Author Topic: star trek  (Read 332757 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

naff

  • someday you feed on a tree frog
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #900 on: October 15, 2017, 10:57:22 PM »
Yeah, lol, i edited/expanded on that thought above :P i think a lot of people thought that way when watching the first few eps, glad we were wrong.
◕‿◕

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #901 on: October 15, 2017, 11:22:56 PM »
Don't skip. Don't listen to anyone who tells you to skip.

Honestly if you care about orders, I suggest watching the original series first that's on you.
IYKYK

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #902 on: October 15, 2017, 11:24:38 PM »
Hey buddy, that scientist has a name and it's Dr. Bob Kelso.

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #903 on: October 15, 2017, 11:29:13 PM »
Good episode of Discovery tonight.


spoiler (click to show/hide)
I'm glad they didn't kneecap Saru and make him incompetent. I was afraid they were going to do that.
[close]

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #904 on: October 15, 2017, 11:40:02 PM »
Due to my illness, it's been nothing but TV around here, and I'm up to episode 12 of Enterprise

I'm up to about episode 18 or so. I still enjoy it although occasionally an episode misses the mark for me.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
I hated the one about the free spirit klingons who arrive on the ship. It was really cringey.
[close]

I agree the crew has the best initial chemistry out of any of the shows. I also like how upbeat the crew is and how they constantly get shit on by downer aliens. It's funny.

naff

  • someday you feed on a tree frog
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #905 on: October 16, 2017, 12:09:14 AM »
Don't skip. Don't listen to anyone who tells you to skip.

Honestly if you care about orders, I suggest watching the original series first that's on you.

Better you than me. I couldn't stomach even half a season of TOS.
◕‿◕

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #906 on: October 16, 2017, 12:28:56 AM »
Don't skip. Don't listen to anyone who tells you to skip.

Honestly if you care about orders, I suggest watching the original series first that's on you.

Better you than me. I couldn't stomach even half a season of TOS.

How? Why? :confused
IYKYK

naff

  • someday you feed on a tree frog
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #907 on: October 16, 2017, 12:41:10 AM »
dated and boring. tv was too heavily invested in shitty old stereotypes back then, and i couldnt deal with it. it was a long time ago i tried watching it, so i'm basing that judgement on old perceptions, but i was pretty convinced it was basement dweller nerd only material at the time (~2009 after watching TNG).
◕‿◕

Tasty

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #908 on: October 16, 2017, 12:41:49 AM »
TOS s1 :ohhh

TOS s2 :gladbron

TOS s3 :kobeyuck

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #909 on: October 16, 2017, 12:47:47 AM »
dated and boring. tv was too heavily invested in shitty old stereotypes back then, and i couldnt deal with it. it was a long time ago i tried watching it, so i'm basing that judgement on old perceptions, but i was pretty convinced it was basement dweller nerd only material at the time (~2009 after watching TNG).

....

I don't think it's dated and boring at all. The stories it has tend to be Twilight Zone-esque and usually portray a fantastic story. Season 3 aside.

I think most people today who say TOS is dated and boring usually do so for superficial reasons. Such as your stereotypes criticism. Or the low budget look of the set. Or the occasional cheese factor.

But in no way is The Menagerie, Corbomite Maneuver, or City on the Edge of Forever dated or boring.

I have never found a compelling argument against TOS beyond the superficial having a problem with its looks or the fact the women wear skirts.
IYKYK

Momo

  • Nebuchadnezzar
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #910 on: October 16, 2017, 12:48:26 AM »
Yeah TOS is some of my least favorite trek, right there with Voyager.

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #911 on: October 16, 2017, 12:50:05 AM »
Jesus Christ I'm so triggered right now
IYKYK

Momo

  • Nebuchadnezzar
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #912 on: October 16, 2017, 12:54:14 AM »
I loved Trip, T'Pol, Hoshi, Malcolm and Travis from Enterprise.
I liked this but then I realized you said Travis when you meant Phlox and had to unlike it.

I assume the Bakula love didn't need to be stated.
Phlox was a walking meme that's why I will always exclude him, feels like he was written to be liked and that made it so i never actually did. I get questioning Travis, he didn't do much but idk, something about his personality always brought a smile.

Momo

  • Nebuchadnezzar
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #913 on: October 16, 2017, 01:02:11 AM »
I really liked The Orville Episode 6. I like how they are still tackling very topical heavy subject matter interspersed with moments of levity, the comedy doesn't work most of the time as usual but the format of this show is pretty strong.
spoiler (click to show/hide)
The show seems to end on a 'we tried but cant really fix this' or 'did we do the right thing' note more often than TNG ever did, starting to wonder if they will ever get a solid win this season. For jokes - the new leg callback to last episode worked though :lol
[close]

Madrun Badrun

  • twin-anused mascot
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #914 on: October 17, 2017, 06:08:19 PM »

Himu

  • Senior Member
IYKYK

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #916 on: October 22, 2017, 12:56:49 PM »
You know you are an old fuck when the highlight of your week is waiting for the new Trek episode

 :goty2


I'm referencing myself with the above.

D3RANG3D

  • The Bore's Like Bot
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #917 on: October 22, 2017, 01:15:19 PM »
Was there no new episode of orville this week?

Momo

  • Nebuchadnezzar
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #918 on: October 22, 2017, 01:18:06 PM »
Was there no new episode of orville this week?
No, I was pretty sad. Had to go out and party, WHAT KIND OF LIFE IS THIS  :six:

chronovore

  • relapsed dev
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #919 on: October 22, 2017, 08:30:46 PM »
Caught up on Discovery. The poor macro-tardigrade. I was very sad for it.

I've read that Saru is a hated character — what a stonking load of horsefrippery. Doug Jones nails it solidly, every time he's on screen. His survival instinct is written in a believable way, and even leads to the resolution of rescuing Captain Lorca. And Lorca's awesome, too.

I'm stunned that the divisive character isn't Michael's roomie, BBW redhead Ensign Broken Human. But if they can excuse Lt. Barkley's clearly messed up psyche in Starfleet, that redhead is small potatoes.

seagrams hotsauce

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #920 on: October 22, 2017, 08:54:22 PM »
I haven't read shit but I completely agree. The ginger chick is clearly the most grating character.

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #921 on: October 22, 2017, 09:00:24 PM »
Saru owns
IYKYK

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #922 on: October 23, 2017, 12:37:04 AM »
Probably my least favorite episode of discovery so far tonight. The only one I would say I legit didn't care for.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
That being said it did set up a few interesting bits with Lorca. He's always been sort of a morally dubious character but tonight really kind of pushed him further in that direction. I'm intrigued to see where they are going with this.

I still think the Klingon stuff is a bit of a mess unfortunately. They don't spend enough time on them and the Klingons in general have reverted to just being the bad guys which feels like a tos era thing instead of being a more diverse culture like they were in the later shows.
[close]

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #923 on: October 23, 2017, 01:04:59 AM »
Sarek :zzz

Least fave Ep since 2.
IYKYK

FatRiker

  • Junior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #924 on: October 23, 2017, 03:03:36 AM »
Lorca's such a basic bitch.

I was trying to figure out how much of Joe Menosky's influence was in this episode. I figure all the Katra dream stuff was his idea.
« Last Edit: October 23, 2017, 03:51:31 AM by FatRiker »

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #925 on: October 23, 2017, 04:48:46 AM »
In hindsight, I think it was more of a mixed episode. I loved the Lorca storyline but the Sarek/Michael storyline did nothing for me. But that Lorca story is fascinating. I ended up thinking he intentionally tried to get the admiral killed but at the end there, it shows he might have taken what she said to him to heart and he's trying to get better. I just don't know how to feel about the captain and I like that. Refreshing for Trek.
IYKYK

chronovore

  • relapsed dev
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #926 on: October 23, 2017, 06:28:32 AM »
Re-watched Yesterday's Enterprise, one of my favorite TNG episodes. Jesus, what a great ep.

seagrams hotsauce

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #927 on: October 23, 2017, 11:01:23 AM »

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #928 on: October 23, 2017, 11:08:32 AM »
Quote
The new installment of a decades-favorite franchise premiered at the end of Sept. on CBS Television Network’s digital subscription streaming service, breaking their single-day record for new subscriber sign-ups...

“In just six episodes, ‘Star Trek: Discovery’ has driven subscriber growth...
It not doing that certainly would be one hell of a disaster.

Momo

  • Nebuchadnezzar
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #929 on: October 23, 2017, 11:08:40 AM »
Discovery got renewed already http://variety.com/2017/tv/news/star-trek-discovery-renewal-season-2-cbs-all-access-1202596182/
Surprised, but not surprised.

Quote
The new installment of a decades-favorite franchise premiered at the end of Sept. on CBS Television Network’s digital subscription streaming service, breaking their single-day record for new subscriber sign-ups...


“In just six episodes, ‘Star Trek: Discovery’ has driven subscriber growth...
It not doing that certainly would be one hell of a disaster.
Certainly, there were like 20 subscribers before so the 20 they got now represents 100% growth! (p.s. i've been following the press releases RE numbers, most of it is weasel stats like % and 'in canada' :lol )

FatRiker

  • Junior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #930 on: October 23, 2017, 11:25:22 AM »
Netflix basically paid for the entire show, so what ever CBS get from subscribers is pure profit. Could just be 1 person and that's enough to get Les Moonves a coffee, and as long as Les Moonves get his coffee the show keeps running.

Momo

  • Nebuchadnezzar
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #931 on: October 23, 2017, 11:30:01 AM »
Netflix basically paid for the entire show, so what ever CBS get from subscribers is pure profit. Could just be 1 person and that's enough to get Les Moonves a coffee, and as long as Les Moonves get his coffee the show keeps running.
Yeah, will be interesting to see if Netflix cuts the same deal for 2 and if not how fast CBS bails as they lose money.

FatRiker

  • Junior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #932 on: October 23, 2017, 11:39:15 AM »
Netflix basically paid for the entire show, so what ever CBS get from subscribers is pure profit. Could just be 1 person and that's enough to get Les Moonves a coffee, and as long as Les Moonves get his coffee the show keeps running.
Yeah, will be interesting to see if Netflix cuts the same deal for 2 and if not how fast CBS bails as they lose money.
Hopefully the internal metrics are good on the Netflix side, and it's not a secret Sense8. I actually think we'll get at least 4 seasons out of Discovery, just because CBS need it to keep people interested in All Access.

Madrun Badrun

  • twin-anused mascot
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #933 on: October 23, 2017, 11:51:51 AM »
I thought holodecks were a new thing for the TNG time? 

Madrun Badrun

  • twin-anused mascot
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #934 on: October 23, 2017, 12:24:18 PM »
meh, episode with an obvious ending. 

Momo

  • Nebuchadnezzar
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #935 on: October 23, 2017, 02:19:42 PM »
meh, that episode did little for me.

FatRiker

  • Junior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #936 on: October 23, 2017, 07:31:31 PM »
I don't really like how they have a holodeck already.

chronovore

  • relapsed dev
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #937 on: October 23, 2017, 10:34:11 PM »
I don't really like how they have a holodeck already.
http://www.ign.com/articles/2017/10/23/star-trek-discoverys-holodeck-has-fans-freaking-out

Arguably drawn from TOS canon, if you accept the animated series content. Not sure if I do.

And, besides, the Klingons are not the same as the TOS-era Klingons so all bets are off. I'm as apathetic about the canon as arguing if Wolverine killed the guards in the Hellfire Club, or if Green Lantern can eat yellow mustard.

Borealis

  • Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #938 on: October 23, 2017, 10:45:22 PM »
Netflix basically paid for the entire show, so what ever CBS get from subscribers is pure profit. Could just be 1 person and that's enough to get Les Moonves a coffee, and as long as Les Moonves get his coffee the show keeps running.

Can Netflix fund another season of Enterprise while they're at.

At least a film-length episode plz.
« Last Edit: October 23, 2017, 10:51:37 PM by Borealis »

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #939 on: October 23, 2017, 10:53:36 PM »
I also didn't much care for the new security chief. I hope he isn't there just to be hunky mc-hunk bad ass love interest. That would get old real fast.

I'm hoping I'm just over-reacting to him.

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #940 on: October 23, 2017, 11:07:33 PM »
People think he's a klingon and the show is deliberately toying with us in making us think so
IYKYK

Borealis

  • Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #941 on: October 23, 2017, 11:29:48 PM »
Ep.7 trailer:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7AwbQrpF_A

Muddy timeloops.

Momo

  • Nebuchadnezzar
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #942 on: October 24, 2017, 12:11:34 AM »
And, besides, the Klingons are not the same as the TOS-era Klingons so all bets are off.
I'm fairly certain Ash Tyler is Voq so they are going to use him to spread the disease that makes Klingons tanned white people with mustaches.



Ep.7 trailer:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7AwbQrpF_A


Muddy timeloops.
I'll probably put this ep on in the background while I read comics tbh, I'm sick of this trope.
« Last Edit: October 24, 2017, 12:29:11 AM by Momo »

chronovore

  • relapsed dev
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #943 on: October 24, 2017, 04:35:17 AM »
Cute pic of Discovery cast:
spoiler (click to show/hide)
[close]

Looks like Japan gets Discovery episodes a day later, so I'll be watching this new one tomorrow.

zomgbbqftw

  • Junior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #944 on: October 24, 2017, 07:04:34 AM »
In hindsight, I think it was more of a mixed episode. I loved the Lorca storyline but the Sarek/Michael storyline did nothing for me. But that Lorca story is fascinating. I ended up thinking he intentionally tried to get the admiral killed but at the end there, it shows he might have taken what she said to him to heart and he's trying to get better. I just don't know how to feel about the captain and I like that. Refreshing for Trek.

He's much more interesting than the rest of the cast so far, not sure I'd put him on the same level as Sisko just yet in terms of grey area morals, but he's better than Janeway and Archer already.

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #945 on: October 28, 2017, 01:31:21 PM »
Finished up the first season of Enterprise.

That was surprisingly good to me.

Probably the best first season of a trek show outside of TOS. I regret I didn't support it by watching it when it aired. Lots of fun lets meet alien stories. Lots of of we don't have a prime directive yet, so we will fuck up when we meet alien stories. And good growing pain storylines with trying to be independent from the vulcans.

The main serial storyline for the first season maybe wasn't the strongest but at least that gave them room to do a lot of other random episodes. I love the time period. I actually prefer the older timelines compared to the newer where they tend to out technology everything.

FatRiker

  • Junior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #946 on: October 28, 2017, 11:15:19 PM »
Enterprise S1 is a bit weird for me, because it's got elements of things I like (Shuttlepod One, Silent Enemy, Breaking The Ice), bad Voyager-tier narcolepsy or botched execution (Terra Nova, Oasis) and full trash or hyper botched execution (Unexpected, Dear Doctor).

chronovore

  • relapsed dev
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #947 on: October 28, 2017, 11:58:40 PM »
I really liked the Dear Doctor episode.

FatRiker

  • Junior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #948 on: October 29, 2017, 12:55:37 AM »
I just can't abide by what Phlox and Archer did. I like most of the episode until that point.

chronovore

  • relapsed dev
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #949 on: October 29, 2017, 01:00:02 AM »
I just can't abide by what Phlox and Archer did. I like most of the episode until that point.
Well, yeah, it's kind of a downer episode, which is what I liked about it.

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #950 on: October 29, 2017, 01:31:22 AM »
I just can't abide by what Phlox and Archer did. I like most of the episode until that point.

I liked the episode but I didn't agree with their decision and I didn't see how saving them would have been any worse than any of the other times they decided to intervene in the affair of other races. I know they were trying to argue we were interfering with the natural evolution of their species but it still seems like the wrong call or at least not the moral one.

It's like seeing starving and sick people and going well that's evolution!

I know there was another species also involved in the equation but still.

chronovore

  • relapsed dev
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #951 on: October 29, 2017, 01:46:01 AM »
I just can't abide by what Phlox and Archer did. I like most of the episode until that point.

I liked the episode but I didn't agree with their decision and I didn't see how saving them would have been any worse than any of the other times they decided to intervene in the affair of other races. I know they were trying to argue we were interfering with the natural evolution of their species but it still seems like the wrong call or at least not the moral one.

It's like seeing starving and sick people and going well that's evolution!

I know there was another species also involved in the equation but still.

There was a throwaway line in there about putting a warp-capable ship in their hands and then letting the dying race go off and POSSIBLY finding a worse race that might come back and subjugate both the sentient races on the planet. The dying race wanted to be saved, but they  were not going to elevate the lower-caste race. Archer decided to let them solve their own problems.

They could end up finding a genetic solution between the two races, creating a new hybrid. They might transcend into machines. Who knows? But interfering like that can have serious problems.

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #952 on: October 29, 2017, 01:55:49 AM »
It's not some much the hard call in that case. I mean I still would disagree with them in this instance but if that is the line in the sand that want to draw to sort of set up the prime directive I'm fine with that in theory. I understand from that sense.

It's more an issue of consistency. I feel like especially in this show since its almost all first contact scenarios they are constantly getting involved in the internal affairs of other societies. They often use the pre-warp drive thing to justify as a hard demarcation line of whether they can or not but I just feel like ethically that is a little soft. I feel like why is that necessarily the thing that determines humanitarian action. I understand maybe not helping them with other technology but humanitarian aid feels like it should be exempt from that.

Not saying there isn't another valid side on the other side. I may totally be reacting purely from an emotional feeling rather than necessarily a logical one.

In general I do like being pre prime directive in dealing with these situations without an easy plot guideline to fall back on just say that is what we do. It is more interesting from a plot perspective to deal with these situations as they come.
« Last Edit: October 29, 2017, 02:00:15 AM by Stoney Mason »

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #953 on: October 30, 2017, 03:16:10 AM »
Discovery episode was average. It started off awful but it elevated itself to average by the end.

That was the most trek episode of them so far. And I mean that both in a positive and negative way. It was a complete one off episode that outside of a minor connection has nothing to do with the overall plotline of the season. I'm glad to see them do that with this trek. I wish the episode was better but at least they are showing they can do completely standalone episodes. Next week from the trailer looks like another type of that episode.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
I don't like the immediate love connection between security chief and burnham. Relationships work on TV when you see the characters build towards them slowly. Not when in a few episodes of meeting each other they are soul-mates. I liked the general structure of the episode. And I think Rainn Wilson is good as Mudd. I just wish the episode had been a bit more clever with the time loop stuff.
[close]

Momo

  • Nebuchadnezzar
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #954 on: October 30, 2017, 11:18:37 AM »
Episode was straight garbage, get the fuck out of here cbs  :neogaf

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #955 on: November 01, 2017, 12:58:03 AM »
Was looking up random trek videos on youtube and came across this one. Was aware of the ryan/mulgrew tensions but hadn't seen this specific video


toku

  • 𝕩𝕩𝕩
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #956 on: November 01, 2017, 01:03:16 AM »
I remember someone (here?) saying she had a big problem with how the show kinda shifted to focus a bit more on seven. I went through Voyager for the first time recently and it's pretty obvious when they pivoted. Don't really blame them though. Seven really boosted the show. Even later on when she started teaching the other pod kids.

« Last Edit: November 01, 2017, 01:07:53 AM by toku »

chronovore

  • relapsed dev
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #957 on: November 01, 2017, 11:07:28 AM »
Was looking up random trek videos on youtube and came across this one. Was aware of the ryan/mulgrew tensions but hadn't seen this specific video



That's surprising. I mean, normally, actors keep that stuff pretty veiled. I guess with Twitter and cons, maybe people are more intent on being more transparent with the fans? I mean, I don't know the whole story, but I'm leaning toward the convention manager's stance: "That's a horrible idea. Why do you think Mulgrew will want to work out problems publicly at a paid event? Tell your anecdotes or don't, but don't put another one of our guests on the spot."

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #958 on: November 01, 2017, 04:07:23 PM »
I remember someone (here?) saying she had a big problem with how the show kinda shifted to focus a bit more on seven. I went through Voyager for the first time recently and it's pretty obvious when they pivoted. Don't really blame them though. Seven really boosted the show. Even later on when she started teaching the other pod kids.

One of the reasons among many, that I never watched Voyager until years later was that from the outside looking in, seven seemed like just a pure sex appeal gimmick from the marketing.

I was surprised when I watched it, that there was meat on the character (along with the pandering sexuality). She and Janeway have some of the best scenes of the show together so its kind of amazing that despite how much tension there was, it wasn't noticeable in the end quality of the work.

From the outside looking in also, I can probably see the annoyance that a new character is suddenly getting all the screen time especially when the new actor is dating executive producer Brannon Braga. But she really was an interesting character compared to the rest of them.
« Last Edit: November 01, 2017, 04:22:11 PM by Stoney Mason »

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #959 on: November 01, 2017, 04:08:20 PM »
Was looking up random trek videos on youtube and came across this one. Was aware of the ryan/mulgrew tensions but hadn't seen this specific video



That's surprising. I mean, normally, actors keep that stuff pretty veiled. I guess with Twitter and cons, maybe people are more intent on being more transparent with the fans? I mean, I don't know the whole story, but I'm leaning toward the convention manager's stance: "That's a horrible idea. Why do you think Mulgrew will want to work out problems publicly at a paid event? Tell your anecdotes or don't, but don't put another one of our guests on the spot."

It's been so long now, I guess people don't care about covering it up anymore.