🚀 go-pugleaf

strait@primenet.com (Jim Strait) wrote:

>In article <65fq38$bl2@nntp02.primenet.com>, otsp@primenet.com wrote:
>>From: mike@otsp.com (Mike Willmoth)
>>Newsgroups: az.sf
>>Subject: Star Trek: The Experience, A Review
>>Date: 25 Nov 1997 17:22:00 -0700
>>Star Trek: The Experience
>>A Sneak Preview from COMDEX
>>Las Vegas Hilton, Las Vegas, Nevada
>>by Mike Willmoth
>>
>>Monday November 17, 1997
>>10:00am, Media Center, COMDEX
>>
>..

>That's quite a review, Mike.  But skipping all the statistics and specifics,  
>were you impressed  or was it just fancy hype.  Did you get the impression 
>that they were going to open just another casino hotel with carnival rides 
>sprinkled with a little Star Trek  or  was it, as the name implies, a way for 
>a fan to experience Star Trek like a museum/presentation.  

>This is possibly an unfair question.  It seems like a lot of vendors keep 
>looking for a new way to cash in on the Star Trek cash cow.  A real Star Trek 
>fan enjoys the adventures in the Star Trek universe, while others only buy 
>merchandise and collect autographs because that is the thing to do.  Those are 
>the fans who spend big money.  That could be the only target of the Star Trek 
>Experience, "Visit the Latest (big money) Star Trek Event".  Or it could be 
>set up to entertain the fantasy of joining the adventure of visiting the Star 
>Trek universe.  Do they pay attention to detail?  That comment about the 
>Klingons plotting to kill/eliminate Picard does not make sense.  It makes me 
>suspicious of a random plot device.  Do they make it (Star Trek) work,  or Do 
>they make it (the ride) function?  

>Bottom line:  How did YOU feel about the whole thing?

I think that once they complete the Experience it will be fine.
Seeing it in the incomplete phase gives me a different viewpoint, one
where I must withhold judgement.  Details seem to be concentrated on,
considering the 1:1 replica of the Next Gen bridge they included.  Is
it perfect?  Not when I saw it :-)

Overall, I'm looking forward to going back when it is done and
operational.

Mike