Author Topic: star trek  (Read 334611 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Tasty

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #540 on: September 03, 2016, 05:51:09 AM »
:bow benji

Yeah, VI is probably my fave. Especially now that I've seen the first two seasons of TOS (in completion) this year. What an amazing send-off.

"Cry havoc, and let slip the dogs of war!"

Tasty

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #541 on: September 03, 2016, 06:12:02 AM »
Also that scene with Uhura and the books is boss as hell. Was laughing my ass off.

Boogie

  • The Smooth Canadian
  • Icon
Re: star trek
« Reply #542 on: September 03, 2016, 08:49:05 AM »
I've now watched all six original Star Trek movies!

Classics: II, VI
Great: III, IV
OK: The Motion Picture
Bleh: V

I think I might like VI the most, but it's hard to tell. Wrath of Khan is just so classic, and there's no beating that James Horner score. But the plot for VI was quite a bit more layered and the cinematography was the best in the series - it looks guuuuud.

No lies detected.
MMA

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #543 on: September 03, 2016, 08:56:27 AM »
One little moment I like in that Khitomer battle is when Kirk just off instinct has the ship "back off, back off" and they then show the Klingons wondering what's going on and then cut back to the Enterprise wondering what the Klingons are wondering. :lol

But that was how the films that Meyer was ripping off were done. But then at the same time, much of that was also how TOS was done. All to save budgets. Setting whole episodes on the ship and running through the same two sets just redressed and so on. Reaction shots instead of special effects. And Meyer's combo of that plus his viewing Trek as "naval battles" (versus Star Wars' dogfights) did a lot to make those battles work in ways that Voyager often didn't understand and TNG struggled with at times early on.

TMP was a huge waste of money in retrospect from a production standpoint, so Khan was made on comparatively nothing, so everything is set on two ships (which are actually the same bridge set) and then the Genesis station, but it helps the mood of the film so much. And you don't really notice that there's basically only two and a half sets for the whole movie. Or that Shatner and Montalban were never even in the same room with each other. VI's scenes on the ship are also to help with the budget. (Everything in V and VI is the Enterprise-D redressed. Where they have the meal with the Klingons is TNG's conference room for example. IIRC when they go in the kitchen that's TNG's Sickbay. That one fan site has a listing of them all probably.) But it doesn't hurt the pacing because they're uncovering the plot and tying it into the larger plot/mystery.

DS9 obviously went in an entirely different direction and scope. Only sometimes did they seem to remember that like the fucking Galaxy Class ships shouldn't really be flying around all crazy like they're the Defiant or runabouts. :lol They handled a lot of the alien ships a lot better in that regard despite (or because of?) having fewer models.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Nemesis has a top three space battle from the films. :shh
[close]

chronovore

  • relapsed dev
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #544 on: September 03, 2016, 06:06:26 PM »
Never say anything good about NEMESIS.

Not even once.

Tasty

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #545 on: September 03, 2016, 08:25:52 PM »
Never saw the final two TNG movies, that might be next.

Great Rumbler

  • Dab on the sinners
  • Global Moderator
Re: star trek
« Reply #546 on: September 03, 2016, 08:32:48 PM »
Insurrection and Nemesis are kinda garbo, unfortunately.
dog

Tasty

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #547 on: September 03, 2016, 08:38:52 PM »
Yeah I've heard. Still should probably see them.


Madrun Badrun

  • twin-anused mascot
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #549 on: September 04, 2016, 10:34:53 AM »
Insurrection and Nemesis are kinda garbo, unfortunately.

The only 2 I have not seen as well. 

Great Rumbler

  • Dab on the sinners
  • Global Moderator
Re: star trek
« Reply #550 on: September 04, 2016, 12:36:58 PM »
With TNG I think the problem is that all of the good ideas already got used in the series, so there just wasn't much left to do in the movies [except for a big-budget confrontation with the Borg]. TOS got cut short and then had a long stretch before the movies started, so they still had a lot of good ideas laying around.
dog

Tasty

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #551 on: September 04, 2016, 05:55:31 PM »
With TNG I think the problem is that all of the good ideas already got used in the series, so there just wasn't much left to do in the movies [except for a big-budget confrontation with the Borg]. TOS got cut short and then had a long stretch before the movies started, so they still had a lot of good ideas laying around.

I mean the plot for TMP was a retrofitted script from Star Trek: Phase II, a sequel TV series to TOS that Paramount cancelled when Star Wars became popular and they retrofitted Star Trek to be a film.

chronovore

  • relapsed dev
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #552 on: September 04, 2016, 08:07:21 PM »
Insurrection and Nemesis are kinda garbo, unfortunately.

The only 2 I have not seen as well.

Insurrection is not good, but it's watchable. Nemesis inspires in me the same protocol as The Phantom Menace -- if I feel like a re-watch, I'll just go watch the RLM review.

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #553 on: September 09, 2016, 11:31:02 AM »

Tasty

  • Senior Member

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member

Dennis

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #556 on: October 26, 2016, 08:26:02 PM »
Well, that is not good.

toku

  • 𝕩𝕩𝕩
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #557 on: October 26, 2016, 09:01:48 PM »
Not surprised.

Tasty

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #558 on: October 26, 2016, 10:23:12 PM »
What is it with "Ricks"?

seagrams hotsauce

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #559 on: October 27, 2016, 04:58:37 AM »
That paired with the Akiva dudes IMDB credits pretty much killed any interest I had in this

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #560 on: November 07, 2016, 02:39:00 AM »
Watched Star Trek Beyond.

I didn't like it. Its heart is in the right place but I just don't think its a very good movie. In fact I thought it was by far the worst of the new trek movies. The villain and his motivations don't make sense to me. The special effects feel like the shaky cam stuff I hate in nearly every movie. There isn't much wonder or exploration in my opinion. There is almost no tension. From beginning to end you know exactly how every beat will play out.

There is good chemistry between bones and spock. That alone isn't enough to hang a movie on. I have a feeling if these movies didn't have Star Trek in the title of them, they wouldn't be reviewed nearly as fondly as they often are. Like I've said before though take my opinion with a grain of salt. I just prefer what the best of those old movies were. And these new ones just don't evoke those emotions from me. I feel more even for the bad old star trek movies than these.

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #561 on: November 13, 2016, 11:22:13 PM »

Yeti

  • Hail Hydra
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #562 on: November 13, 2016, 11:40:50 PM »
Classic O'Brian
WDW

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #563 on: January 18, 2017, 04:37:54 PM »

Tasty

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #564 on: January 18, 2017, 04:50:45 PM »
This show was supposed to be out RIGHT NOW

Ffs

seagrams hotsauce

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #565 on: January 19, 2017, 06:44:29 PM »
I lost all interest in this once fuller left. Hopefully they just kill it outright since everything surrounding it has been a complete shitshow.

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #566 on: January 30, 2017, 05:55:35 PM »
lol. Almost three years later and I did it! I finished voyager!

Basically I would either forgot about it. Get busy watching other things, or just living life. But this weekend I polished it off with the last 4 or 5 episodes.

There were 172 voyager episodes. My guess is I probably ended up watching 100 to 110 of them give or take 10 on either side. I watched a lot of the later season episodes by comparison mainly because the show seemed to get better by then and I was invested in the characters by that point.

Overall my take is I enjoyed it more than I thought I would which has a lot to do with avoiding the absolute worst of the worst episodes and a strong bit of just general Trek nostalgia. It was just fun to watch Star Trek again even if it wasn't the best Star Trek. I would have been much harsher on it if I had watched it when it was running and be more annoyed at its obvious flaws but honestly it mostly just felt like slipping into a comfy bath.

Like I said I totally get why everybody hates on it. There are lots of reasons for valid hate or dislike. And there are certainly things even I dislike about it quite a bit. How everything always wraps up with a nice neat bow at 2 minutes from the end of the episode. How the aliens they meet always feel more human than the humans on the ship. etc.

The standouts of the show are 7, & the doctor to a large degree and Janeway to a smaller degree. Those were generally the characters who were either given the most interesting plotlines, or the most fun plotlines. 7 in particular carries the show during the middle years and is probably the main reason why I think the later stuff is better than the earlier stuff. I barely remember plotlines from the early years. But the later years are memorable because of 7 of 9 and whenever an episodes focuses around her. Having never watched the show I always assumed this character was the lowest common denominator of Trek sex appeal but she is better than that and written better than that. Actually better than anything else on the show.

The final episode is kinda crap imo. It sort of symbolizes voyager in general. It's heart is in the right place. It wants to do the right thing. But it never really has the balls to ever do it or go where it needs to go. That's my overall take on Voyager as a show itself. Although I'm glad I watched it and there are also lots of moments I enjoyed as I watched it that I could mention but won't.

Up next: finish deep space nine. I have just like the last season of that to go. And then tackle enterprise. I want to finish enterprise before the new star trek show debuts. Although at the current pace that is going maybe I will have years to finish that too!






I'm finding it hard to maintain my interest in the final stretch of DS9 so I just said fuck it and started watching voyager. I expanded my plan. I'm going to watch any episode that has a decent imdb rating or any episodes that makes any significant best of List that I can find. Probably also all the season finales and such. So I'll save the DS9 finale to finish up with the Voyager finale at the same time.

So I will end up watching hopefully a decent amount of the "better" episodes while utterly avoiding the absolute worst ones. In a way its a bit fun. I've never watched a show in such a mercenary way before and whatever I think about Voyager it is almost completely new to me so that's always a little interesting at first.

I completely skipped the first season. The only episode that seems to be well regarded there is the pilot which I saw when it originally came on.

I watched about 7 or 8 episodes in the second season. It's been okay. The show is highly flawed of course but it does occasionally hit the high themes trek is known for.

"Tuvix" is a surprisingly decent episode about rights. It's almost a poor man's Measure of a Man with a twist. "Prototype" is a classic style trek episode that would feel at home in TOS and works well because of that. And Death Wish is another take on Measure of a Man except with suicide being the right fought over. Those were sort of the high points so far.


I'm already at season 4 of voyager. You have to remember though I skipped a ton of episodes including the first season completely.

Season 4 seems a little more interesting so I'll probably slow down a bit and watch more episodes as 7 of 9 is an initially interesting character and I'm curious to see the development there.

Like I say I have a very skewed perspective so far on voyager because I've skipped the bulk of episodes and only watched decent or highly rated episodes in a relative sense.

As sort of an overview the big problem I see is that it was just traditionally too typically trek for a premise that needs a lot more.

The show shares a lot of similarities conceptually to firefly and battlestar galactica and while those shows are not completely perfect they feel fully realized. Voyager has its foot in two worlds. It wants to be old style trek and evoke those same emotions and feels but it also wants to try to be modern and more emotional and dark. It can never really find the proper footing to bridge that gap. That being said I've enjoyed most of the episodes I've actually watched so far but once again with the caveat that I've skipped a bulk of the episodes and skipped nearly all of the absolute shit episodes that would completely sour me on the experience.


About halfway through season 4. Things have slowed down considerably because I've watched every episode in Season 4. Once you actually start watching episodes at that frequency, the fatal flaw of the reset button because much more obvious and annoying. It's not like TOS or TNG don't have reset buttton episodes and hit them a lot. Even the finale episode of TNG is a reset button of sorts.

The problem is voyager's premise is much more dependent on the on-going nature of the situation. Things should matter a lot more from one episode to the next. And when they don't it becomes frustrating. There is a good 2 part episode I watched called Year of hell where a lot of dark and interesting stuff happens. But its all one big reset button because a time machine device resets everything. You can be sure when watching Voyager that if an episode has anything really provocative and interesting happen it will all be reset by the end of the episode by whatever plot device to reset things they come up with. You can't cheat people like that. It's like a continual dusty finish from wrestling or something to make a weird comparison.

I know this isn't an original observation about voyager because I had heard it myself before from many people but until I started watching continual episodes instead of just jumping around, I hadn't noticed it.

Rufus

  • 🙈🙉🙊
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #567 on: January 30, 2017, 07:28:03 PM »
There were 172 voyager episodes. My guess is I probably ended up watching 100 to 110 of them give or take 10 on either side. I watched a lot of the later season episodes by comparison mainly because the show seemed to get better by then and I was invested in the characters by that point.



Had to be done. :doge

Appreciate your thoughts though, as I still have fond memories watching reruns.

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #568 on: January 30, 2017, 08:09:59 PM »
May have posted this earlier in the thread but can't remember. One of my favorite scenes from voyager.


benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #569 on: February 01, 2017, 03:46:06 AM »
RESIST!


toku

  • 𝕩𝕩𝕩
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #571 on: May 15, 2017, 05:37:55 PM »
caught the "second skin" ep of DS9 recently and man, even in full cardassian make up kira still the ds9 waifu

chronovore

  • relapsed dev
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #572 on: May 15, 2017, 07:33:11 PM »
caught the "second skin" ep of DS9 recently and man, especially in full cardassian make up kira still the ds9 waifu

Fixed.

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
« Last Edit: May 17, 2017, 05:42:35 PM by Stoney Mason »


Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #575 on: May 17, 2017, 05:50:17 PM »
I'm skeptical but I'll give it a chance. Best trek is always about morals and species conflicts. Not action shenanigans. We'll see.


D3RANG3D

  • The Bore's Like Bot
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #576 on: May 17, 2017, 05:56:34 PM »
Is she supposed to be half vulcan?

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #577 on: May 17, 2017, 06:05:08 PM »
Based on content in the trailer and this below I would say yes.




Great Rumbler

  • Dab on the sinners
  • Global Moderator
Re: star trek
« Reply #578 on: May 17, 2017, 06:05:36 PM »
Development has been such a mess that I'm afraid this is going to turn out pretty bad. I hope I'm wrong, though.
dog

D3RANG3D

  • The Bore's Like Bot
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #579 on: May 17, 2017, 06:10:33 PM »
I could have sworn she had pointy ears at one point the trailer and then not in some of the shots.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Rewatched it dose stiff mannerims she's a vulcan alright.
[close]


toku

  • 𝕩𝕩𝕩
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #580 on: May 17, 2017, 08:32:22 PM »
fuck prequels

chronovore

  • relapsed dev
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #581 on: May 18, 2017, 07:44:21 PM »

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #582 on: May 18, 2017, 07:52:04 PM »
works for me

but lol at that garbage loop used on her name near the start

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #583 on: May 18, 2017, 07:59:30 PM »
on the other hand, this looks like it could be seth mcfarlane's galaxy quest :rejoice


chronovore

  • relapsed dev
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #584 on: May 18, 2017, 08:09:42 PM »
on the other hand, this looks like it could be seth mcfarlane's galaxy quest :rejoice



The preview doesn't look promising, but I'll watch Adriane Palickilikcickci in just about anything.

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #585 on: May 18, 2017, 08:31:39 PM »
He's a huge Trek fan, was in two episodes of Enterprise even, so other than the comedy aspect it's got a lot going for it, budget barely looks less than Discovery lol. I mean it's got Kasidy Yates. It's also an hour, not a half-hour. Norm is voicing that blob character, who is regular cast, that he runs through in the hallway.

Maybe this plus Tim Allen's sitcom getting cancelled helps the rumored Galaxy Quest on Amazon get done and we have two and a half good Trek series going. :rejoice

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #586 on: May 18, 2017, 08:36:30 PM »
Star Trek comedy parody show

 :rejoice


Seth MacFarlane attached

 :trash

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #587 on: May 18, 2017, 08:47:14 PM »
I'm totally fine with people attaching themselves to him simply to get their show on FOX (this is how American Dad, among other things, came to be...and he seems cool to do that for people who wouldn't get a shot otherwise) but then I checked and this is actually from him from the writing/showrunning side too.

But then again, so was pre-resurrection Family Guy while he spent far less time on it after it came back to where he was no longer showrunner or lead writer by the fifth season. Other than doing the voices obviously.

And he's a huge Trek dork...so I'm going to keep my dial turned towards hopeful.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Being ceaselessly hopeful worked for Beyond! The best Trek movie since First Contact!
[close]

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #588 on: May 19, 2017, 12:05:25 AM »
Anything is possible. Maybe it won't suck. But Macfarlane humour's is generally so obvious and scattershot that I have a feeling it will suck the enjoyment I want to have from the show.

I'd prefer a second season of Other Space although that ain't gonna happen.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt4561950/

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #589 on: May 19, 2017, 12:16:27 AM »
Finally found a short interview clip and MacFarlane says the trailer is a bit misleading as it focuses totally on the comedy side but that the show isn't focused on that as much as it just isn't self-serious. He hopes that they go for sci-fi before jokes but hopefully get both. Doesn't seem happy with the Galaxy Quest comparisons, although I'd argue that did what he says he's trying to do, especially when you factor in all the "we're just has-been actors" plotline stuff: https://www.accesshollywood.com/videos/seth-macfarlane-talks-new-comedy-orville/

Peter David seems unreasonably upset and should get back to finishing Fallen Angel and paying his taxes instead of posting this: http://www.peterdavid.net/2017/05/17/the-orville/
Quote
So apparently Fox’s next to-be-cancelled SF series is “The Orville,” from and starring Seth MacFarlane. It basically seems to be “Galaxy Quest” as the TV series would have been.

The part I like the most is that the ship’s captain (MacFarlane) has, as his first officer, his ex. All I could think of is, Wow, I wish I had thought of that twenty years ago when I created the crew for the Excalibur in “New Frontier.” Would that I had made Calhoun’s first officer his ex.

Oh. Wait.
Quote
Peter David
May 17, 2017 at 4:26 pm
It wouldn’t surprise me, but honestly, I’m more flattered than anything.
Quote
Peter David
May 18, 2017 at 12:04 pm
Yup. I haven’t managed that since Bill Mumy and I cast Jewel Staite as an engineering genius on a space ship ten years before Firefly.

toku

  • 𝕩𝕩𝕩
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #590 on: May 19, 2017, 12:24:56 AM »
Anything is possible. Maybe it won't suck. But Macfarlane humour's is generally so obvious and scattershot that I have a feeling it will suck the enjoyment I want to have from the show.

I'd prefer a second season of Other Space although that ain't gonna happen.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt4561950/

still surprised none of the other streaming places picked it up, looked like it was made on the cheap

toku

  • 𝕩𝕩𝕩
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #591 on: May 21, 2017, 11:51:42 AM »

seagrams hotsauce

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #592 on: June 09, 2017, 02:19:39 PM »
http://collider.com/star-trek-discovery-lgbt-characters-alex-kurtzman-bryan-fuller/#cbs


Wether this is good or bad, I'm definitely looking forward to a bunch of internet babbies unironically whine about 'muh essjaydub pandering' and diversity hires in a Star Trek series

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #593 on: June 09, 2017, 02:57:09 PM »
like how do we get more diverse in Star Trek

picture above in that tweet isn't the half of what DS9 was doing, Mirror Kira basically wanted to fuck her counterpart

TNG was doing genderless or multigender species

every relationship Harry Kim was involved in (ALSO THE FACT THAT HE DIED AND IT WAS SOME HARRY KIM FROM ANOTHER UNIVERSE ON THE SHIP FOR THE REST OF THE SHOW AND NOBODY EVER BROUGHT IT UP LIKE HOW IS THIS NOT WEIRDING PEOPLE OUT)

chronovore

  • relapsed dev
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #594 on: June 09, 2017, 10:10:09 PM »
like how do we get more diverse in Star Trek

picture above in that tweet isn't the half of what DS9 was doing, Mirror Kira basically wanted to fuck her counterpart

TNG was doing genderless or multigender species

every relationship Harry Kim was involved in (ALSO THE FACT THAT HE DIED AND IT WAS SOME HARRY KIM FROM ANOTHER UNIVERSE ON THE SHIP FOR THE REST OF THE SHOW AND NOBODY EVER BROUGHT IT UP LIKE HOW IS THIS NOT WEIRDING PEOPLE OUT)

Quote
Voyager was accidentally duplicated by a spatial scission phenomenon. Each ship was unaware of the others' existence, and both tried to stabilize their rapidly-draining antimatter supply with a series of proton bursts. One of the two ships, slightly phased apart from the other, fired the protons first, heavily damaging the other in the process; the damage also caused the infant Naomi Wildman to die in her failed delivery operation. The Harry Kim from the damaged Voyager was killed after being blown through a hull breach. When the undamaged ship was forced to self-destruct after being overrun by Vidiian forces, that ship's Harry Kim took the infant Naomi Wildman and transferred to the other ship. (VOY: "Deadlock")

HOLY SHIT. YOU'RE RIGHT. That's weird as fuck.  :o :o :o

toku

  • 𝕩𝕩𝕩
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #595 on: June 10, 2017, 12:38:53 AM »
I watched that ep recently. They briefly address it at the very end of the ep but thats it. Harry says something like "it's weird that i know you guys and you guys know me but its different" then him and janeway chuckle, the ep ends and it's never brought up again.

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #596 on: June 10, 2017, 09:45:51 AM »
in my version of Voyager, Tom Paris is always crackin wise "don't worry Harry, if you die, we'll just grab another version of you"

Tasty

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #597 on: June 10, 2017, 01:53:53 PM »
Trailer reminded me of Stargate Universe for some reason.

Really wish this weren't a prequel.

toku

  • 𝕩𝕩𝕩
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #598 on: June 13, 2017, 05:32:23 PM »

Great Rumbler

  • Dab on the sinners
  • Global Moderator
Re: star trek
« Reply #599 on: June 13, 2017, 07:19:35 PM »
Geordi looking like a Dollar Store Rick James in that first picture. :lol
dog