Star Trek: Of Gods And Men
Star Trek: Of Gods And Men
PG | 22 December 2007 (USA)
Star Trek: Of Gods And Men Trailers

The year is 2306… 12 years ago, Captain Kirk was swept away by the Nexus. One year later, Commander Scott was reported missing along with the USS Jenolen. The remaining USS Enterprise crew have split. Captain Spock and Doctor McCoy are on Khitomer, continuing their work towards peace the Klingon Empire. Captain Sulu and the Excelsior are on a mission beyond the Alpha Quadrant. Captain Chekov, feels his career has stalled, leaving him to ponder retirement. Captain Uhura, Director of Starfleet Linguistics, feels there may be something missing in her life.Now, Chekov and Uhura, with John Harriman, former Captain of the Enterprise-B, come together for the dedication of a new ship. However, their reunion is cut short when they receive a distress call from an all-too-familiar planet, where they meet up with an almost-forgotten face, and in an instant, something happens that presses the three friends to embark on a mission that will forever change their lives…

Reviews
davidh777

While I liked this film (I gave it a 9 out of 10 for both effort and attention to detail, not to mention the cast and crew's loyalty to the fans in making this film), there are 2 small problems with this film. The 1st, as some have already said, is an obvious, fairly low budget which show in the production value. Truthfully, there are a few "fan series'" out there, that while they don't have any original actors in them, have noticeably higher production value and special-FX. This in part brings me to the 2nd problem, which is for this to be a "film" (granted it is a "web film", but a film nonetheless), it plays more like a old TV episode from the original series, due to both the (as previously mentioned) lower quality FX/production, but also the overall pace and "feel" of the film. HOWEVER... In my opinion, all this being the case doesn't detract from the film, but in some ways makes it all the more cool in that Tim Russ & the rest of the film's crew have captured the essence of the original series which laid the foundation from which all things TREK sprung. The actors performances range from pretty good to excellent (Koenig & Ruck, I thought were especially good; both better than I'd ever seen from either of them). I loved also how it was an all encompassing project, pulling in actors from the entire spectrum of STAR TREK 's various series', even including actors from the fan based Web series STAR TREK: PHASE II (originally "NEW VOYAGES"). Then I guess my final comments would be to praise the fact that the film incorporates major plot elements from at least 3 different episodes from the original series, as well as STAR TREK GENERATIONS. I was a bit disappointed that 90% of the film took place in an alternate time line (this again is very reminiscent of the original series), but in spite of this I cannot honestly say that it didn't make for a terrific story line and plot. Ultimately, what I think it will come down to is, are you a fan of STAR TREK or not? A real fan? (Not an:"I think it's kinda cool" fan, nor someone whose 1st experience with the franchise was seeing the new "Reboot" films). If you are a fan of the old series and original film series then this will be right up your alley. The cast and crew said they made this film as a "gift" to the fans. This would be YOU. If you are not a true fan, "Please move along, nothing to see here"; this film will likely do nothing for you.

... View More
savagesteve13

The plot is rather complex, which is unusual for the simplistic ones of TOS. As an older Trek fan, its great to see a veritable tour de force of actors coming back to reprise their roles from past movies and series, with only a few exceptions. This is unusual in that it is "Uhura-centric", where she plays a core character and of course handles it in a different more female way of doing things. There's still plenty of phaser action and explosions for the guys though, and who doesn't like a green skin slave girl character. Low production values detract immensely, and the CGI is absolutely terrible. I've seen much better stuff from Babylon V and they were using Amiga 2000 computers back in 1994. Pyrotechnics were also missing. Actors didn't have squibs when they got hit by phasers so they just jumped backwards and fell. Going on the cheap. The dialogue also was kind of stilted and forced. Nobody felt comfortable which is usually the hallmark of STTNG. The only one that seemed relaxed was good old Walter Koenig, though his lines were not well written.It could have been much better. To have been graced with so many veteran Sci-Fi actors and then to nuke the production with cheap CGI and a poor script, well its makes you feel that it could have been great if done right.

... View More
Lee Sanderson

This is a fantastic story. Yes the production is a bit rough and nothing like the Paramount standard but all the veteran actors manage to pull off a reasonably good performance. Walter Koenig also turns to his Bester character from Babylon 5 to give depth to the alternate Pavel Chekov. It's absolutely amazing how you're actually drawn into the story within 10 minutes and you begin to forgive the low budget just for the sake of burning curiosity to find out how the story progresses and when it gets to the end, you're left with a feeling of satisfaction and the hope that it will get remade like the Sanctuary series has been. It might have been a good idea to at least have gone to the Babylon 5 production team to polish off the CGI since they were good at low budget production. There's even a kind of blooper reel at the end credits that are extremely amusing.

... View More
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.

... View More
You May Also Like