Trek Saturn Award Nominations

93 thoughts on “Trek Saturn Award Nominations”

1. And…. the Saturn awards lose more credibility. It’s dangerous to be in a position where you are nominating any old dreck with the sci fi label – the Saturn awards seem to discriminate only haphazardly between good and bad – but to nominate such a trashy, nonsensical movie which goes out of its way to repudiate any kind of science-fictional theme or idea in favour of pew pew is just annoying. But on second thought, take a look at the other nominees. It wasn’t exactly a bumper year. Pacific Rim? Kinda fun, but dumb, and disappointing.

2. STD is great science-fiction if you’ve been living on Saturn.

3. Better Into Darkness being nominated than STC and SFF.

4. blah blah blah… real Trek fans hate JJ… Trek blah blah blah.

5. Into Dorkness definitely deserves to be nominated – for the Razzie award.

   By the way, Star Trek Continues is a real gem.

6. More like Vic Mignogna’s form of jealousy and no talent. A sentiment shared by others.

7. This guy and his mancrush.

8. Give it a rest, Ahab. It’s one thing to have a legitimate complaint about a production, but yours is mainly based on a grudge you’re holding against that person. It’s entirely personal. And it leads you to endlessly seeking revenge. Is that how a Star Trek fan, who claims to believe in certain values promoted by ST, behaves?

9. Sigh…I just don’t get it. If you liked STID, fine and you’re certainly welcome to your opinion, but I and most of my friends who are what I would say mild-to-relatively serious fans were not at all happy with this movie.

   And I just cannot hold my tongue here when I am forced to contemplate how this movie could possibly garner critical praise from an outfit that is supposed to represent quality science fiction. I guess as LukeF says, it was just such a lean year when it comes to the science fiction genre so with the bar set so low, there just wasn’t much else to nominate.

   And the individual nominations are even more egregious:

   1) Cumberbatch may be a fine actor, but his role as Khan has got to be the biggest miscasting in all of recorded history! He’s about as much “Khan” as I am the Queen of England.
   2) Costumes? Really? Among other things, the Star Fleet uniforms at the end were horrible…they all looked like North Korean soldiers…very painful to look at and so not “Star Trek” in any way. And I guess the Klingons were a matter of taste…for me, they looked like bad copies of the Orcs from the Lord of the Rings movies.
   3) Best director? Oy…the lens flares, the pacing, the camera shakes…everything was so frenetic that the viewer never has a chance to get engaged on any emotional level with any given scene…not that there was much to sink one’s teeth into anyway so maybe that’s just as well…

   I can only hope that this year bring about some better science fiction offerings.

   And yes, I may be repeating myself to some extent when it comes to my displeasure with STID, but I don’t care…I will do so as I please in the hopes (and as I have said in other postings) that the powers-that-be take notice and endeavor to ensure that the next movie is much better.

   Cheers,

   Jon

   p.s. And I’m sorry Blue Thunder…you may not like Mr. Mignogna and that’s
   your right certainly, but “Lolani” was terrific…it was great all
   around…well-directed, relatively well-acted (Ferrigno and Vroom in particular were outstanding actually), well-written,
   emotionally engaging…overall much more “Star Trek” than STID (which
   was “Star Trek” in name only). Hey, there’s plenty of movies out there
   starring actors that I disagree with on a political level for instance,
   but that doesn’t stop me from acknowledging that they are good actors
   and enjoying their performances 🙂 .

10. Vic Mignogna is NOT a good actor. if anything, he is the exact opposite of what a good actor is. Anybody who tries to takeover another person’s production out of 100% sheer jealousy, is nothing more than a selfish opportunist and a degenerate lowlife. Vic Mignogna(after his ill-fated attempt to takeover Phase 2)is that type of person.

    John Broughton is obviously regretting having Vic as a business partner.

11. Ill-fated as in he failed in his attempt and was banned from P2 for life by a restraining order.

12. I don’t swing that way.

13. What was it that Shakesperean quote that Edward R. Murrow quoted, concerning Joseph McCarthy and his abuse of political power during the awful period in history(i.e. the Communist Witch Hunts-Red Scare)? It went something like this.

    “Cassius was right. “The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves.”

    If Mignogna and the FF people had behaved in a civilized and professional manner, then the accusations hurled forth by Alec Peters and others on the Trek BBS wouldn’t have been made and spread like ‘cyber’ wildfire.

    All that aside, trekfan, I could ask the same involving the hypocrites who constantly slam on J.J. Abrams’s work, the infighting among the fans in Star Trek fandom, and the behavior of Vic Mignogna, Michele Specht, John Broughton, Michael Bednar, Dennis R. Bailey, and the rest of the Farragut Films staff concerning their inexplicable and illogical behavior in how they deal with other Star Trek fans(whether it is in fan circles or fan film productions).

    It’s not hard to understand why some have left Farragut Films and refused to ever work with Mignogna and his unethical business partners.

14. Look, Gene Roddenberry himself, whom, I am sure, we all respect as the father of Trek, wasn’t exactly a saint. He was a human being, with all his weaknesses, but strengths as well. And Shatner has been accused of being egomaniac himself. Does that mean that we should discard the whole idea (Star Trek) because the people who created it and worked on it weren’t saints? That we should not judge the product on its own merits but on the merits of what is going on behind the scenes? That we should base our opinions on who ate each other’s donuts in the cafeteria and not on how the product actually is? Is that really your argument? Give me a break. You’re being entirely irrational. And, by the way, stop shamelessly spreading lies; Vic Mignogna didn’t steal anything, certainly not the sets you accuse him in your ravings. The only thing Vic stole was the show, with his performance as Kirk in Star Trek Continues.

15. He is fine as Kirk. Far better than Chris Pine’s idiotic portrayal of the character. If there were justice, Vic would get the Saturn Award, and Chris Pine would receive a Raspberry Award.

16. The only reward Vic deserves is a sack of an icky brown substance inside a paper bag, left on his front door step.

17. They are not lies. They are factual statements made by others who were betrayed by Vic. David Gerrold being one of those others who was betrayed. And don’t get me started on his bad behavior that has gotten him banned from other conventions(sci-fi and anime).

    It’s a question of morals and ethics. Something that society seems to be lacking in these days.

    Star Trek Continues is nothing more than Vic’s petty form of personal revenge against P2 and anyone else who has gotten in his twisted way.

    I have a hunch that if Gene Roddenberry were still alive, he would have been appalled and offended at such anti-social behavior. Especially at such concerning what many have said about J.J. Abrams and the prequel/reboots.

18. This from the man who elsewhere in this thread compares his crusade against Mignogna to Gandhi’s struggle. Priceless…

19. You really think someone will believe those lies?

    The people of that other fan production already dismissed the accusations that had been made against Vic Mignogna. The matter is resolved. You can let it go. And if David Gerrold has some legal issues with Vic Mignogna, he can deal with them at court. That’s why courts exist. And regarding behavior… well, we’re not the behavior police. A lot could be said about Shatner’s behavior’s as well. But that’s the man’s character, take it or leave it. Besides, that’s his private life. The important thing is he did a good job as Captain Kirk. Just as Vic did a good job, actually a great job, playing Kirk. I think Gene would be very happy with Star Trek Continues.

20. Have to agree with trekfan here…Mignogna’s portrayal was much more accurate than Pine’s for my money. Throughout all of “Lolani,” I pretty much forgot that this was a different actor (than Shatner) as the portrayal was so spot on. And I say this as a fan who has watched and re-watched all of TOS far more times than I can count now (going back to around 1972 or so).

    Pine is a fine actor, too, but he just didn’t sell himself as Kirk as well. Maybe it had to do with how poorly written the character (along with the entire movie) by the STID writers was, but that is MHO. Yours (blue thunder) obviously differs.

    I’m sorry you have such problems with Vic, but I can only judge him on what I see in the product he is producing. And what I see, I very much enjoyed.

    To get back on topic, “Lolani” ought to be the nominee here, not STID which only deserves a raspberry “award” at best…

    Jon

21. To BlueThunder and TrekFan. I respect your passion for Trek, but please do not speculate about me. You can always ask me directly.

    For the record, I have no personal complaint against Vic Mignona, I have no legal claims against him or any project he is currently working on.

    I did direct the Origins episode of Phase II, in which Vic was one of the actors, but we were unable to complete it because two sets were not available. Because (at least) three of our cast are no longer available for pickups, we are now discussing options for a complete reshoot. But at no time did I have any on-set disagreements with Vic Mignona or any other cast member. As always, the cast and crew demonstrated enormous enthusiasm and dedication.

    Whatever other issues may have occurred elsewhere between Vic and anyone else involved with Phase II did not happen in my presence and therefore I cannot comment knowledgeably. Even if I could, I wouldn’t. Gossip doesn’t produce useful results.

    As many here have already pointed out, Star Trek portrays a better future — and for many of us, the most appealing part of that future is that we’re not mired down in endless soap opera. Rather, we’re partners in the grander adventure of exploring the universe and finding our place as a responsible sentient species.

    I believe that fan producers should support each other, should welcome each other, can learn from each other, can celebrate each other’s success — because ultimately, we’re all playing in the same game. What helps one, helps everyone. What hurts one, hurts not just the productions, but also the enthusiasm of the audience as well.

    –David Gerrold

22. OK, Mr. Gerrold. Thank you for personally clarifying that. I certainly appreciate it.

    I also wish you success with your current and future projects.

23. I too, appreciate, what you have clarified, sir. And believe me I don’t doubt your word.

    However you did point this out on the Trek BBS back in September of last year(i.e. the post and the link to it at the bottom of this – under dgerrold-ensign). And for what it is worth, I understand where you are coming from in your statement, 110%. Having a project that I was working on nearly sabotaged by Vic, (even if it was an act of proxy through Michael Bednar – being lied to by him)I share your negative views.

    Unfortunately with the infighting between those who prefer Old Star Trek versus New Star Trek(J.J. Abrams’s reboots) as well as Alec Peters and Robert Simmons revealing what both Vic and the Starship Farragut people pulled on the Starship Ajax production in December of 2011, and later on the Phase II production concerning that early release of ‘Kitumba’ in March of 2012, it seems to me that Star Trek fandom has been polarized into two warring factions who can’t seem to find any common ground, despite their common interest in Star Trek in general. Especially in some of the vicious posts about J.J. Abrams personally on various BB’s.

    And when you have people like Vic and his partners at Farragut Films committing immoral and unethical acts that are suddenly brought out into the open public, then it leads to Gene Roddenberry’s original space opera being given a bad reputation and its good name twisted and perverted out of pettiness, jealousy, personal spite, and selfishness.

    http://www.trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=214357&page=8

    “Let me add this. If Vic wants a directing credit on Kitumba, he is free to write a letter to the Production Team explaining why he feels he deserves the credit. The final decision will have to be made by James Cawley, Alec Peters, Rob Mauro, and myself.
    I have a personal rule against ever saying anything negative about another professional, but since you have asked and put me into this position, I will answer. This will be my only public statement on Vic Mignona. After this, I request that you drop the subject. We are moving forward and it is no longer worth the investment of time and energy from the Phase II production team.

    Here’s my statement: I will never work with Vic Mignona again in any capacity, nor would I recommend him to any other producer. Vic Mignona’s actions, both on the set and off, are the primary reason why we will have to junk everything we shot on the Origins episode. The script is a good one, we got an astonishing performance from Matthew Ewald, and it’s a story we want to tell. We should have been able to finish it and have it out by now, but much of Vic’s work was unusable and Vic has so alienated the production crew that none of us want to invest any energy into finishing an episode with him in it. We will have to start fresh if we want to do this episode. I expect we will do that when it is convenient to schedule it.

    Everything I have said above is a fair reflection of the thinking of senior members of the Phase II team (James, Alec, myself, Rob). We have a kind of unwritten policy that however much we might argue among ourselves about our choices, when we finally do reach a decision it will be unanimous.

    What I have said here should be the end of it. It’s not an invitation to argue or discuss. And should anyone want to make an issue of it, then I will request the forum moderators to delete such discussions.

    Star Trek is supposed to be about working together while we reach for the stars. That’s the adventure I intend to invest in.”

24. Somehow, I doubt he would have enjoyed STC, if he had learned what it’s real purpose is.

25. Mr. Gerrold,

    My deepest respect to you, sir.

    As someone who has been so immersed in Star Trek for so very long and given your statements above on what ST is and has always been about (which I could not agree with more), I would be very curious as to your personal opinion/review of STID?

    But I understand if this is a topic you don’t feel comfortable posting on at this time 🙂 .

    Or did you ever post anywhere an official review from yourself? If so, I’d love to read it.

    Again, I only ask out of curiosity as while I do not personally understand how any fan with a true understanding of what ST represents could have liked STID, I nonetheless respect those who disagree with me. If anything, I want to hear from folks who liked the movie as to why they did and how STID stayed true to the ideals of ST, but I have encountered mostly simplistic vitriol whenever I attempt a friendly debate on the matter (which is of course odd given the core message that ST is supposed to represent).

    Jon

26. Jon, you are not alone when it comes to the issue of STID. Whenever I have pointed this out, the vitriol against J.J. Abrams has been enormous!

    Granted there are some things about the first two films that I liked and there some things about them that I didn’t. But it didn’t stop me from watching them and appreciating them for what they are. Let alone the fact that the films are set in a new timeline.

27. What part of “What I have said here should be the end of it. It’s not an invitation to argue or discuss.” didn’t you understand the first time?

28. Actually, sir, I did understand it the first time.

    Until you posted the following, five days past, which seems to be the exact and total opposite of what you had posted in September of last year.

    “For the record, I have no personal complaint against Vic Mignogna.”

    With all due respect, If that is the case, then why did you post what you posted in September?

    “I did direct the Origins episode of Phase II, in which Vic was one of the actors, but we were unable to complete it because two sets were not available. Because (at least) three of our cast are no longer available for pickups, we are now discussing options for a complete reshoot. But at no time did I have any on-set disagreements with Vic Mignona or any other cast member. As always, the cast and crew demonstrated enormous enthusiasm and dedication.”

    While I can accept the fact that two sets and some cast members were not available, it seems, judging by your September posting that you had(whether it was on set or not)some form of disagreement with Vic. Obviously one that was frustrating enough for you to post what you had posted in September.

    Having had a frustrating and unpleasant experience with Vic and his partners at FF, I don’t blame you for venting that negative energy in your statement last year. Quite honestly, I commend you for what you had to say.

    Please understand that I don’t mean any disrespect to you, sir. I’m only pointing out what you had said in both of your posts(i.e. September of 2013 and the post five days past). Nothing more. Nothing less.

29. No. You did not understand it.

    What I posted was NOT an invitation to discuss the situtation. It was intended to END that discussion.

    It was not in invitation to argue, pry, gossip, or otherwise keep the conversation going.

    I do not know you. As far as I know you are not part of any production crew. Whatever goes on in any production is generally on a need-to-know basis. No one — professional or amateur — is obligated to put themselves at the service of any internet discussion, particularly a discussion which might end up hurting the reputation of another professional.

    Whatever disagreements I might have with anyone — fan or pro — that’s between me and that person, not between me and you and that person.

    I am not going to discuss personal or private situations with you or anyone who is not part of the solution. And I am certainly not going to discuss anything online that could generate additional animosity.

    To be blunt, it’s none of your business. Stop flagellating a deceased equine. It’s dead, Jim.

30. Well, to be equally blunt, if what happened was such a distasteful experience and a huge, major blow to your enormous and over flated ego, then maybe you shouldn’t have posted what you had posted in the first place. By doing that, you left yourself open to such a response.

    While it is none of my business regarding the dispute you and Vic had, it might interest you to know that Vic Mignogna(through an act of proxy)nearly ruined a project that I was developing at the time. Thankfully, with the help and encouragement of both James Cawley and Patty Wright, I was able to salvage that project and complete it.

    For someone who has written for Star Trek, you certainly would be better qualified to write more for Planet Of The Apes than just a novelization of the fifth film.

    And by the way, I think your criticisms about Logan’s Run(the original 1976 MGM film)in Starlog Magazine were way out of line. And to some degree, the same goes for your opinions on Peter Hyams’ Capricorn One(ITC, 1978), as well.

    “The film] belittles and demeans the highest aspirations of the mind … devalues the integrity of science itself. Those of us who stood in our backyards on quiet summer nights, gazing up at the stars and wondering, hoping … the makers of Capricorn One have taken our dream girl and portrayed her as a prostitute.”
    – David Gerrold, Starlog Magazine

    ‘Taken our dream girl and portrayed her as a prostitute’, my foot.

31. Do you know the difference between you and a Rottweiler?

    A Rottweiler knows when to let go.

    My Starlog articles were written in my capacity as a reviewer. As I said above, and I will repeat it again. I am not obligated to play “let’s you and him fight” just because you want to.

    As for my “over flated ego” — you have now devolved to personal attack. This speaks far more about you than it does about me. Is this how you want to be known to your fellow fans?

32. get effing over yourself. if you are being insulting to the professional who is trying his best to keep from calling you a flaming nutcase GET OFF PLACES WHERE YOU WILL BE UNHAPPY. you are just like the kid who can’t take no for an answer & keeps asking. he is DONE with that conversation, YOU should be too. for goodness sake, GET A LIFE!!

33. Starlog magazine? good gods man – that was years and years ago. You’re a little late to take someone to task over something written ages ago. It’s in the past. – almost 40 years ago! get a life man!

34. you are so against this guy so much i’m wondering if he’s your ex????

35. you are so against this guy so much i’m wondering if he’s your ex???? i keep saying this because you just won’t let it go, just like a jilted suitor.

36. i agree with trekfan, we ALL GET THAT YOU DON”T LIKE HIM now PLEASE SHUT UP ABOUT IT!! you have crossed from obnoxious into BOOOOORING.

37. did Mr. Broughton tell you that? how do you know?

38. He’s right about those two films, actually, and didn’t go NEARLY far enough in his criticisms – they were utter crap.

    That aside, you’ve some serious issues.

39. As a dog owner, I know the difference. And I might also add that dogs are certainly a better form of life than mankind. You take it or leave it on that basis.

    While it is true that your articles were written in your capacity as a reviewer(which I respect to a point)some have disagreed with what you have said. I can understand why William Francis Nolan was infuriated when you harshly criticized the Logan’s Run novel(Bantam, 1967).

    “Which brings me to Logan’s Run. I have never read the book. I have no intention of reading the book. I thought the basic premise of the book was stupid when it was first published, and I still think so today.”
    –David Gerrold, columnist, State of the Art

    How can you make such a pre-judgement call like that without reading the book first, and then formulating your own opinion thereafter? Ever hear of the phrase ‘Don’t knock it until you have tried it?’

    As far as your description of “Let’s you and him fight” is concerned, if Vic didn’t continue to hurt others, backstab and betray innocent artists, and continue to ‘twist the knife even further’ in said artists backs, there never would have been a problem to begin with.

    Honestly, the way you posted your response, it sounded like a matter of ego. Unfortunately, I have dealt with egos from others, and I can honestly say that I find such personality traits to be utterly useless, unproductive, unnecessary, and for the most part, unhealthy. Vic Mignogna inherits those poisonous traits, and as a result, he has inflicted harm on many in the fan fiction field. Earlier today, a friend of mine and I had a clash with some of his business partners at Farragut Films over the matter, only because of a foolish and idiotic stunt that Vic pulled during an interview with some reporter in New York.

    I’m not concerned about what other fans think. I’m not in the business of such a useless endeavor. As I’ve stated before, if people like what I have to say, fine. If people don’t, that’s fine, too. I could care less or give a hoot in hell as to whether I am loved or hated. If I worried about such a useless experiment as that, let alone have no control over, I would make myself insane within a week.

    I’m a straight-shooter. I speak my mind. I’m as direct and straightforward as a person can get. I don’t beat around the bush. I cut to the chase and ‘shoot from the hip’. Some people admire me for that. Some hate my guts.

    As I said before: If people don’t like what I post, then they don’t have to read it.

40. When people like Vic Mignogna stops hurting others for no reason…or whatever the twisted reason is…then I will be DONE.

41. I’m well aware that the subjects pertaining to both Logan’s Run and Capricorn One are in the past and how long it has been. It’s two viewpoints that I wanted to address to him for many years. And now I have. I see no harm in voicing a counter opinion concerning his negative reviews on those two subjects.

42. OK, let’s end this, Blue Thunder. First of all, this article was not about fan films or any issues relating to fan films so discussion on that does not rightfully belong here.

    Secondly, I don’t want to see any fights from other places/productions brought to either TrekToday or TrekBBS. It’s unnecessary and causes nothing but grief.

    Thirdly, after David Gerrold posted his bit, it was obvious that he did not wish to bring whatever issues exist with the other person here and I agree with him. Plus, you were rude bringing in all sorts of other crap and insulting David Gerrold because he didn’t do what you wanted him to do. If you’re a regular, you know that flaming is not permitted around here.

    Take your vendetta against Mignogna elsewhere (and before you start, I don’t know the guy from Adam, and don’t care about him or his projects one way or the other).

    This stops now. I will be monitoring this thread from here on in and I won’t hesitate to remove offending posts or posters who don’t stop when I tell them to stop. That goes for anyone.

    Jeez…every time that guy’s name comes up, it’s WWIII on the BBS. *rolleyes*

43. True he is entitled to his opinion. Even if I disagree with them. I wouldn’t call that serious issues.

    Personally, I enjoyed the 1976 MGM film and its social commentary. I might also add that it won a Special Achievement Academy Award for SFX(even though the domed city minatures were not all that special).

    Capricorn One did have that cynical view of the world. One that had gone too far and kept going into the seamy side of life in such detail. Blame such cynicism on the late Richard Nixon and Watergate. Nevertheless, it ended on an uplifting note and it had an interesting storyline.

    Peter Hyams’ plot is a devilishly clever one where he happily swipes more than an idea or two from writer Barry Malzberg’s satirical exhumations of the space-program. Hyams amusingly stated in an interview that he shipped the idea for Capricorn One around for several years but it was not until Watergate made the idea fashionable that was able to sell the script.

    Despite the fact that the film attracted a good deal of disdain in the science-fiction community for its less than reverent attitude toward the space program(as David Gerrold pompously claimed in his negative review), this is an argument that was defeated by the fact that NASA co-operated with and even loaned equipment and space modules for the making of the film. Rather than trashing its ideals, Capricorn One in fact seems to be lamenting the dream that inspired the space program. The film languishes the loss of the dream embodied by John F. Kennedy’s original call to space. A call in the face of the 1970’s budgetary cutbacks.

    I enjoyed it for what it was. An entertaining and successful science fiction/conspiracy thriller.

44. Feel free to believe what you want. I’m done here.

45. See my above post.

46. OK, done with this. No more fighting.

47. Believe what you will. I’m done here.

48. See my above post.

49. See my above post regarding all of this.

50. No more discussion on this. See my above post.

Comments are closed.