (SPOILER AHEAD, SPOILER AHEAD, SPOILER AHEAD, SPOILER AHEAD, SPOILER AHEAD, SPOILER AHEAD, SPOILER AHEAD, SPOILER AHEAD, SPOILER AHEAD, SPOILER AHEAD, SPOILER AHEAD . . . SKIP TO THE NEXT QUESTION IF YOU DON'T WANT TO KNOW)
There has already been a press release on this from Paramount so it isn't that big of a secret. Terry Farrel and the creators couldn't work out a contract deal for the seventh season of DS9 so Jadzia is going to die. I've said it before. I'll say it again. With as much history and texture as there is in that character, the creators should be able to pack a powerful wallop in the season finale of DS9. If they don't, something is seriously wrong!
Travis McCord: So, chief, if I could pull your attention away from your legal troubles for a moment (illegitimus non carborundum, Phil--don't let the bastards wear you down), let me ask: what's your overall opinion of this past season of Trek and X-Files? (Y'know, sort of a yearly wrap-up.)
Phil: X-Files has been as surprising as always. The MythArc stuff has been as wonderful as always--always spinning off in odd directions. And, they've had some great stand alone episodes: The comic book black-and-white episode; the pizaa-boy vampire episode . . . *funny* stuff! And they've done a great job of ramping for the X-File movie (which took some planning since the movie was written and shot a year ago!) Concerning DS9, I missed some of the episodes because of the Star Wars Guide but those I saw seemed to be well done. "In the Pale Moonlight" stands out in my mind as one of the best of the season. Voyager has been the most inconsistent . . . as usual. Some great episodes. Some not so great. "Revulsion," "The Omega Directive," and "Living Witnesses" all intrigued me.
Steve Braun: I definitely understand if you don't respond to this, but because you came up with the defibrillator file, I thought you might know or know where to find out the electrical output for one. I have seen different energy outputs for them (100, 200, 360, 400 joules) but I was wondering about other electrical specs. Some things such as wattage, voltage, and amperage. Or if you knew the length of time the shock lasted you could figure out the wattage.
Phil: Couldn't tell ya! Anybody?
Mark Bjorkegren: Over here in the UK , Sky one has only just broadcast the Voyager Year of Hell episode Part I . Part two is due to be Transmitted on Monday 15th June 1998
(This is where UK is in Voyager episodes as Satellite TV is way ahead of terrestrial TV and matches the Videos for Rent at well)
However while watching the Year of Hell part I. The scene where Seven of Nine found the Torpedo in the Jeffrey's tube.
I am sure I have seen that scene before not with seven of nine or even with Voyager but some one else (STNG ??) . They also found the time shift phase from the torpedo that had not exploded . This was disappointing as I knew the solution as soon as I saw the UXB.
However The real gripe I had was the phase shift given did not have that many decimal places so why were they not rotating the phase of the shields with each torpedo fired at them. They would have soon found the phase as they had taken hordes of hits. (I think they gave a value of 1.2 or something pretty low)
Do you know which series or episode was ripped off at its bugging me and I don't know where to find out ?.
Phil: The only scene that comes to mind is the DS9 episode "Starship Down" in which an unexploded Jem'Hadar torpedo is sticking into the mess hall and Quark and the Alien-o-the-Week defuse it.
Have a great weekend, everybody!
If you would like to submit a question or comment, send it to: chief@nitcentral.com with "Ask the Chief" or "Question" in the Subject line. (Remember the legalese: Everything you submit becomes mine and you grant me the right to use your name in any future publication by me.)
Copyright 1998 by Phil Farrand. All rights reserved.